2020 Make a change

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by DJT

Damn..I switched on my 5KW system 2 weeks ago which is enough to make me net neutral in a household of 2.in fact the way we live means I pump lots back to the grid. (Thanks Peter)

After grants it cost $5.5k. We don’t run airco..


I had no idea I would become a Virtue signaller..help..


I also work in an organisation which invests big time in making their properties self sufficient on energy and which also invests in tech to reduce usage in the first place reducing running costs and their carbon footprint.


It really is going to take individuals and organisations to make the changes that need to be done, 1 panel at a time if needs be. The government of the day certainly won’t.

Yep... hence why I have a 10.8Kw system going on my roof this month... 5 years to pay off investment & then direct savings of between $1800 - $2300 per annum.. (obviously dependant upon weather conditions across the year & changing some of our power consumption habits) sadly, we have to run aircon at least half the year... 34 degrees & 80 - 95% humidity ain't much fun without it...

10.8 Kw on the roof, 8.2Kw inverter is basically hedging my bets on batteries coming down to an affordable price/government incentives such as has occurred in SA just recently plus taking advantage of soon to be non-existent STCs...

Guess I'll just have to join you in signalling my virtues...

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by Lucinda

Well.
Solar might be commercially viable in countries like Germany and the UK,
but we don't have access to large tracts of land for solar farms nor do we get nearly as much reliable sunshine here in Australia as they do in Europe.

It would just be a colossal waste of money I tell you!

[Peter Ward]

According to Geo-Science Australia " The Australian continent has the highest solar radiation per square metre of any continent and consequently some of the best solar energy resource in the world".

With pubic awareness and leadership, the west of NSW/QLD and northern VIC/SA and much of WA could be the *thermal-solar powerhouse of the globe.

*Heat significant quantities of super-saline liquid to well above boiling point.

Run a heat exchanger through them, make steam, drive a turbine.
With a big saline storage tank, thermal inertia means it works 24/7 i.e base-load power. No emissions. Not my idea. UNSW.

As for the cheap shots at myself for reducing my footprint to into negative territory....well...some mother's do 'ave em.

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

With public awareness and leadership,

And there in a nutshell is the problem Peter..

[lazjen (Chris)]

When I mentioned carbon neutral jet fuel, I wasn't referring to biofuel. I meant a "true" neutral system like:

https://www.solarpaces.org/how-deser...of-air-travel/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-neutral_fuel

Note that this is not a cure for climate warming, but it does stop the need to pull oil out of the ground, refine, burn, etc - which is obviously not carbon neutral.

We NEED something like this for air travel, because it will be many years before the battery energy density gets to level required to make electric planes truly feasible (we're at about 1/20th the energy density required about now - some near term gains might jump that by 5 to 7, but still a long way to go).

It beyond infuriates me that, once again, this could be another industry we have in this country with multiple benefits: jobs, reduce imports of oil, potential exports of this fuel, reducing (added) carbon emissions.

And I would not be surprised if this fuel could be used in other creative ways as well.

So, with this, plus an abundance of land for solar panels (+ batteries), just why the ^&$# aren't we exporting energy to the world?

[lazjen (Chris)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

According to Geo-Science Australia " The Australian continent has the highest solar radiation per square metre of any continent and consequently some of the best solar energy resource in the world".

With pubic awareness and leadership, the west of NSW/QLD and northern VIC/SA and much of WA could be the *thermal-solar powerhouse of the globe.

*Heat significant quantities of super-saline liquid to well above boiling point.

Run a heat exchanger through them, make steam, drive a turbine.
With a big saline storage tank, thermal inertia means it works 24/7 i.e base-load power. No emissions. Not my idea. UNSW.

Don't know if you've seen this: https://www.theguardian.com/environm...stralian-solar but if it goes ahead, it's a great step forward.

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by Outcast

And there in a nutshell is the problem Peter..

