ABC Four Corners on Renewable Energy.

[ramblingboy42]

If you didn't see Four Corners last night , make it a priority to see the transcripts.

WE are going to be made to look like a nation of complete ignorant fools if we keep heading down the same path that our countries' government wants us to take.

A couple of small ventures have shown they can reduce their electricity cost by 50% and repay invested costs in 3 years using renewable energy sources.

Other countries can't understand why Australia , having the worlds best resources of renewable energy , are doing nothing serious about utilising it.

It's free ffs, and the infrastructure footprint is basically perpetual up to the point where virtually no further expansion is required.

The secret is there is no fuel cost whatsoever.....only while we use fossil fuels to bridge the electricity generation costs to develop the renewable power generation plants.

We were the leading nation in solar resources , but we are sliding downhill very fast while our technology is snapped up by overseas investors and manufacturers whose government leaders heads aren't in the sand or up someones' else's arses.

[ramblingboy42]

This will help anyone who can't get to see the transcripts from last night....
Solar experts say Australian renewable energy investment being stifled by Government policy - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-07/renewable-energy-investment-killed-by-government-policy/5575262)

[p38arover]

Watch it on ABC Iview.

Don't let this thread become a political rant.

On another forum I frequent, a chap in the USA says he pays 6 cents/kWh. Including GST, I pay nearly 30 cents/kWh.

[rick130]

Watch it on ABC Iview.

Don't let this thread become a political rant.

On another forum I frequent, a chap in the USA says he pays 6 cents/kWh. Including GST, I pay nearly 30 cents/kWh.

And here in the country it's 33c kh/h and the (coal fired) power stations are only 80km away !

[Chucaro]

I was impressed with the Apple set up.

[Chucaro]

meanwhile Qld electricity providers trying to block solar from grid (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-08/qld-providers-trying-to-block-solar-from-grid-groups-says/5579874)

[rover-56]

Even if you don't agree there may be a connection between fossil fuels and global warming, it is still a good thing to move toward renewable energy.
Solar and wind power with storage is commercially viable now as shown by the 4 Corners program and other writers. That includes electric cars. The only thing needed is widespread increase in usage to bring down the cost and encourage investment.
Oil based transport makes us vulnerable to monopoly pricing by middle eastern oil owners. Coal seems cheap energy until you see the hidden costs of subsidies paid to coal companies and power companies.
There is a strong pro coal lobby influencing the government.

Terry

[ramblingboy42]

I think the thing that most are missing out on is the fact that the "fuel" for renewable energy is absolutely free.

Australia has it more abundantly than any other nation, but so too has abundant reserves of coal.

Even if coal can be cleaned up, the coal still has to mined and paid for. This is almost acceptable while we still have the old power stations but they are thermally inefficient , tragically inefficient and no more money should be spent on maintaining them.

I guess when govt stops propping up the coal fuelled power industry , the investors will move on to renewable resources , as they doing in a big way in North America.

I think this is going to be real case of people power having a win.

[p38arover]

Nah. We have plenty of uranium, build nuclear power stations.

I shall have to ask my BIL for his views, he's a nuclear physicist and used to work at Lucas Heights. The last time I discussed solar with was about 15-20 years ago and he was of the opinion (then) that solar, if I recall correctly, didn't give a lot of power for the area occupied by panels.

Obviously, a lot has changed in the intervening years.

[rick130]

Nah. We have plenty of uranium, build nuclear power stations.

I shall have to ask my BIL for his views, he's a nuclear physicist and used to work at Lucas Heights. The last time I discussed solar with was about 15-20 years ago and he was of the opinion (then) that solar, if I recall correctly, didn't give a lot of power for the area occupied by panels.

Obviously, a lot has changed in the intervening years.

Ask him if Thorium is any closer to being feasible Ron.
We were the world leader in that technology, and have plentiful supplies.

[Slunnie]

Ask him if Thorium is any closer to being feasible Ron.
We were the world leader in that technology, and have plentiful supplies.
Kirk Sorenson on Thorium as presented on TED talks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw

[p38arover]

Ask him if Thorium is any closer to being feasible Ron.
We were the world leader in that technology, and have plentiful supplies.

Will do. I was just Googling his name and found he is shown as the co-inventor in a patent held by the Australian Atomic Energy Commission for a method of producing of uranium hexafluoride.


Uranium hexafluoride (UF6), referred to as "hex" in the nuclear industry, is a compound used in the uranium enrichment process that produces fuel for nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons.

I never knew that about him. He's never mentioned it.

[Ferret]

Driving through Europe recently. Quite surprised by the amount of solar I saw installed in fields. More than I've noticed here.

[DoubleChevron]

The bit everyone here seems to be forgetting .... is you need 100% capacity backup for wind and solar ... There's a good portion of the day without sun (or clouded) and there certainly no guarantee the wind will always blow .........

