JoNova
A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).
Jo appreciates your support to help her keep doing what she does. This blog is funded by donations. Thanks!
Follow Jo's Tweets To report "lost" comments or defamatory and offensive remarks, email the moderators at: support.jonova AT proton.me
Statistics
Thank the Lord.
60
Yes, we have a lot to thank Lord Monckton for …
111
From
Mann Bleats Again
(Only follow this link if you have a strong stomach haven’t eaten recently, and have no coffee in hand)
I wouldn’t trust Mann’s dendrochronology of Monckton’s heritage any more than I would his Yamal Hockey Stick.
(Other than staying there for a few weeks during an election campaign Monckton has no connection with Edinburgh.)
50
Morning All.
One of my favourites – and a reminder on what we could look forward to if we’re not careful…
If the ABC was Relevant (Part 44)
(The Government Buyer)
[Scene: A car yard. BRYAN is perusing the stock. He is approached by JOHN]
John: Morning! Looking for a new car?
Bryan: Nope. Prime Minister, actually.
John: You’re the third one this morning. Anything in mind?
Bryan: You know – nothing fancy – reliable, economical family model. Something to get the country from A to B.
John: You mean like a Howard?
Bryan: Yeah – a little Johnny. Nothing flash, does the job. Low maintenance, economical, sensible. Runs for years, no troubles.
John: So – you used to have one?
Bryan: Yeah. About 10 years. Great little model – don’t know why I got rid of him – biggest mistake I’ve ever made…
John: What happened?
Bryan: Traded him in for a Kevin ’07.
John: Big mistake…
Bryan: Lot of people bought it. Good political mileage.
John: How was the Kevin ’07?
Bryan: Came with a $900 factory rebate – that was good.
John: Anything else?
Bryan: Not much. Sounded nice but nothing under the bonnet. It was a lemon.
John: Didn’t stick around for long did it?
Bryan: Nah – had a factory recall. Shipped overseas and was never seen again.
John: What was the problem?
Bryan: Lots. But the final straw was the navigation system. Plug it in and it automatically loses its way.
John: Whatcha got now?
Bryan: It’s a Gillard-Brown.
John: The hybrid?
Bryan: Yeah. The Eco-drive system – not a good idea. An engine that can’t deliver hooked up to a transmission stuck in permanent reverse…
John: Green paintwork with a red interior. And steering that always lurches to the left for no apparent reason – that’s the one?
Bryan: The Fustercluck model.
John: They all were, Bryan. Not the vehicle of choice for the road to recovery. But did they ever finish up fixing the navigation system?
Bryan: Made it worse. Turn it on and it does a press release, heads off in all directions and goes nowhere.
John: So that’s why you’re here?
Bryan: That’s right. I’m stuck with a government that’s wasteful, expensive, dysfunctional and past its use by date. I don’t suppose you’ve heard of the “Cash for Clunkers” scheme?
John: Join the queue brother.
Cheers,
Speedy
371
Crikey… I wasn’t expecting a birthday pressie from you, Jo.
Relax … it’s not until the Tuesday. 🙂
30
Damn computer! See comment #26. And happy birthday, by the way.
10
I’ve made a new diagram showing power consumption for nearly all of Australia, not including Western Australia and The Northern territory, so this is all the Eastern States, Tasmania and South Australia. Here’s the link to the image.
Load Curve Australian Power Consumption
This is what is referred to as a Load Curve. The curve shows actual power consumption (vertical scale here indicated in MegaWatts-MW) versus time across the whole day, starting at midnight and going through the day back to Midnight, and I’ve shown similar curves here at Joanne’s site a few times before.
This is a fairly typical Load Curve for the Summer Months, showing that one large hump (Peak) around the mid to late afternoon. I have coloured in the curve to indicate generation sources.
I have indicated a line horizontally across the image at around the 20MW level, and coloured the two areas above and below the line.
That Blue area is indicated as Peak Power Consumption, and that’s not my just saying that, as the Australian Energy Regulator indicates the Peak Power Consumption period as being from 7AM until 10PM as indicated at this link in the text immediately above the State wholesale electricity cost structures, this Month being for June just passed.
So, the Blue area is Peak Power, and the pink area is the Base Load, the power that must be in place for 24 hours of every day, year round ….. every day.
Note how actual consumption never dips below 18,000MW, and that is at around 2 to 4 AM, while nearly all of us are all tucked up and sound asleep.
Okay then, Hydro power is part of this graph and is being consumed both in that pink area below the line and in the blue area above the line. This Hydro power comes in at around 6% to 8% of all that area, pink and blue.
The Pink area is basically all coal fired power with some Natural gas Fired Power as well.