Now for some interesting numbers. There are around 80,000 members of the Australian Liberal party, (current government ) and
16 million registered voters. Simple arithmetic tells us just one in 200 voters are actually party members that create policy and put up their ilk to be voted into parliament.

Think about that.

Go into a crowded Woolies, Coles or Aldi store...and you probably won't pass by someone who actually has pre-selected a "candidate" .

One nation has just 5000 odd members...less than that subscribed to IIS

Indeed, just half of one percent of voters determine who will be the actual individuals in our government.

So....next election and some party prat gets up and says "vote for me"
Make them answer some hard questions and work to represent you...and I'd also say the future of our planet....or give 'em hell!

Don't for a minute think there is some god-given right for only the Coke and Pepsi parties to rule.

[peter_4059 (Peter)]

"According to the SOLAR-JET Project Coordinator at Bauhaus Luftfahrt, Dr. Andreas Sizmann, a solar reactor with a 1 square kilometer heliostat field could generate 20,000 litres of kerosene a day. This output from one solar fuels refinery could fly a large 300-body commercial airliner for about seven hours."...promising technnology but sounds like it has a way to go.

[PRejto (Peter)]

I suppose this comment is quite off-topic, however whilst we can argue endlessly about the bush fires and possible connection to global warming the fact remains that Australia has always been a relatively dry continent. It may very well be getting worse. I very much doubt that even were all the countries in the world to suddenly agree to reduce emissions drastically that we would ever live to see a reversal of this drying/heating trend. In fact, all one commonly reads is that we might be able to slow the temperature rise. Thus, it would seem that whatever we might do about climate change is going to be a long term problem and solution, if there even is one.

But Australia's current situation demands much more immediate attention with respect to water. I am just gobsmacked that no government has had the courage or guts to go after this issue. I look at the Hoover Dam project in the USA and marvel that it was started during the great depression. That took guts, put people to work, continues to supply vast amounts of water to the arid Southwest, and in addition supplies hydro-electric power. There are certainly areas of Australia in the North that could harbour dams of this magnitude where the majority of water just flows directly into the ocean. If Libya can pipe water across their whole country why can't Australia use a system of dams to fill the river systems? Water and clean power could transform this country. It certainly won't end a drought but surely it would mitigate many of the risks. Even a government opposed to the validity of the climate activists claims could embrace such a project. In my view we have over populated the planet as a direct consequence of our industrialization and scientific progress. I believe our best immediate course of action is to mitigate what we have done to ourselves in the short term while not ignoring the necessity of long term policy with respect to the environment. Neither is happening and that is an utter disgrace as is the sad fact that the NBN is the largest infrastructure project in Australian history. What a ridiculous populist project this has become in the face of other vastly more important potential undertakings! While I understand the passion of both sides of the argument re energy production, compared to the water problem, the debate almost appears trivial.

Peter

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

Now for some interesting numbers. There are around 80,000 members of the Australian Liberal party, (current government ) and
16 million registered voters. Simple arithmetic tells us just one in 200 voters are actually party members that create policy and put up their ilk to be voted into parliament.

Think about that.

Go into a crowded Woolies, Coles or Aldi store...and you probably won't pass by someone who actually has pre-selected a "candidate" .

One nation has just 5000 odd members...less than that subscribed to IIS

Indeed, just half of one percent of voters determine who will be the actual individuals in our government.

So....next election and some party prat gets up and says "vote for me"
Make them answer some hard questions and work to represent you...and I'd also say the future of out planet....or give 'em hell!

Don't for a minute think there is some god-given right for only the Coke and Pepsi parties to rule.

Indeed true Peter but, right now there is no real alternative at the ballot box that can form a functional government...

Unless the collective population get's off it's lazy butt to demand real accountability & to force government to actually govern for everyone then I fear nothing will change.

Right now, I'm not seeing the collective will of the people to force that change..., they seem more interested in reality TV, neverending tax cuts & what's in it for me as an individual to the expense of anyone else...

[Eternal01 (Ian)]

Originally Posted by PRejto

While I understand the passion of both sides of the argument re energy production, compared to the water problem, the debate almost appears trivial.

