Climate Change
In Denmark, all new renewable projects have to offer 20% ownership of the overall venture to local residents.
Some good reading here, more if you search:
https://www.nordicpolicycentre.org.au/community_owned_wind_lessons_from_denmark
Everybody knows, or at least senses, our current system doesn't serve the pubic. We're all feeling ripped off, and people are starting to lash out, sometimes in the wrong direction at the wrong things.
We're in the midst of a wholesale energy transition that, irrespective of your ideology, is going to happen. Of that you can be sure. A way out of the malaise, to again feel like society works for the people, is to wrest back some ownership of energy infrastructure and the Danes have set a template for that.
There is just one thing holding us back from doing it here.
"But socialism..."
…as the polar ice caps melt …snow worries ;)
- our privileged hobbies and interests must also adapt,
renewable …sustainable …working together with nature.
…penguin surfing, the future is now ;)
https://m.
&t=128s
#Progressive Fake Left Anti-Economics Anti-Corporation Anti-Market Economy Fake Woke Virtue Signalling Communist Struggle Agenda Fake Left Voice Eco-Cult 15min-Cities Misinformation-Laws Persecution-Of-The-Poor-Old-Right Woke Mind Virus Movement
GSCO, I'm not attacking the capitalist system, just pointing out the impacts of a warming world.
This is a great chance for developed countries to use their wealth, technology and weight to transition over to renewables.
As these events continue to compound, the rich and privileged will be able to adapt, move locations, buy more expensive produce etc, but the rest of us will shoulder the consequences.
Food-bowls will shift, water will be fought over, some locations will become unliveable etc.
That’s an extreme, doomsday, Armageddon, war of the worlds scenario, more like a movie scene, like the covid threat was.
It surprises me that there are people who believe this stuff.
There’s nothing special about the current moment in time relative to the past few hundred million years. There’s nothing new under the sun.
GSCO, you're correct but this time we've got an over-populated planet and a rapid rate of change.
Tell those in Lismore or under attack by the Black Summer bushfires that's all doomsday, armageddon bullshit.
Don’t forget that the greatest polluters, historically, are the developed countries… and it is the developing countries that are often being singled out in regard to curbing emissions etc.
Amongst all this hysteria and speculation, the greatest perpetrator of greenhouse gas emissions to this day continues to be the military industrial complex - the U.S. military and its overall continued expansion contributes nothing but lip service by using its wealth, technology and weight to demand that others should abide by conditions and transition over to renewables…
And, not surprisingly, whilst dictating a climate change agenda… the US keeps on supplying and moving its diesel powered tanks around at will, keeps producing and upgrading its fighter jets using refined aviation fuel (as well as recently stating that a new aviation fuel facility is being built in northern Australia with a base that accommodates nuclear capable bomber aircraft) and also continues the research and development of ballistic and hypersonic missiles at will. (Also hoping to use the vast open spaces of central Australia to test these missiles).
And, yet, we should be doing our utmost to reign in emissions and be conscious of ‘our’ impact on the environment ?
… just another case of the rules based order ;)
- follow the rules while the rule makers break em ;);)
Do the governments selling the advice actually have any legitimacy ?
Do the scientists really know ?
Do they have a big picture perspective beyond the records kept since the industrial revolution, or is the perspective biased to our modern version of events and based on manipulated and manufactured data ?
Is the information even applicable ?
In the last two decades, how exactly have western powers reduced their carbon footprint and how exactly have they curbed things like… let’s say… the continued production and supply of military hardware around the globe ?
Is there a reason this undeniable evidence is overlooked ;)
There is no doubt the climate is affected - there is no doubt measures need to be taken…
- there is also no doubt that the military industrial complex isn’t slowing down.
Paradox or straight out hypocrisy…
It might be what we don’t know that is the scary bit ;)
https://m.
&pp=ygUXY2xpbWF0ZSBjaGFuZ2UgZGVidW5rZWQ%3D
Craig wrote:GSCO, you're correct but this time we've got an over-populated planet and a rapid rate of change.
Over-populated? The neo-malthusians have arrived. Who are you to say? How many should there be? who should we kill off? Are those of us procreating a problem? Such a wierd thing to say.
