Katoomba Monthly Temp average set to be SMASHED!!! AGAIN!!!

[NeilS]

On the cost of connecting WA to the Eastern States I would have thought that money would be better spent on some solar farms or similar for the two sides of the country.

Yes, but that doesn't address the issue of base load that Paul has raised.

Dispatchable electrons is the issue.

With enough batteries and other storage, maybe, but the magnitude of those that would be required to provide dispatchable power for any length of time and the economics of doing so has been questioned by Paul.

[Beardy]

Is there much hope that batteries will come of age to provide base load power? I get the feeling that it won’t pan out that way except for vehicles etc.
When we do get to the EV being mainstream, our power requirements to charge them will ramp up the baseload too I would expect

[Bushmiller]

Is there much hope that batteries will come of age to provide base load power? I get the feeling that it won’t pan out that way except for vehicles etc.
When we do get to the EV being mainstream, our power requirements to charge them will ramp up the baseload too I would expect

Beardy

Batteries are not the economic answer for the moment. Baseload power would only be affected if battery charging took place primarily when solar was not operative. At this stage we can only guess at how charging profiles will develop. The benefits of electric cars are diminished if fossil fired power is used to recharge them.

Regards
Paul

[Bushmiller]

In an earlier post I referenced a newspaper article from WA regarding a feasibility study for a new coal fired power station in QLD. It appears that the location concerned was the site of Collinsville, inland from Bowen. This is my take on the porposal.

The old Collinsville power station was small. 4 x 31MW units and 1 x 66MW unit. It was built on top of a coal mine and had (still has) a good supply of coal. It was closed down in 2018. At least once during it’s operation they had to shut the station down when they ran out of cooling water. They used old style cooling towers rather than the huge hyperbolic towers, not that that would have made much difference.
Today there is a 42MW solar farm on site. Much has been touted about re-opening Collinsville. That is mis-leading and more exactly the description would be the creation of a completely new station. The indigenous company, Shine Energy, which has local connections is the interested party.

Back during the last Federal election there was a promise of $10 million to fund a feasibility study. Nothing happened to honour that commitment until recently when the Morrison government announced a $4 million grant for a feasibility study.

My impression is that Shine Energy is seeking significant funding if the project went ahead (and in that statement we are well ahead both of ourselves and the feasibility study). I don’t know who would be interested in putting up the $2 billion. The government has no interest in financing anything and has divested itself of much it used to own. I would be surprised if any bank was interested in today’s climate (pun intended).
The government is clearly keen to get onside with the marginal seat of Collinsville (or whatever the electorate is called) and they will no doubt point to the feasibility study as testimony to their commitment to coal. If challenged by southern electorates where there is less sympathy with fossil fired power, they will claim it is only a feasibility study and one they possibly already know is doomed to failure. The government will probably claim they sought an independent study, but the cynical among us might even claim it is a sly ploy to curry favour with zero responsibility and less intent.

One problem is that QLD is probably the worst state of all to contemplate such a venture even disregarding carbon emissions and a move that may well be seen as completely contrary to targets anyway. The last coalfired units built in Eastern Australia, six of them, are all in QLD. They will all last until 2050 if required. I was going to say the best location would have been Victoria, but they have brown coal and that is worse even than black coal for carbon emissions. QLD has, if anything, a surplus ofpower.

There is talk of an ultra critical boiler. Ultracritical is similar in concept to supercritical with the only real difference being that the pressures are higher again with 280bar to 300bar in an ultracritical compared to 240bar for supercritical. Traditional modern drum boilers are 168bar. The advantage of ultracritical is better efficiency, but this has to be balanced against greater strain on all components. This type of unit in the past has had to be around 400MW plus to be economic.

In a way that is the right way to go from a technology aspect, but not at all from the carbon reduction point of view. Time will tell where this will go.

Regards
Paul

[Toymaker Len]

[QUOTE=Beardy;2173838]Really? You are checking to see if I have logged on as you are busting to win an argument

I am not particularly a fan of the whole CC mantra / religion

The thing here is that religion is a belief system and science is not.
Science is a tool. Just like a shovel or rather the idea of of shovel. So if you know what a shovel is then you can adapt the design to suit what you want to shovel, like a super wide shovel for snow or an narrow shovel for digging trenches or a spade for garden work etc. (I should have said 'chisel') If you don't believe in shovels and you have to move a pile of horse manure then you will just have to use your hands.
And science is a unique tool in that it is self correcting. It is only when an idea has been tested thousands or millions of times that it is accepted. Everybody tries to find fault with every theory, every experiment, every set of data. That is how it works. When the scientists say that co2 is causing climate chaos they are not just making an ambit claim, they are stating the best picture of reality which we currently possess. That is why all these astonishingly precise and complicated things that make up global 20thCentury civilization work. All the medicine, communications, global travel, modern agriculture, computers...everything is because the science is right. Religion on the other hand is just what a bunch of people reckon...

