An interesting article by a clearly well informed author!

I wonder if Martin has an opinion on the potential of algae in
the whole energy equation.

Some time ago I read various research reports on the potential of
algae as energy harvesters, done in the US in the late 90s. The
figures were pretty impressive, but with oil at 10$ a barrel at the
time, the economics did not stack up.

Algae are such simple life forms and can multiply amazingly quickly,
given enough sunlight and enough CO2. Using CO2 from coal fired
power stations to feed algae farms, rather then sequester the stuff,
makes lots of sense to me

Maybe Howard wasn't that silly when, with his last gasps, he started to push for Nuclear Reactors. Easily adjusted to load variations they no doubt would make ideal base-load Electricity Sources.
Building Nuclear Power Stations is a long-time project and starting them now would be a good investment in peace of mind, even if they will no longer be needed by the time they are ready to come on line.

So why does the author continue to look backwards instead of forward. The latest generation of nuclear power electrical generators are fission powered which have no control rods to jam (the leading cause of "meltdowns), use non-weapons grade enriched fuels (eliminating the weapons proliferation argument and minimizing waste) and are very safe and tiny, a unit that could sit on a kitchen table would power a residential neighborhood.

This addresses many of the problems that the renewables still can not address such as who wants huge windmills whirring in their back yard and destroying the pastoral views (anybody seen the former East German landscape or the southern Norwegian coast line lately?). Who wants thousands of hectares of mirrors and solar panels built so far outback that the cost of connecting them to the "grid" is prohibitive. We are probably not going to build any more water fall powered generators since the government has decreed we are going to be perpetually in drought and is busy building desalinization plants.

I guess we could hang out for the oxymoronic "Clean Coal" but I wouldn't hold my breath as this is just pandering to the miners union.

And for those among us who want to always be concerned about terror cells knocking out power stations and the "grid" which would blacken the major cities this would present a panacea. The power generation would be so highly distributed that a complete blackout would be impossible. Not renewables, nor huge existing coal generators, can ever address this potential disaster because they must all be attached to the grid.

The single biggest problem getting these little beauties to market is a significant road block enacted by the anti-nuclear crowd that requires that all nuclear technologies be approved by the US Nuclear regulatory commission AND the full cost of approval must be borne by the applicant. Since the cost of gaining approval would be upwards of US$80 million it is a quite effective roadblock to future development.

For more information on this latest technology please read this article from the Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124580572129645069.HTML

Business as usual can't help us, Nuclear plants take 15-20 years to approve, build and horrifically expensive. Sequestration is a dream, as are other supposed ways to mitigate our reliance on non-renewable polluting energy.

The elite demand we continue with wasteful unreliable and heavily polluting single point generation and distribution. The only sensible economic option is to establish local generation using a variety of alternative and bio/gas backups.

The population are programmed to believe what politicians and corporate fools say, rather than common sense and the facts of alternatives. Local generation would lowers costs, as there's no need to produce huge amounts of power to compensate for transmission loses, constant base loads required to cover the entire country and would provide employment and rural small business growth.

The technology is being used by smart people, solar collectors are far more advanced than people are led to believe.

<“The average family with two cars recharged at home will increase their electricity use by 50 per cent.”>

This is false propaganda, people were creating their own energy at home, would cost nothing. It's single point control which raises costs, not diversified and local energy production.

I've been on alternatives energies for more than 20 years and make my own fuel. Saving thousands a year and never suffer blackouts, bills, shortages or price rises. Electric cars are the next step, already they are capable of outperforming fossil fuel cars and have similar ranges. The Tesla vehicle currently is expensive, within the next couple of years, the new lithium ion batteries which charge in minutes, have longer lives, smaller and lighter, will bring the price down rapidly, as will competition and need. If solar energies so poor, how come it powers the space station and every probe or satellite launched. The voyager vehicles launched 30+ years ago, have passed out of the solar system, still running on solar power with nuclear batteries designed and built in the early 70's. The deniers are trying to tell us solar isn't good enough, sounds like a psychological fault in some.

http://www.teslamotors.com/

Nuclear power plants have been built elsewhere in 3 years. http://nuclearinfo.net/Nuclearpower/WebHomeCostOfNuclearPower
As stated elsewhere in this forum, solar and other renewable sources are incapable, at this stage, of providing base load.

The cost of nuclear power is more expensive than coal but at around $1400 per kw it is way cheaper than solar.

Renewable Energy, cringeworthy Australia-Inc ads, the Kurnell desal-plant, denial of free-to-air sports & bloody immigration ... its all about business corrupting elected governments, usurping parliamentary accountability in the name of economic-growth.

Its about same-old infinite-economic-growth on a finite-planet by deferring RISKS using hedge funds. NOW, having suffered major losses, big business plots with our governments to GET TOUGH on citizens, force them to make room for new immigrants/tourists, who by all accounts only benefit Government(GST&votes) and Business(marketplace consumers). All Aussies(of all races) get is beaten up on friday-night or knee-deep-waits in emergency wards.

Its about deferring business RISKS, to poor nations, to future generations and to the weaker individuals in our society. For example people in the Blue Mntns have their land routinely zoned 7E conservation (where 7E owners still pay rates & are hit with weed control orders over lands that they no longer have any rights to) This defers RISK of a public-backlash. Big Labor-developers build mega-condos on precious habitat at Huskisson. The politicians speak: "Look what wer'e conserving in the Blue Mnts so don't complain about Huskisson where we a making a world class accessory to Australia-Inc". No land owner in the blue Mnts can afford JUSTICE. That's the LEVERAGE. That's deferral of RISK. It's getting worse NOW& the rights of Blue-Mntns-citizens are essentially being DEFERRED to immigrants who buy new condos.

ITM Nathan-the-PyramidScheme-builder mounts a lying PROPAGANDA campaign saying that water is scarce not because his immigrant fodder is using it but because WE are hosing our cars and must pay double. Adolf Hitler couldn't get away with that propaganda! With the scare of higher water,energy& entertainment prices plus Carrot-On-A-STICK renewable energy promises, NSW citizens have been FOOLED.

Renewable energy schemes? I mean isn't that what farmers tell slowit donkeys when they dangle the carrot above their nostrils: "the longer the transition takes, the better the outcome."

The only serious energy alternatives, renewable or not, are Geothermal and Nuclear, both of which Federal polititians & businesses are NOT BRAVE enough to RISK

.... until they find a nice hedge that is.