Printable View
There is a fuel tax rebate (20c/L ish, depending on the situation) for commercial road use of diesel. If we regard that as a rebate against the excise, which is 50c/l odd, surely that knocks nearly 40% off the contribution of trucks?Quote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
I recall, from about the same time, research from a NSW PhD(?) student that found that wear & tear was proportional to about the 5th power of the mass. Considering the assumptions that are probably made in both studies, I'd accept either, or anything in between, as an approximation.Quote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
Thanks Alex and Warb
I have added the second half of my above post - just ran out of time yesterday.
Now, stand by for incoming flack.
Article on the ABC that the Snowy 2 tunnelling machine, Florence, is finally on the move after being bogged for over a year. Flo is doing 3-6 metres per day, only 7,500 m to go.
Florence is back to the grind, but Snowy 2.0 has a long way to go - ABC News
Interesting quote from that article:
For Dennis Barnes (CEO of Snowy Hydro), the project is as viable — economically, environmentally and systemically — as ever.
“The project has a 7.4 per cent return and a $3 billion net present value on a $12 billion cost,” he said.
Those numbers really are a worry.
A return of 7.4% on the revised budget means that they anticipate an annual profit of $888 million each year. This requires that they sell an incredible amount of electricity at incredibly high prices.
If they really anticipate a return of 7.4% on the revised $12 billion budget, then it means that on the original $2 billion budget the projected return must have been 44.4%. Unbelievable. Why wasn't there a queue to do the project?
What does a $3 billion net present value on a $12 billion cost actually mean? Does it mean that they have already written off $9 billion of the latest cost projection?
I smell incompetence. I just hope that it is with the reporting journalists and not with the senior management of Snowy Hydro.
RussQuote:
Originally Posted by russ57
Apologies for not replying sooner. Currently in Norway visiting first grandchild. This is first opportunity to reply. Loy Yang stations may have different outgoing feeders, but I have no information on this.
On EVs, I have mentioned before that Norway is streets ahead of almost any other country you care to mention. No new ICEs after 2025. Incentives galore: An example is that tolls for EVs are half price. They are already everywhere. I think it just shows that with the will, there will be a way.
We visited the most northern distillery (Bivrost) today and parked our rental van in the only available parking spot. When we returned to leave, we realised we had backed up to a double charging station, which was two timber barrels on their side. Oooops! We just are not switched on to such things. Charging points are everywhere.
Regard
Paul
I've never been to Norway, but much of what I've read, and discussed with various people over the years, suggests that they have a very different outlook from much of the world. I have postulated that this is a result of the climate. It seems to me that countries with very cold climates often seem far more "community" oriented than warmer places, and I wonder if this is a direct result of that cold climate. People without shelter and food don't survive the winter, and perhaps (historically?) people who don't help others, are in turn not helped by others. The result is a culture and mindset in which everyone pulls together, and there are perhaps fewer "freeloaders" than in warmer climates. If this is the case, it would explain how schemes like the universal income are easier to implement, as people will tend to do the right thing and try to contribute as well as take. Maybe the same culture or state of mind means that implementing climate friendly solutions and schemes is easier, as outright profit and personal gain are less important than community and survival?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
WarbQuote:
Originally Posted by Warb
This is my first time in Norway so there is a huge learning curve for me too. i think you may be being overly generous towards the Norwegians as they are not necessarily more ecologically inclined than average. However, they have some distinct advantages over many other countries. Firstly, they managed their natural resources well and have wealth from those resources of which the main one was oil from the North sea. They did not give the profit away to multinational companies. Secondly, their electricity comes from initially hydro schemes and also wind. So they were not polluting much right from the get go.
My impression is that they have two grids. One in the North and the other in the South. The Southern grid is connected to Europe, supplies into that market and as a consequence is much more expensive than the Northern grid.
Where we are, in Tromsø (pronounced "Tromser," because of the "ø") we are about 350Km above the Arctic Circle. However, the climate is showing signs of warming here too. For example, the tree line is gradually going higher and this has an adverse effect, ironically to my mind, on the creatures that live there. Secondly, it rains more often instead of snowing. Nothing and nowhere is immune it would seem.
