How many kwh's does your house use in a 24 hour period. The said average for au homes is 30Kwh's / 24 hr. If 10% were cut from everyones power, that has got to add up substancially. If 1Kw were installed on everybodys roof in au, that has got to make a huge power drop from the grid. [ 1 Kw of solar array in au = about 4-5 Kwh's of power produced.]

Sure Jason, great improvements in efficiency or frugality in household power usage can potentially be made. But do you think that they will be just by way of peoples' goodwill towards the cause of climate change, no matter how the cause might be promoted?

Of course not. Top-down policies of power-costing and disincentives to use more than we need are absolutely necessary.

The other huge factor in all of this is the very rapidly increasing number of consumers in Australia, by way of the highest ever immigration rate....the vast majority of which acquire a very high power consumption rate by world standards.

So Jason, can I ask you; are you concerned about continuous rapid population growth? And if so, how concerned compared to other factors?

I don't want to hijack your thread, but the continuously and very rapidly increasing rate of power (and all manner of other resources) consumption by way of an ever-greater number of consumers is a huge factor in relation to climate change and sustainability policy....is it not?

There's no such thing as too much power unless you cannot afford to pay for it.

It's the same with food.

It's the same with water.

It's the same with how many automobiles you have, the choices at a Chinese restaurant, and the choices of beer or wine. We are all shameless prodigals, constrained only by the size of our wallets. Conservation is good, but only to the extent of its moral or financial limits.

I want to live where I can buy whatever need and want, as far as my purchasing power (and the limits of the law) will allow. The wealthy have this ssme desire, but will never have to relinquish it, no matter the temperature of the planet. Why should the rest of us suffer, based on the deeply entrenched protectionism of global warming zealotry?

Unless and until a comprehensive public debate takes place, one having fair representation by scientists on both sides of the global warming issue, one whereby the viewpoints of either side are given equal audience, one whereby the opposing scientists are held harmless from ostracism or financial ruin, I cannot and will not accept the "popular" GW mantra. Governments around the world have paid scientists billions to prove that man made CO2 is causing GW. If these huge sums were paid to corrupt the science to reach a foregone conclusion, not the scientific truth, a public debate would "clear the air" once and for all.

Our government is too willing to accept the one-sided GW science, too quick to exclude "second opinions", and way too eager to strip us of the cheap energy that brought us prosperity. Before we allow the government to radically alter our way of life, we must verify or refute the science that got us where we are. If the science is good, then there's no harm done. If the science is flawed, it's better to find out now.

Jeff

No matter what you think about climate change, wether it is real or not, does it matter. The world would be better off without coal burners. I don't think there is anything frugal about changing the way you access power, the more you can be less reliant on power from the grid is all the better. Home made power is going to become an attractive deal. In canberra the power company is paying 60cents / kwh fed into the grid, and you buy it back for 16 cents / kwh. It is only the inbetween people that live to the full extent of their earnings, the rest save their money.

How much is TOO MUCH power?

Too much power is when an innocent person is condemned and it is covered up.

Too much power is when a government gives itself a raises and refuses to acknowledge pensioners need to rise above hardship

Too much power is when the Church steals someone's child and gives it to new parents against the mothers will.

Too much power is when it is decided abortion will be decriminalised and legislates murder of the unborn baby instead. Which means if we condone and legitimise murder of unborns we can murder anyone anytime because not even government values human life.

Too much power is when you commit the crime and I do the time.
Too much power is when police say you can have your name cleared and the system leads the unsuspecting public to belkieve an innocent person is guilty.

Too much power simply - is.
Thank you.

HOW MUCH IS TOO MUCH ?

I'd say....."this" much....

Lets say just hyperthetically.. that the Pope or the Archbishop of Canterbury .. the heads of 2 major world Christian denominations....
made the statement

"Now dear believers.. God has told me that I can marry the following categories of women..(list of categories) including any woman who offers herself to me, even if that marriage is only for a few nights, now.. be fully aware...this is ONLY for me... and not for you believers"

And.. then.. the Pope or the Archbishop proceed to enjoy the delights of a string of female hopefuls who feel that by offering themselves to the highest ranking man in the world (for their faith) that they might.. somehow receive some special blessing through intimacy with the Primate.