I partially agree.

The problem is that the issue of climate change is complex and politically has become too polarising.

Based on my understanding of the science of climate change we can expect greater climate extremes which, when applied to Australian conditions, translates to more extremes droughts, fires and floods. This in turn will have a profound impact on our food security and economy.

Whilst I am 100% behind renewable energy, electric cars and subsidies for renewable energy, it is only part of a broader suite of issues that need to addressed.

[skysurfer]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Energy intensity. Yep. You can't support the world machines supplying ~7billion people living like we do with wind and solar.

Because we are too greedy, particularly the rich. What I miss in the energy discussion is: do we really need so much energy ?
Aircons are one of the worst offenders. These devices are the 100 year old inefficient Carrier design.

https://edition.cnn.com/style/articl...dia/index.html
https://edition.cnn.com/style/articl...dio/index.html

The second article tells about pre-aircon ways to cool buildings.
Addintionally, why not adapt our construction styles such as white painted roofs, or more green lush in cities ? More trees in cities cools better and are a CO2 sink as well.

Aviation ? Air tickets are heavily subsidized due to the Chicago Treaty of 1944 because air tickets are exempt from GST and fuel is exempt from excise.
With the current low prices this is not anymore of this era.
Remembering myself: In 1986 I payed 1100 eurors (not inflation corrected otherwise it would be 3000 euros) (A$4500) for a roundtrip Amsterdam-Sydney and recently I booked the same route for upcoming Feb 2020 which is ... EUR 1100. And most air tickets barely increased in absolute price, but decreased strongly when inflation and income is taken into account.

So taxing and excising air travel is one thing to do. And short haul flights within EU with low cost carriers (e.g. Ryanair) cost in some cases even less per kilometer then a cheap international ticket 5-10 times as far away.

The next step is using synfuel (and not biofuel, because that costs lots of agriculture area which is not available for food).

Originally Posted by multiweb

Good day Carlton. I don't have an answer to the world energy problem. But what I'm sure of is that sinking money into renewables is definitely not the solution. It's very fashionable nowadays to talk about wind and solar. Makes people feel good about themselves. That's pretty much all it achieves. Numbers show that it's only a very small part of the total energy consumption.

The money would be better spent in fixing what we have. There is technology now to capture C02 emissions from a coal fired plant. It requires energy. About 30% of its energy output. Let's start doing that first before scrapping our only reliable source of electricity. That'll buy us some time while we think about fixing the rest one step at a time.

CO2 capture devices are already there, those are called trees, but we are felling them in large amounts like in Brasil, Borneo and, helped by global warming, they are right now being burned away in half NSW and Victoria.

[skysurfer]

Originally Posted by Lucinda

Well.
Solar might be commercially viable in countries like Germany and the UK,
but we don't have access to large tracts of land for solar farms nor do we get nearly as much reliable sunshine here in Australia as they do in Europe.

It would just be a colossal waste of money I tell you!

Huh ?
Australia is the most sunny continent on Earth. Almost as sunny as the Middle East and the Sahara (which are not continents in itself).
Europe receives a lot less sunshine, particularly in winter.

So building large solar plants (with collectors and PV) converting to hydrogen, would be a large export product of Australia.

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by skysurfer

Huh ?
Australia is the most sunny continent on Earth. Almost as sunny as the Middle East and the Sahara (which are not continents in itself).
Europe receives a lot less sunshine, particularly in winter.

So building large solar plants (with collectors and PV) converting to hydrogen, would be a large export product of Australia.

I think you may have missed the sarcasm font...