A small digression, so back to electricity in Oz.
Regards
Paul
...or not. Keen to hear more about the situation in Norway, actually. :2tsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Yairs....so is my hairline...is climate change responsible for that too? It never used to be this high.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Must have been a great experience, Paul, holding that brand new grandchild for the first time. Enjoy family ... and Norway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Definite correlation. Climate change is ubiquitous.Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
[QUOTE=FenceFurniture;2329467]...or not. Keen to hear more about the situation in Norway, actually. :2tsup:
FF
Maybe not in this thread: Don't want to offend the OP!
Perhaps when I return to Oz I will start a new thread. We'll see: No promises.
Regards
Paul
GraemeQuote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
Yes to all statements.
:)
Regards
Paul
In my experience the OP is pretty hard to offend, but I meant more about the sparks & cars situation in Norway. (happy to read a thread on your tour though)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
OK. This link may be of interest as to why Norway is so far ahead with EVs.Quote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
Norway – the EV capital of the world
and in particular:
"we have more than 3000 public charging stations, and 7753 fast chargers, all over the country. Say goodbye to range anxiety!"
All that is in quite a small country in terms of physical size, although long and slim, and a population of 5.4million.
Regards
Paul
Like many/most economists I have long admired the economic management of Norway. For a long time they have successfully placed long term national interests of the population ahead of vested interests and party bickering. And it has largely worked. The only other country on that list is Switzerland; Japan fell off 30+ years ago and has not yet refocused.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
But I actually know virtually nothing about Norway; Paul's comments catalysed me to look up some data and try and put it in perspective:
Size: 385,000 km2 - just under half the size of NSW - 801,000 km2
Length: 1,750 kms - about the same as the distance from Melbourne to Brisbane
Population: 5.4 million - about the same as Queensland
Sovereign Wealth Funds: US$1,555 billion - slightly larger than the Saudi SWF and about five times larger than the Australian and USA equivalents.
Interestingly they supposedly have the longest coastline in the world>Quote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
Yes, because of the severe indentations of the fjords.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobL
Regards
Paul
Here is a rational take on nuclear energy:
Attention Required! | Cloudflare
This is the thrust of the article:
There’s no danger of a nuclear power plant being built in Australia, but it’s banned anyway."
and
"But apart from the fact that it makes no sense, the main reason for Labor to remove the ban, you would think, is that advocating nuclear generation is the Coalition’s only energy policy; without being against the ban, which the Coalition itself imposed, it would have no policy at all and would have to think of something sensible."
In addition, it leaves open the nuclear path should the multitude of issues ever be resolved.
Regards
Paul
I just finished watching Insiders where Dan Tehan was talking up the Coalition's loss in the Dunkley by-election yesterday as "a fabulous result" for the Coalition (there was an absolutely stock standard swing against the sitting Govt of ~3.5% (expected, as usual, as is the way in by-elections) so......this might be a little way off yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
We need strong Oppositions to hold whatever flavour Govt of the day to account, but what we have now appears to be a version of AI (Artificial Idiots).
They have 3463 public charging stations, so ignoring places where you can't drive (for ease of calculation) that's one station per 111 km². Call it 100 km², and it's a 10x10km square...the longest you have to drive in this perfect grid is 28km, assuming you have to drive across 2 diagonals of 14km each.Quote:
Originally Posted by GraemeCook
Australia has a way to go yet...
There is a company in Norway that specialises in building small power plants in conjunction with the landholders. There is one these behind where our son lives. I will have a little more on this once I get back to Oz, but in the meantime here is a link.
Our partner: Smakraft AS - Climate Futures
Regards
Paul
Further to our discussion about a reactor at Jervis Bay in the late 60s:
Like Peter Dutton, John Gorton once had a nuclear plan. It didn'''t end well - ABC News
Luckily Dutton's pro-nookular arguments are likely to blow up in his face long before we ever build anything than can blow up more seriously. He clearly subscribes to the Trump model of ignoring any inconvenient facts that get in the way of his agenda. I'm glad to see that the CSIRO guys scampered into the net and volleyed his idiotic comments straight back at him.
