The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Coal has a role yet in keeping economies as healthy as possible > Comments

Coal has a role yet in keeping economies as healthy as possible : Comments

By Gary Johns, published 24/2/2017

A developing country could spend its money trying to abate carbon dioxide emissions or it could invest in enough ­resources to adapt to climate change successfully.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
By 2024 Bangladesh should have two nuclear power plants with the money lent by Russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooppur_Nuclear_Power_Plant
In contrast by 2024 Australia will have lost a comparable amount of generating capacity with the closure of Hazelwood and Liddell.

It beats me if Qld think they can go from 7.5% renewables in 2016 to 50% in 2030 why they don't offer that expertise to developing countries. I wonder if by 2030 Australia will still have higher per capita emissions than India, Bangladesh and indeed most other countries. Perhaps they've cottoned on to something we haven't.
Posted by Taswegian, Friday, 24 February 2017 1:06:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Adapt, what like those pesky dinosaurs, who found, when their atmosphere was more than 20% Co2, they asphyxiated! As we will when the plant life renewing our oxygen is destroyed by the purveyors of fossil fuel. Or rather the consequences of refusing to adapt to other safer, cheaper, cleaner carbon free energy provision!

You Gary keep on insisting we need coal? Why? And just more rubbish in rubbish out garbage that seeks to retain a coal reliant income stream?

I think it must have escaped your selectively deaf, feeble attention span, but there's cleaner, cheaper, safer than coal, energy. And if the principle part of our energy mix, we can go from strength to strength. without needing to adapt.

Or failing that grow gills so we can still live along the coastline after it is inundated by melt water? Like Kevin Costner in WaterWorld?

Or better yet, adapt to an economy no longer reliant on the absolute stupidity of endless population growth fuel by planet killing fossil fuels.

Some of us could even adapt to that as the richest no wucking furries, folk in the graveyard? Your legacy or epitaph?

As we automate there will be less jobs and we'll need fewer people to fill them!

Is that what you meant by adaptation? And even more intense record breaking heat waves and even more oldies tottering off the mortal coil, years before their appointed date with destiny!

More of your preferred adaptation Gary?

As they say in the classics, please engage brain before putting mouth into gear! At least that way you might even appear intelligent? Nothing however can improve non existent, human empathy!

Perhaps you could adapt into a fair dinkum human being and create some in some unusual and rare for your kind, adaptation?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 24 February 2017 1:14:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Churchill famous opined that "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else."

We are the same. Coal is the right thing for Australia and we will return to it after all the other lunacies have run their course.

Why do we need renewables? Even if its true that the world needs to reduce emissions, we are such a small player that our contribution is immaterial. Maybe we need to be part of a world-wide effort? But the world isn't making an effort. China and India are increasing emissions willy-nilly and the US will almost certainly pull out of the Paris 'agreement' some time this year.

If people really were concerned about emissions they'd be barracking for fracking but they aren't because they don't.

Coal is the cheapest form of energy available to Australians and will remain so for a few decades yet. As things start (or continue?) to go pear-shaped for the economy, self-interest will out-weigh RET fantasies and we will "do the right thing". But its gunna be a bumpy ride until then.
Posted by mhaze, Friday, 24 February 2017 3:18:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've been trying to leave Alan B alone since it just seems cruel to pile on to his constant rubbish. But I can't let this one pass.

" what like those pesky dinosaurs, who found, when their atmosphere was more than 20% Co2,"

20%. 20%!!

Around 70 millions years ago when the dinosaurs died out, CO2 levels were around 800 ppm. That's 0.08%. 20%...struth.

And apparently we're headed back there. We are currently at 400ppm and might get to 550 ppm by 2100. But Alan thinks we're not far from 200,000 ppm.

Being monumentally ill-informed isn't a crime and can be endearing in the young or ageing buffoons. But when you combine that with attacks on the intelligence of those of clearly superior abilities (describing Johns as having "selectively deaf, feeble attention span"), well it ain't a good look.
Posted by mhaze, Friday, 24 February 2017 3:36:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anyone who thinks that Australia can survive without coal is a blithering idiot. We need to get back to coal, using it and selling it to countries like India and China, who don't kowtow to the god of environmentalism or to the climate demi-gods.

The blithering idiots in charge, Team Turnbull, have done nothing commendable by fixing RET and 23.5%. If they want to win Brownie points, they have to scrap the entire RET rort altogether.

This whole subject has become stupid and boring. If it's not coal, it must be nuclear. Wind and solar are a childish fantasy.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 24 February 2017 6:14:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hypocritical article, whinging about an allegedly misleading claim that renewables aren't to blame for power cuts, and then making the thoroughly misleading claim that they are!

SA's last blackout (earlier this month) was the result of the NEM insisting on load shedding after underestinating demand and failing to get Pelican Point power station to switch on half its turbines. 'Tis a bit of a stretch to blame renewables for that.

The statewide blackout last year was a different matter. The way two wind farms abruptly shut down was one factor in the catastrophic chain of events that started with powerlines blowing over. So renewables could be blamed, but as it was a settings problem not an intrinsic problem with renewables, it is not safe to draw any conclusion from that abut the economic effect of renewables.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Taswegian,
Going to 50% renewables in Queensland (or any other Australian state) is relatively easy because of our low population density and sunny climate. Where population density is very high, as it is in most developing countries, the choice is effectively between nuclear energy and a much less energy intense economy than we have.

___________________________________________________________________________________

mhaze,
Though we are a small player, our contribution is far from immaterial. We could be inspiring other countries to do more, but instead our continued usage of coal is an excuse for other countries to do nothing.
Posted by Aidan, Saturday, 25 February 2017 12:21:58 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy