|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Nov 18, 2024 13:15:52 GMT 12
Spend a claimed $5.5 billion (it would be much more than that) to install 1000MW of generation capacity in a harsh and not easily accessible environment. The infrastructure has a lifespan of maybe 20 years. Which will on average provide about 400MW of electricity as best, with zero control over when and in what quantity it will be delivered to the market.
I saw a thing a week or 3 back where it explained how Govts are being 'sold' 1000MW of 'installed capacity' but without the detail of, bugger lost the name they used but it was the same as 'but in reality we'll only get....' I'll suss for the name.
The same article also suggested they could not find even 1 wind farm that ever output anything close to it's 'installed capacity'.
Basically wind farms are being sold as 'A Commodore with a V8 under the hood'. They get installed to find 4 cylinders have been blanked off.
Installed capacity is meaningless where windfarms and solar are concerned. Plenty of performance data around, landbased windfarms are producing 30-35% of the time, offshore windfarms 45-50%. Solar 25%.
|
|
|
|
Post by harrytom on Nov 18, 2024 15:57:09 GMT 12
2 weeks or so back the coal ship arrived in Auckland,40 odd trucks parked in huntly waiting to unload,presume for the power station. Yet today the coal train left the mine in Huntly for Glenbrook. So if Glenbrook can burn Huntly coal why is not being used in Huntly power station. Something doesnt add up?
|
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnb on Nov 18, 2024 17:00:23 GMT 12
It's so Glessen Cox can charge overnight storage costs, plus extra mileage on the trucks, and who pays?  But it keeps kiwirail in the loop of extracting money from the taxpayers. |
|
|
|
Post by fish on Nov 18, 2024 18:05:06 GMT 12
2 weeks or so back the coal ship arrived in Auckland,40 odd trucks parked in huntly waiting to unload,presume for the power station. Yet today the coal train left the mine in Huntly for Glenbrook. So if Glenbrook can burn Huntly coal why is not being used in Huntly power station. Something doesnt add up? Not all coal is equal. Thermal coal is very different from coking coal. Coking coal is used for making steel. It is high quality and costs substantially more than thermal coal. It provides the carbon that becomes the steel. Thermal coal is simply used for heating. Is is low grade and thus cheap. Normally has loads of contaminants, for example sulphur. Very bad for making steel, as your steel will be full of shit. The majority of coal reserves in NZ is very high grade coking coal. That is why the share markets and investors were utterly wetting themselves over the Pike River coal, right up until they weren't. You'd never burn coking coal in a power station. It is way to valuable and way to expensive. Far better to burn gas in a power station, it has substantially less environmental impact, is cheaper, and gas turbines can be used for "peaking", as in, covering the peak power demand over dinner time in the evening, then shut down again, where as thermal coal power stations need to run all day cause they take so long to heat up and produce steam for the turbines. Noting there is a really good gas peaking plant sitting doing nothing in Stratford, while Huntly burns all the dirty Indonesian coal. If you want to ask why, you'll have to see if you can track down Dame Saint Jacinda Adhern and see if you can get her to explain her captains call. |
|
|
|
Post by harrytom on Nov 20, 2024 9:16:23 GMT 12
Would climate be better off having concrete rds. With all roads having tarseal they would be acting like radiators
|
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Nov 22, 2024 8:35:53 GMT 12
Received this on LinkedIn yesterday
XXXX, Should Australia host the COP31 climate summit? Hi XXXX My name is Cathy Anderson and I’m a senior editor on the LinkedIn News Australia team covering sustainability. I often get in touch with members who can add informed perspectives on news and trends.
As COP29 prepares to wrap up, we’re asking sustainability professionals their thoughts on the best way forward to fight climate change.
Australian Conservation Foundation CEO Kelly O’Shanassy says nations including Australia must immediately revise their climate ambitions.
She tells LinkedIn News Australia approval of new fossil fuel projects and exports is hurting Australia’s reputation and causing environmental harm — and argues Australia is not yet deserving of its bid to host the COP31 UN climate summit in 2026 alongside Pacific nations.
I’d love to hear from you. Where to from here for Australia’s policies on renewable energy and nature, and phasing out of fossil fuel? Is Australia doing enough to combat climate change? Watch O’Shanassy's video and join the conversation in the comments of the post, or create your own post and share your insights with your network.
