Coal Seam Gas, Where do you stand?

[irish2]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

Here's the problem all excess power is stored, so where or not it's not sunny for a couple days or a week the Government has stores, assuming they do it how it's done in other parts of the world.

Water can be done artificially without any environmental damage and basically immune to drought, basically.

Wind? there is tonnes of wind to be had in Australia, if there's not there's still the two other options, all 3 options would have us fine, as there would be enough power generated...

Mate there is no way of storing the energy that is generated, without a massive cost. Excess energy is currently earthed during the day as you can not speed up or slow down generators when a bit of sun hits some solar panels. The only way to remove coal and gas generation is to use nuclear, it is a simple as that.

[NC1183]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

Here's the problem all excess power is stored, so where or not it's not sunny for a couple days or a week the Government has stores, assuming they do it how it's done in other parts of the world.

Water can be done artificially without any environmental damage and basically immune to drought, basically.

Wind? there is tonnes of wind to be had in Australia, if there's not there's still the two other options, all 3 options would have us fine, as there would be enough power generated...

Even if money was invested into Nuclear Energy and safer ways of doing it, Nuclear does not harm the environment given it does not leave the plant.

How do you propose we store all this power. Australia's problem is that we have a greater base load with no extra base load power stations built since MacQuarie opened in the late 80's.

Water artifically, you mean make water by de-sal, thats just a waste of the electricity you just made. De-sal plants use so much power it would be uneconomical.

Wind, there are a heap of wind turbines down through S.A from Broken Hill to Adelaide, the problem with wind is the turbines make a lot of noise so they can't be too close to houses and town, or you have to build sub-stations to "Step-Up" the voltage to something that's readily transmittable which means running more powerlines which people don't like looking at.

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

Mate if I can find evidence of the guys around here I'll be sure to give you the heads up.

But in the mean time there is a lawyer who is throwing to book at these people and helping farmers stop this sort of stuff going onto their land.

All in all if they could completely and utterly go on your land without permission they wouldn't offer compensation.

I live in regional NSW and hear a lot of the reports coming out of the Liverpool Plains and actually do a lot of work lately in the Piliga and haven't heard of one farmer successfully or nearly successfully keeping the mines, either CSG or coal(open cut or underground), off their property.

[irish2]

When wind turbines let go they also earth out a massive amount of power. Do you think you can store all that energy?

[Scott]

Originally Posted by irish2

Coal seam gas mining has been going on for 20 years in Australia. Why the big fraccas now?

Scale, nice pun btw.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by irish2

Mate there is no way of storing the energy that is generated, without a massive cost.

Pumped Storage Hydro.

When you have excess power you pump water into a dam, when you need it you dump the water out through a hydro generator.

[dimka100]

Nuclear power is the only way to go ... solar and wind will never ever produce electricity in meaningful quantities, they also consume a massive amounts of space making them inefficient as distance equals gradual loss in power output ... burning fossil fuels like gas or coal will never be green, its simply impossible to burn stuff and produce no CO2 emissions, its also never going to generate sufficient power to build various massive projects like bullet trains as the power requirement is too high ...

Australia has the perfect environment for nuclear power, we have endless uranium which can be dug out for cheap, we also have tons of un populated remote land which can be used to build nuclear sites and safely store any waste ... but then we have a useless government with arts degrees on both sides, so who am i kidding ... IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN ...

[Franco Cozzo]

I'm all for it if it means more jobs.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by dimka100

Nuclear power is the only way to go ...

Reckon. But I think we should pay Somalia (or at least the Pres) to store the waste.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I'm all for it if it means more jobs.

Drill, baby, drill?

Do you ever wonder about what world you'll leave for your kids?

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by cs123

Drill, baby, drill?

Do you ever wonder about what world you'll leave for your kids?

I'm not interested in having kids.

Its not like in 50 years time Australia is going to be one massive hole now is it? We've got a big-*** country with a lot of it is some dodgy desert no one would really want to live in anyway.

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I'm not interested in having kids.