[woodPixel]

Collinsville.... Imagine if they used that $2 billion for solar and battery .

I just happened to receive an investor pack for this.

Battery isn't trivial. It is the future .


https://thehub.agl.com.au/articles/2...t-on-batteries

Also ESCRI-SA - Dalrymple Battery Project

[Beardy]

[QUOTE=Toymaker Len;2173978]

Really? You are checking to see if I have logged on as you are busting to win an argument

I am not particularly a fan of the whole CC mantra / religion

The thing here is that religion is a belief system and science is not.
Science is a tool. Just like a shovel or rather the idea of of shovel. So if you know what a shovel is then you can adapt the design to suit what you want to shovel, like a super wide shovel for snow or an narrow shovel for digging trenches or a spade for garden work etc. (I should have said 'chisel') If you don't believe in shovels and you have to move a pile of horse manure then you will just have to use your hands.
And science is a unique tool in that it is self correcting. It is only when an idea has been tested thousands or millions of times that it is accepted. Everybody tries to find fault with every theory, every experiment, every set of data. That is how it works. When the scientists say that co2 is causing climate chaos they are not just making an ambit claim, they are stating the best picture of reality which we currently possess. That is why all these astonishingly precise and complicated things that make up global 20thCentury civilization work. All the medicine, communications, global travel, modern agriculture, computers...everything is because the science is right. Religion on the other hand is just what a bunch of people reckon...

Len you have misunderstood me
Maybe that is my fault for not elaborating on the comment.
I am not referring to the science I am talking about the cult like following that has emerged as a result where people cannot even have a rational discussion on the topic without vilification, children have been denied their innocence and are being used as political pawns. In a broad sense the public has been led to believe that we have the answers and the right wing and Murdoch are preventing it from happening. You hear the touts of solar, wind, thermal, nuclear, hydrogen, batteries mung beans or whatever else is out there like we have a solution in waiting, it feels like everyone is hysterically running around in circles waving their hands ( and placards) in the air saying do something, children are crying and suffering mental health issues because they have been told they have no future.

That is not the scientists doing that is it? I saw a program were a leading scientist said a particularly finding had been taken out of context and the information being circulated is not correct/ misleading he was asked why then don’t the scientists step up and set the record straight to which the reply was to the effect of “We are scientists, our job is to report our findings not how the information is disseminated ”

If I look at how this thread has developed ( assuming the information is correct given this is a woodworking forum lol) in summary, we have basically already gone as far as technology can allow us to with our green energy uptake and the next phase will develop when the technology allows.

I believe that regardless of who the political leader is of the day and what Murdock thinks, when a viable solution comes to light there will be no stopping it as it will be a huge money trail that even Gina would put her shovel down and follow it.
Everyone needs to put down their placards, take a deep breath, calm down and stand back and have a rational look at where we are at.
We spent too much time focusing on things like the percentage of the reduction of our emissions over the next X years. Realistically we are arguing over 10 or 20% of 1%

As Ray said earlier, there is a sensible common ground in the middle

[FenceFurniture]

Realistically we are arguing over 10 or 20% of 1%

¿Que?

[Beardy]

Some great footage here from Vic Parks of the fire damage

YouTube

[FenceFurniture]

I've never seen burnt landscape where it is just sticks that are left - usually brown crowns, but at the two minute mark the landscape is just bare earth.

"because of Climate Change and it's impact, so this is not normal bushfire - it's beyond that"

[Beardy]

I've never seen burnt landscape where it is just sticks that are left - usually brown crowns, but at the two minute mark the landscape is just bare earth.

"because of Climate Change and it's impact, so this is not normal bushfire - it's beyond that"

Yes it is crazy looking with the scour marks on the ground from the fire tornadoes that developed. It was good to see the pockets that were unaffected and still intact, they appeared to even be surprised at that.

[Glider]

[QUOTE=Beardy;2173987]

I am not referring to the science I am talking about the cult like following that has emerged as a result where people cannot even have a rational discussion on the topic without vilification, children have been denied their innocence and are being used as political pawns.

The science is clear. Now, the only worthy discussion is what do we do about it. It should be about transitioning to a near carbon free future with the least effect on people and the economy.

In a broad sense the public has been led to believe that we have the answers and the right wing and Murdoch are preventing it from happening.
And they would be right; along with Rupert's son, James.

