Ten Bucks a Litre

[pmacc]

Not sure how many members watched Dick Smiths Documentary on ABC tonight but I thought it was a pretty fair snapshot of Australia's energy situation

for those who missed it the link is here, it’s just shy of being an hour long
http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/41110

some of the assumptions Dick mentioned to me are a tad questionable such as Petrol hitting 10 dollars a litre which I won’t get into cause most people don’t want a lecture on macro economics and Dick also fails to discuss Hydrogen which seems to be making some big steps in recent years to becoming a viable form of transportation.

One thing I do like in the doco is that Dick brings up Nuclear energy which is something Australia needs to have a informed debate about especially with all the Uranium we have in the back yard and that our pollies are too gutless to make a decision that would be good for the country because they are worried about polls and elections

so AFF members what did you think of the documentary?

[buggerlugs]

Excellent , Although Dick liked showing off his "Toys"........

[Work Horse]

Yes watched Dick’s show he's a bit like the Don Burke of the energy debate!

It was reasonably balanced, although no mention of what he would do with nuclear waste. The lack of safe waste disposal, the "not in my back yard" attitude of the Australian population and the amount of cheap coal we have are some of the reasons we have not looked at nuclear IMHO

This doco was about the supply side of the energy equation. If you view it in the context of his last doco "The population puzzle", you get an idea of the demand.

Reducing demand would mean our energy supply requirements would be reduced i.e. there would be more to go around.

I think nuclear power would be and easier sell to the public than population control.

I don't believe either will get up.

[xxx000]

I find him painful, always telling us what we should do yet he's gone against much of it in his own life:
1. He made his money from importing stuff yet now wants us to buy Australian

2. He has grandkids yet now wants us to cap our population

Plus there's his regular criticism of Aldi, yet a large % of their product is local

His own Dick Smith store in Belrose shut recently and yet not a whisper about that.

He's a self professed aviation 'expert' who made claims about CASA that haven't come true.
Time for him to retire, curb his ego and stop annoying us

[Marquis]

He has not owned the electronics chain for many many years.

[xxx000]

I'm well aware of that, it's why I said 'made' not 'makes'

the Belrose store was I think one of his home brand stores, peanut butter etc NOT one of his former electronics but not 100% on that

[poppa smurf]

Dick made many claims, mostly a well balanced outlook on Australia's future.

however he did fail to make mention of the new, as yet, still in the pipeline stage of battery technology......graphite.

graphite batteries have the ability to store 10,000 times more energy than a similar size battery.

discussion happening now on our local talkback radio.

[KIWI-1]

Poppa Smurf...
What did you think about the idea of a thermal solar power station in Port Augusta?
edit
Just did a Google - bit sad ARENA won't stump up a few million for the feasibility study.

[mik]

people when discussing clean alternatives to coal always point out the good sides them, nuclear, they still have to dig the yellow cake, refine it, deal with waste, etc.............. the same for his little electric car, "oh look not one bit of pollution it makes",
how much pollution occurs in the manufacture of batteries? bloody shed loads i would be betting

[poppa smurf]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

Poppa Smurf...
What did you think about the idea of a thermal solar power station in Port Augusta?

fantastic idea.....I have attended all meetings proposing the build and not one minister present was against the notion and yet not one went back and looked at granting the billion dollar price tag.

our power stations are coming to the end of their useful life and given that playford generates 40% of South Australia's power they will soon have to be replaced.

nobody wants nuclear for obvious reasons, gas may be an alternative and it has been discussed at various levels and deemed too expensive to implement the infrastructure in this region.

coal has ruled for so long that the infrastructure has become a massive investment and one that the investors dont want to see stop.

thermo solar is an excellent alternative with energy storage, as molten salt, able to provide power to the turbines via steam for something like 13 hours after sundown.

it must be noted that the technology is present in other countries, america is building 4 very large setups right now.

we have it up and running in Port Augusta now, albeit on a small scale with an investment tomato grower......the technology is proven and very workable.

we have ample sunlight and more than enough open, flat land, we simply lack the funds and the governmental initiative.

I think "clean" coal generation may be our future, simply burying the output, as the overseas conglomerates will not cease in wanting their pound of flesh.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by xxx000

I find him painful, always telling us what we should do yet he's gone against much of it in his own life:

Doesnt mean his messages dont have significant truth or his statements are incorrect.

JP

[pmacc]

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

Excellent , Although Dick liked showing off his "Toys"........

there was a bit of that, but i think we all be the same if we had that many toys

Originally Posted by poppa smurf

Dick made many claims, mostly a well balanced outlook on Australia's future.

however he did fail to make mention of the new, as yet, still in the pipeline stage of battery technology......graphite.

graphite batteries have the ability to store 10,000 times more energy than a similar size battery.

discussion happening now on our local talkback radio.