The Blue area is, in the main Natural Gas Fired power and other plants, and why Natural Gas? Because that can be fired up relatively quickly and then deliver its power at short notice, as required, either scheduled or unscheduled, when the grid controllers get on the phone, and tell them that they need their power now. Some of that blue area is also coal fired power, and that is what is referred to as running (or rolling, or spinning) Reserve, plants that are burning coal, and rotating, but not connected to the grid until their power is required.
Now, note that thin line yellow along the bottom.
That is Wind Power, and it comes in at around 800MW on average, some days higher and some days lower, but that 800MW is the year round average. That gives Wind Power around 2.8 to 3.2% of the total. That’s the total power delivered from the 28 Wind Plants in this same coverage area, around 1,200 of those huge towers.
So then, how much of all this power is from rooftop solar panels that is returned to the grids across Australia.
There is around 1200MW of panels on roofs across this area now.
The amount of power that all these panels return to the grid I have also indicated on this graph. It’s so small, that it does not need its own colour.
That power returned to Australian grids comes in at around the equivalent of 50MW to 70MW tops.
Now, see that actual curve. Starting at around 7AM, follow that black line to 6PM. The thickness of that line is the power rooftop panels return to the grid.
Wile this is for power returned to the grid, the remainder of that power being generated by rooftop panels is being consumed by those homes with the panels on their roofs. That comes in at around 100MW or around 1% of that blue area only, and even then, only from 7AM until 6PM.
The amount of power all those panels have returned to the grids for consumption is equal to the thickness of that line indicating the curve.
It is so minute, that grid controllers are not even relying on it when it comes to how much electricity is actually being needed at any one point in time.
So, here we have 3% of power coming from Wind, 1% from rooftop solar, (virtually) nothing at all from current commercial solar power plants and around 8% from Hydro.
There are some other boutique plants that provide small amounts of power to the grids, and the remainder comes from CO2 emitting power plants, in all, 85% of all power being consumed in Australia.
Australians need to understand what this Load Curve actually means, and only then will they realise just how important Coal Fired Power really is.
Tony.
351
We should be closing down or renovating old dirty design generators and installing new efficient ones, preferably wit the capacity to trap the CO2 to use as feedstock for algal biofuel plants.
Note, unlike Carbon Capture and Storage you don’t need to go the energetically expensive step of compressing the gas to liquid so there is very little cost, especially if you consider you would make money from the biofuel.
Still I would love fusion or thorium liquid salt reactors to eventually replace coal since the mining of the latter is problematic.
71
Actually Rob JM, we need the CO2 in the atmosphere. The CO2 levels are dangerously LOW and in geological terms, the lowest they have been for a very long time. We are at 400 ppm. At 180 ppm it is game over … for everything.
242
I’m all for 800ppm oF CO2 in the atmosphere, however we should view it as a valuable resource and not spread it around to the rest of the world for free.
Harnessing CO2 for algal biofuels also provides us with oil independence. NZ has been turning coal into oil for decades, Algal biofuels do the same thing with an energy boosting photosynthetic step in between and most importantly doesn’t require arable land!
62
We got down to 180ppm in the last glaciation. I think the correct ‘game over’ figure is 150ppm.
Each glaciation takes us lower and as the next glaciation is about due we should indeed be building up atmospheric co2. Future generations will almost certainly need to find additional ways to add co2 to the atmosphere to help get them through the next glaciation.
00
We “should” be highly involved in projects like ITER not squandering resources on meaningless bird shredding eco-towers.
Call out the primitivists for what they really are.
71
Most Sydney-siders think that is all of Australia.
131
Rereke Whakaaro:
I lived in Sydney for 25 years but escaped. The rest of NSW thinks that those in Sydney believe that NSW stands for Newcastle, Sydney and Wollongong. Most Sydney siders couldn’t see anything wrong with that, and as for other States – they are Terra Incognita to many. They do know that Qld is to the north and Victoria is to the south. SA is sort of SW.
You can win a bet with them asking whether Adelaide or Wollongong is closer to the latitude of Sydney. Most place it about the Victorian border if not further south.
40
Sydney 33.86°S
Adelaide 34.92°S
Wollongong 34.43°S
So Wollongong is closer to Sydney’s latitude. So most people would win the bet.
But they certainly wouldn’t realise that it was so close to being equal.
10
In a previous “life” I was part of a team pitching to an American company that was looking to put a research lab somewhere in the South Pacific. We were up against an Australian competitor.
The Australians got the morning slot, and so went first. They started by putting up a map of Australia (all of it) and overlaid it with a map of the US to demonstrate that both countries were roughly the same size (as if that mattered in regard to what was being proposed).