[lazjen (Chris)]

Originally Posted by PRejto

...
But Australia's current situation demands much more immediate attention with respect to water. I am just gobsmacked that no government has had the courage or guts to go after this issue. I look at the Hoover Dam project in the USA and marvel that it was started during the great depression. That took guts, put people to work, continues to supply vast amounts of water to the arid Southwest, and in addition supplies hydro-electric power. There are certainly areas of Australia in the North that could harbour dams of this magnitude where the majority of water just flows directly into the ocean. If Libya can pipe water across their whole country why can't Australia use a system of dams to fill the river systems? Water and clean power could transform this country. It certainly won't end a drought but surely it would mitigate many of the risks. Even a government opposed to the validity of the climate activists claims could embrace such a project. In my view we have over populated the planet as a direct consequence of our industrialization and scientific progress. I believe our best immediate course of action is to mitigate what we have done to ourselves in the short term while not ignoring the necessity of long term policy with respect to the environment. Neither is happening and that is an utter disgrace as is the sad fact that the NBN is the largest infrastructure project in Australian history. What a ridiculous populist project this has become in the face of other vastly more important potential undertakings! While I understand the passion of both sides of the argument re energy production, compared to the water problem, the debate almost appears trivial.

Both energy and water are important. And we have the technical means to solve both problems, but lack the political spine and brains to get it done.

Besides fixing up how and where we use our water, we have to move from our current system of waiting for rain, to water generation and delivery.

Will it cost a crap load to get it done? Yes, but the benefits far outweigh the problems with our current approach. And with some smarts we could be generating money from this as well (in the long term).

[Astronovice (Calvin)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Energy intensity. Yep. You can't support the world machines supplying ~7billion people living like we do with wind and solar.

Good day Carlton. I don't have an answer to the world energy problem. But what I'm sure of is that sinking money into renewables is definitely not the solution. It's very fashionable nowadays to talk about wind and solar. Makes people feel good about themselves. That's pretty much all it achieves. Numbers show that it's only a very small part of the total energy consumption.

The money would be better spent in fixing what we have. There is technology now to capture C02 emissions from a coal fired plant. It requires energy. About 30% of its energy output. Let's start doing that first before scrapping our only reliable source of electricity. That'll buy us some time while we think about fixing the rest one step at a time.

If the world was populated by pragmatists the obvious option would be to build one generation of nuclear plants to replace the current fossil fuelled generators. This could eliminate totally all carbon emissions from power generation and transport whilst buying time to develop renewables and energy storage options to the level required to replace that nuclear generation in 40 years time - being the average life of a nuclear station.

I know that many of you will rail against that option but as said previously it would allow the replacement of both fossil fuelled power and transport and buy us time.

Having worked in nuclear power in the 1980’s before coming to Australia from the UK i am aware of all of the associated risks and arguments, but I can say that the station I worked at still churns out around 1200MW every hour day and night and will continue to do so until it’s planned closure in 2022. Nuclear power has been around since the late 1950’s and has proven that when it is well designed (Fukushima wasn’t) and well operated (Chernobyl and Three Mile Island weren’t ) it is safe. It does have a long term waste storage legacy, but at least we would have a viable planet to live on.

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by PRejto

whilst we can argue endlessly about the bush fires and possible connection to global warming the fact remains that Australia has always been a relatively dry continent.......

But Australia's current situation demands much more immediate attention with respect to water. I am just gobsmacked that no government has had the courage or guts to go after this issue. I look at the Hoover Dam project in the USA and marvel that it was started during the great depression. That took guts, put people to work, continues to supply vast amounts of water to the arid Southwest, and in addition supplies hydro-electric power. There are certainly areas of Australia in the North that could harbour dams of this magnitude where the majority of water just flows directly into the ocean. If Libya can pipe water across their whole country why can't Australia use a system of dams to fill the river systems? Water and clean power could transform this country.


I believe our best immediate course of action is to mitigate what we have done to ourselves in the short term while not ignoring the necessity of long term policy with respect to the environment. Neither is happening and that is an utter disgrace as is the sad fact that the NBN is the largest infrastructure project in Australian history. While I understand the passion of both sides of the argument re energy production, compared to the water problem, the debate almost appears trivial.

Peter

Peter, apologies but, I've broken up some of your thread to address a number of your points... Indeed what you say is generally very relevant however...

