Old Koreelah

...and I actually agree with this outspoken politician:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29679312

Like she says, they should be on top of buildings, not covering up good farmland.

This is the first one How Australia Perfected Solar Power and Then Went Back to Coal.

Which other ones were stupid?

Take a look in the mirror.

OK!! How can you denigrate our "beloved leader" like that. If he hadn't got rid of that crippling tax, we'd be paying $100 for our lamb roasts! You know it's true, because he said so.

...some stuff said on this thread is just plain stupid.

I see this thread as a silly exercise in bashing the LNP.

...and to insult to injury, rises in the price of electricity which Abbott blamed on the carbon "tax" were largely a result of overspending on the electricity distribution system. What a con!

Electricity storage technology is developing at an impassive rate; night time solar power is already viable in some areas. We will probable need the network for a few decades to redistribute local generation, but it will eventually be left to crumble as was the case with phone lines. Many developing counties have skipped the whole idea of landlines and have suddenly got modern mobile communication systems

Our grandparents couldn't conceive of the day when every house would have its own stand-alone refrigerating system. The same development process is likely to happen with domestic electricity- just faster.

.

Good idea Dafydd, but after wading thru the Parkinsonisms that Mr. Google has tossed up I am ready to slit my wrists...

One can only take so much.

Maybe Australia should institute a prize for good leadership, awarded years after the full effects of decisions have become clear.

The Nobel Prizes for Science are usually awarded yonks after a research breakthrough; hindsight allow us to see the far-reaching effects of the innovation or discovery. If there was a decent pension attached it might encourage a bit of forward thinking.

Wonder if one of our well-known philanthropic squillionairs could chip in a few bob?

If you take the socialist view, then you are quite right.And the reason you are quite right is that our leader and opposition leader of the day are far too busy with the urgent day to day business of tens of portfolios, not the least of which is Finance.

 

If I had my wish the solution would be solar power, but clearly that needs a few technology leaps.

Not so long ago we couldn't image everyone having a mobile phone. Now most households around the world- even in Africa- have one.

CORRECTIONIt's clear from this thread that Australia hasn't yet perfected solar power to the point that it can compete with coal fired power stations.

 

With the possible exception of some hydro-electric power stations I'm not aware of Australia having any other working and viable sources to coal on a scale to power Cities.

 

How's that

When we vote, we seem to be preoccupied with the next couple of years. Maybe our children should have a vote. After all, they're the ones to inherit the mess we make of the place, and will have to pay the bill.

It's clear from the content of this thread that its title is incorrect; Australia hasn't perfected solar power and can't produce an economically viable alternative source to coal.QED

If this a comment on the woeful short-sightedness of our business and political leaders then I agree. After all, Australia is the country which imported 4WDs for fifty years before our car industry finally noticed a local market and decided to build AWDs here.

If you are saying coal is the only viable way to generate power then real-world events are rapidly overtaking you.

Abbott's culpable opposition to renewable energy could result in the decimation of many communities.

http://m.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/why-abbotts-faith-in-coal-could-be-wrong--very-wrong-20141017-117k1b.html

...I would say anyone that still believes in anthropogenic global warming is religious by your definition...

Let's hope the sceptics are right. If they are not, we're truly in the sh1t.

Explain to your grandchildren why Australia is overrun by tens of million of environmental refugees. The world community will remember which country reneged on its commitments, which country was the biggest exporter of coal...

We purport to respect science...until it tells us uncomfortable facts like we have been living way beyond our means. Instead of listening and acting on the warnings, we shoot the messenger, then carry on as if nothing can get in the way of our comfortable lifestyle.

The ASIC can stay as long as it likes, I'm still not getting one.

Why do some people always expect a government subsidy, as if it is free money with no strings attached?

If a "250Mw stand alone solar (with gas backup at night)" is a viable proposition, then private industry and/or green entrepreneurs should fund and develop it.

We wouldn't begrudge corporations their big profits if they put a bit back into the community. It's not just the poor who take handouts.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-29/a-third-of-top-australian-companies-pay-less-than-10pc-tax/5775870

http://www.smh.com.au/business/james-hardie-paid-an-average-of-0-in-corporate-tax-over-past-decade-20140929-10nntx.html

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/budget-pain-not-for-millionaires-who-pay-no-tax-20140512-zr9o3.html

If you want to politicise it, I think you'll find the time to set policy was back around the Whitlam era.

...Coal fired power stations do have one efficiency improvement option not previously mentioned on this thread:

Presently under construction at Kogan Creek (700MW) plant - is a 35MW boost achieved by passive solar preheating of the water. Lots of pipes and mirrors. Time will tell how well it works.

Liddell has a small experimental solar preheater.

There was a larger proposed 250Mw stand alone solar (with gas backup at night) planned but it got canned when government funds were revoked (according to what I heard). That would have been a interesting start for Australia.