Somehow, during lunch, my boss got hold of the map of Australia. So when we resumed, after lunch, he started in exactly the same way as the Australians, but instead of overlaying a map of the US, he overlaid a map of New Zealand on the eastern seaboard. He then made the comment that, “New Zealand is roughly the same size as the habitable part of Australia”.
Such is the inter-country rivalry.
60
Sort of thought for the day kind of post: was pointed out over at WUWT; how much synthetic PLASTIC the UK protestors needed to survive while protesting. The word hypocrites pops up.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/23/friday-funny-fracking-protestors-and-their-petro-sourced-belongings/#more-92281
101
Yeh, well they’re English,’init, know wot I mean? Posh pillocks, wiv rocks in’ere ‘eds, en plums in’ere gobs, en wot sits on’ere brains. Twerps!
81
Hey Mate! We don’t all fit that description, don’t you know?! I’m afraid we do breed some prize twerps but we are not unique in that ability…I’ve met a fair few in Oz as it happens…
50
Both lots belong to the Greens.
20
An inside view of this weeks electioneering.
Cut, Cut, Cut.
50
They were discovered 100 years ago and suspected to be meteorite, and modern technology finally confirms this.
Now, how to explain how the Egyptians were fashioning one of the hardest known materials 2000 years before the iron age.
August 19, 2013
Far Out: Ancient Egyptian Jewelry Came from Outer Space
30
Handjive,
It is not that difficult. The iron would have already been formed by natural forces. The technological advancement of the “Iron Age” was to learn how to create the metal from the base ore. Once you have the metal (which they did from the meteorite) then the rest is simply time and patience. The shaping would have been done using water and rocks. It would have been nothing for the artisans to be working on something like this for weeks if not months. It was not really a “while you wait” type of society.
41
A copper wire and a bow drill.
http://www.ancientbead.com/Ancient_bead_production.html
00
The answer is easy.
10
Good one! You have to admit, the show does spin some pretty convincing stories. I wonder who pays the professors that are on there. Seems like a fun job–creating scenarios that can never be verified!
20
Sheri:
those professors come free. They’re practicing for jobs on the IPCC. (–creating scenarios that can never be verified!)
10
Interesting suggestions.
What is needed is the evidence they were doing advanced blacksmithing. Quote:
“This shows that these people, at this early age, were capable of blacksmithing,” Rehren said.
“It shows a pretty advanced skill with this difficult material.”
“Unlike softer and more pliable metals like gold and copper, working with solid iron required the invention of blacksmithing, which involves repeatedly heating metals to red-hot temperatures and hammering them into shape.”
“It’s a much more elaborate operation and one that we assumed was only invented and developed in the Iron Age, which started maybe 3,000 years ago — not 5,000 years ago,” Rehren said.”
.
Of course, the underlying point here as well is that humanity might be much older than we know, and, consequently, survived many of the NATURAL climactic changes the alarmist global warming bedwetters like to compare to.
.
Not to detract from the mystery of the beads!
00
Jo,
Looks like Hansen has “found” the missing Hot Spot (apparently it moves around a lot). Willis has much fun with it here.
91
One of the factors that contributed to the triumph of climate science alarmism is the debilitated state of philosophy in general and the philosophy of science in particular. The most important philosopher of science in modern times is Karl Popper and he has become practically invisible in the academic literature. It is possible to spend a career in philosophy without getting a straight feed on his ideas. Here is a series of guides to his major books, designed to provide a summary of the leading ideas. You can read about 10% of the books on the Amazon site, so try before you buy!
30
Popper? His brilliant idea is that you cannot know that anything is true. All you can do is show that something is likely false. Hence is prescription for knowing is lurching from something that is probably false to something else that is probably false until you know everything that is false.
However, by his conjecture (not theory), you cannot know that it is true that you know everything that is false. Somehow that is supposed to constitute knowledge. I do agree that knowing what NOT to do is helpful but if you don’t know what TO do, you are at dead zero and I do mean dead.
It is not falsifiability that makes a conjecture a scientific hypothesis it is being able to test it. However, knowledge is built upon knowing what is true – that which actually the case in reality.
Is it true that we know how to build a bridge over a river that is safe to cross? Yes because most of us cross bridges every day. Oh bridges do collapse from time to time but that is because the government is responsible for maintaining them. Responsible Government is a contradiction in terms. The bottom line is, we know how to do not by knowing what not to do but by knowing HOW to do it. That is a difference that is hugely and vitally important.
Popper published his poppycock to sell books, talks, and seminars and not to give instructions as to how humans can learn to know anything at all useful. What we need to know about reality is what is life giving, supporting, and enhancing. His method only tells us how to avoid killing our selves by actually killing ourselves. Then it is too late for us to use Popper “Knowledge”.
