octave

Round trip efficiency

Hydro from 65% in older installations to 75-80% for modern deployments

Flywheels80% to 90%

Batteries75% to 90%

Electrothermal (ETES)65% to 75%

Compressed air (CAES)65-75%

Round Trip Efficiency

nomad, I always thought that compressed air was too inefficient because when you compress air, you heat it. And then it cools in storage and a lot of energy is lost. Compressing a really big volume to a low pressure minimizes the losses, but you need special caves and stuff to do this.I'd really like to be wrong, and that 80% figure is impressive... how did that happen?

The process is explained in the video. The heat is harvested by being efficiently stored and then added back to the air in the generation phase.

Surprisingly , compressed air storage has managed to get their the electric to electric conversion efficiency up to around the 80% mark. Comparable to batteries and hydro pump storage. And a much lower capital cost to build. Looks very promising.

I read that a majors risk for this company is the declining cost and increasing performance of grid storage batteries. I imagine that the solution to grid level storage will not be a single technology but a range of solutions. What I find attractive about is the use of disused mines.

Wow. Impressive stuff Octave.I'd always believed that compressed air was too lossy to contemplate for energy storage.

 

That was my preconceived notion. What happened to that 2012 pilot plant?

Not sure about the Gaines Texas plant but I did discover a Canadian company called Hydrostor. They are building a demonstration plant at the decommissioned Angus Zinc mine near Adelaide.

Canadian long-duration bulk energy storage company enters Australian market

• RSS Feeds
   
  

19 Jun 2018

Hydrostor, a Canadian company specialising in advanced compressed air energy storage (A-CAES), is establishing a new head office and demonstration power plant in Australia.

The demonstration power plant, which is in late-stage development, will be located at the decommissioned Terramin Angas Zinc Mine near Adelaide, South Australia. It will be Australia’s first A-CAES system and Hydrostor plans to have the facility in service by 2019.

The facility will use Hydrostor’s emissions-free A-CAES technology, have a power rating of 5MW and an energy storage capacity of 10MWh.

Canadian long-duration bulk energy storage company enters Australian market

This is how it works

Releasing heat into the atmosphere. But isn't that.......?

That is why the latest pilot plants are using systems where the heat created in the compression stage is stored and used to reheat the air in the expansion phase.

Near Isothermal

Near isothermal compression (and expansion) is a process in which a gas is compressed in very close proximity to a large incompressible thermal mass such as a heat absorbing and releasing structure (HARS) or a water spray. A HARS is usually made up of a series of parallel fins. As the gas is compressed the heat of compression is rapidly transferred to the thermal mass, so the gas temperature is stabilised. An external cooling circuit is then used to maintain the temperature of the thermal mass. The isothermal efficiency (Z)[7] is a measure of where the process lies between an adiabatic and isothermal process. If the efficiency is 0%, then it is totally adiabatic; with an efficiency of 100%, it is totally isothermal. Typically with a near isothermal process an efficiency of 90-95% can be expected.

Compressed air energy storage - Wikipedia

Storage

• 1978 – The first utility-scale compressed air energy storage project was the 290 megawatt Huntorf plant in Germany using a salt dome.
   
  
• 1991 – A 110 megawatt plant with a capacity of 26 hours was built in McIntosh, Alabama (1991). The Alabama facility's $65 million cost works out to $590 per kW of generation capacity and about $23 per kW-hr of storage capacity, using a 19 million cubic foot solution mined salt cavern to store air at up to 1100 psi. Although the compression phase is approximately 82% efficient, the expansion phase requires combustion of natural gas at one third the rate of a gas turbine producing the same amount of electricity.[17][18][19]
   
  
• December, 2012 – General Compression completes construction of a 2 MW near-isothermal CAES project in Gaines, TX; the world's third CAES project. The project uses no fuel.[20]
   
  

I didn't bother looking at the video about compressed air storage. Have you ever used air tools, they take a vast amount of air to do a little bit of work. The iar drill I have uses more electricity than an electric drill by the time I run the compressor.There was a mob in Spain I think that a few years ago tried to run cars on compressed air and it never got off the ground.

 

When you compress air, the first thing is an increase in heat and that has to be stored to maintain the energy in the air. The alternative is to poke a bit of diesel fuel into it and you have got a compression ignition engine.