I don't see solar or wind as even a limited answer to anything. It either needs to be something small and local that can produce considerable power 24x7 all over australia (transmission losses etc...). Now something like tidal generators or the scheme where they were going to pump water down under the coal to generate steam... Now that's what you call power that can be produced 24x7, and doesn't need 100% capacity back up.

I can't see how there's a simplistic answer to any of this myself.

seeya,
Shane L.

[rover-56]

The bit everyone here seems to be forgetting .... is you need 100% capacity backup for wind and solar ... There's a good portion of the day without sun (or clouded) and there certainly no guarantee the wind will always blow .........

I don't see solar or wind as even a limited answer to anything. It either needs to be something small and local that can produce considerable power 24x7 all over australia (transmission losses etc...). Now something like tidal generators or the scheme where they were going to pump water down under the coal to generate steam... Now that's what you call power that can be produced 24x7, and doesn't need 100% capacity back up.

I can't see how there's a simplistic answer to any of this myself.

seeya,
Shane L.

Geothermal might be a simplistic answer:)
Almost anywhere in inland Australia - only needs confident investors - who only need a trustable government.

Terry

[Chucaro]

The bit everyone here seems to be forgetting .... is you need 100% capacity backup for wind and solar ... There's a good portion of the day without sun (or clouded) and there certainly no guarantee the wind will always blow .........

I don't see solar or wind as even a limited answer to anything. It either needs to be something small and local that can produce considerable power 24x7 all over australia (transmission losses etc...). Now something like tidal generators or the scheme where they were going to pump water down under the coal to generate steam... Now that's what you call power that can be produced 24x7, and doesn't need 100% capacity back up.

I can't see how there's a simplistic answer to any of this myself.

seeya,
Shane L.
It looks like that you did not have the chance to watch the program to which this thread it is all about.
Here is your second chance:

Power to the People - Four Corners (http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2014/07/07/4038488.htm)

Pay attention what they are saying about California, Las Vegas and also what Apple it is doing.

[Rurover]

The bit everyone here seems to be forgetting .... is you need 100% capacity backup for wind and solar ...

I can't see how there's a simplistic answer to any of this myself.
Shane L.

Shane,

To add to what Chucaro and Rover56 had to say. There is some battery technology that's available now called Vanadium Redox technology (largely Australian developed at Uni NSW) which promises to allow storage of power at relatively low cost. It's very much an industrial scale process at this stage, but I guess could be developed for domestic use in future.

As you'll see on the Four Corners report, heat from solar-thermal arrays can also be stored in molten salt and then used to generate power after the sun goes down, so that does provide a short term form of energy storage.

We should also consider much wider use of another renewable source...biomass. In Europe, many communities generate base load power using tree thinnings, forest waste, agricultural straw, dried livestock dung and combustible components from domestic and commercial waste streams.
We could and should be doing the same thing.

Alan

[p38arover]

I saw the molten salt bit. Changing technology, e.g., electronics and computing power, has enabled that focussing of the sunlight in a more cost effective way than many years ago.

The problem with bringing facilities like that on line is the enormous cost of the initial infrastructure. Can the govts. in this country fund it? Unlikely. It would need private investment and those investors would want a guaranteed return.

How long until the govts. introduce a tax on energy derived from renewable sources? They may have to in order bolster their dwindling income from existing power generation.

I recall reading that some country areas, some people were unable to have their solar systems connected to the grid because their local infrastructure couldn't handle the power being put back in.

Re the 4 Corners report, what I found amusing was the need to wear hard hats in an open paddock.

[superquag]

Many years ago, when the internet was younger and less monitored, I came across some articles regarding certain international agreements (by banks and financial bodies) as to who would produce what for whom, and tellingly, what various nations would not support. These were a mixture of carrot and stick, and supposedly binding. They were also not in the public eye...
Europe was for high-end manufacturing, from memory, the US had armaments/industry and industrialised primary & fruit production for exports.
Vaguely recall Asia scored 'value-adding' ,.... but we get to be a hole in the ground.. mineral/mining and broadacre agriculture etc, including - obviously - wool.

Funnily enough, our iron ore works have all (?) shut down, looks like aluminium processing is headed offshore too, heavy and medium industry is being driven to the wall...

No, of course it isn't a Conspiracy Theory, :wasntme: -the way it fits together is a mere co-incidence. Every time. Just like the way imported US fruits fill our supermarkets...as Aussie fruit trees are being ripped out by our un-subsidised growers. Naturally, there's no sensible explanation why the price of Australian wheat has been falling at the rate and extent it has. Who profits from that ? Not the Aussie farmer, regarded as the most efficient in the western world.

The above ties in with what's been happening on the alternative energy scene here in Oz. Or rather, what is NOT happening.... We used to lead the world, and still punch above our weight, yet little or nothing is properly developed or built here for local and Export markets... it usually is 'exported' as intellectual property.
One wonders why financing local ventures seems so impossible for us, yet other countries are able to buy our ideas and make them fly.

[gofish]

Time for nuclear IMHO. Things have changed alot over the years & it's much safer nowadays. It's funny that Australia is so ANTI-NUCLEAR yet exports so much uranium.

