Australia has been a lucky country, because it has a large amount of natural resources and a small population to support from its wealth.The Lucky Country by Donald Horne
'Australia is a lucky country, run mainly by second-rate people who share its luck.'
The phrase 'the lucky country' has become part of our lexicon; it's forever being invoked in debates about the Australian way of life, but is all too often misused by those blind to Horne's irony.
There is an echo, Rumpy posted that up, further down the page.https://www.theguardian.com/busines...overnment-has-run-the-economy-into-the-ground
Looking forward to some more sound economic management.....Bloody Shorten
That article was from 2009. Not sure how you blame Barnett for this?https://www.smh.com.au/business/kimberley-keeps-giving-20090904-fbfo.html
Cheapest option is pipe it to Karratha
Barnett continues to push for Broome and it ends up off shore
They had approval and pulled out on economic reasons
Barnett’s to blame for this
That article was from 2009. Not sure how you blame Barnett for this?
Woodside didn't build onshore Broome because the estimate was enormously expensive to construct the plant. In excess of 80Billion. Woodside spent a long time and well over a billion on the feasibility study.
The WPL Browse gas fields have not ended up anywhere yet.
There is an echo, Rumpy posted that up, further down the page.
Not sure of the relevance of the independent assessors, why are you mentioning them? Woodside had already come to a no build decision in 2013.So you think Woodside chose Broome and then figured out it cost too much
As I said pipe it to Karratha but that didn’t suit Barnett’s agenda.
The independent assessors included Tom Hatton, who joined the EPA board in 2014 and is set to take over as chairman in November. The other delegates were EPA board member Glen McLeod, who joined in 2013, and Gerard Early, the former deputy secretary of the federal environment department.
Speaking to reporters on Monday, the WA premier, Colin Barnett, suggested that the site would still be developed as a gas hub, but not by Woodside.
“Well I think what you’re seeing is another step in approving the site at James Price Point so you can have future industry there,” Barnett said.
“That won’t be the Browse gas project itself but into the future there may well be an LNG site established there.”
Barnett said that Woodside’s decision to use a floating gas hub was disappointing because it “reduced the opportunities for Western Australia,” but remarked that “there are several other opportunities out there yet to be developed.”
Not sure of the relevance of the independent assessors, why are you mentioning them? Woodside had already come to a no build decision in 2013.
Woodside originally estimated 40+Billion, and the govt did want an onshore option. The cost blowout with everything running rampant was far too great. FLNG was still conceptual, FPSOs (ie Oil processed offshore) was established and it is only a matter of time technology would enable FLNG, and note Shell is just putting FLNG Prelude online now. Shell is much bigger of course than innovative minnow Woodside.
Yes Karratha is an option but remember this is not just a Woodside decision, other and differing JV partners are involved and it is still a long way to Karratha. The HUGE advantage is there are established facilities there of course. I think Woodside is more interested in getting Scarborough Gas going there first. Time will tell.
Probably will be a gas hub at JPP one day. I don't think I will be around to see it.
Focusing on the economy aspect, the big problem in Australia is that we keep giving away opportunities.
We have a mentality akin to running a quarry for road construction gravel and deciding that it's all too hard and we just can't be bothered doing anything with those gold nuggets we keep digging up. So we crush them and the dust goes in the road along with the rest of the gravel because that's the easy way.
A ship sitting offshore extracting a non-renewable resource and simply selling it without even bringing it ashore is in much the same category really. It's turning gold into gravel sort of thinking to be doing that.
Keep giving away so much opportunity and it's no wonder the economy has ended up where it is.
No, we can not because we have a minimal wage well above the rest of the world, no bank ready to loan you money,
if any loan, rate one of the highest in the world. Still..
No quick building, years of red green tape and aporoval circus
Once built, H&S at every corner and unions circling for blood if big enough project
And if you do it, one of the highest company tax rate
As explained befire, any business which can be based elsewhere has no sane reason to stay here.
From it startup to engineering or finance
So we are left with RE,mining,farming and retail for the locals... look at the rich list for australia
Still good at biotech.I could summarise what's being said here by saying that everyone's lamenting the loss in Australia of the large scale practical application of science and technology, that is primarily engineering and manufacturing, and that we have instead reverted to the 19th Century Australian economic focus of primary production and services for the local market.
That's what it comes down to really and it has to be said that it is the large scale application of science and technology which is the defining characteristic of wealthy democracies. Those who rely on primary production and low value services tend to be poor and/or not particularly democratic.
There's the odd exception to the above but it's true for the vast majority of all countries on earth.
Still good at biotech.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?