Beat me to it Ben.
Why the hate towards wind turbines by this government?
The coal industry appears to have a direct line to the highest office in the land and is trying to run all its competitors ( wind , solar, whatever) out of Australia.
Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable.
Beat me to it Ben.Why the hate towards wind turbines by this government?
I can loosely understand the hate towards turbines for reasons that BF speaks of earlier, the science isnât settled on their potential health risks, but going after solar is beyond the pale
There are technical pros and cons to wide spread roof top solar.
First is that by placing the generation at the load, wasteful transmission losses are eliminated. But the capacity of the distribution system has to be the same. ( see below)
But if distributed rooftop grid connect systems become too widespread, the power system economic model might be compromised under certain situations.
For best stability there is need for a base load generation system and the need for peak load capacity. The fact that rooftop solar disappears at night means 9-12 hours a day there is a need for full base load generation capacity and significant peak load generating capacity even though there is less power being required for 12 hours during the day ( rain hail or shine). Peak load capacity might be generated by more expensive gas powered rather than coal powered stations.
So widespread solar might actually increase the cost of power from the generating stations and thus your power bill. However. less coal would be burned. Thats a good thing.
Anti clean anything is Phoney Tone. Energy, Politics, Media ⌠anything.
Yesterdays man, a fossil fueled fossil.
It wonât happen, but thereâs no one in Australian political history more deserving of being removed from office in total disgrace. I hope one of the Canberra minions gets a conscience & leaks something to expose his disgusting ways.
Interesting that Julie Bishop didnât acknowledge the Man Monis letter ignorance until after the house had gone to itâs break. Baz Cassidy last week asked assembled journoâs,⌠âWas it on purpose?â last week on insiders. Awkward silence & shoe gazing ensued.
I had long wondered it myself, did they deliberately ignore that letter, hoping the guy might do something so the fear politics 101 would find traction??
I honestly would not put it past this lot. Nothing would surprise.
The Pope is on board.
Not surprising considering nearly every incarnation of the bible states that we are the custodians of the gods earth that the church would eventually say what he has.
Is tone a catholic?
Beat me to it Ben.Why the hate towards wind turbines by this government?
I know why I donât like wind turbines, and it is only about the harsh treatment of those who live close and have been affected. And I am 100% certain that it is the proximity of the turbine to their homes that is the issue, and this is an easy fix. You either move the people to another place or you engineer turbines to have no effect.
In my travels on this matter, I have met with all sides of politics, and sadly the only ones who have done their homework are Senators Madigan and Xenothone .
Labor is fully supportive because they say it creates job, and they totally reject all claims of ill effects of turbines. They get a lot of funding from related Trade Unions.
Greens are fully supportive because it means less coal burnt and that has to be good for climate change issues. They totally reject all claims of ill effects of turbines. They also get massive funding donations from Windy Industry.
Liberals & Nationals mostly reject wind farms. When questioned the answers are dodgy, seems many of the key Libs own properties in Western Victoria near wind farm sites and object on visual and economic grounds, that is the effect on their property values and life styles. They do get funding from the Coal Industry, and I have not heard much concerns voiced about those directly affected.
So it is left to two very weird Senators to carry the fight wanting more information, and Madigan and Xenothone have virtually single handedly forced more scientific work.
The real facts are that we need to develop wind energy and there are good options in terms of placement, size of turbines and how to develop these farms. The current method of subsidizing major overseas suppliers and then further subsidizing operators, is the poor and expensive option, and hopefully my two Senator mates can win in the end and we will get a sane response, with smaller local wind energy developments instead of these massive turbines, huge transmission lines and many people severely impacted.
Is tone a catholic?Does Bill Shorten â â â â in the woods?
Is tone a catholic?
In a 1950âs Jesuit sort of way.
Is tone a catholic?
Yep, and Catholics are over represented in both LNP and Labor. Must be something to do with the great training at deception and lies you get from your local priest.
Clown pollies in question time trotting out the old âcolourless, odorless gasâ line again. Letâs put them in a room full of carbon monoxide then.