The world has a population of humans, all of them worthwhile. This population will increase probs till about 2050 or so.
Humans are a resource; a benefit, not a cost.
Sorry, bit of a fly away comment.
I don't think the planet can support infinite growth though? It is a closed, finite system yes?
[quote=mcbain][quote=Craig]GSCO, you're correct but this time we've got an over-populated planet and a rapid rate of change. [/quote]
Over-populated? The neo-malthusians have arrived. Who are you to say? How many should there be? who should we kill off? Are those of us procreating a problem? Such a wierd thing to say.
The world has a population of humans, all of them worthwhile. This population will increase probs till about 2050 or so.
Humans are a resource; a benefit, not a cost.[/quote]
Dunno the exact number, but any environment has a carrying capacity, same with wild animals, same with domesticated humans. We can fiddle with the numbers via green revolutions - agricultural advances - but there'd still be a capacity. Soz if that scares you.
Can't see where Craig mentioned killing people off. Populations naturally decline with rising living standards.
"Humans are a resource" Yes, I've seen The Matrix too.
I agree w Craig on overpopulation.
Whether you consider it an over-population or not, Craig's point that the current rate of climate change will be in a vastly more populated world and thus effect more people than previous eras of climate change, still holds true.
Just add more hi-rise apartments and put the extra animals in the apartments.
velocityjohnno wrote:Just add more hi-rise apartments and put the extra animals in the apartments.
We definitely need more high rises. We need less of never ending urban sprawl. Plenty of crappy old existing buildings that can be replaced with something better.
Anton Petrov notes we may have entered an interglacial termination event:
Very interesting discussion of papers and evidence of methane concentrations running away after human-related emissions of this gas entered a stable level. He notes these have occurred many times before during interglacials before the resumption of ice age cold phase conditions.
Not Quite Right……in the head that is.
Quote : Opposition Leader Peter Dutton describes nuclear power as “most credible” pathway to reduce emissions.
Is that right Peter ? Ok, so you won’t mind if we store all of the radioactive waste at yours.
Who votes these uneducated nutcases in to power?
Nothing at all intelligent between those little flaps of cartilage.
The sheer stupidity of even suggesting nuclear power for Australia is dumbfounding.
Please consider your children’s, children and their children and so on.
“When the stuff gets in, you cannot get it out “. AW
Gerday AW, hope you well and enjoying the seasonal changes.
A mate was just reflecting on the above in an email, he wrote:
"Dear god, libs are fooling themselves... first, by the time we got any sort of fission reactors made and on-line, there's a good chance that fusion would be coming up for grabs... never mind the waste from the fission reactors... I've been a believer in solar since I saw panels at the royal show in (I think) 1976; we have a ginormous country, shedloads of sun ... a friend of mine in uk is hardly alone in having panels on his roof - he pays zero for elec, even in winter, and most of the time the govt pays him for the elec he provides. UK was waaaay behind us in the 70s on solar... the useless buggers have caught up and outpaced us. ludicrous"
- absolutely loving the Botany thread btw, cheers, great place to go when the other threads weird you out ; )
With greatest respect AW I disagree. Putting aside Dutton's disingenuous antics aside. The case for nuclear has never been stronger for Australia. We are told we are in a climate emergency. It's becoming highly doubtful we will reach the less than 2C target. we are not acting fast enough. Rising population, tyranny of distance and infrastructure challenges, conflicting land use & enviro values, NIMBYS, Growing 1/3 Rentier class, the ethics of exporting & opportunities for reusing nuclear waste sent to other countries, and plain old politicking are just some of the good reasons for nuclear. If we acted 10 years ago we'd be somewhere by now. All options need to be on the table. Nuclear has shown to be extremely safe and its only getting safer thanks to technological advancements - it needs to be part of the solution. The economics argument against nuclear is a furphy - economics change, global supply chains oscillate, all of sudden private investment becomes much more favourable. My children's and their planet depend on us taking action now. We need to start saying yes to something.
basesix wrote:Gerday AW, hope you well and enjoying the seasonal changes.
