• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Renewable energy

Status
Not open for further replies.
boyo

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Australians want renewable energy target retained by big margin

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rgy-target-retained-by-big-margin?CMP=ema_632

"Australians overwhelmingly want the renewable energy target to be retained or even increased, as the Abbott government considers abolishing the incentive for new renewable projects.
Polling for the Climate Institute shows 72% of Australians want to keep or expand the renewable energy target (RET), which requires that 20% of energy is sourced from renewables by 2020."
 
Pfitzy

Pfitzy

George Gregan (70)
Would love to get hot rock technology up. Definite promise but needs more efficient transport medium to get to urban centres
 
boyo

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Clean energy sector ‘on hold’ while government reviews renewables target

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ld-while-government-reviews-renewables-target

"More than $5 billion was invested in Australian clean energy last year but the sector has virtually ground to a halt owing to widespread anxiety over the government’s commitment to renewables, according to the industry body.

In its analysis of renewables in 2013, the Clean Energy Council found that nearly 15% of Australia’s power was produced by renewable energy, with $5.18 billion invested in the sector."

"The industry now employs more than 21,000 people..."
 
boyo

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Australia's Energy Security - 24/7 Concentrated Solar Thermal Power plus Molten Salt Storage (CSP+)
This has been mentioned on GAGR previously.

Baseload from solar - the usual suspects will say that it's impossible.

It's here it's now.

Boom!
 
Runner

Runner

Nev Cottrell (35)
I suggest you try the Climate Change thread in Politics blog. This area has been well covered by all sides there and many of the points / articles here have been dealt with.

Happy reading terry j
 
terry j

terry j

Ron Walden (29)
arrggh, just saw more than a thousand posts in that thread, want to help by narrowing it down just a tiny bit??

alternatively, I guess i could expand just a bit. (re the vid I commented on, more as an appreciation to boyo continually posting things)

Don't remember exactly 'how many homes' that plant could power, but first thing that struck me was a two to one ratio required, the one to provide power for the day, twice to also then store enough energy to tap into by night.

then we have transmission losses from an area of 'sufficient sunlight daily' to the homes.

For example, not much use having a huge solar power station for syd IN syd, land cost alone would rule it out.

etc etc etc.

I love alternative power, but sometimes you also gotta be pragmatic.

Unless of course there are good points in that thread, maybe I have to wait till i have a few hours to kill to trawl thru it.
 
Runner

Runner

Nev Cottrell (35)
On the right track.

The alternatives work but is the
1)upscaling that causes hassle -- 1 wind turbine = 1000 homes as long as wind blows and it takes years to recover the carbon used to create and maintain the turbines. Add in the subsidies or they will not be built and it is not cost effective. Work out how many for Sydney with each requiring an area the size of a large sports field.
2) you still need a back up system so if you decrease demand for the main power users but expect to have full capacity plants you either subsidies or have higher prices. The consumer looses.
3) solar as long as the sun shines then you need back up. Even in some rural areas they still have back up generators with wind and solar systems.
4) europeans are moving away from it due to the costs particularly after the GFC as the subsides are high.
5) Geothermal works if you have it like Iceland or parts of NZ. None in Sydney.
6) No wave machines have been successfully run in Australia. One attempt failed at huge cost.
7) Nuclear and the greens go crazy and howl at the moon.

In general without a subsidy from the public it is a nice idea but not practical.

Fortunately I am a way for a weeks holiday so I will miss the responses for awhile.

Do read the other posts
 
Braveheart81

Braveheart81

Will Genia (78)
Staff member
Runner said:
7) Nuclear and the greens go crazy and howl at the moon.
Click to expand...

This is such a furfy. Neither the LNP nor ALP have shown any serious interest in Australia adopting nuclear energy.

It is a complete red herring at this stage to suggest that it is likely to be part of Australia's future whilst neither major party has any desire to pursue it.

Blaming The Greens is complete misdirection.
 
boyo

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Big savings from renewable energy target but consumers miss out

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/big-savings-from-renewable-energy-target-but-consumers-miss-out-20140702-zstn1.html#ixzz36N2JAgPr

From the comments:-

Evidence is anathema to Abbott and Co whenever, and as it frequently does, contradict their ideological, evidence phobic agenda.
Of course the LNP cheer squad also disparage evidence, especially of the independent type that contradicts their fantasist world views. According to them, and in reality this government, many thousands of scientists are engaged in a worldwide conspiracy and are manufacturing evidence of global warming/ ACG. Evidence for this? Scientific illiterates misunderstanding, or even deliberately misrepresenting, scientific data. Some are paid and or otherwise supported by the fossil fuel industry via sham groups who also advocated against tobacco being carcinogenic, and who were not so coincidently supported by the tobacco industry. They don't even have the decency to put up alternate theories that can survive even basic scrutiny.
If there's a conspiracy, it's not by the very many providing peer reviewed science in support of climate change, it's by the vested interest minority, being the 'denier' camp that provide nothing but white noise to confuse the intellectually lazy.


TA being wrong about something, again.

Who'd a thunk it?
 
boyo

boyo

Mark Ella (57)
Solar experts say Australian renewable energy investment being stifled by Government policy

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...nvestment-killed-by-government-policy/5575262

"Mr Kennedy says Australia risks "going the way of the dodo" and missing out on "the biggest economic opportunity of the 21st century" if it continues to favour coal over renewable power.

"We get stuck in quarry Australia mentality from the 20th century while the rest of the world is phasing out coal and trying to move towards these new industries and creating whole new ways of doing business and jobs which Australians may never benefit from," he said."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top