Yenn it is a shame you did not watch the video because there is a thorough analysis of the energy efficiency. Also, there are already 2 plants working now, The Huntorf plant in Germany with (290MWh with a 42% efficiency and the Mcintosh plant in Alabama (110MWh at 54% efficiency.) These are both Diabatic, meaning the heat you mention is dispersed into the atmosphere as waste. Both of these plants require the burning of some gas to heat the air as it is utilized.

The experimental plant in the video stores the heat and uses it to reheat the air as it is used.

The two plants that are running are doing so commercially and economically. Both of these facilities have been operating successfully for many years.

The thing is that there is no shortage of energy on planet earth. We have reached the stage where capturing energy is cheaper than releasing energy in coal that took millions of years to collect. The problem is storing that energy in a way that is economical and can be used exactly when needed. At the moment the electrons that are powering my computer so that I can type this rubbish are being produced and used straight away. This is not the way we produce and consume other products, it is a "just in time" production system that is literally just in time. The problem then is storage. This problem is being solved and whilst we know the limitations of today's chemical batteries we tend to ignore how quickly technological problems in the past have been solved. As a follower of news on these subjects, I am optimistic about recent developments in batteries, for example, the joint research collaboration between Honda, NASAs jet propulsion laboratories and Caltech on Flouride Ion batteries as well as many other types of battery. Apart from that, there are other good things happening. Here is a video about pumped compressed air storage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VadUK8-5OSA:4

The notion that we can't have pill testing because it is breaking the law is ridiculous. The reason is that the systems in New Zealand, Portugal etc. as well as being successful are also legal. You see the law was changed to accommodate it. No "thin of the wedge" and "what if we all decide to break the law." It is legal. In New Zealand the drug testing body does not break the law, it may sail close to the wind but does not break the law. The police have no desire to stop it because it works.

Apparently, there is much evidence that cannabis oil can prevent epileptic seizures. I have not personally evaluated the actual evidence so I am not idiotic enough to have an opinion WITHOUT EXAMINING THE EVIDENCE. I understand that it is quite likely that cannabis oil MAY have a positive effect. If this is true then we should change the law to allow it. Some objections I have read are that, whilst it may work it could be "sending the wrong message" The problem is that some people tend to be both ignorant and hysterical. Cannabis usage is reasonably high throughout all areas of society. Why is it that the extract from cannabis sativa plant is so taboo but the extract of willow bark is used by most people.

I was highly amused by a video posted on another thread about growing hemp. One of the reasons for resistance is that according to the crusty old conservatives growing hemp will send the wrong message about drug use even though hemp crops do not contain THC to the level that is psychoactive. It is as foolish as saying we must ban bagels or muffins because of poppy seeds (which contain opium)

I think the problem with this thread is that we are not debating the same thing. I say that the evidence gathered from numerous schemes overseas demonstrates that the death rate is reduced as well as well as crime and violence. The anti crowd on this thread have not read and then challenged that proposition. in fact, they have made it clear that any benefits are overruled by principles of the law is right and unchangeable.

The only way to change my mind is to prove that the testing regimes in as I understand it around 20 countries cause more harm than good. That is the bottom line for me. This is why I am not religious. Don't tell me why behaviour A is not allowed, tell me why and what harms are caused and you need evidence that is stronger than "I heard that"

In this thread, I asked some questions which no one answered. Australia's early realization that one of the vectors HIV infection was from the injecting drug using community. They realized that swapping dirty needles for clean would reduce the transmission of HIV eventually into the non-injecting drug using community.

It has also been suggested that MDMA is inherently dangerous if unadulterated and at a known dose. As I pointed out it is being used in a medical research setting right at this moment for the treatment of PTSD.

'Ecstasy' Study Results Promising for PTSD

This is from WebMD, well respected and hardly a bunch of hippy druggies.

"Oct. 30, 2018 -- The long-banned “club drug” MDMA showed strong results as a treatment against posttraumatic stress disorder in its largest and longest study to date, researchers reported Monday.

The phase II clinical trial followed 28 patients with chronic PTSD, including military veterans and crime victims, who took the drug during three daylong psychotherapy sessions over 3 months. After two sessions, 43% of the group that received active doses of MDMA no longer met the definition of PTSD, compared to 33% who got a low dose of the drug as a placebo. And a year after the first session, 76% of the active-dose group no longer had PTSD, according to results published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology."