You hear the touts of solar, wind, thermal, nuclear, hydrogen, batteries mung beans or whatever else is out there like we have a solution in waiting, it feels like everyone is hysterically running around in circles waving their hands ( and placards) in the air saying do something, children are crying and suffering mental health issues because they have been told they have no future.

Beardy, you're using very perjorative language. The frustration stems from powerful people who are busily protecting their own interests and often disguising their actions as protecting the interests of others. They are preying on the scientifically uninformed. About children, I was 13 in 1961 when the world was on the brink of thermonuclear war during the Cuban missile crisis. My American friends were practising classroom drills in the event of missile attack. The kids are tougher than you think.

That is not the scientists doing that is it? I saw a program were a leading scientist said a particularly finding had been taken out of context and the information being circulated is not correct/ misleading he was asked why then don’t the scientists step up and set the record straight to which the reply was to the effect of “We are scientists, our job is to report our findings not how the information is disseminated ”

The scientists don't control the media. They have stepped up, but they don't control the mass media.

If I look at how this thread has developed ( assuming the information is correct given this is a woodworking forum lol) in summary, we have basically already gone as far as technology can allow us to with our green energy uptake and the next phase will develop when the technology allows.

I cannot agree with this. Solar, wind, pumped hydro, electric cars, eating less red meat, air and discretionary sea travel etc. are all existing remedies which are available for both investment and for the market to embrace for the sake of our descendants. I don't want to change, but I know I have to.

I believe that regardless of who the political leader is of the day and what Murdock thinks, when a viable solution comes to light there will be no stopping it as it will be a huge money trail that even Gina would put her shovel down and follow it.

Spot on. And do you think they'll give a stuff about working people?

Everyone needs to put down their placards, take a deep breath, calm down and stand back and have a rational look at where we are at.
We spent too much time focusing on things like the percentage of the reduction of our emissions over the next X years.

No way, mate. This is too important. People are dying. My wife lost her 1865 farm house near Bodalla and $100k worth of fences in the worst spread of bushfires in living memory. Climate records are being broken every month. The speed at which it's happening is frightening and it's even surprised the experts.

As Ray said earlier, there is a sensible common ground in the middle

In 1974 the ozone problem was identified by Rowland & Molina, two researchers at the University of California. Their results were based on no more than a computer model. The world banned fluorocarbons in aerosols and refrigeration. Problem solved, not without some pain I might add. Here we have incredible amounts of supporting data from a myriad of scientists worldwide supporting man's deleterious contribution to the greenhouse effect. But only a few industries were badly affected. Now it's everybody.

The problem is that people are not sufficiently informed and they're being manipulated. And those self same people are trying to tell scientists how to do their job! OK, let's all express our opinions on doctors, airline pilots, engineers etc. and tell them that they don't know what their doing. Does anyone here like people telling them how to do their job?

It's way past time we all stopped with the "opinions" and started to pull together. The science was established 124 years ago Arrhenius' formulas were developed in 1896 and they still work today. Nothing new to see here.

mick

[doug3030]

Yes it is crazy looking with the scour marks on the ground from the fire tornadoes that developed. It was good to see the pockets that were unaffected and still intact, they appeared to even be surprised at that.

Yes, when I looked at the video I certainly got the impression the makers were expecting it to be a lot worse than what they found. In fact they seemed optimistic of a good recovery excepting a few of the worst areas.

[NeilS]

... science is a unique tool in that it is self correcting. It is only when an idea has been tested thousands or millions of times that it is accepted. Everybody tries to find fault with every theory, every experiment, every set of data. That is how it works.

Excellent description of the scientific process, Len.

Living knee deep in scientists as I do in both my wife and my family, I know close up that the prize goes to the scientist who challenges the current thinking with a new explanation that can't be disproved. The process is one of attrition. Put forward a new theory and it will attract vigorous attempts to discredit it. A theory only lasts until it is disproven. That is why Einstein's theories are accepted, at least for now!

As far as I can see, none of the participants in this thread are calling the science into question (am I wrong about that), just what should be done about it.

[NeilS]

Geothermal, which I think Tim Flannery was keen on, has fundamental issues to my mind. I am not an expert in this field, but anything that is three or four kilometers down in the ground and relies on some pipework has some potential for unreliability. Having said that, how deep are oil wells? I don't know.

The most useful document on that is the International Geothermal Expert Group's Report to ARENA

The one page of Key Findings summarises it quite well.

Drilling multiple 4km deep wells at an average cost of approx $15m (back in 12014) is the limiting factor along with the remoteness of the best geothermal areas from users. Just one successful well can establish the economic viability of an oilfield. The stakes are much higher for deep geothermal energy.