43
The moment you start speaking about “truth” you have clearly left the realms of science!
Do you know any better ways than emperical falsification for overcoming the inherent problem of of human confirmation bias?
The Popper scientific method is the best way of obtaining objective results.
It defines science from pseudoscience!
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html
In my experience philosophy is as slippery as statistics!
31
You don’t have to know everything to know something otherwise you cannot know anything. The fact of the existence of our technological civilization is testament to the fact that we know many things that are true or we could not have made it. If you don’t know that, I can’t help you. You are seriously delusional and way beyond what I can do for you or say to you.
You can know that a statement is true but it is true in the relevant context. For example, I know that it is true that you are taller than one inch and shorter than one hundred feet. The context is the real world of real humans and not some imaginary universe in which things can become what they are not without cause.
The problem with believers that truth and science don’t mix is they believe they should be able to make any random out of context statement and that statement must be found to be true for all contexts, all situations, for all times. Such a statement is never true. However, if you make your statements conform to the facts as known, it damn well is true and that IS Science.
You can know trillions of things that are not true and you will know nothing of what is or can be nor will you be able to make things that work according to your chosen purpose. However, if you know the nature of the relevant material and the nature of the cause and effect linkages among those things, you can make something that works AND you know that it works and why. All of that knowledge is true – meaning in accordance with what actually is.
32
I suppose what I’m trying to get across is that in my view Science should be defined as a methodology, and a scientist as a person who incorporates that methodology into their investigations. The outcome of scientific investigations is knowledge, not truth. Knowledge can always be improved upon or even falsified if new evidence comes to hand. Truth on the other hand is unchanging, and therefore should be kept out of science along with belief.
A scientist must remain sceptical of all theories, that doesn’t mean they cant agree with a theory if all the evidence supports is.
As for technological inovation, that just natural selection at work!
Now let’s not start a discussion on the matrix or wave particle duality.
10
Agreed, science is a method more than it is a thing and truth is unchanging. However, there is the fantasy of absolute truth which applies only to tautologies and truth in a well specified context. You don’t appear to agree that the second kind of truth exists.
Consider the statement 2 + 2 = X. In the context of radix 10 X = 4. In the context of radix 3 X = 111. 2 + 2 = 2 + 2 in any radix > 2 but cannot even exist in radix 2. The context of a statement is as or more important than the statement itself. A statement can be true in one context but false in another.
Another example: Newtons laws of motion in the context of human scaled dimensions, masses, speeds, and precision cannot be falsified. It has been sufficient to build the industrial revolution and to get man to the moon and back. In that context it is true. You must change the context to extremes before you can discover small discrepancies. The context makes all the difference.
This is what I mean when I say ALL knowledge is contextual. Make your statement, stay within its proper context, and it will always be true IN THAT CONTEXT. Go outside of that context and all bets are off. A scientific statement of truth then is a statement that specifies its proper context and does not extend beyond it.
Anything else is at best a hypothesis or conjecture. Even worse, it could be nothing but a fantasy, wish, or wild ass guess to which true or false cannot be applied. They do not have enough relationship to reality to be false.
Obviously then, the identification of proper context is critical. It is not simply any random collection of ideas, fantasies, wishes, and old wives tales. It must be something very specific. It is an integration of a succession of ever more wide knowledge contexts from the most primitive to the most advanced that is without contradiction. It is this integration from the ground up without contradiction that makes the context proper and any statement holding to that context true.
This presents the kernel of how science can be based upon that which is true. It relegates “falsification” to simply one minor step of the scientific process and not its core. How to accomplish it takes far more words than I can present here.
11
You need to experience a better class of philosophy.
Objectivity is possible to man. There is a way to eliminate confirmation bias. It is non trivial but not impossible. If you are really interested, I will explain it.
31
BMJ 2003; 327 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7429.1459 (Published 18 December 2003)
Abstract
Objectives To determine whether parachutes are effective in preventing major trauma related to gravitational challenge.
Design Systematic review of randomised controlled trials.
Data sources: Medline, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases; appropriate internet sites and citation lists.
Study selection: Studies showing the effects of using a parachute during free fall.
Main outcome measure Death or major trauma, defined as an injury severity score > 15.
Results We were unable to identify any randomised controlled trials of parachute intervention.
Conclusions As with many interventions intended to prevent ill health, the effectiveness of parachutes has not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using randomised controlled trials. Advocates of evidence based medicine have criticised the adoption of interventions evaluated by using only observational data. We think that everyone might benefit if the most radical protagonists of evidence based medicine organised and participated in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the parachute.
50
Very amusing. Evidence of humour in a serious journal , last seen circa 2003.