[DoubleChevron]

Geothermal might be a simplistic answer:)
Almost anywhere in inland Australia - only needs confident investors - who only need a trustable government.

Terry

I simply cannot understand solar and wind. No matter how reliable and efficient it is ... It can't provide power 24x7, so why invest such staggering sums of $$$ into it .... Storage ?? You must be kidding... We'd need a battery the size of the moon to charge for the hours without daylight.

Our power bill is so bloody expensive because we are paying for all the poeple that installed solar and heavily subsidize them. It's us poor suckers now paying tremendous amounts for power so the people with panels on there roofs with excellent "feed in" tariffs can get "there power for free".

We have lots of wind turbines near us.... Sure there pretty and all, but they generate crazy little power given the cost of installing the infrastructure.... and if the wind stops they need a 100% capacity backup.

Get it ?? Why invest staggering amounts of money into something that requires 100% capacity from alternate power sources.

Geothermal is the only way ahead from what I can see (or possibly wave generators ... just look at Australia population.... the majority of it is within a couple of hundred km of the beach ). It would have to be a very distributed power industy with many small generators though.

I can't see australia moving away from coal power for many decades. It's just not economically feasable, no matter how much the greenies jump around saying how evil it is.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Chucaro]

I simply cannot understand solar and wind. No matter how reliable and efficient it is ... It can't provide power 24x7, so why invest such staggering sums of $$$ into it .... Storage ?? You must be kidding... We'd need a battery the size of the moon to charge for the hours without daylight.

.................................................. .................................................. ......

seeya,
Shane L.

So the Apple example it is not enough for you?
I guess that your position is based in ideology by finishing your posts, quote: It's just not economically feasable, no matter how much the greenies jump around saying how evil it is.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Shane,
<snip>
We should also consider much wider use of another renewable source...biomass. In Europe, many communities generate base load power using tree thinnings, forest waste, agricultural straw, dried livestock dung and combustible components from domestic and commercial waste streams.
We could and should be doing the same thing.

AlanFor those who don't fully understand, biomass is growing trees, chipping them and then burning them.

While the growing of trees absorbs CO2 the trimming, felling, chipping, transporting and burning releases more CO2 than was absorbed.

The other source of biomass is waste products from places like furnature manufacture and timber mills. If we still had any of those, the burning still releases CO2.

So while it is a renewable energy it is not carbon neutral.

[p38arover]

Our power bill is so bloody expensive because we are paying for all the poeple that installed solar and heavily subsidize them. It's us poor suckers now paying tremendous amounts for power so the people with panels on there roofs with excellent "feed in" tariffs can get "there power for free".

The 4 Corners report refuted that. The report stated prices have risen significantly to pay for the infrastructure, i.e., poles and wires, to transport what was expected to be an increase in electricity demand, where, in fact, demand has fallen.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I simply cannot understand solar and wind. No matter how reliable and efficient it is ... It can't provide power 24x7, so why invest such staggering sums of $$$ into it .... Storage ?? You must be kidding... We'd need a battery the size of the moon to charge for the hours without daylight.<snip> I never knew that the wind only blew during the daytime? :confused:

When talking about solar, the comment about batteries is true for photovoltaic generation, but demonstrably untrue about solar-thermal which stores excess heat in molten salt during the day and the retained heat used to create steam to turn the turbines for power generation at night.

<snip> Our power bill is so bloody expensive because we are paying for all the poeple that installed solar and heavily subsidize them. It's us poor suckers now paying tremendous amounts for power so the people with panels on there roofs with excellent "feed in" tariffs can get "there power for free"....<snip>Only a small percentage of the households with solar panels get "excellent feed in tarrifs" most people only get a reduction in their kW usage by the kW they feed in.

<snip> We have lots of wind turbines near us.... Sure there pretty and all, but they generate crazy little power given the cost of installing the infrastructure.... and if the wind stops they need a 100% capacity backup.

Get it ?? Why invest staggering amounts of money into something that requires 100% capacity from alternate power sources. ...<snip>It is unlikely that there will be an absence of wind simultaneously with an absence of sun (during daytime peak consumption periods) across the entire electricity grid, so while there needs to be an excess of wind/solar capacity to cope with demand, the 100% backup is a furphy.
<snip>
Geothermal is the only way ahead from what I can see (or possibly wave generators ... just look at Australia population.... the majority of it is within a couple of hundred km of the beach ). It would have to be a very distributed power industy with many small generators though.

I can't see australia moving away from coal power for many decades. It's just not economically feasable, no matter how much the greenies jump around saying how evil it is.

seeya,
Shane L.Agree with this last statements, but you have neglected to include tidal and wave power generation. Tidal flow will occur every day the Moon exists and continues to orbit the Earth.

[DoubleChevron]

So the Apple example it is not enough for you?
I guess that your position is based in ideology by finishing your posts, quote: It's just not economically feasable, no matter how much the greenies jump around saying how evil it is.