There was a few items such as this which would of been good to introduce im guessing they were missing due to the time limit of the doco and possibly because its still in the pipeline which means it may never eventuate as a viable alternative

Originally Posted by Work Horse

Yes watched Dick’s show he's a bit like the Don Burke of the energy debate!

It was reasonably balanced, although no mention of what he would do with nuclear waste. The lack of safe waste disposal, the "not in my back yard" attitude of the Australian population and the amount of cheap coal we have are some of the reasons we have not looked at nuclear IMHO

This doco was about the supply side of the energy equation. If you view it in the context of his last doco "The population puzzle", you get an idea of the demand.

Reducing demand would mean our energy supply requirements would be reduced i.e. there would be more to go around.

I think nuclear power would be and easier sell to the public than population control.

I don't believe either will get up.

Nuclear waste is one of the 2 big issues surrounding nuclear power along with the risks of a meltdown and its something again we need to have a debate around.

Personally and this isn't a popular view but with the amound of arid land we have i do not have a issue with Australia storing nuclear waste especialy within the Woomera prohibited area where some areas are going to be contaminated from the Cold war era testing for a very long time.

I do believe that as electricity prices rise to a point where we have to go nuclear for a cheaper alternative, only then will a majority of Australia will embrace Nuclear power and its issues

Renewables such as solar and wind will be part of the solution aswell but i still believe we need a mixed basket of energy production

[mik]

I saw a doco on the molten salt power storage/solar generation thing a while ago, , it looks to be a good thing, and with the massive amount of land at our disposal in OZ, one would ask the question why the hell are we not going down this path ?
Another question , why the hell are we not stockpiling some of the resources we are selling by the millions of tons overseas every year .............. is that what we call short sighted planning ? we seem to have that in abundance !

[poppa smurf]

we have many alternatives available to us as far as energy goes......some are viable, some are not.

the system at the moment is geared toward profit at all cost, we have the worlds most expensive electricity (America for example pay roughly 12c per kilowatt) and that is the way multi nationals like it.

Dick pointed out massive mines that are being built simply for export????? and yet we are heading toward a deficit with new taxes and charges being levied....

profit at all and any cost is the catch cry of today unfortunately.

[GASWAGON]

If only Natural gas didn't take up so much tank room in a car we could all be filling and driving off from home with our Natural gas meters at home....Its an excellent clean fuel just like LPG is..

[GASWAGON]

I think the best solution is electric cars that are recharged from your solar system battery pack at home, but its rediculously expensive to set up as Dicky explained in his show?

[JamesR]

besides waste, what is the issue with Nuclear? its quite stable and is quite safe!
there is hundreds of nuclear plants around the world, and not very many failures. we dont get big earthquakes, no tsunamis, tornados/cylclones/hurricanes arnt a big issue.

[mik]

Originally Posted by JamesR

besides waste, what is the issue with Nuclear? its quite stable and is quite safe!
there is hundreds of nuclear plants around the world, and not very many failures. we dont get big earthquakes, no tsunamis, tornados/cylclones/hurricanes arnt a big issue.

Yes it is "quite safe" as long as unexpected circumstances don't arise, we have had some wild stuff over the years, and while you would hope even though catastrophic events are few and far between especially down south, but some parts of oz are prone to unpredictable weather floods cyclones, recently i think there was a tornado hit somewhere ??
the nuclear stuff has to be dug up = money , refined = more money, plant to be built = lots and lots more money, maintained lots more money, waste taken care of = more money, now add to that ongoing risk if **** does hit the fan..................... even if the chances are minimal......they are there.
The old saying, once the genie is out of the bottle it is very hard to put back. Fukushima is still leaking radioactive water into the sea today ! what can they do about it ......... not much.

To me it makes no sense to take the risky option when less risky options are known and available that pose zero risk, even if the safer option cost a bit more to implement which would you pick? i know which one i would pick.
the main issue i see here is the ramifications of shutting down coal plants to put something better in,
A. it is politically unpalatable,
B. probably economically unpalatable while coal is cheap and the country is broke.

[jpblue1000]

having worked with the UK nuclear industry and had discussions with barbara lady judge the head of the UK Atomic Energy Authority Im nowhere near convinced. the known fuel is very limited and would not satisfy a 100% conversion for current and predicted consumption globally. It would however bridge a gap between fosil fuel use and a renewable future, one that does scare the nuke brigade and fossil fuel lobby as they know their time is limited.
But nuclear going wrong is still better globally then coal when its working fine!
But the question needs to be asked do we want to leave a legacy forever for a cheap easy solution. is our 20 year economic benefit worth the cost to the next milleneum or two worth of generations to look after our mess. Even if there is no 'disaster' they pay for the upkeep, maintenance and whatever is necessary of our nuclear waste.
Modern reactors are so far pretty well designed, but they still produce waste and risk and as when they get older we don't know the implications.
I know when a nuke plant fails I don't want to be anywhere near it...ever, when a coal plant is going right I dont want it anywhere near me, but when renewables fail...they fall down, they burst or they sink. no dramas. I believe a public mandated move to renewables with appropriate re-deployment of investment capital in our country will save the economy and our country.
it will give many hundreds of thousands of people employment to 'Nation Build' our way to a renewable future and I cannot see any real drawbacks with a mixed mode renewable future.

