Global Warming

[eZyT]

I've thought about this throwaway society we have.

I bought an oven made in South Australia from my local small town appliance shop yesterday

unrelated but related.

me and mrs EZ both have an almost anaphylactic reaction to shopping (we've never bought a TV or a fridge or a washing machine or a phone - always rescued them)

anyway, we felt great about buying a thylacine locally.

Australian manufacturing. wow

 

[RoarEmotion]

I bought an oven made in South Australia from my local small town appliance shop yesterday

unrelated but related.

me and mrs EZ both have an almost anaphylactic reaction to shopping (we've never bought a TV or a fridge or a washing machine or a phone - always rescued them)

anyway, we felt great about buying a thylacine locally.

Australian manufacturing. wow

I actually list stuff on eBay, Facebook marketplace not for the money but don’t doesn’t end up in landfill (at least as quickly). Not as admirable as your efforts though.

 

[tigersnake]

I actually list stuff on eBay, Facebook marketplace not for the money but don’t doesn’t end up in landfill (at least as quickly). Not as admirable as your efforts though.

I'm the same. Chucking something that took a fair bit of manufacturing into landfill, I really hate it, I can't do it. I've learnt the hard way not to list stuff for free, 1700 pings FFS, geez thats a funny story, then abuse for not replying individually etc etc, what I do now is stick 20 bucks on it, that eliminates the 'free' searches, and when they turn up and need it and plan to use it, its free.

I take waste seriously. Got my landfill down to half a bin every 3 or 4 weeks. Its not hard if you put a bit of effort in.

 

[Wildride]

Nuclear debate heated, but whose energy plan stacks up?

Will the government’s renewables plan cost $1 trillion? Is nuclear energy cheaper? Can a reactor be up and running by 2037?

www.theage.com.au

 

[Willo]

The Net Zero Aus methodology is computing the NPV cost of the entire energy system up to 2050, so it's way more than the capital costs. You have to compare apples with apples. The report shows that even maintaining baseline (ie current conditions) has an NPV cost of $4.2-4.5 trillion up to 2050.

I didn’t write that article or do the economics. It was part of the article I was referring to before with Poshman

The $9 trillion number referred to is all investment in all sectors of the economy (public and private) to achieve the energy transition and decarbonise the entire economy. This is not the cost of transforming the energy network only, but also includes behaviour and usage changes, investment in vehicles etc. Ie almost all of these costs are to be incurred no matter what tech is producing the electricity.

Well that may be so.
But who determines who has to change over to ev’s for example? What if people or businesses can’t afford the transition to ev’s?
Who pays for that? Do businesses go broke, do people walk everywhere?
What does our defence force run on? Ev tanks, electric planes. How will we defend ourself? Solar navy or sailing boats. If the Chinese want a war, I hope we tell them to play fair and only use what we do. That’ll *smile* them.

Net zero for the whole country is a complete furphy.

 

[Brodders17]

For those who are putting up the 'costs' of renewables, did that figure include private investment or just government spending?
We know the figure on nuclear will only include government spending- for 1 very good reason.

 

[Willo]

I bought an oven made in South Australia from my local small town appliance shop yesterday

unrelated but related.

me and mrs EZ both have an almost anaphylactic reaction to shopping (we've never bought a TV or a fridge or a washing machine or a phone - always rescued them)

anyway, we felt great about buying a thylacine locally.

Australian manufacturing. wow

Not much manufactured locally in Australia anymore. It’s a shame and shameful.

The “throw away” society can’t just be blamed on capitalism.
When you’ve got one of the biggest economies in the world mass producing everything under the sun at a cheaper cost to buy new than it is to repair it doesn’t help matters. That country being a communist country, maybe that’s its long term plan. To reduce manufacturing skills and factories in all manner of products.

Make $squillions doing it, and make every other country dependant on China for those goods and the skills and factories to produce them. And a monopoly on the raw products as well.
A short term plan for China is about 50-100 years.

 

[Willo]

For those who are putting up the 'costs' of renewables, did that figure include private investment or just government spending?
We know the figure on nuclear will only include government spending- for 1 very good reason.

May be a bit of both
Do what others do. Read the posts. It might say which it is, or not.
If it’s not there try google.

 

[DavidSSS]

I reckon Crikey put it best, describing Dutton's nuclear policy as sabotaging renewables, not as a by-product of the policy, but as the aim of the policy:

For all the acres of words being written about Peter Dutton’s fantasy of seven nuclear plants, no such plants will ever be built in Australia. Yesterday’s announcement by Dutton — so devoid of substance that even the press gallery’s fence-sitters derided its lack of detail — was really about creating a cover for the one solid Coalition energy policy that currently exists.