Before seeing Dutton spouting his crap on TV, I used to think that builders were the only people who would tell a lie to your face even in the sure and certain knowledge that they'd be called out on it inside 10 minutes... "Yeah, mate, it's supposed to be like that. Nothing we can do about it now." :rolleyes:
I was reading an update on the cost blowouts, delays, etc. with Snowy 2.0 a couple of days ago - and that's mainly just digging holes !! I don't rate our chances of being able to build a nuclear reactor without having "a few bits left over" and generally stuffing it up. Given our history with large civil projects, I'd say you could take any cost or lead time quoted and at least double it.
PaulQuote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
I was also fortunate enough to visit Tromsø a few years ago... it is one of my favourite places. I was there in their summer so had endless hours of sunlight, as you do that far above the artic circle. It's on my bucket list to return to in winter when they won' get to see the sun above the horizon for six weeks.
Sunrise and sunset times in Tromso
I look forward to reading the thread on your Norway experience should you do that.
To those participating in this thread, may I once again thank you all for setting an example for how discussions with sometimes opposing points of view should be conducted. Although I rarely contribute (mainly because I usually can't do so meaningfully) I follow this thread closely. I may be none the wiser, but at least I'm better informed.
NeilQuote:
Originally Posted by NeilS
I am planning a little information on Norway in a separate thread. Won't be back as soon as planned as the aircraft was diverted from Oslo to Trondheim because bad weather had closed the airport. Currently marking time at Trondheim waiting for Oslo to open!
ETA Brisbane some time this year.
Regards
Paul
Thanks AlexQuote:
Originally Posted by AlexS
I think it is down to the considerate and respectful cooperation of everybody.
I hope there are many like you, who, while not contributing frequently (your posts anywhere are always considered), enjoy and derive information from the many contributors.
Regards
Paul
Some time ago I posted on the small Hydro Station behind where my son is living in Norway. Well during our visit I saw the station in the flesh, although only from the outside.
It turned out that the station is owned by Simon's landlord, who lives next door, in partnership with a company that specialises in these "micro" units. Bjorn, the landlord, said that he had keys to the station and he could get us in. This was not surprising as he runs the station, from his phone. However, it does not operate during the winter as the dam, which is situated 140m above in the mountain behind freezes over and any precipitation becomes snow. There is not enough water during that time.
This is the lead up towards the turbine building:
Attachment 536446
I had made the short trek and had a look around. The snow was over one meter deep around the building.
Attachment 536447 Attachment 536448 Attachment 536449Attachment 536450
Initially I had walked up there but when Bjorn went up, he travelled on this:
Attachment 536451
Just a quad bike and for summer the standard wheels will go back on.
And this is the data. Commissioned in 2016, a 140m head, 1.6MW maximum capacity (For comparison, our electric feedwater pumps at Millmerran are about 4MW and at Bayswater the electric feedwater pumps are over 9MW) and a potential of 1400l/sec. The suction pipes from the dam are underground.
Attachment 536452
When we went back, we still couldn't get access easily to the turbine house because what looks like snow, and is, becomes ice further down and not so easy to clear away. The door at the side was blocked. However, the second time I did manage to gain access to the front window to take a few pix of the Hydro Generator:
Attachment 536453 Attachment 536454 Attachment 536455 Attachment 536456Attachment 536457
The arrangement with Smalkraft is that they build the station (and the concrete walled dam) and Bjorn runs it. The monetary split is that for thirty years (this period may vary) the land owner gets 10% and the company receives 90%. After that ownership reverts 100% to the landowner. Of course, the question there revolves around what state the unit is in after this period of time.
These are the power lines (two different voltages) running nearby:
Attachment 536442
This is the connection to the grid on the lower voltage. I did not get to find out what that was:
Attachment 536443
One thing that confused me was this building coupled to a weir just downstream from the turbine house:
Attachment 536444Attachment 536445
It turned out to be nothing to do with the Hydro plant and was a fish spawning facility. It had fallen into disuse and not operated for twenty years.
Regards
Paul
Paul,
Very Interesting - keep posting.
BTW most of the attachments are not showing up. I think you may have linked them to your PC or phone and not actually uploaded them OR they are the wrong format ie not JPGs etc.
