Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[sptrawler]

Why not go to the correct thread for these issues?
Your claim was about the general public playing a big role in CO2 emissions, and it was patently false.
.

Are you joking or what?
What is the main producer of CO2 ? Electricity.

What does the electricity do? It supplies the load required.

How much is required? It depends on the affluence of the people, in outer Botswana probably very little, as the people live in a mud hut with no t.v or fridge or air conditioner.
In a suburb of Sydney probably a lot as there is probably 3 t.v's, a main fridge and a beer fridge and either one very big air conditioner, or several smaller split systems.

So do people add to the CO2? Well you may think we don't, but I think the FACTS say we do.
If you can't understand that, well it is pointless discussing it with you IMO.

 

[rederob]

What is the main producer of CO2 ? Electricity.

Yes, through fossil fuel use.
And the residential component consumes only a third of that amount, so you continue to not understand the data, as per below:

Moreover, Australia is a renewables backwater, as here is what a tiny nation like the UK can achieve.
That is a matter of POLICY.
So the simple bottom line is that in relation to electricity generation, national policies have a huge impact on the CO2 load.
The general public are not making POLICY and there is no such thing as orderly progression, as you claim.
You keep clutching at straws.

 

[sptrawler]

And a THIRD is nothing? like I said you are only playing stupid, but having said that, you do it well.
I'm not clutching at straws, you're talking rubbish as usual.
The only thing in your favour is, you do it with gusto.

 

[basilio]

This is by nobody believes alarmists, baz. There is no mentioned in The guardian article about the subsidence do with them messing about with the Senegal River.

It's nothing to do with rising oceans and all to do with a civil engineering **** up.

Really Wayne ? Did you actually read the article or just make up your denial dribble ?

Mangone Diagné, from the regional division of Senegal’s environment ministry, puts it bluntly: “Saint-Louis is surrounded by water and is incredibly vulnerable to climate change. But the damage was caused both by nature and by men.”

He is referring to an engineering mistake, which contributed to the deterioration of the Langue de Barbarie. In 2003, heavy rainfall caused the Senegal river to rise rapidly, putting Saint-Louis at risk of flooding. As a quick fix, local government dug a four-metre-wide breach, or canal, cutting through the Langue de Barbarie. The effect has been the opposite of the one intended. Although at first the river level dropped, the breach quickly started to expand. It is now 6km wide and has cut off part of the peninsula, turning it into an island – and flooding Doun Baba Dieye.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...is-losing-its-battle-against-the-rising-ocean

 

[rederob]

This was your claim:

When you consider electricity is our major emitter, add to that our manufacturing has declined and our smelters have reduced, I guess you have to lay a lot of the fault for high emissions at the feet of the general public.

It was untrue.
The data showing it has been provided above.
What is your new point, if you have one, as none so far is credible?

 

[sptrawler]

This was your claim:
It was untrue.
The data showing it has been provided above.
What is your new point, if you have one, as none so far is credible?

Like I said it is pointless discussing it with you as has been shown in other threads, even when you are wrong, you just put your hands over your ears and keep chanting.
Time to ignore again.

 

[rederob]

Like I said it is pointless discussing it with you as has been shown in other threads, even when you are wrong, you just put your hands over your ears and keep chanting.

The wonderful thing about the forum is that what you said is available for others to check.
Why not at least try to show that what you claimed had merit, and not indulge in your continued lies.

 

[sptrawler]

The wonderful thing about the forum is that what you said is available for others to check.
Why not at least try to show that what you claimed had merit, and not indulge in your continued lies.

O.K I will give it one more go.
Right, what policy could the Federal Government enact, that would speed up the upgrading of the transmission system?

 

[rederob]

O.K I will give it one more go.
Right, what policy could the Federal Government enact, that would speed up the upgrading of the transmission system?

They could immediately build an HVDC spine along the Eastern seaboard to allow the rapid deployment of wind and solar by generators, and simultaneously ensure that the grid was technically able to "absorb" the type of electricity thus generated (as you know there are technical requirements that differ according to energy source).
More importantly, they could outline what their national policy will be in relation to a price on carbon as this is what all the States are calling for so that there is certainty in relation to multi-billion dollar commitments necessary to ensure Australia's energy future.
That said, the federal government has failed miserably to capture Australia's bountiful natural gas resources and integrate these into energy firming requirements. Although natural gas is not emissions free, it represents a significant reduction over burning coal, and would have been significantly cheaper as well had we coralled gas reserves for domestic consumption.

 

[rederob]

O.K I will give it one more go.

Me too.
Your idea that the general public bore great responsibility for CO2 flies in face of 0.5% increase in demand for electricity over the past decade while the population grew around 17%. In simple terms the general public are continuing to reduce their per capita electricity consumption. Note also that this consumption is exclusive of the issue of the millions of households that electricity neutral (or near to it) as a result of the installation of rooftop solar.

 

[sptrawler]

They could immediately build an HVDC spine along the Eastern seaboard to allow the rapid deployment of wind and solar by generators, and simultaneously ensure that the grid was technically able to "absorb" the type of electricity thus generated (as you know there are technical requirements that differ according to energy source).