A mate was just reflecting on the above in an email, he wrote:
"Dear god, libs are fooling themselves... first, by the time we got any sort of fission reactors made and on-line, there's a good chance that fusion would be coming up for grabs... never mind the waste from the fission reactors... I've been a believer in solar since I saw panels at the royal show in (I think) 1976; we have a ginormous country, shedloads of sun ... a friend of mine in uk is hardly alone in having panels on his roof - he pays zero for elec, even in winter, and most of the time the govt pays him for the elec he provides. UK was waaaay behind us in the 70s on solar... the useless buggers have caught up and outpaced us. ludicrous"
- absolutely loving the Botany thread btw, cheers, great place to go when the other threads weird you out ; )
Basesix. Hi mate. Nice to hear from you. Hope you are well.
Similarly, in 1978 in a science class at school, i made a solar oven that actually cooked food quickly and efficiently, i was so stoked with my apparatus that one of the teachers asked if he could take it home and cook on it over the weekend, i said yes.
I’m thinking now, did he really want to cook on it or plagiarise my design.
I was often in strife in Grade 6 at primary school and every other year at high school, merely because i wore about 5 badges daily protesting woodchipping, coal power, unnecessary logging and nuclear power.
I was informed i was degrading the reputations of the respective schools, want crap.
Australia thinks it’s progressive with clean energy, it’s happening, albeit all too slowly for my liking.
It should’ve started at least 40 years ago when people like Bob Brown suggested that we as a nation, borrow heavily and set up a global epicentre of solar hardware manufacturing, coupled with software engineers/programmers etc.
We are very slow and lack foresight regarding keeping smart people here and for them to not go offshore.
We have no problems borrowing billions for intensive military hardware, so why not renewables.
David Suzuki when he used to do an annual environmental lecture series here use to shake his head when arriving into Australian capital cities by plane.
He was gobsmacked and very disappointed when looking out the plane windows, all he could see in peoples backyards were swimming pools and not solar panels. Why?
We are a flat continent, have seriously high rates of solar insolation, very little topographic relief, bar a tall mountain (2200m) and a not so high Great Dividing Range, which starts in Casterton, west Victoria and terminates at Mt.Cornwallis on Dauan Island which is about 10km from PNG mainland.
Germany has a system similar to Denmark where you can get an interest free loan, purchase photovoltaic panels, bang them on any free wall space or roof, or rent space, you keep 50% of proceeds and the government the other 50%. Win, win. Vineyards ripping out vines and installing parabolic solar sun trackers etc.
We have much work ahead of ourselves, nuclear power should never be a remedy for our short or long term provision of energy.
Wholeheartedly agree Basesix, when things in life are not so normal , delve into the biological world. Clears all cobwebs.
Spent all day Saturday in Anglesea at Angair Wildflower Show, stoked by the sheer number of people interested in using local native flora who attended over both days, a very heartening future lays ahead , represented by so many children showing interest from guiding parents. Great to see.
Followed the next day in beautiful warm weather with more ‘cobweb clearing’, 12kms of slow bushwalking, plants, birds and everything else stuff. AW
bonza wrote:With greatest respect AW I disagree. Putting aside Dutton's disingenuous antics aside. The case for nuclear has never been stronger for Australia. We are told we are in a climate emergency. It's becoming highly doubtful we will reach the less than 2C target. we are not acting fast enough. Rising population, tyranny of distance and infrastructure challenges, conflicting land use & enviro values, NIMBYS, Growing 1/3 Rentier class, the ethics of exporting & opportunities for reusing nuclear waste sent to other countries, and plain old politicking are just some of the good reasons for nuclear. If we acted 10 years ago we'd be somewhere by now. All options need to be on the table. Nuclear has shown to be extremely safe and its only getting safer thanks to technological advancements - it needs to be part of the solution. The economics argument against nuclear is a furphy - economics change, global supply chains oscillate, all of sudden private investment becomes much more favourable. My children's and their planet depend on us taking action now. We need to start saying yes to something.