I'm serious. Say tomorrow they invented the perfect polllution free power plant. How many decades would it take to roll them out (regardless of cost).

That waubra wind farm just near us ... it's taken a lot of years to build and claimed maximum is 192MegaWatts if the wind is blowing hard enough. (I have no idea if it ever generates this).

Those Loy Yang power stations generate 3250Mwatts alone .... How on earth can we replace that sort of capacity for any sort of affordable amount, no matter what type of power station it is...

So to generate that sort of power from those 1.5Mwatt wind turbines ... You would need 2167 wind turbines to generate that .... that's if the wind is blowing...(so you would still need a 100% capacity alternate power supply)

However I just looked at the wind watch org website, the real life figure are those windmills are only 15 -> 30% efficient. So lets derate to the maximum efficiency... so 0.45MW from the 1.5MWatt turbines ... so you would need 7222 windmills to match the capacity of Loy Yang ...... as long as the wind doesn't stop blowing ......

Get the idea of where I'm coming from ?? The capacity of those old dinosaurs is HUGE.

How could the australian economy afford replacing them with any sort of "greeny" type infrastructure in any sort of time frame that isn't decades away :wasntme:

We can work towards something, but I personally think it should be something like geothermal or tidal... It's something that needs to be "always on", not weather/season depedant.

seeya,
Shane L.

[Slunnie]

We already have systems designed to allow storage and release of energy, designs that could be used for solar. Look at what they do at Kangaroo Valley and Bendeela power stations. The stations have the ability to pump water up using excess energy and then generate power when loads are high. A design that could be used as power storage also.

[Slunnie]

It's something that needs to be "always on", not weather/season depedant.

seeya,
Shane L.
I disagree. We need to take advantage of the benefits, even if its not perfect. We also cant keen consuming dirty energy the way we are.

[isuzurover]

...
The last time I discussed solar with was about 15-20 years ago and he was of the opinion (then) that solar, if I recall correctly, didn't give a lot of power for the area occupied by panels.

Obviously, a lot has changed in the intervening years.

Yes, a lot... (click on link to see map with red squares)

The red squares represent the area that would be enough for solar power plants to produce a quantity of electricity consumed by the world today, in Europe (EU-25) and Germany (De). (Data provided by the German Aerospace Centre (DLR), 2005)

Theoretical space needed for solar power plants to generate sufficient electric power in order to meet the electricity demand of the World, Europe (EU-25) and Germany (De) respectively. (Data by the German Center of Aerospace (DLR), 2005)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertec#mediaviewer/File:Fullneed.jpg
Desertec - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertec#mediaviewer/File:Fullneed.jpg)

[Lotz-A-Landies]

We already have systems designed to allow storage and release of energy, designs that could be used for solar. Look at what they do at Kangaroo Valley and Bendeela power stations. The stations have the ability to pump water up using excess energy and then generate power when loads are high. A design that could be used as power storage also.The KV hydro system is an ideal storage system and used for peaking during high demand. It doesn't need sun or wind and doesn't need time to build up steam like conventional power stations.

You merely have the water sitting up at the top of the hill and when you want more power you turn on the tap and the water running down hill spins the turbines.

You could install the system anywhere you have a tall hill/mountain top with space for a storage reservior and a water supply like a passing river. As Simon says, the turbines use the excess power in the grid (from all sources including wind and coal) when consumption is low to turn the generator turbines into pumps to move the water up hill.

[bee utey]

It's not as if coal power plants never break down either. What happens then? Either the power goes out or other sources take up the slack. Renewables with storage will in time take the place of monolithic stinko power, so long as it gets financial support equal to what the dirty stuff currently enjoys.

[DoubleChevron]

The 4 Corners report refuted that. The report stated prices have risen significantly to pay for the infrastructure, i.e., poles and wires, to transport what was expected to be an increase in electricity demand, where, in fact, demand has fallen.

There was an article in the age where someone was saying much the same thing last week. The higher the power costs get, the less people are using, so the less the privatised power companies are making .... So the more they want to increase the "line maintenance fees" to upkeep profits .... Which is obviously a self defeating endless loop.......... As the more power costs, the less consumers will use.

Kinda sucks for me though ... My choice of lifestyle has ended up with me in a non-gas area, so we heat with two reverse cycle A/C's ... which means we are 100% reliant on power regardless of it's costs ( $800+ bills are entirely normal in winter). Waaaayyyy cheaper than paying $130+ a meter for wood to heat.

I sure don't know who to believe. But I do know the cost of power has increased a staggering amount over the last decade (infact everything has .... the only thing that hasn't increased is my wage).

seeya,
Shane L.