Also, regarding bulk energy storage, We already have a pumped storage hydro power plant here in Qld - capable of up to 600Mw output which can be deployed in 14 seconds when needed. It has been operational since the 1980's and although it is not on line all that often, it does permit the grid to be run with less 'spinning reserve' so it's existence actually improved the overall efficiency of all other power generators simply by being available, so they didn't have to burn coal just in case it was needed. Remember that it takes a lot of time to bring big steam engines on line if they are suddenly needed.

 

Re: efficiency of power stations, well as Dafydd said, there is only so much you can get out of a particular power station. However, over the years there has been noticable improvements in boilers and burners, etc. So the newer units are more efficient than the older types. Many new units run gas since it is cheaper to use as well as 'greener'.

Australia has lots of gas, but thanks to lack of vision by the likes of John Howard, we're pretty well giving it away- and, unlike all other gas exporters, we're not reserving any of it for our own industry.

"Geothermal anyone? Temperature underground doesn't change much."

 

Geothermal = fracking radioactive rock = nuclear but remote areas (in Australia) and with limited control.

 

Why not have a proper controllable nuclear power plant positioned where you need it & save all the transmission runs also? As a bonus it will also work consistently unlike Flannerys dud thing.

 

Bottom line, if you like geothermal you like fracking and nuclear, good for you. Nuke is natures power source of course.

 

Don't get too hung up on transmission costs; if our government would allow the spread of rooftop solar to continue, more energy would be collected right where it's needed. Our cities could eventually become net energy exporters.

Nuclear power has only ever been economical when integrated with weapons development. During the Cold War many countries put up with the vast expense and safety issues because they were told nuclear would secure their future.

Now a much more ominous threat to our future has been identified. We should be prepared to pay for a solution. Nuclear fusion provides limitless power, and it's available everywhere. The reactor is a safe distance... 150,000km away. Smart countries are investing in that clean future. Australia is becoming increasingly isolated as an exporter of dirty energy.

.

National Bank will never again get my money; their dodgy dealing cost us heaps, and they can afford lawyers to stiffle any efforts at recompense. Bastards.

OK

I'm not for a moment having a crack at you, or anybody else's circumstances.

 

But I am critical of your post which on my understanding of the facts, is biased, base-less and incorrect.

 

Regards Geoff

So easy to say/write isn't it OK? And chuck in a bit of good old Coal Industry conspiracy theory too.But let's all try to take your post seriously, so I respond as follows:...

...you may not have noticed that NZ is in a slightly more geothermally active area than are we in good old stable OZ...and no bubbling mud or geizers etc in the Wyong/Lake Macquarie area.....

If you or anyone else has greater knowledge then we should all be happy to read about it; adopting a condescending tone does nothing for the discussion.

...You say that there is our most promising "Hot Rock" concentration...

The map you attached (which may be more up to date than the one I relied on) barely shows hot rock under the Muswellbrook area. I shall defer to your greater knowledge of the subject.

So "Why not give it a try?". Why don't you take all of your savings and assets and pump them into forming a company to commercialise Geothermal Power in the Bayswater Power Station region. It is certain to be a success and you will surely receive backing from all of the other anti-coal zealots. Why not give it a try? $750 M should get you going on a small pilot installation, and perhaps the next Labour/Greens government will subsidize it, except that some local group of rent-a-protester wacko's will probably chain themselves to the deep drilling machines to stop that work before you get started...

Sorry you chose to take this line, Geoff. I have few resources to invest, but am one of the interested little people who have a vested interest in the wise and sustainable investment of our nation's capital. As you may have noticed, many projects rely on the taxpayers' dollars to get them off the ground.

Interesting idea, pm. I believe that, after the Balmain colliery was closed the mine workings, which ran under Sydney Harbour and out to sea, were used to store gas.

...CO2 is a fertilizer, by the way; plants structures are built from it. I would imagine that it would make considerable sense to use some of the CO2 emitted by power stations to promote the growth of food crops in intensive (greenhouse) cultivation. I've no idea of the acreage involved; but it's a pertinent question I think - makes more sense than CO2 sequestration.

...You cannot take a power station such as Bayswater, and set an arbitrary requirement on the % improvement in its efficiency - because that's what governs the amount of CO2 it produces - per year. The efficiency of such a plant it what is designed into it... So we're looking at long-term in any change from coal-fired steam plant - and I don't think we have any politicians who are capable of thinking past the next election...

water besides burning coal. Not far under Bayswater PS is one of Australia's most promising concentrations of hot rock. Why can't we tap that heat to run the two thermal power plants sitting right above it?

The last I heard about this fascinating resource was years back when a measly $5 million was grudgingly allocated to research its potential. Was it found to be a dumb idea, or has King Coal nudged the idea aside? .

The concept of using alternate heat sources has already been trialled: solar collectors at the nearby Liddell power station preheat some of the water for its generators.

The infrastructure is already in place and functioning. Why not give it a try?