Yes, of course, people die from taking homemade drugs. They die because it may be adulterated, the dose is uncertain, it is taken with other drugs etc. Testing can reduce this. If people think this is untrue then please demonstrate that by quoting figures of increased deaths from the many countries that have LEGALISED pill testing.

These countries currently have some form of testing. If as some people claim that it would be such a disaster then surely the record of increased deaths would be a powerful argument.

Service from 20 countries representing 31 different checking services (run by 29 separate organisations2 ). Twenty-three of the 31 services were operating within European countries: France (4)3 , Spain (4), Switzerland (3)4 , Austria (2), Slovenia (2), Belgium (1), Hungary (1), Italy (1), Luxembourg (1), Netherlands (1), Poland (1), Portugal (1), and the United Kingdom (1). Six of the 31 services were operating in the Americas, including United States (2), Canada (1), Colombia (1), Mexico (1) and Uruguay (1). Two of 31 services were operating in Australasia, including in Australia (1) and New Zealand (1).

Effectiveness of drug checking

Drug checking has been shown to be an effective way to reduce the harm from drug use through informing safer use, limiting use, and helping users avoid the most dangerous substances. The services also provide monitoring and detection of new psychoactive substances to inform public health interventions. The Loop have stated that 20% of samples are handed in for disposal and 40% of service users reduce intake.[17] KnowYourStuffNZ have found that, when substances are not as expected, half of service users state they will not take that substance and a quarter say they will take a smaller quantity.[18] Drug checking services also reach drug users who are not reached by existing services. Evidence from research conducted by Austrian pill testing service CheckIt! found 58% of people who use the service would not otherwise seek out harm reduction information, and about 75% are more likely to access harm reduction services if pill testing is included[19].

No one has provided any evidence that drug or pill testing causes more harm than good they have only demonstrated that for them it is philosophically unacceptable, and that is fine as long as people understand their motives. Also please try hard to understand that my view is not about free drugs for all but about harm minimisation. Sometimes a pilot breaks the law or perhaps runs out of fuel over tiger country, even if these people have broken the law we still send a helicopter to rescue them, it is just what civilized people do.

I have no problem with people who come to a different decision to me but please do not misrepresent what I am saying.

For science nerds (if there are any here)

Well time to move on from this subject. The way I approach these dilemmas involves loads of research and I think I am ready to read something not drug-related. I do however feel the need to clarify a few points.

I suspect that people think I am motivated by wanting to give things to drug users to be nice or to encourage further drug use. They also think perhaps I am motivated by libertarianism. Although I suppose I tend towards personal liberty, this is not my motivation.

For example needle exchange programs. I am all for them, not to save an addict a few dollars but because of the harm reduction done to the addict but mostly to the wider community. Countries that have needle exchanges also have lower rates of HIV and Hep C. Because a needle becomes something that you trade in for a clean one makes it less likely I will stand on a discarded needle at the beach.

Needle exchange programs provide the following:

• Disposal of used needles.
   
  
• Referrals to treatment centers.
   
  
• Access to methadone clinics.
   
  
• Condoms.
   
  
• Peer education.
   
  
• Screening for AIDS and other diseases.
   
  
• Information about HIV prevention.
   
  
• Onsite counseling services.
   
  

The evidence for needle exchange is quite persuasive. https://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/83AAED699516CE2DCA257BF0001E7255/$File/evid.pdf

But this is where the disagreements begin.

I have posted numerous links to hard evidence which I am quite sure no one looked at. There were plenty of opportunities to challenge me on the interpretation of evidence. I am supposing that those who disagree with me believe that whether or not these schemes are of benifit is secondary to a principle of zero tolerance.

In terms of illegality, the New Zealand testing service states that it is not breaking any law and operates with the blessing of the authorities. It is unfortunately not able to help anyone under 18 and in fact, they are not able to personally handle the drugs as this would be illegal. They provide the equipment and supervise the pill owner who performs the test themselves. The figures show that 5%-7% of users when the test shows that the drug is unadulterated never the less after the counselling that is part of the testing decides NOT to take it. Yes, a small number but to me, this can only be a good thing. What if this figure improved and became 60% would those against say so what it is the principle that matters.

As far as being around people who use drugs, hey I have been a musician all of my working life, of course, I have been around drug users although mostly at the lighter end.

In terms of a more rigid application of drug laws I would not rule that out but I ask myself where is an example that I can look at to see how it works. The US has tough drug laws and a very high prison population. I find it hard to see how this tougher system improves society. I guess we could go even tougher such as some Asian and middle eastern countries but of course, they still have their societal problems.