Thanks Bob.Quote:
Originally Posted by BobL
I did see that, pulled out some more hair, which I can't afford to lose, and loaded pix again. hopefully all good now.
Regards
Paul
That building is fabulous. Most countries would have built the cheapest, ugliest building possible. Not Norway!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
And even though we never get snow, I want a set of those tracks for my quad bike!!
I have mentioned so many times that every electricity source has at least one fatal flaw readers of this thread are probably rolling their eyes even as I type. So it is in Norway with their hydro. In winter water freezes and inflows to dams are restricted as the precipitation falls as snow. Consequently, there is still a balancing act to be performed.
The grid in Scandinavia is linked and also to Europe. When prices are low in Europe (Lower than in Norway) they buy in power so they can conserve their own resources. The adoption of electric power replacing traditional oil means their demand is also increasing far more than before. I saw a statistic that gave the per capita electricity consumption at twice that of the USA for example.
This link gives some insight to the way they manage the resources:
The power market - Norwegian Energy (energifaktanorge.no)
In particular there was this:
Attachment 536458
Regards
Paul
WarbQuote:
Originally Posted by Warb
I thought the tracked quad was pretty cool too. Although I didn't see it, Simon said the youngsters take those up the side of mountains. Pretty hairy stuff and not a little dangerous.
Regards
Paul
Very sensible, and exactly the approach what I'm expecting from Voldemort.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
FFQuote:
Originally Posted by FenceFurniture
Yes, it does slightly remove the gloss from the Norwegian electricity market and makes a small nonsense of their EV proliferation. Having said that, they are streets ahead of most other countries. As for Lord Voldemort, I think he would do well to swot up on some unfortunate truths before he spouts further nuclear philosophies. I note he has backed away from the SMRs so somebody must have mentioned, in passing, they are pie in the sky. He may be relying heavily on the great unwashed's lack of understanding of such matters. If he continues down the nuclear path, he will look foolish. An alternative policy is good policy, providing it is relatively sound.
Perhaps he does know the flaws of nuclear, but is trying gain an extended lease of life for fossil fuels by touting a, for the moment, non viable alternative.
Regards
Paul
11% of Norway's power comes from wind.
On a couple of ocassions we saw the wind turbines on the top of mountains. This group were at the Western end of Kvaløya at Sommarøy.
Attachment 536495
They are a little difficult to see in a small pic and even more difficult to imagine how they get them up on the mountain and dig significant footings down into the rock. I can only guess they lift drilling machines and turbine components into place using helicopters. A little more research gave up this:
Kvitfjell Raudfjell - Zephyr
Regards
Paul
:no:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
"...he will continue look foolish" :;
I was mildly amused by this sentence of advice in the link for people who want to go and look at the wind power generators.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Quote:
Pay special attention during the winter as there may be a risk of snow or ice being thrown from the turbine blades or falling from other parts of the turbine. K
I can think of much worse places to be diverted to than Trondheim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
Just two of the fun things that we came across in Trondheim are its Trampe bicycle lift - Wikipedia and its heated seating in public places. Dare to sit down on a stone or metal tubing bench in a public place in winter and you are pleasantly surprised to find your rear end warmed...:B
Yes, a smart move as those wind turbines keep turning long after the hydro turbines are frozen solid! Only under exceptional circumstances do the wind turbines get turned off when the internal blade heating fails to prevent the build up of ice layers that cause them to become unbalanced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushmiller
We also saw them on top of remote mountain ridges in various places in northern Norway. The following were somewhere between Tromsø and Honningsvåg. Not that easy to see in the photos, but for scale keep in mind that the impeller diameter is almost the size of a cricket or football oval...
BobQuote:
Originally Posted by BobL
As Neil mentioned in the post above, ice can form on the blades under certain conditions and there is a possibility you can be unlucky. As you can imagine, snow forms on house roof tops, and eventually it turns to ice. Then, at some point when thawing occurs it falls off the roof in chunks. Think 20kgs of rock at a time and contemplate the injury likely to occur if the fragile human head is immediately below.
Regards
Paul