Its not like in 50 years time Australia is going to be one massive hole now is it? We've got a big-*** country with a lot of it is some dodgy desert no one would really want to live in anyway.

Sorry Danno ... I do have kids, and grandkids .. I do care what they will end up with.

"some dodgy desert" .... All the more reason to look after what prime land we have.

[XD 351 Ute]

Originally Posted by GCRXR6

Sorry Danno ... I do have kids, and grandkids .. I do care what they will end up with.

"some dodgy desert" .... All the more reason to look after what prime land we have.

There's also three other words that spring to mind in this debate:
Great Artesian Basin............

If they let their crap get anywhere near that, then someone should really be in strife.

Ed

[flappist]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

Luckily there is another side to this rather then just an environmental problem, gives reason to those who don't believe in the environmental side to have a say about their future..



Here's the problem all excess power is stored, so where or not it's not sunny for a couple days or a week the Government has stores, assuming they do it how it's done in other parts of the world.

Water can be done artificially without any environmental damage and basically immune to drought, basically.

Wind? there is tonnes of wind to be had in Australia, if there's not there's still the two other options, all 3 options would have us fine, as there would be enough power generated...

Even if money was invested into Nuclear Energy and safer ways of doing it, Nuclear does not harm the environment given it does not leave the plant.



Mate if I can find evidence of the guys around here I'll be sure to give you the heads up.

But in the mean time there is a lawyer who is throwing to book at these people and helping farmers stop this sort of stuff going onto their land.

All in all if they could completely and utterly go on your land without permission they wouldn't offer compensation.

Storage of energy? How is that done, the world biggest battery?
Water without damage? Ever seen the slogan "NO DAMS"? Water based generation systems are powered by GRAVITY.
Wind? Yes lots of it but none near the population centres. Guess why? Here is a hint, people don't like to live in windy places.....

A little less youtube and internet experts input and a bit more of get out there are see it for your self will give you a better idea of what is actually going on around the world.

Have you ever actually seen a mine, power station, solar farm (other than a house joke), wind generators, hydro electric.

I will let you in on a secret, almost everything you see on any media is doctored to favour the agenda being pushed. THEY ALL TELL LIES. As you have spent almost all of your life in school you are used to believing what you are told without question. As you get older you will start to realise that even a lot of that was untrue........

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well not until Monday anyway.....

LOL
I'm voting for the same side as you Tony but unfortunately the only ones standing against it are the Katter mob. Yeehaa

[XR6Naranja]

Originally Posted by flappist

Storage of energy? How is that done, the world biggest battery?
Water without damage? Ever seen the slogan "NO DAMS"? Water based generation systems are powered by GRAVITY.
Wind? Yes lots of it but none near the population centres. Guess why? Here is a hint, people don't like to live in windy places.....

A little less youtube and internet experts input and a bit more of get out there are see it for your self will give you a better idea of what is actually going on around the world.

Have you ever actually seen a mine, power station, solar farm (other than a house joke), wind generators, hydro electric.

I will let you in on a secret, almost everything you see on any media is doctored to favour the agenda being pushed. THEY ALL TELL LIES. As you have spent almost all of your life in school you are used to believing what you are told without question. As you get older you will start to realise that even a lot of that was untrue........

First two have already been explained..

And wind? I live in a windy place, Byron Bay is a windy place, Lennox Head is a windy place, Evans Head is a windy place, hell even Katherine located near the middle of the NT was a windy place, that's not media -.- That's experience, and it goes on...

Little less youtube and internet experts, how about a little less ignorance?

I lived in the NT which basically has all of these, besides Hydro which the most efficient way was developed internationally but could easily be done here.

I'll let you on a secret too, just because someone is younger then you, doesn't mean that whatever they say is instantly rendered incorrect and useless, especially when your example barely applies to me.

Originally Posted by irish2

Coal seam gas mining has been going on for 20 years in Australia. Why the big fraccas now?

Hasn't been known to everyone has it..

Originally Posted by irish2

Mate there is no way of storing the energy that is generated, without a massive cost. Excess energy is currently earthed during the day as you can not speed up or slow down generators when a bit of sun hits some solar panels. The only way to remove coal and gas generation is to use nuclear, it is a simple as that.

All 4 greener energies can be used in combined, if we look at the amount being spent to use CSG, cost is irrelevant, the Government was even offering a cash back for solar then pulled out stupidly.. The energy can be stored, but rather not to the Government without these big costs which is why you use all 4 combined.

Originally Posted by NC1183

How do you propose we store all this power. Australia's problem is that we have a greater base load with no extra base load power stations built since MacQuarie opened in the late 80's.

Water artifically, you mean make water by de-sal, thats just a waste of the electricity you just made. De-sal plants use so much power it would be uneconomical.

Wind, there are a heap of wind turbines down through S.A from Broken Hill to Adelaide, the problem with wind is the turbines make a lot of noise so they can't be too close to houses and town, or you have to build sub-stations to "Step-Up" the voltage to something that's readily transmittable which means running more powerlines which people don't like looking at.




I live in regional NSW and hear a lot of the reports coming out of the Liverpool Plains and actually do a lot of work lately in the Piliga and haven't heard of one farmer successfully or nearly successfully keeping the mines, either CSG or coal(open cut or underground), off their property.

This... for water...

Pumped Storage Hydro.

When you have excess power you pump water into a dam, when you need it you dump the water out through a hydro generator.

Power, since all of you must be amazed is actually stored in a battery, like I previously stated using all these things combined will be more then efficient, the battery is actually a home based thing, the power is obviously limited from solar, but when it's rainy, over cast, it's usually windy, if it's not windy, one again use the Hydro, if all of that fails being the least harmful way, use nuclear power from a grid/solar set up, it's all there it seems that some of the people here will jump on the guns without research.

Oh did I mention that CSG wells cause a much louder sound then wind turbines, but one is more safer? -.-

And there are a couple here that have been successful, but I obviously have to locate proof before I can convince anyone of it.

Originally Posted by irish2

When wind turbines let go they also earth out a massive amount of power. Do you think you can store all that energy?

When CSG lets go it explodes, it causes huge amounts of destruction, it causes health problems, it causes instability in the ground, I know which one I'd rather.

Originally Posted by cs123

Pumped Storage Hydro.

When you have excess power you pump water into a dam, when you need it you dump the water out through a hydro generator.

Cheers, answered it for me.

Originally Posted by dimka100

Nuclear power is the only way to go ... solar and wind will never ever produce electricity in meaningful quantities, they also consume a massive amounts of space making them inefficient as distance equals gradual loss in power output ... burning fossil fuels like gas or coal will never be green, its simply impossible to burn stuff and produce no CO2 emissions, its also never going to generate sufficient power to build various massive projects like bullet trains as the power requirement is too high ...

Australia has the perfect environment for nuclear power, we have endless uranium which can be dug out for cheap, we also have tons of un populated remote land which can be used to build nuclear sites and safely store any waste ... but then we have a useless government with arts degrees on both sides, so who am i kidding ... IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN ...

Yes I've said this many time's, unfortunately the Government is rather thick.

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I'm not interested in having kids.

Its not like in 50 years time Australia is going to be one massive hole now is it? We've got a big-*** country with a lot of it is some dodgy desert no one would really want to live in anyway.

Has nothing to do with the land that we have to spare, rather what it'll do, you'll be affected before you die, and more jobs? barely it's not a long duration thing, there will be huge amount of jobs for a year until all rigs are up, then say 3 quarters are cut because un-needed, ruin water, wild life, health, the earth, economy for a couple grand?


It's rather worrying that people will jump on my back with mainly personal opinions rather then looking this stuff up for themselves.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by flappist

Storage of energy? How is that done, the world biggest battery?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-...droelectricity

We actually do it in QLD at Wivenhoe with Split Yard Creek.

A 500MW power station that can run for 10 hours until it's empty. It is used to supply power during peak loads and is replenished when power consumption is low. I got to go for a tour of it when it was being built in the early 80s. Pretty cool stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splityard_Creek_Dam

[XR6Naranja]

Originally Posted by cs123

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-...droelectricity

We actually do it in QLD at Wivenhoe with Split Yard Creek.

