Electric vehicles and alternate fuel sources

Hydrogen outa solar seems the most practical way.





.

Invested just highlighted almost 5,000MW of power we may not see on a dark (as most nights tend to be) windless night.

We do get plenty of them in Australia.

maybe I shouldn't throw away the hurricane lamps just yet.

Pumped /gravity and batteries is all I have to say. It's coming, like it, or not.
For context: I drive a 1951 model car and a 1957 model ute and specialise in vintage (Ward-Leonard) equipment at work. I have zero interest in modern stuff, but I can see what's coming. Anyone who says otherwise is pissing into the wind.

Jarrod.

Yeah Jack I'm afraid you're drinking the kool-aid in yard glasses.

Wattsupwithmisinformation you're quoting is based on a "study" from 2012, in energy terms 8 years ago is ancient history.

The "substantial coal fired power plant closing in 2023" they carry on about is Lidell. Otherwise known as the generator that predates colour TV, the one that it's private owner insists be closed because it's unreliable, in fact it's so old it's actually inventing new, interesting and unpredictable ways to fall apart.

"Why can't Liddell keep running?

Plant components are designed with a finite life, typically 25 to 40 years. The rate of deterioration of metal properties increases exponentially as plants near their end of life, such as through corrosion, erosion, and high temperature metal creep.

Liddell has been set to close in 2022 for more than a decade as it is when it reaches the end of its technical life. After this point, trying to run the plant safely and reliably is more expensive than replacing it with new technologies."


thehub.agl.com.au/articles/2018/07/the-f...dell-power-station-2

The reality, in Australia today, as spelt out by the statutory authorities running the show, is that renewables are the future.

An article from the Australian Energy Market Operator which points out that, at a worst case scenario Australia's grid will be running 50-60% renewable in just FOUR years from now.

A moderate case for a few market adjustments & continued level of investment sees us at 75%, a step change scenario, with more appropriate rule changes, good investment signals, actual government leadership... means we'll be at 90%

reneweconomy.com.au/aemo-lays-out-action...ndvt75fuhAMynu8Zn5ok

The other source you're quoting has similarly dubious credibility...

GWPF... This is a "foundation" that is run by a handful of vested intetests. Much like big tobacco put out bullshit to create doubt around cigarettes causing cancer, the people running this "foundation" are putting out bullshit, and using you, to coin a phrase, as a useful idiot.

Funding sources

Because it is registered as a charity, the GWPF is not legally required to report its sources of funding,[13] and Peiser has declined to reveal its funding sources, citing privacy concerns. Peiser said GWPF does not receive funding "from people with links to energy companies or from the companies themselves."[14] The foundation has rejected freedom of information (FoI) requests to disclose its funding sources on at least four different occasions. The judge ruling on the latest FoI request, Alison McKenna, said that the GWPF was not sufficiently influential to merit forcing them to disclose the source of the £50,000 that was originally provided to establish the organization.[15]

Bob Ward, the policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, commented:

"These [FoI] documents expose once again the double standards promoted by ... the GWPF, who demand absolute transparency from everybody except themselves ... The GWPF was the most strident critic during the 'Climategate' row of the standards of transparency practised by the University of East Anglia, yet it simply refuses to disclose basic information about its own secretive operations, including the identity of its funders." [13]

In accounts filed at the beginning of 2011 with the Charities Commission and at Companies House, it was revealed that only £8,168 of the £503,302 the Foundation received as income, from its founding in November 2009 until the end of July 2010, came from membership contributions.[16] In response to the accounts, Bob Ward commented that "Its income suggests that it only has about 80 members, which means that it is a fringe group promoting the interests of a very small number of politically motivated campaigners."[16] Similarly, based on membership fees reported for the year ending 31 July 2012, it appears that GWPF had no more than 120 members at that time.[17]



So not only is the source rubbish, the argument that we should use taxpayers money to prop up businesses that're already failing, is ludicrous...

Covid19 will indeed reshape the economy... and it will be for the good of everyone if we invest in new sustainable industries.

www.abc4.com/news/national/coronavirus-a...mping-coal-industry/

www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/n...coal-sector-57670695

But back to tricky new cars...

Your favorite bond villain is known for a few exaggerations but he's promising full self driving cars... next year.



www.engadget.com/tesla-earnings-q1-2020-235416562.html

invested energy wrote: Yeah Jack I'm afraid you're drinking the kool-aid in yard glasses.

Wattsupwithmisinformation you're quoting is based on a "study" from 2012, in energy terms 8 years ago is ancient history.

The "substantial coal fired power plant closing in 2023" they carry on about is Lidell. Otherwise known as the generator that predates colour TV, the one that it's private owner insists be closed because it's unreliable, in fact it's so old it's actually inventing new, interesting and unpredictable ways to fall apart.

"Why can't Liddell keep running?

Plant components are designed with a finite life, typically 25 to 40 years. The rate of deterioration of metal properties increases exponentially as plants near their end of life, such as through corrosion, erosion, and high temperature metal creep.

Liddell has been set to close in 2022 for more than a decade as it is when it reaches the end of its technical life. After this point, trying to run the plant safely and reliably is more expensive than replacing it with new technologies."


thehub.agl.com.au/articles/2018/07/the-f...dell-power-station-2

The reality, in Australia today, as spelt out by the statutory authorities running the show, is that renewables are the future.