[rover-56]

This is a great thread - I only hope something similar is being discussed in every other forum in Australia.
Governments need to be prodded by citizens to make investment in alternative energy technologies attractive. Like a guarantee that such technologies will receive the same encouragement as coal mining and burning.
I wouldn't mind tax dollars being spent to encourage investment in solar, wind, wave, geothermal, and salt energy storage. Questions asked of candidates at election time can be very revealing.
And I do like that Tesla electric car:)
Terry

[DoubleChevron]

It's not as if coal power plants never break down either. What happens then? Either the power goes out or other sources take up the slack. Renewables with storage will in time take the place of monolithic stinko power, so long as it gets financial support equal to what the dirty stuff currently enjoys.

I'm certainly not pro-coal.... I just can't see how there is any alternative regardless of the song and dances the greenies make. Isn't there even nuclear power stations being decomissioned .... to be replaced with the evil coal ones were not allowed to use in countries that currenlty use nuclear.

There will eventually be an answer to energy needs, but I sure can't see it being wind or solar.

seeya,
Shane L.

[p38arover]

Aren't the Greenies (not the Greens) against wind power because they kill birds?


I never knew that the wind only blew during the daytime? :confused:

One problem is that it doesn't blow all the time.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

<snip>Kinda sucks for me though ... My choice of lifestyle has ended up with me in a non-gas area, so we heat with two reverse cycle A/C's ... which means we are 100% reliant on power regardless of it's costs ( $800+ bills are entirely normal in winter). Waaaayyyy cheaper than paying $130+ a meter for wood to heat.
<snip>
seeya,
Shane L.You'll be buggered if the NSW Chief Medical Officer gets her way and we see bans of the use of wood fired heaters! State's top doctor says we should consider banning wood fire heaters (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/states-top-doctor-says-we-should-consider-banning-wood-fire-heaters-20140705-zsx92.html)

<snip>

I never knew that the wind only blew during the daytime? :confused:

One problem is that it doesn't blow all the time. Yes we understand that and it was explained fruther in the post, but the original post gave the impression that both solar and wind didn't work at night.

[Slunnie]

Aren't the Greenies (not the Greens) against wind power because they kill birds?

Lucky true Greenies don't drive cars, they would be devastated to see what gets left on the highways around here!

[DoubleChevron]

You'll be buggered if the NSW Chief Medical Officer gets her way and we see bans of the use of wood fired heaters! State's top doctor says we should consider banning wood fire heaters (http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/states-top-doctor-says-we-should-consider-banning-wood-fire-heaters-20140705-zsx92.html)

Unless you cut your own, heating by RC air cons is actually way cheaper. Wood is $130+ a meter. We were burning upto 3meters a month .... which is staggeringly expensive heating.

I must admit though, I do like a nice wood fire for heating :)

seeya,
Shane L.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Unless you cut your own, heating by RC air cons is actually way cheaper. Wood is $130+ a meter. We were burning upto 3meters a month .... which is staggeringly expensive heating.

I must admit though, I do like a nice wood fire for heating :)

seeya,
Shane L.There are lots of roadworks in SW Sydney at the moment and each weekend when the sites are closed you see people with trailers collecting up the felled trees. :D

I drove up to Kurrajong over the weekend and you could smell the odour of wood heaters in the air. It kinda makes you think of being warm sitting in front of the fire with a nice glass of red! :)

[rover-56]

Unless you cut your own, heating by RC air cons is actually way cheaper. Wood is $130+ a meter. We were burning upto 3meters a month .... which is staggeringly expensive heating.

I must admit though, I do like a nice wood fire for heating :)

seeya,
Shane L.

Well, I burn wood, I am lucky enough to live on a place where the regrowth rate is greater than the cut up rate.
Wood is not polluting if it is burnt properly.
If you see smoke, it is not being burnt properly.
Terry

[DoubleChevron]

Well, I burn wood, I am lucky enough to live on a place where the regrowth rate is greater than the cut up rate.
Wood is not polluting if it is burnt properly.
If you see smoke, it is not being burnt properly.
Terry

How do you manage to keep your fire burning overnight, if you don't shut it down so it smolders :) ...............

sure a nice hot fire has no smoke, you'd burn a HEAP of wood and have a bloody hot house though :D

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Well, I burn wood, I am lucky enough to live on a place where the regrowth rate is greater than the cut up rate.
Wood is not polluting if it is burnt properly.
If you see smoke, it is not being burnt properly.
TerryDepends upon what you call pollution. CarbonDioxide is pollution to some and you can't burn wood without releasing it.

[rover-56]

"Depends upon what you call pollution. CarbonDioxide is pollution to some and you can't burn wood without releasing it."

The CO2 is released when it rots anyway.

Terry

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Only some of it gets released, and some gets trapped in the soil and if you leave the tree standing it will continue to absorb CO2 while its alive and that could be hundreds of years.

Timber used to build things like houses will store the CO2 while the house stands.

[rocket scientist]

How about a bit of lateral thinking on the subject.
Consumers seem to be buying more and more power guzzling appliances than ever before, and councils allow energy inefficient houses to be built by the thousands.
Living on solar power off the grid you soon learn to rethink what appliances we don't really need!

Pete.