A 500MW power station that can run for 10 hours until it's empty. It is used to supply power during peak loads and is replenished when power consumption is low. I got to go for a tour of it when it was being built in the early 80s. Pretty cool stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splityard_Creek_Dam

Yeah I was sure there was something like this around but wasn't able to find it related to the towns I was thinking of internationally that solely run on natural power.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

First two have already been explained..

And wind? I live in a windy place, Byron Bay is a windy place, Lennox Head is a windy place, Evans Head is a windy place, hell even Katherine located near the middle of the NT was a windy place, that's not media -.- That's experience, and it goes on...

Little less youtube and internet experts, how about a little less ignorance?

I lived in the NT which basically has all of these, besides Hydro which the most efficient way was developed internationally but could easily be done here.

I'll let you on a secret too, just because someone is younger then you, doesn't mean that whatever they say is instantly rendered incorrect and useless, especially when your example barely applies to me.

So we build a HUGE wind generator at Byron, how does this electricity get to Sydney, you know, they place where most of the electricity is actually used?
This is of course assuming that the greenies allow the big VERY noisy wind generator that murders speckled ducks to be built.

What happens on the days when it is not windy?

What happens to the hydro during the droughts?

Have you ever had any experience in power generation or transmission?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by cs123

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-...droelectricity

We actually do it in QLD at Wivenhoe with Split Yard Creek.

A 500MW power station that can run for 10 hours until it's empty. It is used to supply power during peak loads and is replenished when power consumption is low. I got to go for a tour of it when it was being built in the early 80s. Pretty cool stuff.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splityard_Creek_Dam

Yep know of it, so they run it for 10 hours, how long to fill it again?

As the demand in QLD is just under 4,000 MVA we will need another 7 of these and of course some methodology to keep refilling them which is not all that efficient and is usually done at night so solar will be a bit of a problem.

I used to do this for a living and have worked in power stations as well as high and low voltage transmission.
There have been hydro stations in QLD since the 1930s but even in FNQ where it rains all the time they can't generate enough and have to import from the south.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

Power, since all of you must be amazed is actually stored in a battery, like I previously stated using all these things combined will be more then efficient, the battery is actually a home based thing, the power is obviously limited from solar, but when it's rainy, over cast, it's usually windy, if it's not windy, one again use the Hydro, if all of that fails being the least harmful way, use nuclear power from a grid/solar set up, it's all there it seems that some of the people here will jump on the guns without research.

I wrote a really long reply about how stupid batteries are as a suggestion today, but lost interest and deleted it.

Batteries are too expensive, and if the cost of the batteries isn't bad enough, the cost of making them useful is.

[XR6Naranja]

These are examples, even Melbourne is windy, I'm sure as hell somewhere near Sydney is windy...

Infact in Hong Kong they have build an apartment/office skyscraper that barely relies on grid power.

It is clear that neither of us have experience in these things, but it seems that you don't have much knowledge of these things at all.

Because these questions you ask have already been answered and/or have been rectified by the companies that create and build these ideas.

Even though half of my information is based from the internet, it's not the devil you should use it sometime, would save a lot of time.

EDIT:

I find it funny that you have worked in this career but still question it as if you haven't?

Do you have to convince yourself to get out of bed as well?

Because it's sure seems that you're hell bent on sticking to whatever is there no matter what it's outcome, even if it was nuclear bombs.

[XR6Naranja]

Originally Posted by Scott

I wrote a really long reply about how stupid batteries are as a suggestion today, but lost interest and deleted it.

Batteries are too expensive, and if the cost of the batteries isn't bad enough, the cost of making them useful is.

You're talking about cost as if it matters...

The cost of each individual well is stupid, the cost of putting it there is huge, and in 200 or so years when the predicted gas is to run out they'll have to make it work anyway, if the earth is even worth living on...