That policy is to sabotage investment in large-scale renewable energy — or to “cap” it, as Nationals leader (and putative deputy prime minister in a Coalition government) David Littleproud put it this week.

The point of this is re-enforced by comments Robert Barr from the lobby group Nuclear for Climate made:

I think what will happen is that nuclear will just tend to push out solar

He also said

And I think it wouldn't be that difficult to build control systems to stop export of power at the domestic level.

Yep, we already have talk of charging people to feed in energy from the solar panels on their roof when supply is plentiful, nuclear can also mean they actually stop you from exporting power. Nuclear power stations are not designed to be turned on and off all the time. Nuclear power stations become even less viable if they have to be turned up and down in response to changes in demand or supply.

The reality of this policy is that it is an excuse to prolong the life of fossil fuels.

Nuclear is a silly proposition, unless your real agenda is to prolong the use of fossil fuels and screw renewables - on that score a nuclear proposal (you don't even need to build them, which they won't as they make no sense) can be effective.

DS

 

[AngryAnt]

For those who are putting up the 'costs' of renewables, did that figure include private investment or just government spending?
We know the figure on nuclear will only include government spending- for 1 very good reason.

Exactly - because its a bad investment compared to renewables.

 

[RoarEmotion]

I reckon Crikey put it best, describing Dutton's nuclear policy as sabotaging renewables,
Nuclear is a silly proposition, unless your real agenda is to prolong the use of fossil fuels and screw renewables - on that score a nuclear proposal (you don't even need to build them, which they won't as they make no sense) can be effective.

DS

In Australia I agree.

What does Japan do?
Seems nuclear is their main hope for low co2 energy.
We should be exporting uranium there.

Energy in Japan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[eZyT]

Not much manufactured locally in Australia anymore. It’s a shame and shameful.

The “throw away” society can’t just be blamed on capitalism.
When you’ve got one of the biggest economies in the world mass producing everything under the sun at a cheaper cost to buy new than it is to repair it doesn’t help matters. That country being a communist country, maybe that’s its long term plan. To reduce manufacturing skills and factories in all manner of products.

Make $squillions doing it, and make every other country dependant on China for those goods and the skills and factories to produce them. And a monopoly on the raw products as well.
A short term plan for China is about 50-100 years.

you need to contrast the tips in Cuba with Florida with regard to the repair rates of communism V capitalism.

think youlle find capitalism = throw away and buy another.

thats whats landed us in this mess

 

[Brodders17]

I reckon Crikey put it best, describing Dutton's nuclear policy as sabotaging renewables, not as a by-product of the policy, but as the aim of the policy:



The point of this is re-enforced by comments Robert Barr from the lobby group Nuclear for Climate made:



He also said



Yep, we already have talk of charging people to feed in energy from the solar panels on their roof when supply is plentiful, nuclear can also mean they actually stop you from exporting power. Nuclear power stations are not designed to be turned on and off all the time. Nuclear power stations become even less viable if they have to be turned up and down in response to changes in demand or supply.

The reality of this policy is that it is an excuse to prolong the life of fossil fuels.

Nuclear is a silly proposition, unless your real agenda is to prolong the use of fossil fuels and screw renewables - on that score a nuclear proposal (you don't even need to build them, which they won't as they make no sense) can be effective.

DS

Yep, forgive me because i cant remember the exact figures, but Dutton's plan is for something like 10% nuclear, while gas increases from something like 30% of our current supply to over 50%. and renewables actually decreases.
If they got into government they would aim to stop cap new investments in renewables, so while the wait for any nuclear power is 15 years at the least, (most likely a lot longer) Australia's increasing power demands will be reliant on aging coal power- which will need massive investment to remain online- and on gas. All the while the Australian tax payers will be forking out billions to build these plants.
And if they dont get the states to change their laws on nuclear we will just get more and more power supplied by coal and gas while our emissions go up and up. (and keep in mind all states- including those with Lib governments - continue to be opposed to nuclear power plants.)

 

[Willo]

The other Government cost for renewables is where ARENA and other agencies are funding infrastructure. $500 million of taxpayers money to install ev chargers.
Plus all the subsidies for ev’s ($3,000 cash for a certain price range) solar rebates, heat pumps etc.

So while these ev’s are saving on fossil fuels ie petrol and diesel, I wonder what the trade off is via coal fired power generation for all these ev chargers throughout the country. Or at home where this are no solar batteries.
I just read that there was a take up of over 8,900 ev’s for May and nearly 40,000 since the start of the year.