A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.
A former climate modeller for the Governmentâs Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climateâs sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
It turns out the UNâs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.
âYes, CO2 has an effect, but itâs about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decadesâ.
surely this cant be true why would they want dodge the figures how surprising!
Global warming: World sweats over July breaking warmest month record, 2015 hottest year so far Updated about an hour agoPHOTO: NOAA said many countries and the worldâs oceans experienced heatwaves in July. (ABC News)
MAP: Australia
Australians may be surprised to hear July was the warmest month ever on record worldwide and 2015 has been so far the hottest year.
Impossible. July was the middle of winter.
A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.Initial thoughts are you'd trust a doctor to look at your spotty â â â â , and you'd get a climate or environmental scientist to look at the climate, and an electrical engineer to look at an electrical engineering problemA former climate modeller for the Governmentâs Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climateâs sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
It turns out the UNâs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.
âYes, CO2 has an effect, but itâs about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decadesâ.
surely this cant be true why would they want dodge the figures how surprising!
Would be interesting to read his paper, I guess.
How can you have six degrees in applied maths ?
He must be a really interesting bloke to sit next to on a long flight.
-
he didnât correct âthe basic climate model which underpins all climate scienceâ because thereâs no such thing. There are a bunch of different climate models, designed, built, & used by different groups, and while the Ipcc has their own in-house one it looks at the others too. Could be that the reporter didnât know the subject he was writing about, or the reporter or the bloke himself wanted to sensationalise the story.
-
I notice that electrical engineering bloke says something other than co2 is driving the current warming. He makes no effort to explain what it is. Wonder if the many-times-debunked solar intensity line is going to be wheeled out?
How can you have six degrees in applied maths ?He must be a really interesting bloke to sit next to on a long flight.
If he exhales enough Co2 will he go up to seven degrees?
**** boom tish ****
**** here all week.
A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.Initial thoughts are you'd trust a doctor to look at your spotty â â â â , and you'd get a climate or environmental scientist to look at the climate, and an electrical engineer to look at an electrical engineering problemA former climate modeller for the Governmentâs Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climateâs sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
It turns out the UNâs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.
âYes, CO2 has an effect, but itâs about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decadesâ.
surely this cant be true why would they want dodge the figures how surprising!
Would be interesting to read his paper, I guess.
Partly why I have trouble taking Tim Flannery with anything other than a grain of salt. That said, at least these blokes are actually scientists, unlike that Lord whatsisname fool from the UK.
Yep. Although I don't know if Flannery has actually claimed to have done research into climate change? He's an activist for getting stuff done (as it impacts his actual field), but generally he just quotes' the relevant PR publications.A MATHEMATICAL discovery by Perth-based electrical engineer Dr David Evans may change everything about the climate debate, on the eve of the UN climate change conference in Paris next month.Initial thoughts are you'd trust a doctor to look at your spotty â â â â , and you'd get a climate or environmental scientist to look at the climate, and an electrical engineer to look at an electrical engineering problemA former climate modeller for the Governmentâs Australian Greenhouse Office, with six degrees in applied mathematics, Dr Evans has unpacked the architecture of the basic climate model which underpins all climate science.
He has found that, while the underlying physics of the model is correct, it had been applied incorrectly.
He has fixed two errors and the new corrected model finds the climateâs sensitivity to carbon dioxide (CO2) is much lower than was thought.
It turns out the UNâs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has over-estimated future global warming by as much as 10 times, he says.
âYes, CO2 has an effect, but itâs about a fifth or tenth of what the IPCC says it is. CO2 is not driving the climate; it caused less than 20 per cent of the global warming in the last few decadesâ.
surely this cant be true why would they want dodge the figures how surprising!
Would be interesting to read his paper, I guess.
Partly why I have trouble taking Tim Flannery with anything other than a grain of salt. That said, at least these blokes are actually scientists, unlike that Lord whatsisname fool from the UK.
I canât help but wonder if an electrical engineer would be employed by, say, fossil fuel electricity providers.