An article from the Australian Energy Market Operator which points out that, at a worst case scenario Australia's grid will be running 50-60% renewable in just FOUR years from now.....

“...will be running..”

Yep, much like a four cylinder ‘running’ on 3 cylinders..:pinch:

invested energy, I suggest further reading of the links you supplied.

There are so many ‘outs’ written into the ‘advise’ of the inevitable “...unplanned generation outages or loss of generation due to weather conditions...” that you’d think Sir Humphrey Appleby had a hand in writing the stuff.

Apparently when the sun goes down and the wind stops blowing they intend to blame global warming for the power grid collapse...:whistle:





.

invested energy wrote: The other source you're quoting has similarly dubious credibility...

GWPF... This is a "foundation" that is run by a handful of vested intetests. Much like big tobacco put out bullshit to create doubt around cigarettes causing cancer, the people running this "foundation" are putting out bullshit, and using you, to coin a phrase, as a useful idiot.

Funding sources

Because it is registered as a charity, the GWPF is not legally required to report its sources of funding,[13] and Peiser has declined to reveal its funding sources, citing privacy concerns. Peiser said GWPF does not receive funding "from people with links to energy companies or from the companies themselves."[14] The foundation has rejected freedom of information (FoI) requests to disclose its funding sources on at least four different occasions. The judge ruling on the latest FoI request, Alison McKenna, said that the GWPF was not sufficiently influential to merit forcing them to disclose the source of the £50,000 that was originally provided to establish the organization.[15]

Bob Ward, the policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, commented:

"These [FoI] documents expose once again the double standards promoted by ... the GWPF, who demand absolute transparency from everybody except themselves ... The GWPF was the most strident critic during the 'Climategate' row of the standards of transparency practised by the University of East Anglia, yet it simply refuses to disclose basic information about its own secretive operations, including the identity of its funders." [13]

In accounts filed at the beginning of 2011 with the Charities Commission and at Companies House, it was revealed that only £8,168 of the £503,302 the Foundation received as income, from its founding in November 2009 until the end of July 2010, came from membership contributions.[16] In response to the accounts, Bob Ward commented that "Its income suggests that it only has about 80 members, which means that it is a fringe group promoting the interests of a very small number of politically motivated campaigners."[16] Similarly, based on membership fees reported for the year ending 31 July 2012, it appears that GWPF had no more than 120 members at that time.[17]



So not only is the source rubbish, the argument that we should use taxpayers money to prop up businesses that're already failing, is ludicrous...

Covid19 will indeed reshape the economy... and it will be for the good of everyone if we invest in new sustainable industries.

www.abc4.com/news/national/coronavirus-a...mping-coal-industry/

www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/n...coal-sector-57670695

...........:huh:




The GWPF is one of many news sites I reference.

From what I see of the ‘articles’ listed at the GWPF site they are mainly articles from other news sites.

Of the latest articles at the GWPF I see the sources listed as the Times and the Wall Street Journal listed amongst many other world news sources. Does this mean the GWPF is a “useful idiot” of all the news organisations it utilises...:huh:

www.thegwpf.com/


From the “who we are” part of the GWPF site...

Neil Record (Chairman) — Educated at Oxford and London Universities, Neil Record started his career as an Economist at the Bank of England. He is the chairman and founder of Record plc (1983). Mr Record is a Visiting Fellow and Investment Committee member of Nuffield College (Oxford), a Trustee of the Institute of Economic Affairs (London) and a Governor of Magdalen College School (Oxford).

Lord Lawson — Nigel Lawson (Conservative member of the House of Lords) was Secretary of State for Energy (1981-83) and Chancellor of the Exchequer (1983-89). He is the Honorary President of the Global Warming Policy Foundation and author of An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming, 2008.

Edward Atkin CBE — Edward Atkin founded and created Avent in 1994, the world’s No 1 in Baby Feeding hardware. He is a multiple Queen’s Award winner for Technology as well as Exports. Mr Atkin helped create what is now the Reuters Institute for Journalism at Oxford University and owns a research & development centre in Cambridge dealing advanced transport technologies.

Martin Bralsford — Martin Bralsford is a Chartered Accountant. He is a former President of the Jersey Chamber of Commerce and a former chairman of the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust.





.

maybe his factory dont run on solar or batteries ...but all his business runs on a lot of wind......now he s suggesting the lot might be broke ......Henry Ford tried to pull this stunt on the Dodge brothers,and lost a multi million dollar lawsuit to them....Not that it did them a lot of good...they both fell victim to the Spanish flu in 1919.

Well Im pretty sure Yallorn is getting shut in only a couple of years and Loy Yang and about 15

So thats the last of the coal fired jiggers for Victoria

So if you dont like solar or wind you better get used to living without electricity

Even if these get pushed out by a decade , which Yallorn wont as its out of viable coal we are facing a problem if people dont want wind or solar
Hydro power is pretty much fully developed in main land Australia
Tassy still has the Franklin river to develop

So I feel we need to learn how to work with these new changes or go back about 100 years in life style, which may not be so bad either

Coal fired power stations are pretty much a done deal these days no matter how much we may like them


Paul