early counts show KAP outpolls the greens

Are you for real?? no really i am asking.

Why force us to use something that costs more, doesnt always work, is less efficient, and needs goverment subs just to run?

 

There are plenty of sources to back that claim up and if that didn't happen than neither of us would be sitting our computers posting right now.

That is the difference.

Provide a source or admit that it didn't happen. I am not asking for very much and the fact that you are trying deflect the issue shows how weak your argument truly is.

 

Because it better than using finite resources that have been proven to damage the environment.

 

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=....,cf.osb&fp=47d2e4c2035d6b63&biw=1366&bih=542

Knock yourself out... Have a good read.

 

Now which page contains the actions of Bob Brown.

 

I aint ya dog little boy, read through it and find out.

 

I wasn't the one who made the claim.

 

Its a wide known AND ADMITTED action you fool. If you cant be bothered reading up about it it again shows YOUR lack of intelligence.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ion-generates-electricity-NIGHT.html?ITO=1490

It's getting more efficient and more reliable all the time.

Plus there's always Geothermal.

 

No. That is not a fact. It is just a bit of nonsense you made up.

Solar thermal with storage in combination with wind CAN provide cost effective base load power.


Here is a fully costed plan which demonstrates how it can be achieved in Australia in 10 years:
http://beyondzeroemissions.org/zero-carbon-australia-2020

 

Its not there NOW though is it mate.....

 

strange, others power ahead and are relying more and more on alternative power sources, but horse people like you say it can't be done.
You know what horse people are, do you?
They are the ones, who said some 115 years back, that a horse can never be replaced by the car, which was just introduced by Carl Benz.....
How does it feel like living in the past ??????????????????????????????????

 

Actually it is there NOW mate.

Solar thermal with storage plants are operating and many more under construction which will provide baseload power 24/7. And the cost of PV and wind have already dropped to be less than coal.

You need to keep up more. Luddite is a very poor look.

 

It is interesting to listen read through your posts as robust as they are. The personal name calling may be a touch immature but regardless there seems to be good passion.

Alternative fuel sources is an interesting issue. I feel we have other issues that need to be addressed in order to move forward with alternative sources. One for example is where do we wish our population cieling to sit. Obviously the more people we have the more power we will need.

Change is good. Still water goes stagnant as the saying goes. However if the change is too quick and the proper infrastructure is not put in place we will invite catastrophe. We as a nation are heading in the right direction, not quick enough for some, too quick for others, albeit in the right direction.

If we were to leave it to the Greens coal would be gone overnight. So would Australias economy, your house, my house and many more. I think we need to have a gradual change over many decades, slowly ushering in alternative sources while coal and gas pick up the declining bulk.

I was asked to help finance a tidal generator last year, however I was committed elsewhere. The turbine was the size of a small generator and was placed on piers. these piers would rise and fall with the tide and thus generate power. This small unit could generate enough power to look after 30 homes. Not alot you say. Well the particular pier had 400 places to put this turbine, so therefore you had the ability to power 12,000 homes. The test pier was a small one. How many of these piers do we have in Australia. This group needed income to work on reducing the size of the unit and doubling it's output.

Now if we do go alternative it will be much more localised. Tidal and wind on the coast, and perhaps wind, solar and Geo in the west. At the moment Geothermal is too expensive for its output. Unlike more volcanic areas of the world where Geo is used, here in Australia it is rather deep and requires great resource to extract.

Long and the short. Some people need to be more patient and others need only open their mind.

 

What you said was: Solar and wind will NEVER be able to provide the base load power that coal gives us nor could they ever be as cost effective....understand that FACT before making yourself look so stupid.

Which is a ridiculous statement given the rapid advancement of the technology that quite obviously has the potential to do just that.

In any case, Natural gas and Geothermal can provide base load power right now which could be supplemented by solar and wind.

Coal is not the be-all and end-all of electricity generation in Australia.

 

Good post. Global over population is at the heart of all of our environmental problems, "conservationists" who ignore this problem have zero credability. Viable clean energy will no doubt be used in the future, and progress is being made in the development of clean energy, but it`s not there yet.

 

A fully costed plan to decarbonise the Australian economy in 10 years has already been developed:

http://beyondzeroemissions.org/zero-carbon-australia-2020

 

Yep, it`s called extinction

 

yes all jokes aside, the biggest enviromental concern isn't fossil fuels it is what they call the human stain. That is that we are invariably eating and poluting our world away. Only the truly ignorant would deny that. What can we do about it. There is really nothing we can do. It is inherent in our species to reproduce, however our only competitior in the food chain is ourselves, therefore it seems we are eating ourselves.

Smarter people than I don't have the answers. One thing is for sure if we don't find them soon, you won't have to worry about running out of fossil fuels as they will most certainly see out humanity.

 

Carefull you don't stray into Green ultra extremism there Slippery. But I agree, population is the number one problem facing the world. For reasons I cannot fathom, governments are studiously avoiding and ignoring the issue, in fact here in Australia we are moving in the opposite direction and encouraging people to breed.

 

Using other ways besides burning coal to turn a turbine is called "extinction"? Why?

Making electricity isn't rocket science. There are lots of ways to do it.

 

Haven't talked to many American conservatives here on this board have you? They would have all women barefoot and pregnant constantly between the ages of about 12 and 68 - because God will just keep on providing............

 

Yes Adultmale, true I don't want to go too Green.lol.

The reason we are looking to boost population is because it is envisaged that we may not have enough people to sustain a credible workforce or enough to be economically independent.

Now when I say economically independent I mean to say we will not have the population to feed our economy if the whole Global Marketplace falls apart. You probably are unsure where I am heading with this, but I will try to give an example.

I live in a town of around ten thousand people. We are mainly mining and cattle driven economy. If either one was to fall over, the town would suffer economic hardship, but if both were to dive, it would be economic ruin. There is a place west of here that was mainly if not all railway dependent. They closed a portion of that operation that was around 80 % of the towns workforce. 3/4 of the businesses closed and the housing market suffered a staggering decline where houses that were bought for $ 150,000 then sold for $ 20,000. Even though not completely extinct, it is barely breathing, and time will eventually take its toll.

Now you take a small city of around 100,000 people, it begins to generate its own economy. Purely because it has people to feed, clothe and house. This turns dollars over. Sure there are slow times but the water keeps trickling and the pond stays healthy.

Australia needs somewhere around the 40 to 50 million people range to be somewhat self supporting. Now heres the conundrum, we cant really support that amount of people as we only have a small amount of arable land for food, and we certainly dont have the water. Infrastructure we can develope, health we will not be able to manage. So on one hand we can generate our own economy if need be, on the other the way of life we know and have known will be a long lost memory. Wages will invariably go down as there will be more competition for jobs, in turn lifestyle will suffer as families will have to sacrifice to get by. In Japan it is average for a worker to work 10 hour days, 2 of those hours are given to the employer for free. Just because they employed them. I can hear the Labor hounds now calling for blood.lol.

I used Japan as it is a modern country, economically similar to ours. In China, even though it has become much better with the advent of a burgeoning middle class, if you earned $ 10 per day you were well off. India, well that is just a tragedy.

Population increase is a lazy way out of re skilling your workforce. It is both faster and more economical. However with the increase in people comes the increase of social and at times economic problems.

 

Agreed Slippery, I can`t understand why the global population issue is so studiously ignored by the AGW church, no money in it I guess,

 

Sounds nice in theory, but in practice, it`s nothing but another balls up.