tobes, those renewable options are still way too uneconomical. thats the problem. nuclear is the only alternative (at this stage) for economical bulk energy that won't harm the planet. all the others will never become mainstream, way too inefficent for the cost.
here's a stat for you. a 7 gram pallet of enriched uranium generates more energy than 17,000 cubic feet of gas. i know which one is worse... do you?
Now, I'm just speaking about WA, but as far as I can tell we have no water problem...just too many people who want to have English gardens and pools.....raise the price as a start.
It is a crack up that water is more expensive in Switzerland, whose only natural resource is in fact water, than here in Australia (we have plenty..just have to pump it). Like in the UK, the Swisskis drink their water after they've flushed it down the toilet many times over. The concept of future planning is something young countries like Australie and USA are still finding hard to grapple with......wild west slash and burn attitude (changing fast though) because we have (had) the space and resources...............not.
I don't have a lawn or pool any more because I kite.
I was planning a BBQ at Altona, as a get together for F-one kiter's. The usual commercial PR fun thing. Now the free sausage sizzle will be not free but require a donation. which will go to St VdP/Salvos.
Anyone game to Helpout?
I honestly believe there will have to be a future transition in farming and water distribution and this will be painful. However if there is any way I can help raise funds for families then count me in.
recycled water = chance's are the water you drank or swam in today has been pooped and piddled out of animals thousands if not millions of times. There’s no less and no more water on earth for thousands if not maybe millions of years. Recycled waters the way to go!
salt water and excess salt from desalination = as above it all ends up back in the system , problem with recycling water is the energy needed to produce the clean water and its not a be all and end all of a system that’s sustainable .
Nuclear reactors = isn’t renewable and it leaves a legacy of toxic waste. What it can do is employ and produce nuclear industries related to refinement, mining and storage hence it’s a political economical winner. I don’t think we need it and regardless of it being cleaner than coal it still produces allot of carbon emissions because of the refining, mining and so on.
Renewable energy = be that wind, wave, thermal rocks or solar the inherit problem is base load energy needs. i.e. when you and 4 million others come home from work and put on the air con, telly and electric oven that’s base load, renewable energy stand alone cant supply this base load when called for, what can though (and this is the fyffe by nuclear proponents) is stored hydrogen energy which can be produced from water into oxygen and hydrogen through the electricity of the renewable energies aforementioned. Hence you have the base load needed and an economical industry that’s carbon neutral. Carbon trading schemes and emissions taxes will be the only way to get something like this off the ground (oh and cars running off hydrogen too would help investment opportunities)
Dry marginal land farming = hate to admit this but I don’t think its going to be viable in 15 to 20 years time. For several factors. Inputs are always going up and outputs if not going down in value don’t go up. price of meat and grains are still the same roughly as it was 15 years ago but the price of fuel, fertilizer, chemicals, transport and capital costs like machinery have almost doubled and will continue too – there is only so much efficiency farms can become until the cost squeeze eventually catch’s up.. The saying get big or get out is only relevant up to a certain size farm operation as well. Local supply and demand prices won’t be able to compete against emerging third world countries produce like china and Argentina , its not all doom and gloom as I think another factor that’s not yet apparent but will play into the environmental as well as the farming arguments will be carbon trading schemes. Marginal farm land will no doubt end up as tree's as its going to be cheaper for companies to have a negative impact on their carbon emissions by having trees and buying cheap farm land to grow deep rooted tree's.
Short term - sorry ral I have no solutions dude but hope it improves for the cockys over there!
I think Nuclear is definitely an option, you can adjust the amount of power to meet requirements whereas coal is more fixed. (You could switch one or two units off during no peak but the cost of restarting them doesn't justify it). The Alternative to this is some countries which use coal, but use hydroelectric during peak people to handle the extra load, during off peak, the use excess electricity to pump the water back up to the dam.
On the issue of the extra salt going back into the water, this can be used for salt byproducts, but even more salt is put into the water, I don't see it as a major, the polar caps are melting due to global warming anyway which is bringing more fresh water into the sea. Having seen the fish in the red sea and arabian gulf, I can tell you fish and corals are quite capable of living in these conditions, in fact, Jeddah is considered to be the best dive spot in the world, better than the great barrier reef even.
Renewable energy = be that wind, wave, thermal rocks or solar the inherit problem is base load energy needs. i.e. when you and 4 million others come home from work and put on the air con, telly and electric oven that's base load, renewable energy stand alone cant supply this base load when called for,
If every home in Australia was retro fitted with both PV systems and micro wind generators (a mini version of a wind farm turbine) then there would be no further practical use for a national grid as each home could generate its own needs. If this government had foresight it would fund a national installation program for this technology and then raise revenue by taxing people on the metered rate of consumption. This could be done via an internet uplink to a national billing department.
More environmentally friendly than burning coal, safer than nuclear, less obtrusive than huge solar plants or wind farms and with a 10 year pay back on installation, plus a further amount for future maintenance and upgrades.
Of course this would need vision and leadership, rather than adopting the ostrich position and hoping it will all go away!
. Apologies to all...just don't listen to me. 