Perhaps it's better that I don't comment on that.. and see what others think.

That's a pretty astonishing thread hijack, even for you Porky. To try and turn a discussion about household electricity usage into your tedious 'whack-a Mozzie' mantra is quite bizarre, even by Porkycarp standards.

I think your brain must've really exploded after all.

I dunno Jason. I mean, good on you for starting new general threads. But you don't seem interested in discussing the issues.

I've asked direct questions, directly related to the subject...and I get no response. Very perplexing.

The point from my first post is that there is not a whole lot of point in trying to reduce per-capita consumption of power or any resources in order to reduce our overall consumption and rate of waste production, if the number of capitas is just going to rapidly increase with no end in sight.

It's worse that this. With the current growth-at-all-costs mentality, if we all reduce our personal rates of consumption, we are actually facilitating the increase in the number of consumers that can be supported by the same resource base, thus leading to bigger environmental impacts.

Comeon, it is just crackers to not consider all the aspects of both supply and demand when it comes to climate change and sustainability.

Ludwig You must be having me on;
You miss the issue altogether.
I am not talking about reducing your power consumption. I am saying we can produce an amount of home grown power instead of getting the lot from the grid. Houses can produce their own power, feed it into the grid which you get paid for, then you buy it back from the grid+extra power you are not supplying yourself. That means coalfired electricity will be greatly reduced.

Thanks Jason. But you haven't answered my questions. In fact, you haven't addressed my point at all.

Sure we can all be more frugal and many of us can produce some of our own power and perhaps feed some back into the grid. But what's the point if the whole kaboodle is just going to forever get bigger and bigger, and forever place more pressure on our resource base, until it comes up against insurmountable obstacles?

This is my point - the whole country, and planet, needs to limit the scale of its operations. There's no point in becoming ever-more efficient at the personal level if the number of personal operations continues to rapidly and never-endingly grow.

With respect, you are looking at one small aspect of the subject, and apparently seeing it in isolation and not as part of a bigger issue. That is, you're not looking at it in a holistic manner.

Jason, the amount of coalfired power will not be greatly reduced if a large number of people start feeding power into the grid, if at the same time there is a large additional number of people moving into out cities and towns that need power from the grid who are not feeding anything into the grid.

Continuous rapid population growth dilutes, cancels out or perhaps completely overwhelms efforts to implement home-grown power and grid supplement set-ups.

Ludwig The resource base has a tendancy to shift with the advancement of technology.
The second paragraph is not going to happen.
These people coming in need to reside somewhere;- Therefore the dwelling has already got grid feed power set up already.

I'm in a three bedroom two story house in Perth. My daily is between 5 and 7kWh/day. I have a 1kW solar system that usually covers that and sometimes a bit over that I sell to the grid.

My attitude is primarily environmental but also I hold the view that why should I be giving money to Synergy (energy retailer)for stuff I do not need.

10%? 30% is an acheiviable reduction right across the board. I ran an energy audit business and a 20 minute walk through (of say a pub) could save 10% by just doing simple things like labelling and speaking to duty managers etc. Why waste energy heating up the sky? My favorite demo - pull out a $50 note and attempt to light - telling the managers that's what they were doing every day for ZERO benefit.

Places like the pub just goes to show why the price of power has to greatly increase. Good on ya with ya power plant there will be a rush on such things, in times to come. It sounds like you could get off the grid altogether.

Oh dear, you're just not interested at all in real sustainability Jason... are you?

I mean, you can't possibly be if you are not concerned about continuous rapidly increasing pressure on our already badly stressed resource base and environment.

I'm sure your heart is in the right place, but I've got to say, that if you are only interested in the 'technofix' side of things and not at all interested in the scale of human activity, then not only are you missing the crux of the issue of why we have to be forever more efficient, but you are actually playing straight into the hands of those that forever promote a bigger scale of humanity and resource exploitation, and who are taking us rapidly away from a sustainable society and towards a massive crash event.

This sort of stuff is of the utmost concern to me, as it should be to every one of us.

As I said before; "... you are looking at one small aspect of the subject, and apparently seeing it in isolation and not as part of a bigger issue. That is, you're not looking at it in a holistic manner."