Next time there is a festival on the police could raid it and arrest hundreds of users and hold them in custody, have them appear in court perhaps jail some but I am not sure this technique has worked anywhere but I can be convinced of anything with solid evidence.

By the way, after a little bit of googling, I have found that pill testing kits are available for purchase (although I do not know how accurate they are) Also the price of infrared spectrometers continues to fall. I can see a time when a plugin device and a phone app may provide the same service. Perhaps then a pill testing service will become irrelevant.

Anyway, as I say I have other things to do. I do understand and respect other peoples opinions even when I don't agree with them.

What did the pragmatists do in the lead up to WW2?

That is rather a rather strange argument. You tell me since you have obviously constructed an argument around it.

pragmatistDictionary result for pragmatist

/ˈpraɡmətɪst/

noun

1. a person who is guided more by practical considerations than by ideals.
   "hardheaded pragmatists firmly rooted in the real world"
    
   
2. PHILOSOPHY
   an advocate of the approach that evaluates theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application.
    
   

I would imagine it would have been difficult to win the war without pragmatism.

If you don't like the word pragmatic perhaps I could rephrase it and say I believe in evidence-based decision making.

Why is it PM that you give coal generators a free pass given that 3 were unavailable for maintenance or repair? I would bet if a wind farm went offline you would not be so generous. Every mechanical device needs to be serviced and from time to time repaired. in a large wind farm there would always be perhaps 1 or 2 turbines offline for maintenance.

As nomapete points out the battery in SA is NOT designed to power the state it is designed to prevent blackout or brownout until alternative means come online. It has been successful at this and has made its owners plenty of money.

The fact that expensive generators were used is a bit of a red herring. The point is that a grid with redundancy to ensure there is never a blackout or brownout is just way too expensive. We try to match our generation to our usage and any reserve capacity costs. The example I would use is this, I lived on a bush property for 20 years, there was no power to the block. We installed a quite modest solar power system. To design the system so that we would never run out of power would have been quite expensive back then. We had a backup generator, we sized the generator to be suitable for 95% of its backup needs. On the rare occasion I neede a welder I hired a larger generator. This was cheaper than buying a much larger generator and hardly ever using it.

The cost of SA using for a short period of time diesel generators must be averaged over the year and must be compared economically with having other means on standby. Without the battery handling the load temporarily what other options exist? Given that you can not fire up a coal powered generator quickly I guess you need it to run consuming coal ready for when it is needed.

The anti-new technology crowd seems to believe that we have reached the peak of technology and no further improvements are possible or even required. I do not believe we can shut down every coal burner and replace it with new tech straight away but I do think it would be foolish to build more given that it has to be financially viable over perhaps 60 years. What people will often say is that we should wait until renewables are superior and cheaper. The problem there is that if you take for instance the car, it was neither cheaper or more efficient than the horse at first. Governments subsidised the car by building road networks, they could see the potential. 1901 two brothers fly a few meters 1969 "one small step for a man" I well remember the first mobile phone, the battery was in a separate case.

Just a few random points before I move on from this subject.

Just reading back through this thread (and I am not trying to have a go at anyone) it appears that those who are for pill testing are pragmatists and those against are principlists I say this because it seems clear from peoples posts that they have not evaluated or even looked at the evidence gathered from many years of these schemes overseas. I have always been a pragmatists, for me, outcomes are more important than rigid principles.

As an example, I loathe the idea of injecting all dubious substances. I accept that using these drugs is illegal, however, I believe needle exchange schemes have saved countless people from contracting aids and or Hep C. I believe that this benefits the wider community.

"Australian Governments began in the mid-1980s to pilot or support programs involving needle exchange for intravenous drug users. These remain occasionally controversial, but are reported to have been crucial in keeping the incidence of the disease low, as well as being extremely cost-effective.[24][25]"

HIV/AIDS in Australia - Wikipedia

My question would be, do people who oppose pill testing also oppose needle exchange programs?

I did not really know much about MDHA but what I have learned is that it is used (controversially) by some therapist in the treatment of PTSD. As a drug, it was rated in a study (UK 2007) as 18th in harmfulness from a list of 20 recreational drugs. The death rate is relatively low, deaths being caused by additives or unpredictable potency as well as mixing with other substances.

