It's bleeding obvious that we cannot have cheap electricity AND lower emissions. Our extremely stupid and pigheaded politicians continue to believe the AGW liars - and continue slinging our money at those liars. Now, the really, really stupid thing happening is that, while suffering massive electricity costs to enable the bare necessities of life, we are expected to accept vehicles driven by this extremely expensive electricity, which use a hell of a lot of electricity to produce, and whose batteries will be worn out long before the rest of the vehicle.

Of course, the lunatics in South Australia, at around the same time they were blowing up coal powered electricity-producing plants and putting up Middle Ages windmills, also decided to electrify the trains, which now grind to a stop regularly because of power problems. And, we would have to overnight at places with charging stations in order to cover the vast Australian distances: you couldn't drive from Adelaide to Melbourne in one hit, with one petrol top up as you can now. It's not only our inability to get a decent Prime Minister that makes us a global laughing stock.

Electric vehicles...a sure way to thin out traffic congestion by eliminating the (working) poor from the roads.

This follows the Julia Gillard "disconnect", cash for clunkers, aimed at taking affordable vehicles off the roads.

All travelling down the same broad road as unaffordable housing and electricity.

Yes, we could have nuclear and as small portable mass produced factory-built modules within six months. And because it's essentially proven as MSR thorium, which have the added advantage of being able to be deployed as waste burners, which we would be paid annual billions to bury.

And we would, except after we'd gleaned every last erg of energy from it. And as we do so, half our emissions and massively reduce energy costs. As always with Don, he can't get past coal as being the cheapest energy we could have!

Yes, he gives lip service to nuclear knowing in his heart those who decide our energy policy will never ever actually allow it given the alleged personal revenue and quite massive electoral funding coal provides?

Clearly, he and every other hardline conservative, just don't actually believe in climate change or that we are causing most of it? Bags electric cars, because they don't burn fossil fuel? And probably has never ever driven one and sees problems that don't exist or can easily be remedied.

Adroitly, as usual, overlooks biogas which in scrubbed combination with ceramic fuel cells. Produces power for four times less than coal and from fuel we outlay good money, to dump at sea!

China is on track to roll out over a million affordable electric cars in 2018 and ramped production year on year until 2030 when all production of conventional engined vehicles will be banned.

Others will follow suit if only to keep market share.

As of today, an electric vehicle with highway speed and a range exceeding 140 kilometres, could be purchased for around $7,000.00 brand spanking new? Minus the tariff penalties? Imposed to protect our local car manufacturing industries!

That prospect and the new black gold, lithium terrifies the fossil fuel industry and their likeminded coal-fired supporters. As does private enterprise power prices south of 2 cents per KwH.

Read Robert Hargreaves, Thorium, cheaper than coal.
Alan B.

The future for thermal coal, is as alternative transport fuel we make right here and simply cook out all the methane, then compress it for most conventional powered transport.

Or convert it into methanol as an alternative for petrol or ammonia as alternative diesel. And then only when CNG or compressed methane isn't practical.

Ammonia can be catalytically disassembled to release pure hydrogen, and the CO2 content compressed and recompressed to produce a liquid, reintegrated with hydrogen to produce many other products, which include fertilizer and plastics. All reliant on cheap nuclear energy.

Currently, conventional nuclear energy costs at least twice that of coal in the power plant construction cost and for fuel?

Take a conventional light water reactor of 350 MW. Over a thirty year lifetime, it will need 2551 tons of fuel, burn less than 1% of it and produce 2550 tons of highly toxic waste.

Now extrapolating from fuel usage numbers at Oak Ridge Tennesee and their 60-70's thorium, accident and incident free, burn. A 350MW unpressurized thorium MSR would require just one ton of massively cheaper fuel.

I mean the security guard out front, would cost more than the entire thirty years worth of fuel. And for its operational life, carried in on the back of a holden one tonner, as a single, once only load!

Burn 99% and create less than 1% as far less toxic waste, which is eminently suitable as long life space batteries!

Finally, this combination produces Bismuth213, miracle cancer cure. Successfully deployed in day clinics, against death sentence cancers, including ovarian cancer, pancreatic cancer, myeloid leukemia, and some very nasty brain cancers just to mention some.

With both ovarian and brain cancer, separately claiming more victims annually than our average corresponding road toll.

Likewise for America, where the numbers sacrificed at the altar of global corporations exceeds 60,00 per!

So keep on blocking MSR thorium mate! You are one of many serving your country and humanity very well and should be ultimately appropriately awarded/rewarded for your conspicuous role?
Alan B.

Apologies and correction, the number 60,00. should be read as 60,000!
Alan B.