Bonza. Hi Your opinion., ive had mine. Very good points you make, every source of energy must be judged, BUT,
Radioactive waste- Where is it going to end up ? AW
I know we are not there yet - but the tech is moving in the right direction around different small scale 4th Gen reactors where low grade radioactive waste can be used (e.g. we don't necessarily need mine new uranium). I'm far from an expert but it makes for exciting reading. That aside Australia is very geological stable as you know so there good safe reasons why we can appropriately store the waste here. Currently we export our radioactive waste or at least historically have- someone else's problem (or resource?). We should be optimistic in our scientists and technologists to develop the solutions to these challenges. time is running out - we can't keep blaming the other side.
basesix wrote:Gerday AW, hope you well and enjoying the seasonal changes.
A mate was just reflecting on the above in an email, he wrote:
"Dear god, libs are fooling themselves... first, by the time we got any sort of fission reactors made and on-line, there's a good chance that fusion would be coming up for grabs... never mind the waste from the fission reactors... I've been a believer in solar since I saw panels at the royal show in (I think) 1976; we have a ginormous country, shedloads of sun ... a friend of mine in uk is hardly alone in having panels on his roof - he pays zero for elec, even in winter, and most of the time the govt pays him for the elec he provides. UK was waaaay behind us in the 70s on solar... the useless buggers have caught up and outpaced us. ludicrous"
- absolutely loving the Botany thread btw, cheers, great place to go when the other threads weird you out ; )
Yeah sure. They can bring the incentives for solar back and we will outpace the UK in no time. 8c per kWh is just pointless. It only makes sense with batteries at that rate.
bonza wrote:I know we are not there yet - but the tech is moving in the right direction around different small scale 4th Gen reactors where low grade radioactive waste can be used (e.g. we don't necessarily need mine new uranium). I'm far from an expert but it makes for exciting reading. That aside Australia is very geological stable as you know so there good safe reasons why we can appropriately store the waste here. Currently we export our radioactive waste or at least historically have- someone else's problem (or resource?). We should be optimistic in our scientists and technologists to develop the solutions to these challenges. time is running out - we can't keep blaming the other side.
I agree bonza. I also like solar but energy storage persist to be an issue. It requires mass battery production and distribution.
I’m with you, I’ll take anything to move away from fossil fuels.
bonza wrote:I know we are not there yet - but the tech is moving in the right direction around different small scale 4th Gen reactors where low grade radioactive waste can be used (e.g. we don't necessarily need mine new uranium). I'm far from an expert but it makes for exciting reading. That aside Australia is very geological stable as you know so there good safe reasons why we can appropriately store the waste here. Currently we export our radioactive waste or at least historically have- someone else's problem (or resource?). We should be optimistic in our scientists and technologists to develop the solutions to these challenges. time is running out - we can't keep blaming the other side.
Bonza. Agree, cant keep blaming either side because it’s a concern for all of us.
Again, I recently mooted why do we need so much energy per capita, we are breeders, thats why.
Would we be interested in a one child policy ? Probably not, but it’d make sense.
Our biggest problem is population growth nationally and globally.
I think i read last week 2000 new arrivals per week into Oz at present.Why ?
Aside from holding a supermarket item in your hand, what are most of our population thinking when purchasing food, there’s some kind of endless supply and resource beyond the four walls of the shop or they simply don’t know or care.
Australia has already exceeded its true carrying capacity of 12mill people.
This number was deduced in the mid 90’s, anything above that amount is at a total net loss to our soils, water etc.
So, we are cruising along in a false environmental and economic situation, almost like permanently being in debt, where you just pay the monthly limit to keep the ball rolling, but you’ll still always be in debt.
True you state we are geologically/tectonically stable, we sit roughly in the middle of our plate., the whole world sits on an enormous pluton of granite.
Sequestering radioactive waste kilometres below the ground is a furphy IMO. The scenario has not changed, simply creating a problem for another generation/s., something will go wrong and all we’ve done is handpass it to someone else to deal with. The major crux of sequestration, its like holding a hot potato.
Ive concerns at present with the rates of copper, gold and lithium extractive industries globally.
Copper and lithium form part of this new generation of energy supply, at what cost ?
Im all for any type of clean energy, tidal, wind, solar, regrettably so much copper is required for the generator wiring of large wind turbines and lithium, well, its the new gold, batteries for EV, phones, computers etc.
Does the environmental damage negate the very reason we want clean energy in the first place ?
And, what really defines clean energy? All questions, we need answers.