Now let me make it quite clear, I am not advocating its use. My advice to a young person who wants to experience ecstasy would be to take flying lessons!

This drug seems mainly attractive to younger people. I am a responsible adult and I have so far led a productive and happy life, in fact, the older I get the happier I get, but in my mid to late teens I did make the occasional poor decision (not involving drugs, alcohol perhaps) but luckily I survived these experiences and I was able to become a better person.

I find it hard to relate to the notion of "they knew what they were doing so let them die." The thing about this particular drug is that it tends to be taken irregularly. It seems pretty tragic to me that a 15-year-old may take 1 tablet because as we know 15-year-olds are not necessarily great at decision making and are desperate to fit in with their peers my die when testing could dissuade them from taking it. I note that in the statistic presented by "Know your stuff" in New Zealand show that when a test confirms that the pill is NOT contaminated around about 5% of people nevertheless chose not to take it and they disposed of it. A further 2% said they would probably not take it but did not dispose of it. These numbers are small but important When the drug was found to be not what the person expected half of them did not take the drug. As a pragmatist I say the outcome tends toward the positive. Unless there are negative or unintended consequences then I am supportive.

My position on this is pragmatic and supported the evidence from many years from overseas. As someone who is open-minded, I am always open to changing my but only by evidence. Harsher drug penalties may or may not work but the intelligent thing to do would be to analyse various ways of handling this problem. We can look at overseas schemes both lenient and harsh. We need to consider the unintended consequences, for example, does pill testing lead to more drug use, does it increase or decrease deaths and does a harsher drug policy mean the police are taken away from other duties, can we afford to jail large numbers of casual users, what is the long term effect when these people leave jail?

For me, it is pragmatism over principlism

being bandied around is that the cost off last weeks power outage in vic sa will cost around wait for it (you have a stab at it) xxxxxxxxxxx owing to the FACT wind and solar failedaint it great that your taxes are being wasted on the biggest con ever of renewable energy neil

Neil 3 coal-fired generators went offline.

Power generators fail ahead of horror 44C day

POWER GENERATORS FAIL

A third electricity generator in Victoria was shut down overnight as people suffered through sweltering temperatures, ahead of an expected 44C day.

About 6500 properties lost power on Thursday evening as the mercury struggled to dip below 30C.

Victorian Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio told 3AW this morning that three units at the coal-fire power stations Yallourn and Loy Yang A were not working.

“This means we can’t rule out brownouts,” Ms D’Ambrosio said. “We have ageing coal-fired power stations. They are becoming less reliable.”

A spokesman for EnergyAustralia told news.com.au that one unit at Yallourn, located in Latrobe Valley, came offline this morning after leaks were found in one or more boiler tubes.

“These tubes are required in the production of steam, which drives the turbine,” he said.

The issue was first noticed about midday Wednesday but the station decided to keep the unit running in a “controlled and reduced capacity” to help meet electricity demand during yesterday’s hot weather.

“Our ability to safely operate this unit was essential yesterday and helped ensure Victorians remained with power,” he said.

“Following this peak period on Thursday, we were forced take it offline because the condition of the tube leak deteriorated.

“We will be assessing the unit throughout the day. At this stage it’s unclear when it can return to service.”

Another unit was also down for scheduled maintenance so the power station is currently only operating at 50 per cent capacity.

A third unit at neighbouring Loy Yang A reportedly went down on Tuesday due to a tube leak with repairs expected to take about three days.

United Energy, Powercor and CitiPower spokeswoman Emma Tyner told ABC radio 6500 customers were affected by electricity outages overnight. The number had reduced to about 800 by 9am, mostly in the Powercor network, she said.

Many countries do have harsh drug laws and consequently large prison populations. I am not aware of any countries where this has worked.

It is all too easy from the keyboard to think we know exactly how to fix every problem that society has but in reality the world is more complicated than that.

My idea would be this:

Legalise most recreational drugs. Register, tax and regulate dealers. Of course, many dealers would not register. Have very strict penalties for unregistered dealers (much harsher than the present).

Registered dealers gradually move into the traditional business world with all of its obligations. I could go down to the bottleshop and buy a bottle of my favourite Laphroaig whysky. I know how much active ingredient the bottle contains. If I drink the whole bottle I know I will get sick or die. I can be confident that the whysky is not cut with industrial ethanol. It simply would be business and legal suicide for the company to provide a contaminated product. Product liability should apply as well as recalls etc.