Same goes for Nuclear, money could be spent to make it work safer and better, because in the end there won't be any choices, difference is, spend it now, live a better life, kids live a better life, grand kids live a better life, earth thrives as it should, or do it later and there really isn't much point but to simply run the earth and civilization into the ground because that's all there is left to do.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by flappist

Yep know of it, so they run it for 10 hours, how long to fill it again?

14 hours, I believe to refill. It is to augment base load capacity as you would be well aware. You don't want to have a coal fired turbine spinning to supply short peaks. You fill the dam when there is excess generation capacity and let it go when you peak.

Well aware of your history in the electrical game, so I was a little surprised at the battery comment. Perhaps it was just to spark debate.

I'm not suggesting that this is the be all but it's an example that there are possibilities for "storage" of power.

As for the alternative energy debate (which is going a bit OT from CSG). I am by no means a greenie. I've been a techie my entire working life and the thing that drives me is that there is always a way to improve the way we do things.

We see evolution in everything, from cars to computers to electronics. Why not power generation? Coal fire cannot be the end game for power generation. Nuclear has it's drawbacks and Hydro has been shown to have environmental issues too.

Something will come along but we shouldn't scoff at people that are trying.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

These are examples, even Melbourne is windy, I'm sure as hell somewhere near Sydney is windy...

Infact in Hong Kong they have build an apartment/office skyscraper that barely relies on grid power.

It is clear that neither of us have experience in these things, but it seems that you don't have much knowledge of these things at all.

Because these questions you ask have already been answered and/or have been rectified by the companies that create and build these ideas.

Even though half of my information is based from the internet, it's not the devil you should use it sometime, would save a lot of time.

EDIT:

I find it funny that you have worked in this career but still question it as if you haven't?

Do you have to convince yourself to get out of bed as well?

Because it's sure seems that you're hell bent on sticking to whatever is there no matter what it's outcome, even if it was nuclear bombs.

You really have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

You are just regurgitating rubbish you have read on the net and just can't understand why the world does not do all these obviously simple things.

They built a building that does not rely on the grid?

How many smelters have they built like that?

How many electric rail systems or mines or fabrication plants or commercial refrigeration systems or all the MAJOR users of electricity?

As far as my experience, the last time I had anything to do with a solar power station that runs an entire island with up to 200 people was about 3 months ago, Lady Elliot Island.
I am licensed to work on high voltage transmission lines and substations and have been involved in construction, control and maintenance of many zone subs.
I have worked in a coal power station (Howard) and a bagasse power station (MSF).
Last time I had anything to do with wind generation, albeit as an observer was in 2010, FNQ in the tablelands.

So what are your qualifications and what is it you have you actually done again?

[Scott]

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

You're talking about cost as if it matters...

The cost of each individual well is stupid, the cost of putting it there is huge, and in 200 or so years when the predicted gas is to run out they'll have to make it work anyway, if the earth is even worth living on...

You haven't ever worked out the costs have you? And in 200 years, I don't think we'll be muddling around with Power Stations as we know them today.

Infact, in 200 years I wouldn't be surprised if every electrical device sold has to be self sufficient.

Hell, we might even have perpetual motion sorted out, or even more unlikely, have convinced the Govco to let us all have our own personal nuclear reactors.... just in the little box beside our front doors so nice "Uranium Guy" has easy access to change our rods.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by cs123

Drill, baby, drill?

Do you ever wonder about what world you'll leave for your kids?

nah.. mad max 2 is my favourite fillum...

[distortion]

My opinion only:

I have done a fair bit of reading (online and books) and talking to politicians (federal) who I happen to have regular contact with (and are not nearly as dumb as they seem on tv, for those who hate all politicians)... From what I can stitch together the following is the case!

Solar, wind and thermal (hot spring etc) technologies cost too much per watt to cater for large populations, and are not self efficient (you need to combine multiple forms to have stable sources of power). The relatively small communities in towns that happen to be situated close enough to areas suitable (and communities that will allow them) are the only viable options for using this technology. These are not 'city' power options, only for towns. They may in some cases contribute to city power, but will never over take other power options.