The motivation for EVs will be expensive petrol not so much concern for emissions. When that happens farming and aviation will be gutted as their vehicles don't have a realistic battery option. Food and personal mobility will consume people's income too bad for other discretionary spending.

If half of Australia's 18m fuel cars were replaced by EVs each nightly topping up 10 kwh for 40 km travel that is 9m X 365 X 10 kwh = 32.9 Twh on top of Australia's 257 Twh per Energy Update 2017. That's about a 13% increase needed for electricity generation. All from wind and solar? It would however greatly reduce Australia's transport emissions and annual fuel import bill currently standing at $34 bn. Can't see this going smoothly.

It is very good idea about electric vehicles

"It is very good idea about electric vehicles"

That's about he only good.

Just imagine the power drain every day if all Australian vehicles were electric.

I can see the aircraft industry being adversely affected but not the farmers, farmers could always revert to steam power.

There would need to be other exceptions, fire fighters and other emergency vehicles, police etc. and the Armed Forces, but with an all electric private car fleet the cost of production of fossil fuels would skyrocket.

It can all go smoothly with nuclear, which will provide electrification of urban transport as well as the energy to make synthetic fuels with short carbon-cycle (i.e. carbon "neutral/free"),or, no carbon-cycle at all (e.g. ammonia). These fuels can be used in long-range transport, shipping, mining and agriculture, in ICE's or fuel-cells.

The cost of EV's will fall (China has this covered)and electrified urban vehicles will become commonplace.

We just need to take the step of legalizing nuclear and climbing aboard the imminent SMR revolution. This is where the LNP should be taking us. There is no hope of sensible energy policy under Labor/Greens, none whatsoever, while blind faith in reliable renewables prevails.

SMR's can load follow renewables but the left won't even come a that. The same ideological blindness stops them supporting culling N.Qld crocs, as seen on Q&A last night. Greens are a laughing stock and it's too bad Labor needs them as it might have more policies worth voting for without their influence.

First the academics talked the pollies into pushing diesel use instead of petrol.

Now the clowns have caught up with the facts of life, & want to ban diesel.

So now they push electric, when there is no way we can produce the necessary batteries or generate enough power to replace petrol.

How about a sweepstake on when the so called scientists will start clambering to ban electric cars.

If we could just lock these academics in their ivory towers, & silence them, we would all be much better off.

Just for Alan, if we are still allowed private cars in 30 years time, a doubtful prospect, they will be steam powered. The steam generated by a small chip of nuclear material installed on the production line for the life of the car.

Remember you heard it here first.

The clever Chinese are working on laser activated thorium-powered car and reported some time ago well before Hasbeen thought of it!

As for steam, other things could be incorporated like recycling helium or something able to tolerate the heat generated without flashing to another product or products?

As superheated steam can do and become an explosive mixture of hydrogen and oxygen able to blow up the complete car or convey it into orbit.

I believe batteries will improve to the point where recharging will be doable to 80% in just thirty seconds and enough time for a complete tyre change?

And with all four wheels driving without the need to pause for even a semblance of a gear change! far quicker off the grid, around corners than almost anything else, and not only will they be able to be recharged in thirty seconds to 80%? But have the current max range of around 400 klicks extended to around a thou.

Albeit with solar panel spray jobs, ground-hugging aerodynamics and regenerative braking.

As for nuclear-powered steam not nearly as far-fetched as it might seem given it combines the two most powerful forces in nature to work together and could make all sorts possible like endless roaming off the beaten track in various RV's and completely off the grid.

And one day bound to find their way into all manner of defence vehicles and shipping?

It just needs mindsets able to cope with change and intelligent innovation. Rather than endlessly repeat, there's nothing better than coal.

For sure we can use and mine coal but for different purposes, say as a source of cheap industrial gas, or any of its derivatives, or as a source of carbon for man-made graphene.
Alan B.

How many Universities do we prop up year after year & here we are in 2018 & none of them have produced a so-called scientist who can come up with a decent battery ?
I suppose we'll just have to bide our time till some farmhand invents something useful as is the case with most practical inventions.

individual,
ISTR the vanadium battery was an Aussie invention. But vanadium is expensive. It would be good if we could use something cheap like iron instead, but the government doesn't support science as much as it used to, so the battery research has gone overseas.

Coal obviously is cheaper and works, fact. Renewables are much much more expensive as well as not being consistent, fact. We find ourselves with people in charge preferring the wrong way rather than the right way and making us pay more and more for their wrong decision. I expect this madness to continue until some politician loses his job or seat and then watch the run for the exits!
Can someone tell me who gets the money for renewable certificates? I wondered about this and then had this horrible thought of some slimy lawyer/merchant banker type having a fund and trousering all the money! Tell me it ain't so Joe!