Firstly the AEMO have said what their priorities are and they are being built, they didn't mention a HCDC spine down the East Coast, so where you pulled that from god knows.
Nothing can be immediately built, as it requires technical analysis design,configuration, procurement and manufacture, procurement of easement and installation.
Secondly who says a HVDC spine would be any better than local connection to the HVAC existing grid?
Thirdly I personally can't see the point of a stand alone HVDC system running 1000's of klm, when there already is already an HVAC grid with existing easement. It basically sounds like a brain fart to me and a way of getting rid of billions of dollars and will be the slowest way to allow more renewable access.

More importantly, they could outline what their national policy will be in relation to a price on carbon as this is what all the States are calling for so that there is certainty in relation to multi-billion dollar commitments necessary to ensure Australia's energy future.

As has been said on most forums discussing this, whether it be the Paris agreement, the Lima accord or where ever, a price on carbon needs to be enforced globally, to enforce it here just puts us at a further financial disadvantage and we are already going backwards regarding manufacturing.

That said, the federal government has failed miserably to capture Australia's bountiful natural gas resources and integrate these into energy firming requirements. Although natural gas is not emissions free, it represents a significant reduction over burning coal, and would have been significantly cheaper as well had we coralled gas reserves for domestic consumption.

All sides of Government are to blame for that one, in W.A we have a gas reserve policy and it didn't need the Federal Government to do anything, so why is it now the Federal Governments fault? Oh I know why, because you don't like them. lol
You really do need to sit down and take a rest, the hysteria you are trying to generate must be tiring for you.

 

[sptrawler]

Me too.
Your idea that the general public bore great responsibility for CO2 flies in face of 0.5% increase in demand for electricity over the past decade while the population grew around 17%. In simple terms the general public are continuing to reduce their per capita electricity consumption.

That is due to the improvements in efficiency of appliances, not by people voluntarily cutting back their usage patterns, Australia is still one of the highest per capita users of electricity. Ask Knobby.

Note also that this consumption is exclusive of the issue of the millions of households that electricity neutral (or near to it) as a result of the installation of rooftop solar.

Without batteries, they still use the grid, so they are no where near neutral. I have 6.6KW installed and we are frugal with usage, but still import.

 

[rederob]

It basically sounds like a brain fart to me and a way of getting rid of billions of dollars.

Take this to another thread if you want to discuss it.
You have no idea about what can be done unless it fits into your existing mind set.

 

[sptrawler]

Take this to another thread if you want to discuss it.
You have no idea about what can be done unless it fits into your existing mind set.

All the comments actually pertain to climate change and renewables, so it might as well stay here, where people might learn something.

 

[SirRumpole]

Me too.
Your idea that the general public bore great responsibility for CO2 flies in face of 0.5% increase in demand for electricity over the past decade while the population grew around 17%. In simple terms the general public are continuing to reduce their per capita electricity consumption. Note also that this consumption is exclusive of the issue of the millions of households that electricity neutral (or near to it) as a result of the installation of rooftop solar.

Well actually the general public is responsible for most of the emissions.

Transport transports people and goods that people buy.
Agriculture supplies food that people eat.
Manufacturing produces goods that people consume.
Land clearing is to produce food , building materials or paper products that people demand.

etc

The fact that some of these processes can become more efficient is only one side of the equation, the other is the greater the population, the higher the emissions.

The elephant in the room that few want to acknowledge is population growth. Limiting population growth is the only viable long term solution to our environmental problems.

 

[rederob]

All the comments actually pertain to climate change and renewables, so it might as well stay here, where people might learn something.

"Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?"

 

[sptrawler]

Fortescue Metals to Install 150MW of solar P.V and battery, to make a gas/hybrid generation hub for its mines, reducing the reliance on gas/diesel generation.

http://www.fmgl.com.au/docs/default-source/announcements/pilbara-generation-project.pdf

At a cost of $750m it isn't cheap, but is a further example of how we are reducing our carbon footprint and hopefully helping to stop global warming.

 

[IFocus]

There is no policy, try this, solar farms being built that cannot connect to the system and have to wait...............where is the policy to guide this? There isn't any.

The big moves come from policy not individuals Green Peace worked that out decades ago when they ran the "think global act local" thing and it did SFA.

The US Republicans also looked at that and then started you cannot criticize us because you do yada yada yada bcause they know it achieves nothing, zilch, zero.

Policy sets the future for security of capital investment (big money big moves eh)and shapes the outcomes timelines etc it is the basis for planning for the future currently the Federal government are firmly try to hold back the tide and hold us in the past (remember Tony Abbott).

If there is no policy there is no plan.

Poor planing equal PP outcome no plan equals cluster.

Anything you see now is private industry just having a punt and going ahead to try and stay with the rest of the world.

As Red stated about the NEG FFS it was Coalition policy so they killed Turnbull same mob who is running the show now that's what this mob think of policy.......

 

[sptrawler]

Nice rant.

 

[macca]

If I intended to build a great big solar farm (or anything, for that matter) the Very First thing I would do is work out who I am going to sell to and how am I going to deliver.

If I only have one potential customer, namely the AEMO, then surely I need an undertaking In Writing that they would accept my product at the market rate before I begin searching for a site, let alone plan or commit to panels.

Extremely dumb management decisions just highlight Dumb managers.

A very old saying is "lack of forethought and planning (aka due diligence) on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part"