We use some of the tax take used to educate and to mitigate the societal costs of drug use.

The notion that anyone who takes drugs is on a certain trajectory and will die a junkie with a needle hanging out of a vein is not quite true. The reality is that drug use in some demographics is substantial. Most of these people grow out of it. In my 20s I used to get drunk reasonably often but with age, I have of course become more sensible as almost everyone does. The tragedy of a young person dying from a contaminated drug or a drug of unknown potency is that this young person would more than likely would have moved on from taking drugs if they survived long enough to grow up.

Would this work, I don't know, these issues are complex and require intelligent and open-minded study. We need to learn from the small successes other counties have had.

apparently there are over 600 pieces off sheeeeet going into some them there pillsabout 200 or so can be picked on a spectrometer and the values known

 

so that leaves 400 bit off crap in some of them pills that are unknown

 

so unless you have a spectrometer in your back pocket the pill testing is flawed

 

some off the sheeeet in those pills that the spectrometer has found the values are a complete mystery

 

octave them judges have to be serious and penelize the user and the sell with a conviction then they wont get a job and wont get out off the country neil

Neil, luckily they do have a spectrometer in their pocket.

The service provided by KnowYourStuffNZ includes:

– provision of factual information about drugs and drug use in general, signs of excessive or dependent use to look out for, and information about where to get help for drug related problems.

– testing of substances using reagents and infra-red spectroscopy to discern the content of a sample.

Our Service

BUTThe girl in Parramatta had PURE drug, Still killed her.

 

The pusher Should be charged with her death.

 

Any death by other means are chargeable offences.

 

Hit & kill a cyclist with your car !. YOU WILL BE CHARGED.

 

But its only a pill, Make it legal, TO KILL with a PILL..

 

It's Illegal to have !.

 

It's Illegal to sell !.

 

It's Illegal to kill !.

 

DON'T change the LAW for DRUG pushers.

 

spacesailor

I agree but this is not changing the law for pushers, is it? No one is talking about not charging the pusher.

If the idea is so obviously flawed then you should be able to find hundreds of examples where it has failed or made things worse.

In an earlier post, you said this "We should do what Portugal did years ago and de criminalise drugs. They have a much lower drug problem than us" - and I totally agree we should try what has worked for them including pill testing! Pill testing is not new and it has amassed a great deal of data regarding it's performance. You are of course entitled to your own opinion (but not your own facts)

https://www.smh.com.au/national/what-is-pill-testing-20190103-p50pg5.html

"Pill testing is part of the Netherlands national drug policy – it was introduced there in 1992. Government-sanctioned services have been in Austria since 1997, Belgium since 1993 and Switzerland since 2001. Pill testing is also available in Portugal, France and Spain. Not-for-profit organisations have been testing in the US and Canada since 1999 and in the UK since 2013.

In New Zealand, pill testing is offered at festivals by the volunteer group KnowYourStuffNZ, which is independent but supported by the New Zealand Drug Foundation.

Australia’s first professionally administered pill-testing outfit was in a mobile laboratory at Canberra’s Groovin’ the Moo festival in April. The testers used an infrared spectrometer to identify substances in a sample of each pill."

OctaveYour words !

 

"The testing is not destructive. it only requires a scraping "

 

The first layer on most pills is a coating to keep the ingredients intact.

 

And even if "pure " it can still kill.

 

Trying to swallow a none coated pill is fairly hard without water.

 

My anti-inflammatory pill is non-coated & collapses in my throat. ( reach for the wife's water).

 

spacesailor

Space you really are clutching are straws

The methodology is well described.

Firstly drugs made in a basement are unlikely to be coated. If you are correct then test results would not show anything meaningful at all but you can read reports on what drugs are found. If they are only scraping the very surface then how is it that they are able to attain the results that they are obtaining.

By the way, the figures show that around 5% when told the drugs is what is supposed to be and has no impurities still elect not to take them. For some, this may y be the first time they have ever been cancelled.

New Zealand has been doing this for a few years now. This is the are the methods they use: (but you probably are not interested in facts) Here is a link to the organisation that tests drugs in NZ including some of the raw data 2016/17 results

Our testing methods – Reagents and FT-IR Spectroscopy

"KnowYourStuffNZ is made up of dedicated volunteers, and operates independently but with the support of the New Zealand Drug Foundation. The technology and methods we use are helping to develop global best practice in this evolving field. We share our processes and data with overseas testing services such as The Loop in the UK and DanceSafe in the USA. All KnowYourStuffNZ’s volunteers are trained in the use of the technology and interpretation of results.