So they have not even completed the 'knees up" event in Baku, Azebaijan this year, which with ~65,000 delegates has achieved absolutely nothing, let alone booked their tickets for Brazil for next year, yet they are already worrying about where the following year's event will be held. It's just a never ending first class gravy train/boat!
|
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Nov 23, 2024 16:39:07 GMT 12
just another reminder of the insanity of NZ shooting itself in the foot to keep the climate catastrophists happy (see link for interactive chart)
This chart shows greenhouse gas emissions since 1990. The changes have been:
China +9,500 MT, +216%
India +2.525 MT, +166%
NZ -11MT, -14%
US -99MT, -2%,
EU -2,196 MT, -40%
The change by continent is:
Africa +1,808MT, +62%
Asia +17,202 MT, +134%
Europe -3,.659 MT, -36%
North America +277MT, +4%
Oceania +34MT, +5%
South America +672MT, +22%
It is very clear that limiting temperature rises to 1.5 degrees (a number plucked out of the air anyway) is impossible to achieve just with US and EU. There needs to be more focus on China and India.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnb on Nov 23, 2024 19:03:42 GMT 12
I wonder if the greens agree with that graph and stop putting pressure on NZ???
|
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Nov 24, 2024 7:07:13 GMT 12
Would climate be better off having concrete rds. With all roads having tarseal they would be acting like radiators Concrete is horrendous for emissions, right there with petrol. Which makes it so much fun when some urban wokie has a crack at me about farming. Interestingly few seem to know how bad concrete is. Tarseal is great for thermals, fly over spaghetti junction in Alk on a sunny day and there's no mistaking a lot of hot air is rising fast.
I'm informed, by some who should know like CZ, that NZ is not good for concrete roads as the ground moves too much, we need the more flexible tarseal.
|
|
|
|
Post by em on Nov 24, 2024 7:18:19 GMT 12
Would climate be better off having concrete rds. With all roads having tarseal they would be acting like radiators Concrete is horrendous for emissions, right there with petrol. Which makes it so much fun when some urban wokie has a crack at me about farming. Interestingly few seem to know how bad concrete is. Tarseal is great for thermals, fly over spaghetti junction in Alk on a sunny day and there's no mistaking a lot of hot air is rising fast.
I'm informed, by some who should know like CZ, that NZ is not good for concrete roads as the ground moves too much, we need the more flexible tarseal.
Concrete is not very good for Mangawhai or Bream bay beaches either . I haven’t had a deep dive into why Pakiri sand is not sufficient but there sure are some very flash houses in the sand dunes in the middle and northern end of the beach . Yeah tar seal is great for thermals . When I lived in Devonport I would fly my RC glider off the top of Mt Victoria . Light west or north west breeze was the go for an upwind launch from the car park . The thermals rising off the New world car park were next level and a great way to lose sight of your glider into the clouds real quick . |
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Nov 24, 2024 8:49:47 GMT 12
Would climate be better off having concrete rds. With all roads having tarseal they would be acting like radiators Concrete is horrendous for emissions, right there with petrol. Which makes it so much fun when some urban wokie has a crack at me about farming. Interestingly few seem to know how bad concrete is. Tarseal is great for thermals, fly over spaghetti junction in Alk on a sunny day and there's no mistaking a lot of hot air is rising fast.
I'm informed, by some who should know like CZ, that NZ is not good for concrete roads as the ground moves too much, we need the more flexible tarseal.
Ground movement is not a major issue swinging the decision providing you get the sub base right. Remember concrete roads are use in cold countries where there is potential for "heave" if water gets underneath and freezes. That being said asphalt is often preferred in countries where there is icing because the heat absorption accelerates ice melt.
Concrete takes longer to place, more expensive and notably more slippery, but stronger, more durable/longer life. Emissions are a mix, high emission to produce cement, but also high emissions to produce asphalt and its binders, the latter which tend to leach over time. Aircraft runways tend to be concrete for the heavy planes, some do have ashpalt surfaces but these are typically over a concrete sub base.
|
|
|
|
Post by harrytom on Nov 24, 2024 9:07:57 GMT 12
Would climate be better off having concrete rds. With all roads having tarseal they would be acting like radiators Concrete is horrendous for emissions, right there with petrol. Which makes it so much fun when some urban wokie has a crack at me about farming. Interestingly few seem to know how bad concrete is. Tarseal is great for thermals, fly over spaghetti junction in Alk on a sunny day and there's no mistaking a lot of hot air is rising fast.
I'm informed, by some who should know like CZ, that NZ is not good for concrete roads as the ground moves too much, we need the more flexible tarseal.
As you should know.Devonport to Takapuna is a concrete rd with the tram tracks ,just been tarseled over like many AK surban streets |
|
