Guess it depends where you drive - I reckon we hit about a dozen birds on that trip, mostly sphinifex pigeons, and a budgie or two. That was towing a camper trailer as well, so usually travelling at 95-100kmh.
Sure, coal is cheap, but there is a difference between "cheapest price" and "best value". Its the same as buying a "cheap" disposable plastic product over an "expensive" well-made product that will last much, much longer: if the cheap plastic thing needs to be replaced all the time, in the long term you're better off buying the more durable, high quality one. Creating employment is obviously a plus, but if there are more efficient ways of creating the energy then employing large numbers of people in an inefficient system is silly. We could pay people to clean the streets with toothbrushes and create employment. It would be a poor use of money and labour but it would create employment. As for "clean coal", the whole idea revolves around taking the smoke out of smoke. It's like trying to make solar work without sunlight or hydro work without water.
That's one big white elephant. If its worth doing its worth doing. A concessional tax rate is a subsidy. Better than giving money to banks to play on the international finance casino but not better than not spending (taxing) at all. B.
Not so sure the Japs would agree with you:lol: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/f...-and-what-are-the-dangers-20110330-1cfmb.html Kind Regards non recourse
Never understood the animosity towards wind power, I associate with more greenies then I would like and the animosity towards wind power from them is perplexing to say the least
The more we come to grips that Oz can't afford Total Free Trade the better off we will be. Targeted subsidies for Nation Building Projects is exactly what we need rather than the free for all we currently have with International Investment in Oz. My post was really to higlight the latent untapped power of the Oz Super Money.
Yay! Someone else who understands evolution and what we should really be trying to conserve. Most environmentalists seem to think that the status quo is optimal and needs to be preserved at any cost. Tell that to the genes! They don't give a flying proverbial about the status quo.
One or two mishaps and the objectionist brigade swing into full gear. Imagine they outlawed everything after a couple of f#%@ ups? Given that it is apparently destroying the world, should not Julia be obliged to ban coal-fired power, instead of using it as fund raising? Like all agenda pushing, it is based on creating a perception that will cause disapproval. There are a heap of studies that show nuclear power to be much less risky and much less polluting than conventional coal-fired power.
Bring on thorium! More seriously, nuclear is SUPER-energy dense. I saw an estimate once that said that the Ranger uranium mine (when it was at higher production a few years ago) produced enough uranium to fuel the same amount of the world's electricity as around 60% of Australia's total thermal coal exports (in either 2007 or 2008, I think). Think about it. One single (albeit higher risk) mine producing something like 5,000 tonnes of uranium has the energy equivalent of over 60,000,000 tonnes of export quality coal (i.e. 60+ million tonnes)! Talk about risk versus reward.
Im sure you would think differently if the "mishap " was in your backyard When the fkups kill & effect hundreds of thousands & render the land unusable for centuries yes it should be outlawed
We all think differently when it comes to NIMBY. However, it is apparently conclusive that conventional fossil fuels are affecting 6 billion of us.
Personally, I would be totally willing to work in a privately built and operated nuclear facility (and ~95% willing to work in most, but certainly not all, government built and operated facilities). Consequently, I would be happy to have one in my backyard.
Holy <insert random god of your choice> wrmcad! Based on those statistics we should ban peanut butter from our schools.. (oh wait...).
I am on the fence about nuclear power plants, but I think that it is worth pointing out that there would be a big difference in safety between a NPP built in 2012 and one that was designed and constructed when the HQ Holden was in the new car show rooms. Fukushima no. 1 was commissioned 41 years ago.