Showing how research may become hidebound by process at the expense of its purpose.
30
Well you’re not wrong about that!
00
TonyfromOz –
will look at your diagram. could u unravel the following for me? is there any truth in it? btw got around to watching The Cars that Ate China (ABC), which was excellent:
22 Aug: ABC 7.30 Report: The hot topic of climate change
Climate Change Minister, MARK BUTLER:Renewable energy increased its share of the national electricity market by 25 per cent. There was a very significant reduction in brown coal in particular as a contribution…
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3831873.htm
10
pat,
that’s another of the ploys used by the Renewables, and the way that the truth can be hidden in plain sight.
They use wind and solar when it suits them, as shown in this case here, to say that there has been a 25% increase in the share of power for renewables. Now, in this case, this 25% increase only includes wind and solar, and can you see how that figure of 25% is accentuated, making it sound like quite a large increase, and green apologists will say that ….. “hey it’s a true figure.”
And, of course, it is.
The increase in those two renewables (wind and solar) share of the market has increased from 2.8% to around 3.5%, so, as you can see, it is a 25% increase, but from a tiny, tiny, all but insignificant base.
Now note that the word used was RENEWABLES, so, when it suits them, like whenever they need to boost that percentage for renewables to make it look larger, they always add in the totals for Hydro.
Now, Hydro is around 8% of the total power, (from every source) so, now add on the solar and wind part (3.5%) so add that to Hydro and you now get almost 12% for ALL renewables.
Hydro has not increased its power delivery, so the actual increase has been from 10.8% to 11.5% (the old and new total renewable figures) so the real increase is only 6%, which is nowhere near his quoted 25%.
Can you see how the figures are manipulated and the largest number outcome (that 25% increase) is always used to make it look like renewables really are having an impact.
It’s the same as the green dream of 20% from renewables by 2020, a total that will NEVER, (and how strongly can I say that) be achieved, because while we have 8% from Hydro that means we now need a further 12%+ (because as the total percentage increases, then the Hydro part of that percentage decreases)
Of course, the figures that they use will be the Nameplate Capacity, and if they construct wind and solar plants like there is no tomorrow, they may just achieve that 20% NAMEPLATE.
However, when you take actual power delivered, then, and here I will just use Wind Power alone for the purpose of the exercise.
Currently, there is 2660MW Nameplate for Wind supplying on average 800MW of power for actual consumption.
So, their dream to achieve 20% from renewables means they will need a NEW construction total of 12,000MW of Wind Nameplate, which is 3.4 times what we already have now, (around 1200) so now we need an extra 4,800 wind towers, around 16 new Wind Plants, between now and 2020, 7 years, or almost three new plants a year, not small plants but huge plants of 300towers each, and that’s not just planned, but actually up and running by that time, so most of them would need to be at least at the proposal stage by right now, and that is not happening.
And hey, who cares, you still will only have power for around 7 hours a day, on average.
It just will not happen.
Tony.
190
I think you will find the greens would prefer to increase the renewable energy production to 20% by decreasing our power consumption by 50%.
40
Rob JM, you say here:
I wonder if these Green idiots realise that means closing half of everything down, rail, hospitals, work places, shops, malls, and the list is just too long to mention, and mainly consists of closing down completely one in two buildings taller than two stories across the whole of Australia.
Until people actually realise that, then stupidity like this will always gain traction.
You tell me how that will ever happen.
Tony.
100
I think they are looking to north korea for inspiration!
80
Tony, aside from the rhetoric that argues the mythology for “sustainable renewable energy”, which is a load of crock like other politically correct-created mythologies, capital investments in the private sector calculate a rate of return on investment (ROI) as a comparative means of evaluating alternative avenues in which to borrow/invest capital. In the public sector, that is often conspicuously ignored, with the NBN being the classic case of deliberately (fraudulently) avoiding a business case to justify the billions of expenditure extracted from the perennially abused taxpayer.
Is it any different with the claimed “renewable” energy where public funds have been allocated to pink bats, solar panels, etc, all in the name of “energy saving devices to help save the planet”, courtesy of a Green-Labor alliance? For the pivate sector purveyors of bird/bat chompers in receipt of massive subsidies from the public sector, the ROI is very healthy, thank you. For the public sector, it’s both dream on and pay up, except, perhaps, if you are a recipient of a dis-proportionate heavily subsidised payment for power “returned” to the grid compared to what you pay to take from the grid.
We have (had) public sector investment in power generation over many decades, e.g. the Snowy Mountain scheme, Tas Hydro and numerous coal fired power generation, pre-privatisation. The ROI has obviously been significant, and on-going. If we equally consider the flow-on benefits and multiplier effect for the nation, without low cost reliable coal fired energy, which has literally built Australia, we would be a stagnant backwater on the globe.
