Quite certain.

CNG cars were popular in NZ for quite some time. Now that I think about it, it was probably more like 18 years but it was most definitely a CNG car.

Kelvin Thompson correctly aserts that gas would be a useful transitional fuel. He then seems to go onto promote gas as the be all and end all.

To begin, he seems to say that gas is left on the outer. This may be partially true for Australia, although we are rapidly increasing our gas capacity, the US is bringing on more kilo-watts from gas than any other source. The consumption of gas world wide is expected to increase at 2.4% a year. In Australia, gas accounts for 17% of energy (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/ausenv.html), with capacity growing. To suggest we've been deaf to the gas industry (which by the way is pretty much industry as the oil industry) is wide of the mark.

There are some major problems with gas. Primarily, like oil, a gas peak could occur in the not to distant future. Gas has peaked in the North Sea, and may have peaked in North America in 2003 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak#Natural_gas). As the big users, like the US, reserves dwindle, it is likely they'll look elsewhere for their gas. Australia, Russia and OPEC nations are likely to pick up the slack.

With increasing demand and production, it is possible that a peak in gas could occur as early as 2030, with a possible exhuastion of gas in 2085.
http://www.peakoil.net/JL/JeanL.html
although the Internation Energy Outlook gives a more optimisitc figure
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/nat_gas.html
it puts a peak past 2030.

If gas is a transitional fuel, fine, it's definatly cleaner than coal. But I have issues with dramatically increasing infastructure for gas when a peak may occur within 25 years. It's a finite resource.

We need to begin moving beyond finite resources, and I'm yet to see any evidence that the ALP is planning to do so. (Yay! Two rants on peak production in one night!)

My problem with Gas, at least in Sydney, it is not available. We have GAS at the top of the street, and bottom, but the GAS Company wants $5000 to run the line down the street!

Consequently, our house uses electricity for Hot water, heating and cooking and so does the 4 new houses built in the street.

In our case the house produces more co2 emissions than our cars. We could reduce our dependency on coal fuelled electricity, so it would seem ideal that GAS could be offered, as we would be polluting less right now!

I am in total agreement, Mr Thomson.

Whilst I am somewhat concerned about exploiting all our resources, the use of gas as a transitionary fuel is the only way to go. With 50% reductions in CO2, greenhouse gases could be drastically reduced until renewables are sufficiently robust to keep the lights on.

Converting to gas could eliminate the necessity for carbon sequestration. The mind boggles when one imagines that billions of kilograms of this gas would be contained "indefinitely." Too many "what ifs" for my liking.

It's predicted that Western Australia has sufficient gas reserves to last until the end of the century, with the prospect of unexplored additional reserves.

Any government, sincere about reducing CO2, should seriously consider the prospect of utilising our gas reserves immediately and in conjunction with renewable energies.

Though one wonders which party would have the guts to take on the coal industry and the myriad of denialists from the big end of town. Mmmmm.....I won't hold my breath waiting!

Dicky said;
It's predicted that Western Australia has sufficient gas reserves to last until the end of the century,
with the prospect of unexplored additional reserves.
unquote
However if your suggestion was taken up, ie coal fired power stations
converted to gas or gas turbine power stations built, how long would
the gas last then ? I wish I had the sources to work it out but I
would make a guess and say the gas would be finished by 2050 at the
latest, and not the end of the century.

The gas is too valuable to burn, we should keep it for fertiliser
and plastics etc.

As someone's grandchildren will say tomorrow night on ABC TV 8-30pm;

"You burned all that stuff ?".

Bazz, I was not suggesting we burn gas indefinitely. As Mr Thomson pointed out, gas should be used in a transitional period - perhaps for the next 20 years whilst we are seriously developing renewable energies, particularly solar.

I have no faith at all in the "carbon trading" scheme. That's simply a cop-out to maintain profits at all costs and to delay any remedial action.

We have yet to see a government in this country who is sufficiently courageous to mandate for capping of chemicals from all stack emissions, therefore, excessive CO2 and other harmful pollutants will continue.

The EPA Acts are being breached in this country, 24/7 and at this very moment, I am witnessing a massive, uncontrolled, unmitigated plume of SO2 from a gold roaster, sweeping across the skies and blotting out everything else where it will eventually dump on unsuspecting residents.

Producers of pollution have repeatedly used their influence to delay preventive action, arguing that the immediate expense of redesign to achieve pollution prevention is unwarranted in the face of any uncertainty about harmful environmental and health effects.

And our industry aligned, scyophantic state and federal governments, in collusion with polluters, continue to rub their hands in glee!