Alan,

"As for nuclear-powered steam not nearly as far-fetched as it might seem given it"... has been around for years and years, in nuclear powered submarines and surface ships.

The harsh reality all the dreamers don't want to face is that this whole debacle about electricity, whether for vehicles or for our homes and industry, is that, it is all a pipe dream.
It all works in the minds of those who have convinced themselves that pollution is going to kill every living thing on the planet if we don't stop it's production.
This is a nonsense, it just is not possible.
The govts have chosen to go where the votes are, and CC is a great vote getter.
Renewables MIGHT be the way of the future.
It is not the way any time soon.
The key to any product for the masses is quantity.
There is simply no viable method of gathering and supplying a sizeable quantity of electricity with the current options.
Even if we used all the main sources being promoted, eg; wind and sun. On the other hand firstly shoot the greens and all those who are pushing renewables and, for the foreseeable future go with the tried and true, proven power generating plants such as coal and nuclear, we might just get through this next phase of development involving EV's and so on.
Remember, continuous, reliable, cheap power.
Renewables cannot deliver even one of these requirements.
We are talking base load to peak load.
We cannot drive a car that only goes for distances of 50 to 100k's between charges.
It is simply un-acceptable.
No, come back to me when we can buy a car for approx $15,000 to $20,000, and it will go for 400 to 500k's before re-charging, and I can re-charge in under 5mins.
But until then stop dreaming and pushing a fanciful and childish agenda.

You are probably right about a farm hand will invent a good battery individual. It is often interesting what prompts a great invention. or improvement.

I was involved many years ago in the marketing of a very highly efficient heat exchanger. I had the engineering department at QUT authenticate it's transfer capacity to facilitate exports to both China & Japan. The professors were blown away by the thing. It was many times more efficient than any thing they had even dreamed of.

It was invented by a wheat farmer out back of Dalby.

Why was it invented? His wife would not go camping with him, unless he provided a hot shower. He used waste heat from his car engine to heat the water via his heat exchanger.

The Patent has run out now, they have been copied in China & I think here, but it was a practical bloke with a need, not a researcher or engineer who invented it

Altrav your wish is my command.
The Hyundai Kona, available next year will do 400km on a charge.
Word is the price will be $45,000.It is Eu 26714 in Norway.
The Kona has a 64Kwhr battery available as an option.
The problem with EVs is that they are about $20,000 dearer in Australia
than in the US and EU.
The Renault Zoe car costs $65,650 ! I priced it yesterday.
Alan B, your charge in 30secs means you will need a crane to lift the
plugin charging cable. Work out the current needed to charge a 50kwhr
battery in 30 secs.
You will find at 400volt dc it needs a 15,000 amp cable.
Smaller batteries of course will mean lower currents.
True most cars so far have smaller batteries, around 30kwhr, but the
drive for greater range means larger batteries. Still 7500 amp cable
will require aid to lift it and struggle it into the socket.
Also there would be a major problem to dissipate the heat from the battery.
The charging point will need a high voltage supply especially if there
are several fast chargers.
So do not ever expect to see chargers faster than some 15 minutes.

Still all that aside the Nissan Leaf is the number one seller in Norway.

Altrav, another catch 22. The larger cables needed for very fast
charging will need really high capacity cables from the socket to the
battery and between all the cells in the battery.
This will increase the weight of the car and reduce the range. 22.
Some later cars I have read will increase the battery voltage to 800 volts.
That would be a major help but the safety situation gets more difficult.

Bazz, quite right.
This whole CC thing has ballooned into another govt rip-off and the public, not being aware of the facts involved in this 'pipe dream' called renewables, has been sucked in so effectively, they have lost what little perspective was on offer on the matter.
Whilst the biggest con-men we have seen of late, the greens, push their crap, all to the benefit of themselves and their individual futures, we have to suffer through years of BS until eventually we start to see some semblance of what we are trying to achieve.
For the time being, and the foreseeable future, we must not give sway to the mentally disturbed greens and the mentally deficient public, and keep plying money into these renewable nightmares.
They have amounted to NOTHING, and no-one has the guts to stand up and denounce the whole thing, especially the con-men behind it all.
Electrification will come, eventually, I don't doubt it.
In the meantime we have taken our eye off the ball and allowed the thieves and con-men to steal and gouge at our immediate expense.
I want to have discussions and debates with like minded people.
People with a bit more knowledge about what they speak, other than what they regurgitate over a skinny latte with their equally stupid and entitled friends.