That can never be justifiably claimed, even hypothetically, for “renewables”, into the future. Unless of course we all accede to the gradual shutting down of industrial development as the Green totalitarians wish for. Meanwhile, the “progressives” are sitting warm and/or cool in their coal grid powered homes, content in their smugness of having made others pay for their personal brainwashed foray into a religious ideology called CAGW.
My question is: can you direct us to any studies been done to calculate the ROI for all past public investment in energy generation facilities vs what is being allocated to wind and solar power? Both as a separate factors of public and private investment? And from the perpectives of capital and operating costs for all means of energy supply to, and actually used in, the grid.
Perhaps that would help throw another metaphorical “spanner in the turbine” and a “perpetual cloud over the photovoltaic cells”, also illustrating the amount of capital sent out of Australia to suppliers of those particular technologies, and the on-going subsidies for the piffling amounts of energy generated NOT used, but paid for big time?
51
And therein lies the distinction between relative and absolute risk. The former is relied upon most heavily by the epidemiologists of the Ministry of We Know Best to peddle their version of fear and catastrophism in order to implement policy and justify intervention.
30
Something interesting to the mechanically minded…
The “MyT Engine” is a new design of ICE invented 12 years ago by American Raphial Morgado. It fits a large displacement engine into a smaller space and it uses non-reciprocating pistons that run inside a toroidal chamber. You partly see how it works and hear his comments about it in this video.
Someone from the Australian DoD recently compared it to other engines in the ADF fleet and recommended the engine be tested further as a replacement for current engines.
There’s also some videos floating about with more technicals and a 3D animation. Really fascinating that someone imagined an engine working this way.
According to some sources a Russian company has bought the rights to it.
In one video he talks about the possibility of cars with this engine getting 150mpg, which is 1.6L/100km. Because cars have an air intake filter, but a car retrofitted with this new engine would be putting out far less exhaust than current technology, the irony is that we could be using old cars to clean the air of cities.
There is one video of a dynamometer run but difficult to see what’s going on. There’s also a video of a car with this engine running on compressed air at some fairly decent speeds. Still no video of a car actually working with this engine on petrol fuel, so perhaps some healthy scepticism is still deserved.
I just found the piston timing mechanism amazing.
61
I will be impressed when I can buy a car with one of those engines in it, fuel it with used peanut oil or somesuch, and get a reliable 100+ miles per gallon from it for 100,000+ miles. Until then, it is an unrealized future based upon a lot of pretty pictures and marketing bravado (aka BS).
The idea is right up there with zero point energy and cold fusion. There is a bunch of slippery talk, easily faked videos, and questionable untestable demos but no delivery of actual usable product that one can buy in the market place.
Talk is cheap. Patents can be issued based only upon a convincing theoretical discussion plus filing and other legal fees. Delivery to the market something that matches the talk is where the challenge becomes very difficult. In the vernacular: that is where the rubber meets the road: no traction – no product – no sale.
PS: I have over ten patents to my name. One product based upon on my first patent has been on the market for over 40 years and is still being sold. The rest of the patents are on a deliverable technology that has been sold and delivered to three customers. One is currently using it for educational and research purposes in the Physics Department of a private east coast (US) college.
30
In an attempt to back up my skepticism about the MyT engine, researched the issue and found the following:
Automobile highway energy use proportions from: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml
Engine Losses: 65% to 69%
Thermal loss 56% to 60%
Combustion 3%
Friction 3%
Parasitic Losses: 3% to 4%
Water Pump, alternator, etc.
Drive train Losses: 5% to 7%
Power to Wheels: 20% to 26%
Wind resistance: 13% to 16%
Rolling resistance: 6% to 8%
Braking 2%
Now for sake of argument, let us say that the MyT engine has no loses other than Thermal, Drive train, and Wind, rolling, and braking losses.
You can’t do with out wheels, drive train, and an alternator. That leaves only the thermal loss to work with.
Please note, no matter what kind of internal combustion engine you have, it is a heat engine. Useful work can be extracted from heat only if there is a temperature difference through which the heat fluid can transition. The greater the temperature difference, the greater amount of energy that can be extracted. This is basic thermodynamics and there is no heat engine technology that can get around the laws of thermodynamics. Magic and wishful thinking is inoperative in this universe.