[Slunnie]

My fire burns all night, I just turn the airflow down on it. It goes to coals and burns slowly like that. Open up the air in the morning with some new timber and away it goes. I definitely get overnight and up to 12hrs depending on how its managed. Also, it doesn't make much difference to the burn duration if you load it right up or only use half of the area - more timber and the burn rate just goes up.

I think the smoke initially is just the resin or something in the timber burning out. It stops smoking reasonably quickly.

[rover-56]

Only some of it gets released, and some gets trapped in the soil and if you leave the tree standing it will continue to absorb CO2 while its alive and that could be hundreds of years.

Timber used to build things like houses will store the CO2 while the house stands.

I only burn fallen wood.
I think you are acting as devils advocate?:)
I suppose like all living animals we have an effect on the environment.
The logical end point to this argument is that perhaps we shouldn't exist?
At least we can use some intelligence to minimise our effect on our surroundings.
Maybe we should feel guilty about the CO2 we breathe out.
Terry

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I only burn fallen wood.
I think you are acting as devils advocate?:) <maybe - it's probably no worse than coal fired power and more enjoyable.>
<snip>
Maybe we should feel guilty about the CO2 we breathe out.
TerryMaybe there should be a carbon tax on Coca-Cola (or all carbonated drinks)!

[rover-56]

How do you manage to keep your fire burning overnight, if you don't shut it down so it smolders :) ...............

sure a nice hot fire has no smoke, you'd burn a HEAP of wood and have a bloody hot house though :D

I let it go out.
House is insulated and stays above 12deg.C. Not hard to get it going in the morning. Back up to 18+ in 1/2 hour and boils the kettle for my coffee:).
I am in NE Victoria and at 900m.
Terry

[isuzurover]

Re wood fires...

I like a wood stove as much as the next person - and it is the primary means of heating our house in winter - however you cannot kid yourself that it doesn't create pollution - even if there is no visible smoke.

Even a fire with no visible smoke will be producing about 300 different chemical species (not just CO2 and H2O) as well as lots of particulates.

On a related note: We did some recent work where we found that SOx emissions from a diesel running new/clean canola were higher than diesel or biodiesel (made from the same canola) - this is because the sulphur levels in diesel are so low these days, and the process of making biodiesel pulls a lot of the sulphur out. The same is possible for wood. SOx assists particle formation.

[ramblingboy42]

Double Chevron.....why have you come on here arguing against what has and is being proven every day to be practical and economical.

Your arguments are aligned with the very people that got heavily rubbished in the Four Corners program last night.

It is very obvious that you have not watched the program and have come on here huffing and bluffing.

If you had seen the program you would not say the things you have said.

Now go back and watch it....Chucaro put a link up to it......then come come back and say those things you said.

[Mick_Marsh]

But I do know the cost of power has increased a staggering amount over the last decade (infact everything has .... the only thing that hasn't increased is my wage).
Actually, Shane, I was around at a friends place today. We looked at his power bills from 30 years ago. The price of power (cents per kWh) has not increased much. What has skyrocketed in cost, however, is the connection fee. What they charge you whether you use any power or not.

My friend, who has a solar system, showed me his account on the energy suppliers website. This is a breakdown of his daily usage. The orange is what he takes from the grid and pays around 30c/kWh for. The blue is what he feeds into the grid and is payed around 8c/kWh for.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/07/615.jpg (http://s1074.photobucket.com/user/mick_marsh_AULRO/media/EPSON003.jpg.html)

This is the same thing but on a monthly basis.
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/07/616.jpg (http://s1074.photobucket.com/user/mick_marsh_AULRO/media/EPSON004.jpg.html)

What isn't shown is what he uses from his own system.

[Bigbjorn]

My Mrs and I would cheerfully murder the people whose homes surround our place and have wood burning heaters. Our house stinks of wood smoke and it affects our breathing. These characters start their fires in late May at the first sign of a cool evening and they let them smoulder away until late August. This is Brisbane, for Christ's sake. You don't need a heater of any kind.

[Chucaro]

I found an interesting reading.

Renewable energy is ready to supply all of Australia’s electricity (http://theconversation.com/renewable-energy-is-ready-to-supply-all-of-australias-electricity-29200)

Quote:
Moving to 100% renewable electricity is safe, technically feasible and affordable. It can cut greenhouse gas and other emissions and land degradation, while creating local jobs and energy security. It is ready to go!
End of Quote

At the bottom of the page there are links to more articles from the author.

Cheers

[Mick_Marsh]

I found an interesting reading.

Renewable energy is ready to supply all of Australia’s electricity (http://theconversation.com/renewable-energy-is-ready-to-supply-all-of-australias-electricity-29200)

Quote:
Moving to 100% renewable electricity is safe, technically feasible and affordable. It can cut greenhouse gas and other emissions and land degradation, while creating local jobs and energy security. It is ready to go!
End of Quote

At the bottom of the page there are links to more articles from the author.

