I am a believer in climate change. I was wondering if the water levels are about to rise dramatically or if they have already started.

if water does rise there will be more space to kiteboard around the town and streets so its all good, go global warming

Dawn Patrol said...

.
The way i see it is that nuclear power is the only reasonable source of green power at the moment.

Ha, I think you are uninformed

So a few things why nuclear isn't 'green':
-You have to dig uranium out of a mine, using diesel trucks (like coal mining)
- You need to process and enrich the uranium (more diesel/coal etc)
- Then you have to get rid of poisonous/carcinogenic material that lasts for like millenia somehow (wasting environmental space, even if done 'safely')
- You have to build a huge reactor, alot of energy to build it, the break even for the energy expenditure to build it and mine/process fuel (uranium) is long too

I'm worried about what a few centimetres of ocean rise will do to reef breaks, and the fact that many species are already living on the extremes of their temperature thresholds, without the ability to relocate to different climes, they will perish (goodbye habitat, goodbye animals and plants), a large percentage of natives too

Nice stats, but you said "nuclear is the only green energy source atm"

How is nuclear waste 'green'?

How is substituting one enviromental problem caused by poor energy choices with another progress?

Will humanity continue to use poor technologies until the 'next big environmental crisis' cannot be 'cured' by humans?

Is nuclear waste is 'green' shall we bury it under you vegie patch? Or is it okay, because it will be under someone elses vegie patch (but not if your the somone else)?

How is stuff that is 10kn down radioactive?

Aus has lots of uranium, near places like kakadu, lets mine all of it, that wont have other (less currently media important) environmental isssues will it?

Saying 'nuclear has no CO2 emmissions' after you say you need to use diesel to mine it is contradictory

Nuclear power is safe, just ask the ex-residents of Chernoble (sp?)!

Clean is not mining using carbon energies to fuel machines

Do we need a solution NOW, or the right solution SOON?

What about tidal, wave, hydro, biofuels (the waste materials not the grown purposely ones) for other renewables?

So we need one 'silver bullit' technology, or would it be smarter to have a swathe?

How is solar rubbish? More solar energy falls on mine sites then is taken out it (per year)

Shall we wait for nuclear fission then?

Just posing questions.

No, exams are Wed. haha, can agree on anything!

There is radioactive ground, then there is uranium (enriched)

Tens of thousands have died as a result of Chernoble, just because only 2 died straight away, does this mean we can just pack up Sydney and leave (and pretend that everyone already affected wont have huge issues for generations)

What you exam on? Hope its related! Mines on water ecology (keep your nuclear stuff outta it!) Goodluck in exam

dism said...

What you exam on? Hope its related! Mines on water ecology (keep your nuclear stuff outta it!) Goodluck in exam

Cheers, the exam is on environmental engineering. Good luck to you also.

Yeh my point of chernynobil was that it shouldn't have happened, and it happened out of stupidity. All the other countries were warning russia a bad thing could happen out of what they were trying, and it did.

So if we want to be green and environmentally friendly, why haven't we progressed down this path?
http://www.abc.net.au/quantum/scripts98/9820/thoriumscpt.htm
Maybe not enough Mr C ash in it for the top end crowd

When people mention that "nuclear power" would be the answer to our problems,
I then mention how many power stations would Austalia need? and are you going to distribute the power?
Lets assume that each state would need at least 2 station main & backup and with 7 states (including NT) thats 14 "nuclear power" stations MINIUM.
Now the cable system for the power would need a total upgrade to handle the massive potential loads.... right?
And then say in 20-25 years time when the maintenance is perhaps not quite up to scratch (think about the condition of the roads in Australia) and run by the government? or do we privatize it? (think ABC child care)
The concept of "nuclear power" actually concerns me, not for the safety now but in the future.....
At least with wind, solar, hot rock etc all adding smaller amounts of power to the grid, would actually a much safer and reliable system for all in Australia

Why talk about nuclear power in Australia anyway? If countries like Germany and Denmark can start using solar and wind power to generate electricity then Australia should be able to do it too. Sure people talk about baseloads and how renuables can't meet them. Exactly the same argument could be put towards coal fired power stations if there were not enough of them around.