For convenience I will refer to Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_efficiency
“Main article: Carnot’s theorem (thermodynamics)
The second law of thermodynamics puts a fundamental limit on the thermal efficiency of all heat engines. Even an ideal, frictionless engine can’t convert anywhere near 100% of its input heat into work. The limiting factors are the temperature at which the heat enters the engine, T_H\,, and the temperature of the environment into which the engine exhausts its waste heat, T_C\,, measured in an absolute scale, such as the Kelvin or Rankine scale. From Carnot’s theorem, for any engine working between these two temperatures:[4]”
(Translating an image into text)
Efficiency is less than or equal to (1 – High Temperature/Low Temperature) in degrees Kelvin (absolute).
For example, if an automobile engine burns gasoline at a temperature of 1089K and the ambient temperature is 294K, then its maximum possible efficiency is 73%.
A realizable gasoline engine is less than half that efficient and a Diesel engine is only 35% or so more efficient than a gasoline engine or about 50%.
Even if the MyT engine extracted all the energy it could out of the fuel (it can’t), it still couldn’t reach the stated the over 3X normal 150mpg figure if used in a standard automobile. The Three Laws of Thermodynamics prohibits it and those are laws that cannot be broken by heat engines.
60
See! I TOLD YOU it would be “interesting to the mechanically minded…” 🙂
Sorry if I’ve missed it, but I don’t see where you established what Carnot efficiency the engine would have to have to meet a 100mpg fuel efficiency, after all those forms of energy loss are subtracted.
Also, the claimed power to weight ratio is 20:1, which means it would have applications in aircraft even if the 100+mpg efficiency doesn’t materialise for cars.
And that timing mechanism…. isn’t it magical?
Okay, perhaps it’s not clear if this engine belongs on the road or in the Guggenheim.
10
Power and weight are different units so what does a power to weight ratio of 20:1 mean?
Is there some thing wrong with gas turbines for aircraft? They seem awfully popular.
00
The Carnot Efficiency is the maximum efficiency of conversion of heat energy to kinetic energy of ANY heat engine no matter how it is constructed. Kinetic energy is what makes the car move! The MyT engine is not and cannot be an exception. It is a fundamental limitation of a heat engine.
From the presenting post: “In one video he talks about the possibility of cars with this engine getting 150mpg”
The 150Mpg figure meant in a normal automobile or small truck if it meant anything at all. Thus my analysis fits the statement to the letter. There is no way that there can be a heat engine sufficiently efficient to get 150mpg. It simply takes too much energy to move the auto and to over come the massive losses. You cannot overcome the limitations of the Three Laws of Thermodynamics by the use of a heat engine.
00
You’re not very good at explaining it, but I think I see what you’re trying to say. The missing link was relating the fuel economy requirement to the energy efficiency limit. Basically, because it’s a straight engine swap, the only way a 3x improvement in fuel economy can happen is through the engine using 3x less fuel for the same work extracted. This immediately translates to a nearly 3x less chemical energy input for the same work extracted by the engine. That’s the bit I didn’t see the first time.
No question about the Carnot limit, obviously, and those temperatures sound about right.
Because the current engine efficiency is ~30% and the hard limit is 73% then even a doubling of fuel economy is prohibitively difficult, and the 3x or 5x impossible.
Okay got it.
Amazing what you find when you Google “MyT Engine hoax” or “MyT engine scam”. 🙁
I just found some other old forum pages where the other problems highlighted are that lubrication is difficult, and there will be uneven wear on the inside of the toroid due to compression and combustion acting centrifugally.
It was nice to have hope for 24 hours.
Heyyyy guyyys! I just heard about this really great solar power plant in Spain, the nameplate capacity is huuuuge…. 😉
00
Ah yes, The Spanish Solar Plant.
Tony.
00
At least you got it. Good for you! Perhaps I do need to work on my explanation. I will think about it the next time I want to shoot down an impossible dream.
Hope you didn’t invest in the MyT engine technology. Not only does it have a Thermodynamic limit that makes it certain that it can’t deliver to the marketing BS, it also has a mechanical limit. The limit is set by the large circular rotating seal at the bottom of the combustion chamber. That seal must withstand high temperatures and very high pressures for thousands of hours of operation.
If the seal fails, the whole engine fails and, for a car, it is a walk home event. If the engine is used for an airplane engine, you had better hope for a soft landing or you might end up being scraped into a body bag for delivery to the morgue. A design with a one point total failure mode is not a robust design no matter what other qualities it has.
10
A number of new family cars available in Europe now can get close to 90 mpg on the government’s so called ‘extra urban’ cycle. One of those cars even has a 2.2 lite engine, though most use smaller engines usually below 1.6 litres. Those same engines are expected to be getting a further 15% to 20% improvement in the next generation in 4 years time.
The Mazda 6 has a 2.2 litre diesel engine and used to get 60 something mpg with the newest version just out getting 78.5 mpg. A Renault Megane Sport (Tourer) get’s 88 mpg and another car I looked at, a Volvo get’s just over 90mpg, both have engines about 1.59 litres, both diesel. There are others.