Cheers


Author



https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2014/07/345.jpg Mark Diesendorf

Associate Professor and Deputy Director, Institute of Environmental Studies, UNSW at UNSW Australia
(http://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-diesendorf-226)

Disclosure Statement

Mark Diesendorf receives funding from the Cooperative Research Centre for Low Carbon Living.


Hmmmm.......??????

[Chucaro]

Yes Mick and also, Quoted from HERE (http://www.ies.unsw.edu.au/our-people/associate-professor-mark-diesendorf): he has collaborated with and consulted for a wide range of organisations including AusAID, Australian Conservation Foundation, Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Hydrocool Pty Ltd, Minister for Minerals & Energy (Western Australia), StateRail (NSW), Sustainable Energy Development Authority of New South Wales, Sustainable Energy Authority of Victoria, WWF Australia, and various municipal and local governments in Australia and China.
Based on his belief that science, technology and economics should serve the community at large, he has been at various times secretary of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science (Canberra), co-founder and vice-president of the Sustainable Energy Industries Council of Australia, co-founder and president of the original Australasian Wind Energy Association, president of the Australia New Zealand Society for Ecological Economics (ANZSEE) and vice-president of Appropriate Technology for Community and Environment (APACE).
End of Quote

by the way, Quoted from HERE (http://www.engineering.unsw.edu.au/energy-engineering/crc-for-low-carbon-living)
the School of Photovoltaic and Renewable Energy Engineering at UNSW, was part of a successful bid to receive funding for a Co-operative Research Centre (CRC) on Low Carbon Living, announced by the Federal Government in December 2011. Led by Professor Deo Prasad of the Faculty of the Built Environment, the seven year project will receive $28m from the Australian Government through the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research. The CRC is a multidisciplinary research effort with research expertise in engineering, material science, architecture, town planning, economics, and the social sciences. The CRC will bring together leading researchers and key end-users and includes 26 industry organisations, 16 government agencies and 6 research institutions across Australia.
End of Quote

Are you suggesting that we have to discredit or doubt about work done by the university because the sponsors of their research?
Just curious..........

[ramblingboy42]

what is wrong with receiving funding?

[Chucaro]

what is wrong with receiving funding?

That it is my question, those that are worried about that will be better to never purchase a prescribed drug from a doctor.
Many of research done in Universities of medical research institutions are receiving funding by pharmaceuticals and other corporations that can have conflict of interests.

[rover-56]

Hmmmm.......??????

Yes, but I have read one of his books, and apart from a couple of glaring personal opinions (about eating meat from cattle and sheep), I can't pick many holes in his comments.

Terry

[rover-56]

Also, I have worked within quite a few CRC's during my time with the CSIRO, and I can tell you that all the research staff were exceptionally careful both to declare the sources of funding and to make very sure that personal beliefs did not colour the presented results of research.
In CSIRO peer review is very rigorous.
Terry

[Davehoos]

Im at the bottom end of the energy food chain at my house.
Last months power bill shows that I produced 100Kg per 1/4 CO2 more than last year and less KWhr. the billed amount is more than $100 less. middle class one average income-Im told there is a subsidy for children this year.


Its not worth me installing solar hot water as of peak electric works out as less than $400 a year total. might be worth the 10 year investment with a push when I need to replace a hot water service.


Solar panels, I believe they might be Ok but going on what my neighbours cost are I be long gone before they recover cost-I havnt seen anything yet to show they are good for the environment if they are plonked in small sizes at each household.


Everthing that I can save at home would be waisted a hundred times over at work. The few people I personally met in the research industry already know that.

[Tank]

Watch it on ABC Iview.

Don't let this thread become a political rant.

On another forum I frequent, a chap in the USA says he pays 6 cents/kWh. Including GST, I pay nearly 30 cents/kWh.
Ron, it is impossible to compare unlike countries on energy costs, or any other costs really.
Both countries are roughly equal in size (area) OZ has 20+million to pay for infrastructure and energy fees, USA has 300+million to pay the same bill, why wouldn't it be cheaper, Regards Frank.

[p38arover]

I understand that Frank. I wonder if nuclear generation keeps costs down.

[Tank]

There are lots of roadworks in SW Sydney at the moment and each weekend when the sites are closed you see people with trailers collecting up the felled trees. :D