Energy supply should constitute an amalgam of all available clean sources, not just being totally reliant on one.AW
agreed AW.
but worse case scenario if things do screw up its negligible on the earth's ability to recover compared to a rapidly warming planet or current FF impacts on human health.
I'm not sure where the Big Australia proponents think we are gunna get our water from. Have they seen the state of the Basin? How will we activate all those almonds they are growing in the south sucking up all that water and paying off all those wall st traders? Desalination starts to become more of a likely option once again. where does the energy come from?
flollo wrote:basesix wrote:Gerday AW, hope you well and enjoying the seasonal changes.
A mate was just reflecting on the above in an email, he wrote:
"Dear god, libs are fooling themselves... first, by the time we got any sort of fission reactors made and on-line, there's a good chance that fusion would be coming up for grabs... never mind the waste from the fission reactors... I've been a believer in solar since I saw panels at the royal show in (I think) 1976; we have a ginormous country, shedloads of sun ... a friend of mine in uk is hardly alone in having panels on his roof - he pays zero for elec, even in winter, and most of the time the govt pays him for the elec he provides. UK was waaaay behind us in the 70s on solar... the useless buggers have caught up and outpaced us. ludicrous"
- absolutely loving the Botany thread btw, cheers, great place to go when the other threads weird you out ; )Yeah sure. They can bring the incentives for solar back and we will outpace the UK in no time. 8c per kWh is just pointless. It only makes sense with batteries at that rate.
Follo. Hi. Hows things ? Good points, nice discussion by all.
How is it pointless, surely its not about how much money you make from solar, isn’t it just about doing the right thing for the planet.
We are on our second iteration of a Solar energy system.
Initially getting 67c feed in tariff some years ago, now 9c. It’s never been about making a profit for us, its always about doing the right thing.
Agree, the feed in tariff back to the grid is appalling, shame on our State and Federal governments for caving into the pressure of the FF providers, weak as piss IMO. They pull out the old card, well if you don't lower the rates we might all of a sudden not employ so many people, they fall for it everytime.
Solar and wind storage (batteries) can be an issue, especially for mega large scale projects but it’s resolvable, 10km from here there is a bank of 20 batteries, each about the size of a 20feet long shipping container, they are no impost on the landscape at all and connected to an enormous wind farm.
Home storage batteries are affordable and can simply be mounted on a wall outside or even inside, if every home in Australia had solar, solar/wind(little 2 prop set up) sending its juice to a battery, we’d probably not be in this current situation .
Again a lot of this snail paced progression is compounded by the involvement of many large businesses who are gross polluters and users of FF but simply don’t have the funds to transform and cross over to clean energy.
Politics and big business typically get in the way.
Albeit, many of the very large mining firms are now some of the biggest converts to clean energy, well it’s easy, they are very cashed up.
Shareholders destroy countries IMO.
The day i’m forced to access energy from nuclear is the day I will depart Australia, we’ve already fucked everything I value, that would be simply the last straw. Waste not wanted. AW
bonza wrote:agreed AW.
but worse case scenario if things do screw up its negligible on the earth's ability to recover compared to a rapidly warming planet or current FF impacts on human health.I'm not sure where the Big Australia proponents think we are gunna get our water from. Have they seen the state of the Basin? How will we activate all those almonds they are growing in the south sucking up all that water and paying off all those wall st traders? Desalination starts to become more of a likely option once again. where does the energy come from?
Bonza. Good topics. Desal plants and Hydro Electricity operations use huge amounts of energy, either are not so green, especially Hydro., we believe most things we are told, I don’t, always like to check the facts.
Why are we growing rice, cotton and other water intensive products , I’ll tell you, we are copying the US, where most of their agricultural and horticultural pursuits are being performed in areas in a range way outside where those plants or animals would normally grow sustainably but in way fewer volumes.
There needs to be a new name in global farming , ‘Contrived Farming’
Food production in geographic locations 1000;s km from a water or energy source, i.e California, Nevada, Arizona, water piped in from the Rockys, Colorado River, which ends just into northern Mexico where it becomes a dribble and eventually dust, sickening stuff environmentally speaking.
Again and again, it’s population increase driving it all.