JP

[mik]

I'm all for improving the nation too, however i don't agree with the forcing people to change or upgrade by the punishment or scare tactics methods, and or destruction of our industries, and also paying a big chunk of our country's money for a carbon tax to a body that more than likely has an alternative agenda, that's just my opinion though.

[poppa smurf]

well the thing is changes can be made at minimal or at a cost that is equal or possibly less than the equivalent upgrade costings of our current systems.

playford power station for example has to be upgraded, its useful lifespan has been reached, some say, exceeded, replacement cost is in the billions.

why not put that amount of monies into solar, solar thermal or geo thermal, producing equivalent amounts of power for less monies also good for the environment.

[Trump]

I am going to go out on a limb and put forward the following statement:

Clean, renewable energy production in the future won't be from massive advances in baseload generating capacity. It will come from micro generation; each house would have enough generating capacity for its needs and a small surplus.

Solar panels are a good start, but two things limit their use as a true micro generating technology:
- A proverbial acre of them are required to generate the energy required by the average household.
- There is no real efficient way (both in energy and spatial terms) to store the energy for use at night. Enough batteries to do so would occupy a small room.

Batteries like these graphite units would go a long way to addressing the storage problem. And the efficiency of solar panels would need to be at the 60-70% mark to make a 16-20m2 array of panels possible (based on the standard 240V single phase 80A supply to houses from the grid). Once this happens, the need for baseload disappears.

[poppa smurf]

I agree to a certain extent with your statement in that the future energy production will be from a lot of smaller generators.

given the statement made recently by a prominent spokesperson of the solar industry that Graphite would hold 10,000 times more energy than any battery currently on the market then it would follow the size needed would be 10,000 times less than current technology.

we are currently working on a system, nearing completion, that uses a lot less than a room full of batteries, turns out it is very usable with minimal generator need........substitute graphite, at a reasonable price, for these batteries and the generator could easily go.

the future in home generation is very close.......just needs funds.

[Trump]

Originally Posted by poppa smurf

I agree to a certain extent with your statement in that the future energy production will be from a lot of smaller generators.

given the statement made recently by a prominent spokesperson of the solar industry that Graphite would hold 10,000 times more energy than any battery currently on the market then it would follow the size needed would be 10,000 times less than current technology.

we are currently working on a system, nearing completion, that uses a lot less than a room full of batteries, turns out it is very usable with minimal generator need........substitute graphite, at a reasonable price, for these batteries and the generator could easily go.

the future in home generation is very close.......just needs funds.

Are you able to elaborate further on this project you're a part of?

[Spurious]

Dick smith is a! He had his 5 minutes of fame, why is he still getting air time.

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by FlivverFord

Dick smith is a! He had his 5 minutes of fame, why is he still getting air time.

'Clever' Dick, isn't that the latest catch phrase at DSE stores?

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by xxx000

I find him painful, always telling us what we should do yet he's gone against much of it in his own life:
1. He made his money from importing stuff yet now wants us to buy Australian - He only imported stuff that wasn't made here

2. He has grandkids yet now wants us to cap our population

Plus there's his regular criticism of Aldi, yet a large % of their product is local But ALL their profits go to Germany

His own Dick Smith store in Belrose shut recently and yet not a whisper about that.Dick hasn't owned the stores for years, Wefarmers own them (as well as Coles, Bunnings, etc)

He's a self professed aviation 'expert' who made claims about CASA that haven't come true.
Time for him to retire, curb his ego and stop annoying us

see posts in red

[OLD BALDY]

Wesfarmers DON'T own Dick Smith stors

[poppa smurf]

Originally Posted by OLD BALDY

Wesfarmers DON'T own Dick Smith stors

coles isn't it?.....at least thats who I thought own it.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by poppa smurf

coles isn't it?.....at least thats who I thought own it.

see below. Coles is owned by Wesfarmers

Originally Posted by OLD BALDY

Wesfarmers DON'T own Dick Smith stors

sorry, I was wrong, Safeway did own, but sold it, from Wikipedia

Formerly owned by Woolworths Limited, now by private equity firm Anchorage Capital Partners. Founder Dick Smith no longer owns any part of the company.