A very interesting read with plenty of perspective
Letter to the Editor
Written By Terence Cardwell*
The Morning Bulletin
I have sat by for a number of years frustrated at the rubbish being put forth about carbon
dioxide emissions, thermal coal-fired power stations and renewable energy and the
ridiculous Emissions Trading Scheme.
Frustration at the lies told (particularly during the election) about global pollution. Using
Power Station cooling towers for an example. The condensation coming from those
cooling towers is as pure as that that comes out of any kettle.
Frustration about the so-called incorrectly-named man-made ‘carbon emissions’ which
of course is Carbon Dioxide emissions, and what it is supposedly doing to our planet.
Frustration about the lies told about renewable energy and the deliberate distortion of
renewable energy and its ability to replace fossil fuel energy generation. And frustration
at the ridiculous carbon credit programme which is beyond comprehension.
And further frustration at some members of the public who have not got a clue about
thermal Power Stations or Renewable Energy. Quoting ridiculous figures about
something they clearly have little or no knowledge of.
First, coal-fired power stations do NOT send 60 to 70% of the energy up the chimney.
The boilers of modern power stations are 96% efficient, and the exhaust heat is
captured by the economisers and reheaters and heat the air and water before entering
The very slight amount exiting the stack is moist as in condensation and CO2. There is
virtually no fly ash because this is removed by the precipitators or bagging plant that are
99.98% efficient. The 4% lost is heat through boiler wall convection.
Coal-fired Power Stations are highly efficient with very little heat loss and can generate
massive amount of energy for our needs. They can generate power at an efficiency of
less than 10,000 b.t.u. per kilowatt and cost-wise that is very low.
The percentage cost of mining and freight is very low. The total cost of fuel is 8% of total
generation cost and does NOT constitute a major production cost.
As for being laughed out of the country, China is building multitudes of coal-fired power
stations because they are the most efficient for bulk power generation.
We have, like, the USA, coal-fired power stations because we HAVE the raw materials
and are VERY fortunate to have them. Believe me, no one is laughing at Australia –
exactly the reverse, they are very envious of our raw materials and independence.
A major percentage of power in Europe and U.K. is nuclear because they don’t have the
coal supply for the future.
Yes, it would be very nice to have clean, quiet, cheap energy in bulk supply. Everyone
agrees that it would be ideal. You don’t have to be a genius to work that out. But there
is only one problem—It doesn’t exist.
Yes – there are wind and solar generators being built all over the world but they only add
a small amount to the overall power demand.
The maximum size wind generator is 3 Megawatts, which can rarely be attained on a
continuous basis because it requires substantial forces of wind. And for the same
reason they only generate when there is sufficient wind to drive them. This of course
depends where they are located but usually they only run for 45% -65% of the time,
mostly well below maximum capacity. They cannot be relied upon for a ‘base load’
because they are too variable. And they certainly could not be used for load control.
The peak load demand for electricity in Australia is approximately 50,000 Megawatts,
and only small part of this comes from the Snowy Hydro Electric System (The ultimate
power Generation) because it is only available when water is there from snow melt
or rain. And yes, they can pump it back but it costs to do that. (Long Story).
Tasmania is very fortunate in that they have mostly hydro electric generation because of
their high amounts of snow and rainfall. They also have wind generators (located in the
roaring forties) but that is only a small amount of total power generated.
Based on a average generating output of 1.5 megawatts (of unreliable power) you would
require over 33,300 wind generators.
As for solar power generation, much research has been done over the decades and
there are two types. Solar thermal generation and Solar Electric generation, but in each
case they cannot generate large amounts of electricity.
Any clean, cheap energy is obviously welcomed but they would NEVER have the
capability of replacing Thermal power generation. So get your heads out of the clouds,
do some basic mathematics and look at the facts, not going off with the fairies (or some
would say the extreme greenies.)
We are all greenies in one form or another and care very much about our planet. The
difference is most of us are realistic. Not in some idyllic utopia where everything can be
made perfect by standing around holding a banner and being a general pain in the
Here are some facts that will show how ridiculous this financial madness the government
is following. Do the simple maths and see for yourselves.
According to the ‘believers’ the CO2 in the air has risen from .034% to .038% in air over
the last 50 years.
To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in a clearer perspective: If you had a
room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x 3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would
occupy in that room would be .25m x .25m x .17m or the size of a large packet of
Australia emits 1 percent of the world’s total carbon Dioxide, and the government wants
to reduce this by twenty percent or reduce emissions by .2 percent of the world’s total
What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?
By their own figures they state that the CO2 in air has risen from 0.034% to 0.038% in
Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 (in the air) has increased in 50 years by 0.004
Per year that is 0.004 divided by 50 = 0.00008 percent. (Getting confusing – but stay with
Of that, because we only contribute 1%, our emissions would cause CO2 to rise 0.00008
divided by 100 = 0.0000008 percent.
Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the government wants to reduce it by 20% which is
1/5th of 0.0000008 = 0.00000016 percent effect per year they would have on the world
CO2 emissions based on their own figures.
That would equate to an area in the same room, as the size of a small pin!!!
For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and roofing
installations, Clean coal technology, Renewable energy, etc, etc.
How ridiculous is that?!
The cost to the general public and industry will be enormous. Cripple and even closing
some smaller business.
To the Editor I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of
NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4
X 350 MW Munmorah Power Station near Newcastle. I would be pleased to supply you
any information you may require.
* Terry is now retired and is in excellent health at age 69. Nobody paid him to write the article which was, (to their credit), published by the local press. ? ?
Article copied from Catallaxy Files
Australia’s wild parrots, which are increasingly being exposed to some of the world’s highest temperatures, have evolved to grow longer wings to cope with the extra heat.
What extra heat?
Scientists at the University of Notre Dame Australia have found that the wings of ringneck parrots, which live in Western Australia, have grown by 4-5mm over the past 45 years.
Researchers claim the adaptation means the birds, commonly called 28s after their whistled “twen-ty-eight” call, have adapted so they can shed more heat when they fly.
These parrots have a life span of up to 50 years and commonly live 20 to 30 years thus they have supposedly evolved over one generation.
Darwin would be amused.
“South Australia hasn’t seen a storm like last week’s in living memory,” Mr Weatherill said. “Those images of transmission lines bent over showed just how powerful the wind was.”No, those images show just how flimsy the infrastructure was. I put more concrete around the base of my fence posts than the SA guys did around their pylons. Yes, the storm produced the blackout but there’s more to it than that. The wind turbines closed down before the pylons were knocked out and the sudden drop in power from wind caused a huge instant demand from the Victoria connector. It closed down to protect the Victorian energy system. If SA had coal or gas generators on line it wouldn’t have blacked out. From Graham Llloyd in The Australian quoting a report from the AEMO
A dramatic, sudden loss of wind power generation was the root cause of South Australia’s state wide blackout last week. And the bulk of damage to high voltage transmission lines that was caused by high winds and paraded as evidence to defend renewables most likely took place after the power had been lost. These are the major facts contained in the Australian Energy Market Operator’s (AEMO) preliminary report.Graham continues;
But AEMO said data currently available indicates that the damage to the Davenport to Brinkworth 275 kV line on which 14 towers were damaged “occurred following the SA Black System”. The big event was a 123 MW reduction in output from North Brown Hill Wind Farm, Bluff Wind Farm, Hallett Wind Farm and Hallett Hill Wind Farm at 16.18.09. Seconds later there was an 86 MW reduction in output from Hornsdale wind farm and a 106 MW reduction in output from Snowtown Two wind farm.Renewables are fine so long as there is a base load source to maintain the grid. Green left wing state governments are outbidding each other in taking us along the road to renewables without listening to engineering advice. They will cost us dearly. Link here to The AEMO Report. Greenies should read it and ponder.
Climate change will significantly affect accessibility and availability of freshwater resources and was a key factor in the 2008 food crisis, that increased the number of undernourished people worldwide by 75 million, he says.Now that’s a big call! From the Science and Publicity website;
The SEAFRAME sea-level study on 12 Pacific islands is the most comprehensive study of sea level and local climate ever carried out there. The sea level records obtained have all been assessed by the anonymous authors of the official reports as indicating positive trends in sea level over all 12 Pacific Islands involved since the study began in 1993 until the latest report in June 2010. In almost all cases the positive upward trends depend almost exclusively on the depression of the ocean in 1997 and 1998 caused by two tropical cyclones. If these and other similar disturbances are ignored, almost all of the islands have shown negligible change in sea level from 1993 to 2010, particularly after the installation of GPS leveling equipment in 2000.The whole piece strikes me as being a job application submitted for our new Climate Change advocate Prime Minister.
“Since its removal following the lies and smear campaign by the IPA and others, emissions have massively increased, polluters are largely free to pollute again, and Australia is further isolating itself from almost every other economy on the planet who are doing the exact opposite, and there’s a prize for that?” Greenpeace Australia chief executive David Ritter said.I’m calling on Greenpeace and their Australian subsidiary, the Greens, to donate any money received in their lies and smear campaign to the Australian treasury to start paying back the billions of dollars they have cost the nation. They could start by donating the $1.6 million they got from WOTIF owner Graeme Wood. They played a major part in the development of Desalination plants that cost billions to build but now mostly sit idle costing millions a year in maintenance; they have stopped mining development all over Australia as part of their campaign to close down the coal mining industry and that has cost the nation billions; they have stopped the building of dams effecting agricultural and city water needs and generally do their best to stuff up the economy. They owe Australia big time