Again, this ‘growing flowers in the desert’ syndrome is fools paradise.
My partner was a major contributor and reporter on the state of the Artesian Basin and it’s rapidly diminishing water volume several years ago, its historically spewing out water unabatedly at points in some areas for years on end. She received mainly hostile feedback from farmers she confronted along the way, bad attitudes were rife, many, when asked why don’t they tap off a pipe/spring feed , answered why should i, its never going to run out. A typical attitude.
Say no more. AW
Bonza.
The earth’s ability to recover from catastrophic human induced events.
You make a very good point that reminded me of an interview decades ago.
British TV guy David Frost interviewed Professor Stephen Jay Gould, one of the greatest evolutionary biologists, he hailed from the US, author of many books that I assume a lot of us have read , including myself.
David asked him a ridiculous question as to what he (Stephen) thought about computers and that level of IT and could he foresee a day where computers and robots overtook the earth. Stephen looked perplexed, briefly answered , how could they, the directive comes from humans in the first place.
Before Stephen could formulate a decent reply, Frost quickly asked another question ,
‘What would happen to earth tomorrow if all humans no longer existed ?
Goulds reply was straight faced and succinct, easy answer he said,
All structures be it timber or brick/concrete no matter how large, would slowly be covered in vegetation, acids would slowly break down concrete and steel would oxidise and eventually after a very long period of time there would be little to no trace of our existence and the planet would simply carry on business as usual as it did before we evolved. AW
AlfredWallace wrote:My partner was a major contributor and reporter on the state of the Artesian Basin and it’s rapidly diminishing water volume several years ago, its historically spewing out water unabatedly at points in some areas for years on end. She received mainly hostile feedback from farmers she confronted along the way, bad attitudes were rife, many, when asked why don’t they tap off a pipe/spring feed , answered why should i, its never going to run out. A typical attitude.
Say no more. AW
In SA mining companies use a lot of water from the artesian basin, but the EPA police it closely, and there is a limit to what they can take. Don’t know about other states or industries, but EPA do monitor the water level. Not saying you could trust them, you know, there’d be a lot of influence from certain quarters.
chin wrote:AlfredWallace wrote:My partner was a major contributor and reporter on the state of the Artesian Basin and it’s rapidly diminishing water volume several years ago, its historically spewing out water unabatedly at points in some areas for years on end. She received mainly hostile feedback from farmers she confronted along the way, bad attitudes were rife, many, when asked why don’t they tap off a pipe/spring feed , answered why should i, its never going to run out. A typical attitude.
Say no more. AW
In SA mining companies use a lot of water from the artesian basin, but the EPA police it closely, and there is a limit to what they can take. Don’t know about other states or industries, but EPA do monitor the water level. Not saying you could trust them, you know, there’d be a lot of influence from certain quarters.
Chin. Hi. Thanks for that info, Must be difficult to fully police the entire area of the basin, imagine the personnel and funds required to do a proper job.
Periodically, some type of business gets caught, fined for misuse or abuse of the access to water and life goes on.AW
NSW lack significantly in their ability to monitor let alone regulate water use in comparison to other MD basin states. You can’t regulate if you don’t have the data. This was highlighted several years ago in that infamous four corner doco and subsequent icac referrals and department upheavals. . Just one of many many sad episodes in the story of the life of the MD basin.
Anyway to your point AW. The trad owners tell us look after the country it will look after you. The earth will be fine. Will we?
bonza wrote:NSW lack significantly in their ability to monitor let alone regulate water use in comparison to other MD basin states. You can’t regulate if you don’t have the data. This was highlighted several years ago in that infamous four corner doco and subsequent icac referrals and department upheavals. . Just one of many many sad episodes in the story of the life of the MD basin.
Anyway to your point AW. The trad owners tell us look after the country it will look after you. The earth will be fine. Will we?
Bonza. Hi. Yes, i remember it well, I share your sentiments as well.
The FNP know that, the problem is I don’t think the rest of us have heeded their message.
Earth will be fine, not so sure about us.
My wish is for my son and his future children and their children and so on to see and appreciate what’s here on Earth. Why should they inherit a place devoid of natural beauty just because we decided to play the ‘selfish gene’ card at present ?. AW
.