Initial testing is carried out using reagents such as Marquis and Mandelin, as well as Ehrlich’s for detecting LSD. These reagents are now available in New Zealand through The Hemp Store. We recommend the DanceSafe instructions for interpreting reagent tests.

More detailed testing at events is carried out using a Bruker ALPHA – a Fourier transform infra-red spectrometer. This uses infra-red light to generate a characteristic absorption spectrum for each sample, allowing the detection of drugs, adulterants, and mixtures.

Together, these methods allow us to identify over 95% of substances that people bring us.

When people find out the drug they have is not what they presumed, they are often willing to abstain from taking that drug. For our testing in the 2016/17 summer season, half of our clients chose not to take a substance that was not as presumed. "

Just to get a sample of the COATING !.

Are you suggesting that the testing methodology is flawed?

I believe this is the standard method used in 20 countries that do allow drug testing. It is hardly some wild experiment that has never been tried before. Most recently drug testing occurred in Canberra https://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/act/overwhelming-success-calls-for-expanding-pill-testing-after-canberra-trial-20180619-p4zmdn.html

People here have offered their "opinion" that it is ridiculous and they are so sure it could not possibly work but they don't seem to have much understanding of the methods and the fact that this is happening in 20 countries so far and more are considering it. I have no problem with people who at least make the effort to look at the evidence and come to a different conclusion.

Drug checking - Wikipedia

Goes to a music festival and decides to have a pill tested. The pill is consumed by test process (destructive testing).

it only requires a scraping

"After signing a disclaimer which reinforced that the results did not show the drugs were “safe”, and filling out a short pre-test survey, attendees put a sample of their drugs onto a sheet where a chemist scraped off a small amount for testing."

As keep saying my position is that it should be tried on a small scale (and so should other things) and we should adopt whatever improves the situation. I am neither for or against but to rule it out and not to even consider results of schemes being used overseas is frankly stupid.

In order to have more than just an opinion, it is important to actually analyse evidence.

The girl at Parramatta would have been given her pill back, as it was PURE,.And she would have Still Died. (Her Dad said so)

No one thinks that pill testing would have a 100% success rate. Space would you be for or against a limited trial where the results could be evaluated rather than going on peoples gut instinct either way?

In medicine, if there is a problem to be solved we do trials. For me the data is everything. I don't know what the answer is although I do know that what we are doing now is not working. Space do you believe that we should investigate the evidence from elsewhere. If pill testing does not work or makes matters worse then fine look for another way. To not look at the data seems to me to be ridiculous and dumb.

I suspect that people would rather voice there opinion based on gut feeling rather than doing a little intellectual work and examining the evidence.

https://www.ecstasydata.org/text/2011/2011_tedi_factsheet_on_drug_checking_in_europe.pdf

I do think mining of some sort will be with us for some time but it is interesting to see where engineering is going. Concrete is extremely energy intensive and its use is a substantial contributor to co2 production. Wood, on the other hand, is renewable and it locks up CO2 for at least the life of the building. The wood, of course, would have to be harvested in a sustainable way.

Vancouver is home to the world’s tallest wooden building...for now

https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/wooden-skyscrapers-timber-trend-catching-fire-duplicate-2/index.html

octave what part do you not like what are you trying to say neil

is it not clear?

Neil, you are implying that anyone who does not support the "let die" philosophy is therefore in favour of all of the things in your list. I think this is hysterical nonsense. Perhaps this is not what you are implying. "Your example of a druggy bashing and robbing an 86 year old" of course I want to stop that but nothing so far has stopped it. But wouldn't it be better if that druggy was in a more controlled environment? Why does a druggy rob someone? It surely is because drugs are expensive and illegal. You may think I am a horrible person but what I am saying is this, if drugs were decriminalized and somewhat supervised don't you think the 86 year old might be less likely to be bashed?

Neil, there are not just 2 extreme positions, there are many shades of grey. If you believe that anyone who advocates for harm minimisation is therefore in favour of the items in the list you presented then I think you are wrong.

I do accept that you believe your position is the most likely to fix things, that's fine but what you are saying is anyone with a different opinion is as bad as the worst drug pusher