Per home solar is definitely a great option - however no one wants to fund it. If each house had a 5kw+ system, the load on the current system would be extremely low for houses, whilst big industry and the like could use the load generated under coal power. I believe a big investment into per home solar, with a minimum system being 5kw, is the best green option available.

The best option for our exponential growth in energy requirements is Nuclear. Positives for Australia: energy in-dependency. We dont need other countries at all for this power (pretty much the same as coal in that regard). MUCH greater capacity to produce - future proof! Almost limitless future supply - we have so much yellowcake we would be self sufficient for thousands of years. Pollution - no airborn pollution. Possible Negatives for Australia: fairly high power station purchase price. - well, pricing to reduce the coal power emissions is expensive too, as is green power. Pollution - lucky Australia has the most geological stable area on earth, with extremely hard rock to work with, and areas that have next to no water table to worry about. Storage of spent rods is not a big issue when you take into account what Australia has to offer. Safety - new generation stations are extremely safe - China has developed a system where the fuel isnt stored as rods or whatever, its used as a 'sand'. In the event of the fuel over heating, there is a 'plug' that is engineered to melt at a certain point, which allows the sand to pour through a grill of some sort and onto a cooling pan that requires no water to safely cool down the fuel. (I'll try to find a link to something on this technology)

In the meanwhile, those who argue against Nuclear should read this: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/featur...ear?page=0%2C3

The political situation is harder than the technological. The Libs want nuclear (have for years), Labour and the Greens (don't even get me started on why they are putting more effort into social engineering than environmental issues, their 'green' premise would suggest they should be doing the opposite) do not want nuclear for their own reasons (I have asked but have not got a straight answer)

Please don't get upset about the above opinions etc. I'm not out to offend anyone, but the whole CSG issue is frustrating, as there is always SOMEONE upset - farmers or the community who want power!

[XR6Naranja]

Originally Posted by flappist

You really have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

You are just regurgitating rubbish you have read on the net and just can't understand why the world does not do all these obviously simple things.
Rubbish? It's all common sense, there is other ways there, its more natural and if you're going to look at cost, it doesn't change a thing, it's done before, it's working as of right now, and therefore there is not much reason it can't happen now...

But sure enlighten me as to why they don't do it right now as opposed to dirty, harmful, loud CSG that basically goes against so much that Govco so call strives to do, but hey that's not the first time, just like Carbon Tax.


They built a building that does not rely on the grid?
I said barely, but it still provides for itself on claims that it uses none of the grid and puts the any left over back into the grid, but feel free to check out Pearl River Tower.

How many smelters have they built like that?
This tower was only built recently, give time for progress, smelters aren't exactly contaminating water tables, the Artesian Basin, and so forth.


How many electric rail systems or mines or fabrication plants or commercial refrigeration systems or all the MAJOR users of electricity?
Like above, I never said we can FULLY phase out other means of electricity, but we can sure well make it minimum rather then the ONLY, at least at minimum it's basically likely that we wouldn't need to use CSG, but hey as suggested earlier, we mine uranium, wouldn't hurt at all to start nuclear power.

As far as my experience, the last time I had anything to do with a solar power station that runs an entire island with up to 200 people was about 3 months ago, Lady Elliot Island.
I am licensed to work on high voltage transmission lines and substations and have been involved in construction, control and maintenance of many zone subs.
I have worked in a coal power station (Howard) and a bagasse power station (MSF).
Last time I had anything to do with wind generation, albeit as an observer was in 2010, FNQ in the tablelands.

So what are your qualifications and what is it you have you actually done again?
So if you have these qualifications, why aren't you able to come up with a viable solution, those with qaulifications in science are able to tell you CSG is not worth it, how is it you with qualifications in energy is unable to provide a better solution, on top of that why constantly pick out parts and question them when you know full well an answer and could simply state it and then some actual answers might come out, I may not have these qualifications, but I'm not blind either, and by that I mean the effects on CSG is there, the history and current success of more safe or natural supplies of energy is there, what more do you want?