I drove up to Kurrajong over the weekend and you could smell the odour of wood heaters in the air. It kinda makes you think of being warm sitting in front of the fire with a nice glass of red! :)
Those lovely smells you are talking about is the Aromatic Hydrocarbons from a witches brew of Toxic carcinogenic compounds, PAH's as above, Dioxin, Furans and the same Toxins that cause CANCER in tobacco smoke, but wait there's more, this witches brew, wood smoke is 20 times more potent than the same volume of Tobacco smoke.
So while you can suck in that crap and enjoy.
Anyone who believes wood smoke emissions do not pollute is living in Fairyland with the pixies.
Do you really think that CO2 is the only greenhouse gas released from burning wood in a Domestic Wood Heater (DWH), if yes, go away and bury your head back in the sand.
CO2 is the only greenhouse gas (GHG) that is measured when it comes to climate change/pollution, why? because the powers that be don't have a PROTOCOL for measuring the OTHER GHG's, so as far as they are concerned we only need to worry about CO2, because they have a Protocol for that.
Methane released when burning wood (esp. in a DWH) is a GHG and it is 23 times more potent than CO2.
When climate change does arrive it will be because of Methane released into our air.
Now we have Dioxins, Furans, PAH's, POP's, Bap's all released into the air from each and every DWH, all these Carcinogens are being produced in your DWH, mainly because you can restrict the Oxygen the fire needs to burn these toxins off.
Most heaters have this Secondary burn system (touted by the AHHA as a godsend), great but it only works if the heater is turned up on full, it relies on high heat to burn off excess gasses, turn it down to smoulder and you have a Cancer making machine.
See if this makes sense: a tree stores CO2 (as well as some really nasty compounds) and emits Oxygen, so you come along with your macho chain saw and cut that tree down and burn it in your Slow Combustion DWH, releasing that CO2 into the air we breathe, along with all the other TOXIC crap, so you are destroying one of the 2 things on our planet that keeps us alive.
So where do you think this pleasant smelling brew of Carcinogens is going after it goes up the chimney, well if there is a "Cold Air Inversion" over you area then up to 40% of what goes up your chimney will be drawn back into your house to fuel the DWH.
The rest goes into your neighbours property (which is illegal) all over the washing on the line and through any window that is foolishly left open, into the lungs, then into the blood. If you are elderly with a pre-existing heart or Lung disease, a pregnant women or a child you are most at risk, of Premature Death.
Compounds in DWH emissions will damage the immune system, others will cause Cancer, POP's like Dioxins etc. never leave your body they accumulate and there is no treatment for Dioxin ingestion.
Yet we still have people that say that burning wood is environmentally good, I'd love someone to prove that bit of bull****, they say wood burnt is GHG neutral, because we plant another tree.
Well that's a laugh, show me where in the world are there more trees being planted than are being cut down, Australia has only 1/3 of it's trees left since colonisation, how is it possible to call wood a renewable resource and non-polluting, you can of course, if you have a VESTED interest.
Ignoring the other pollutants from the use of DWH and discounting the effect on climate change incredibly STUPID and dangerous.
There has recently been a Senate inquiry into DWH and there impact on health and the measures that will be introduced to reduce the Death Toll will hit the pockets of those that like the smell, like the ambience, Polluter Pays, so enjoy polluting the air WE ALL have to breathe, because soon you won't be able to afford to burn wood, also have a thought about what you are breathing in every night when you shut your DWH down to smoulder overnight, or during the day, also the 1400+ Australians that die each and every year from airborne pollutants, I will copy some emails at the bottom of this post for anyone that is interested in some facts.
BTW can you name me any other household appliance that your State government will buy back off you so you will stop poisoning our air, Regards Frank.

Sorry don't know how to get the promised emails onto this post, try here for factual info http://woodsmoke.3sc.net/

[Tank]

Ron, I think if Nuclear was cheaper (for the retailer), no amount of protest or scientific evidence would stop Nuclear plants popping up everywhere.
I think the biggest costs other than the horrendous cost of building one would be Public Liability Insurance and the cost of storing spent fuel for the next 250,000 years, those costs have to be borne by someone and if you guessed the Consumer you would be right, Regards Frank.

[Tank]

My Mrs and I would cheerfully murder the people whose homes surround our place and have wood burning heaters. Our house stinks of wood smoke and it affects our breathing. These characters start their fires in late May at the first sign of a cool evening and they let them smoulder away until late August. This is Brisbane, for Christ's sake. You don't need a heater of any kind.
Brian, your Local Council has powers to instruct the offending neighbours to cease polluting your (and everyone else's air) lifestyle. A smoke abatement order, but I warn you that you will become the PROBLEM in your councils eye, not the bastards polluting your air. Council has a duty of care to provide a safe environment, remind them of that duty, it may work, or you may be kicking a dead horse, you can sue in the District Court and seek compensation for damages to health and property.
See Law Handbook (in your State, local courthouse) under neighbourhood disputes, Smoke, Ashes and Dust) if Council refuse to act get in touch with the Local Government Ombudsman to light a fire under them, good luck, try to avoid breathing in that crap, hard I know, Regards Frank.

[d2dave]

Actually, Shane, I was around at a friends place today. We looked at his power bills from 30 years ago. The price of power (cents per kWh) has not increased much. What has skyrocketed in cost, however, is the connection fee. What they charge you whether you use any power or not.


Not the case here. When I moved here 14 years ago peak was 14 cents and off peak was 3.5 cents.

It is now about 31cents and off the top of my head without getting out a bill, off peak is about 14 cents, the same as peak was.

Supply charge has also gone up. From memory it was about 40 cents a day and now between 95 to 105 cents depending on the retailer.