Australia is indeed the driest continent in the world however, you simply cannot ignore that 'climate change' or more accurately, man's acceleration of a natural cycle is also in part responsible for our land, indeed our planet getting drier..

The water problem could certainly be managed far better but, it's not as simple as you might think.. the idea of pumping water south from regions such as Darwin & Far North Queensland has been investigated more often than you might suspect & not only is it not a particularly economically viable project, in some cases, it's simply not actually possible due to the mountain ranges & lift required to get the water flowing...

Water management of our existing resources is however, woeful.. wilful mismanagement by current and past governments, introduction of water intensive crops in regions that simply don't have the water; unrestricted access to mining companies at essentially no charge to underground water sources.. greedy political fingers dipping into the water buy back schemes... let alone individual states who refuse to play ball unless they get to have everything they want from the system & bugger the rest of the states downstream...

I agree, it's outrageous that no-one is kicking up a stink (except those in the affected communities) sadly though, our governments have been & still are complicit in the mismanagement of these issues.. unfortunately in our current political climate, even changing governments will not sadly fix this issue...

The reality is, there is no long term policy on anything in this country... there is no action to mitigate what we even have now... it's all about getting re-elected in a three year cycle... that's it.. there is no infrastructure plan in this country & hasn't been for at least 30 years... what's our excuse... oh, it's those damn immigrants... you I'm sure, heard the politicians & media scream it from the roof tops... not the fact we haven't invested, just 'immigrants'...

Our population has become so self centred & self interested.. where's my tax cut... hell, last election it collectively swallowed the lie that Labor was coming after your super by outlawing tax refunds for less than 1% of retirees who didn't pay tax... but, just the fear alone (factual or otherwise) was enough to send the population into a frenzy that Labor was gonna take something away from us & vote accordingly...

You are right, there are so many issues in this country right now that need dealing with, it's hard to actually say where the priority should be but, the reality is, we don't have a priority for any of them... Our governments (past & present) priority is getting re-elected... our population's priorities seem to be only focussed on itself as an individual... if it's not affecting me directly.. don't care... or so it would seem...

One can be passionate about more than one thing & I suspect you'll find that most on here commenting about the climate are just as passionate about all those things you've mentioned...

For the record though, NBN in it's original form actually was a worthwhile project.. ask any rural community whether they would like greater connectivity & the answer is a resounding yes... just not for the reasons most city dwellers would think of... it would actually help them manage their farms better, their businesses better & a whole range of other meaningful spinoffs for their communities... so NBN a waste of time.. well actually no, not in it's original form... in what has been actually rolled out.. yep, pretty much...

So, I don't disagree with the main thrust of your post but, we can do substantially more to address all of the issues if we became a little less obsessed with tax cuts, became more interested in our country & the welfare of all it's population & demanded far better performance from our governments.. but, I see little signs of this actually happening..

[Lucinda (Lucinda)]

Originally Posted by lazjen

Both energy and water are important. And we have the technical means to solve both problems, but lack the political spine and brains to get it done.

This country has no shortage of people with intelligence and unimpeachable character.
What is wrong is that the system filters these people out of contention for leadership positions as a matter of policy and replaces them with dim witted, corrupt, corporate boot lickers.

[Outcast (Carlton)]

Originally Posted by Lucinda

This country has no shortage of people with intelligence and unimpeachable character.
What is wrong is that the system filters these people out of contention for leadership positions as a matter of policy and replaces them with dim witted, corrupt, corporate boot lickers.

Sadly though, we are that system... all of us... we allow this to happen because as a collective we individually vote for the popularist policies that line our own pocket in the dream that one day, we might too be rich...

[skysurfer]

Originally Posted by Outcast

Sadly though, we are that system... all of us... we allow this to happen because as a collective we individually vote for the popularist policies that line our own pocket in the dream that one day, we might too be rich...

Correct, we elect them (here in EU as well), but after the elections they get power hungry and do what they want.