Like I said Scott, why bother in 200 years when the water we drink is contaminated, tree's are dead, jobs are cut, everyone is poor, we have very limited farms, why in 200 years would it matter if we have this technology if today we can keep what we have, do you want to rely on international countries for food where they have a MUCH lower standard then us hence why we don't import much of their vegetables or fruit or even meat.

Why not simply convince the Government to look at the realistic side now rather then the easy and damaging side they want to go.

If we can't convince them to change for what we have now, what makes you think we'll convince them in 200 years?

Over 200 years they'll spend what, billions on this idea?

They'll make a bit of money, then go right into debt, why? because we'll be producing poor or no cattle or other farming animals, we'll be producing poor or no fruit and veg and the list goes on, then at that point, we'll literally be relying on mining of limited minerals from the ground...

[XR6Naranja]

Originally Posted by distortion

My opinion only:

I have done a fair bit of reading (online and books) and talking to politicians (federal) who I happen to have regular contact with (and are not nearly as dumb as they seem on tv, for those who hate all politicians)... From what I can stitch together the following is the case!

Solar, wind and thermal (hot spring etc) technologies cost too much per watt to cater for large populations, and are not self efficient (you need to combine multiple forms to have stable sources of power). The relatively small communities in towns that happen to be situated close enough to areas suitable (and communities that will allow them) are the only viable options for using this technology. These are not 'city' power options, only for towns. They may in some cases contribute to city power, but will never over take other power options.

Per home solar is definitely a great option - however no one wants to fund it. If each house had a 5kw+ system, the load on the current system would be extremely low for houses, whilst big industry and the like could use the load generated under coal power. I believe a big investment into per home solar, with a minimum system being 5kw, is the best green option available.

The best option for our exponential growth in energy requirements is Nuclear. Positives for Australia: energy in-dependency. We dont need other countries at all for this power (pretty much the same as coal in that regard). MUCH greater capacity to produce - future proof! Almost limitless future supply - we have so much yellowcake we would be self sufficient for thousands of years. Pollution - no airborn pollution. Possible Negatives for Australia: fairly high power station purchase price. - well, pricing to reduce the coal power emissions is expensive too, as is green power. Pollution - lucky Australia has the most geological stable area on earth, with extremely hard rock to work with, and areas that have next to no water table to worry about. Storage of spent rods is not a big issue when you take into account what Australia has to offer. Safety - new generation stations are extremely safe - China has developed a system where the fuel isnt stored as rods or whatever, its used as a 'sand'. In the event of the fuel over heating, there is a 'plug' that is engineered to melt at a certain point, which allows the sand to pour through a grill of some sort and onto a cooling pan that requires no water to safely cool down the fuel. (I'll try to find a link to something on this technology)

In the meanwhile, those who argue against Nuclear should read this: http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/featur...ear?page=0%2C3

The political situation is harder than the technological. The Libs want nuclear (have for years), Labour and the Greens (don't even get me started on why they are putting more effort into social engineering than environmental issues, their 'green' premise would suggest they should be doing the opposite) do not want nuclear for their own reasons (I have asked but have not got a straight answer)

Please don't get upset about the above opinions etc. I'm not out to offend anyone, but the whole CSG issue is frustrating, as there is always SOMEONE upset - farmers or the community who want power!

I agree with a lot that you have said, I'd like to think I've laid down more then fair statements as well.

All 4 listed sources of power would take our environment impact right down, may even provide jobs in the nuclear department, maybe more for a solar, wind, hydro boom...

All 4 of these would greatly reduce impact in more then just environmental which it's obvious isn't cared about, but I wasn't expecting that as this is a car forum, we drive petrol and gas filled cars, but environmental isn't the only problem.

So in reality, we can use all 4, the complaints of noise means nothing as CSG also has noise, the problem of drought is not a problem, this has been combated before for Hydro, solar can run whole towns, maybe not cities, but in the case of a city, simply put in place nuclear plants, all of this doesn't hurt Australia in multiple ways, and doesn't make the ground unstable...

[poppa smurf]

Only after the last tree has been cut down,

Only after the last river has been poisoned,

Only after the last fish has been caught,

Only then will you find money cannot be eaten.

~ Cree Prophecy