One in four cars sold in May in Australia was an EV or hybrid vehicle, data shows

Automative industry findings show Australians have purchased double the number of hybrid vehicles this year compared to the same period last year

www.theguardian.com

 

[Willo]

you need to contrast the tips in Cuba with Florida with regard to the repair rates of communism V capitalism.

think youlle find capitalism = throw away and buy another.

thats whats landed us in this mess

Yes I know some of the poorer countries embarrass the richer countries by recycling a lot of different parts and with what they can do wit( them.
But those third world/ poorer countries are really the market. It’s the lazier, richer countries.
But also actively encouraged by China in its pricing.
How often do you hear it’s cheaper to replace (that item) than to pay a repair man to fix it.
Try takin a microwave oven or a tv set in for repair. Let alone a toaster or an electric jug.
I remember as an apprentice (aeons ago) rewinding a toaster element and replacing an electric kettle element etc. these days the hourly cost of repair and the parts don’t add up.
Some bigger items might. eg stove or oven elements. Try to get a compressor repaired on a fridge. Most times they’ll just tell you it’s not worth the cost. But a new one.
A lot of electric tools, battery or corded are much the same.

 

[RoarEmotion]

I'm the same. Chucking something that took a fair bit of manufacturing into landfill, I really hate it, I can't do it. I've learnt the hard way not to list stuff for free, 1700 pings FFS, geez thats a funny story, then abuse for not replying individually etc etc, what I do now is stick 20 bucks on it, that eliminates the 'free' searches, and when they turn up and need it and plan to use it, its free.

I take waste seriously. Got my landfill down to half a bin every 3 or 4 weeks. Its not hard if you put a bit of effort in.

I got a new mattress for my back and someone took my previous one for free.
Their new bed was going to be months late in a new house and they had nothing.
But yep pricing something free typically causes problems and all sorts of weird messages.

 

[Willo]

Just on the assumption that all states oppose nuclear power plants, other states may have bans on nuclear, SA doesn’t .

No surprise there that States haven’t welcomed Duttons announcement, seeing all the mainland states are Labor.
Tasmania the only liberal state with an massive supply of hydro wouldn’t be in the running for a nuclear plant anyway.

But where do the states and Commonwealth powers lay when it comes to such things as power generation. You’d think that it would be a state responsibility to build, maintain and guarantee supply. But there are over arching responsibilities when the National Grid intersects stare borders.AEMO and other agencies have a mix of state and federal members.

Could the Federal government take on/over the States and enforce its will because of “National Security” concerns?
I’m not sure. I’m by no means an expert on all things in our Constitution. I’ll have to have a read and do some research.
Lucas Heights near Sydney, I believe is a Commonwealth facility. (Not for power generation, but still a nuclear reactor)
More to come….


SA’s Premier Peter Malinauskas was all for nuclear power until he got the tap on the shoulder from Canberra to tow the party line.
He still says he is open or neutral to it, but economically it doesn’t stack up.
(This was when he was lobbying for the new frigates and nuclear subs to be built at the Osborne ship yards.
Told to shut up or SA doesn’t get the ship building contracts.)

Albanese, Malinauskas split over nuclear power

South Australia’s Premier says building nuclear submarines in Adelaide should open the door to a wider conversation about nuclear energy.

www.afr.com

Date: - SACOME welcomes Premier Peter Malinauskas’ comments on Nuclear Energy | Policy Commons

<bound method Artifact.get_generated_summary of <Artifact: Date: - SACOME welcomes Premier Peter Malinauskas’ comments on Nuclear Energy>>

policycommons.net

 

[Willo]

I got a new mattress for my back and someone took my previous one for free.
Their new bed was going to be months late in a new house and they had nothing.
But yep pricing something free typically causes problems and all sorts of weird messages.

Advertise it for free and they near want you to pay them to take it away.
As tiger snake suggested put a small nominal $ figure on an item, let them beat you down and they think they e had a win and go off happy.

 

[Sintiger]

As an aside from someone who is not an expert on these things, where does the $12 billion Snowy 2.0 fit into this?

 

[RoarEmotion]

Advertise it for free and they near want you to pay them to take it away.
As tiger snake suggested put a small nominal $ figure on an item, let them beat you down and they think they e had a win and go off happy.

Yep facebook marketplace (although we are now way off global warming other than as an extension that capitalism drives throw away materials = more energy on making new stuff = demand (IMO is the biggest problem)) is ambit claim city.