From what I understand the way we use power has peaks and troughs. So the electricity companies have be prepared for the peaks probably at 7pm and on hot days when everyone has their airconditioning on.

An alternative will be to create a system where electricty is generated by renuable sources during the day or whenever its windy. This electricity is stored in batteries or some other system such as pumping water uphill to a dam. When the electricity is needed then the energy is released.

Where will all the batteries be? Possibly electric cars that have the capacity to store electricity when there is an excess in the network, and then discharge when there is a shortage. So you could charge your car up in the early morning when everyone is asleep. If you were not using the car then it could discharge its power during the day or in the evening. You would make a profit on buying cheap electricity and selling expensive electricity.


What does climate change mean for Australia? If some form of carbon tax is introduced, climate change will make most of us poorer. The carbon traders and governments will be richer. So climate change will mean that income is redistributed.

i am all for green also,

certainly there are lots of options on the table. solar, thermal, wind and nuclear all seem to be the good options.

the nuclear debate has moved on from the dangerous super reactor which has the potential to cause so much damage.

they are now made in mini form

www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news-toshiba-micro-nuclear-12.17b.html

www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos

there is also new technology for both wind and solar which make it more worthwhile.

the video link at the top basically says that with the current governments levels of reduction we will loose the northern end of the great barrier reef, kakadu, the ski fields etc in the next 20-30 years.

i think it suggested that this outcome was the good outcome if we can achieve 550 parts but the projections are suggesting it will be more like 750 parts and therefor worse. either way the experts are saying we have gone beyond a good point now.

the "negative" experts are saying extinction is approaching (not sure i agree). there is some data to back this up though. off the top of my head i think we are currently running at 30% extinction already. that's why people are currently scouring the globe recording flora and fauna dna maps.

the ice sheets sliding into the sea is bad. off the top of my head a couple of hundred feet bad.

there are lots of positives here also

by 2010 it is rumoured that electric and hydrogen cars will be sold to the masses

a clean coal power plant is being built in qld

the building industry is completely onboard with green design. there are guidlines, laws and legislation for all forms of construction and these reg are being tightened every year.

the environment is now top of the list of public concern.

the depression we are heading into is an opportunity to reset the clocks. hopefully the next industrial age will be driven by clean power. it seems to be heading this way so i am very hopefull.

i've done my own thing to help out also.

my home doesn't require heating or cooling year round due to design.
the garden doesn't need watering
i use public transport
i use energy saving devices

AND I WINDSURF....

A mate doing a study on alternatives to coal plants told me today that Australia's uranium deposits would only last to 2030

Think of the break even, why would we bother?

Just end up something else to buy from overseas, like the rest of our imports, we already have a huge import to export ratio don't we?

a little thought on acting locally, however trivial a part it may play in the big picture. having windsurfed professionally in the '90s i know a bit about the carbon footprint of lugging that gear around and the toxicity of manufacturing and disposing of it.

cut to this year: i hadn't done much water sport at all since '97 until i had the chance to jump on a sailboard again earlier this year. enter my conundrum: i love being on the water, going fast, getting air, being in beautiful settings, and yet i know the cost of these resource-intensive pleasures.

enter kitesurfing: the gear is small, and what there is has fewer nasty resins and foams, but best of all, i don't need a car. i realise not everyone can jump on a tram to stkilda or a train to brighton or altona, but those of us who could use public transport to go kiting, and yet continue to drive, might give this some thought.

again, when faced with megalomaniacal chumps in hummers towing jetskis and trailbikes, or equally, with the carbon footprint of kitesurfers and windsurfers who constantly fly and drive around the world, then this is perhaps a drop in the ocean of desirable change, but the psychological shift to a bit of mindfulness and humility in our daily resource use will, i suspect, resonate beyond the initial changes in behaviour.

i believe that all of us in the affluent world will have to get used to less energy-intensive ways of life. whether we (especially the most affluent and energy-hungry of our species) make this transition voluntarily and soon, or whether we wait for the rude shock of peak oil and other resource limits to kick our selfish arses even harder, will be one of the most interesting and challenging choices we may ever make, individually and collectively.

see you on the water, and on the tram,

brendan

Historically global warming has led to abundance - proliferation of vegetation and animals. In a way it seems odd that we struggle to reject the gift.

H.L. Mencken: “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”... Or Tax