Most of my driving is done on motorways and country roads and so I usually get the ‘extra urban’ figure quoted and sometimes better. With careful driving a hundred miles per gallon may be acheivable with the latest family cars, but not if you live in a large town or city.
I fully expect to see 100 mpg family cars available in 4 years time.
00
I am curious–most of the “high mileage” cars are hybrids and the mpg are not representative of the gas/diesel usage, but rather the electric just upping the “mileage” for the car. Often they seem little more fuel efficient than any gas car when you exceed the electric distance (that would be the “extra urban” cycle?).
The diesel ones get high mileage, but how much of it is “hypermiling”?
I’m just curious how the high mileage is achieved. Many of the cars seem to have very limited usage. And to me, a hybrid gets the mileage of the gasoline usage, not the electric and gasoline combined. I know at one time, there was talk of making car manufacturers label the electric range and the mpg when you switch to gas. I don’t think that really happened, though.”
00
The cars mentioned are not hybrids. Although the 2.2 litre diesel Mazda 6 has a regenerative braking arrangement, storing energy from braking as electric power which it can then re-use, not unlike current formula one cars.
But Volkswagen and BMW are working on hybrids that get several hundred miles per gallon which have even been test driven by some members of the press. I think the realistic future for cars is in the storage and re-use of the braking energy to extend mpg.
00
Andrew,
Haven’t read that one yet.
But for some history you might try a read on the chapter “Lost causes, oddballs and unconventional ehgines” in
Herschel Smith’s “A History of Aircraft Piston Engines”.
00
There’s a book on my shelf describing about 300 unconventional engine types. It was written by the late Dr Ing. Stephan Zima (obituary in German). AFAICT, the book has only been published in German as Ungewöhnliche Motoren (2nd ed published 2005). The merits and flaws of the engine configurations are discussed in terms of thermodynamics, mechanics and practicality. It’s an extensive collection, with 390 references cited.
The design discussed seems to have roots going back to the early 20th century; if not earlier; being an arrangement of sequential, free-piston engines.
I did a little R&D for the Orbital Engine Company in 78/79 with vacation experience related to disc valve operation (timing and airflow) in Sarich’s orbital engine. The major issue I recognize is the need for sliding, flat seals for the connection to the common shaft in the “Morgado” design. Also, in common with side-ported (typically 2-stroke) engines, the piston rings move over the inlet ports, increasing the rate of wear, especially when the ring is under pressure and being forced to seal the (moving) combustion chamber under power or compression.
The Morgado engine’s dwell at TDC isn’t a benefit for spark-ignition engines because it increases the likelihood of knock where the unignited fuel-air mixture (end gas) spontaneously ignites, producing a collision of multiple, high-speed flame-fronts that resonate in the chamber, stripping the protective, insulating boundary layer of air from the surfaces. That exposes the metal to direct flame temperatures. It burns through like an oxy-torch.
When knock is detected in a modern, conventional, reciprocating engine, delaying ignition protects the engine due to the geometric, sinusoidal volumetric rate of expansion of combustion chamber size. The spark-ignited flame front grows (at a rate of up to 80 metres/second) into a more-rapidly expanding volume, reducing peak pressures in the “end-gas”. So the flame front burns progressively through all the mixture without the ringing knock that would strip the protective boundary layer.
The Beck motor of 1909 had a toroidal/annular “cylinder” within which moved a total of 8 pistons. The later Esselbe motor (1912) (scroll to fig 3 here) had a different arrangement for power transfer which was mechanically inefficient. History repeats and 30 to 50 years later, the inventions appeared again in “technology demonstrators” as “novel”.
The fundamental problem of a high-density power output from such an engine is the temperatures that will be encountered during operation. Sustained operation near maximum power is likely to melt the thing unless a great deal of power is diverted to cooling. As others have already identified, any heat engine is going to be limited by Carnot efficiency and that means that a lot of heat will be gained by the engine during operation; which has to be removed just as quickly to ensure the engine’s survival.
Piston engines in the 1930’s and 1940’s approached their peak power density (to volume) in aircraft. Liquid-cooled engines had higher specific outputs because they were able to move the heat well away from the engine itself, moving it to large-area radiators.
A gas turbine is able to achieve greater power density because its operation is dominated by moving the working fluid through the engine with all of it being the coolant. In bypass turbines, even more coolant is moved. It’s an air-cooled engine.
30
Almost every argument in the alarmists’ armoury either does not stand up to scrutiny, is complete BS, or is the conclusion drawn from manipulated data.
Yet, there is one which gives their theory a little credibility and it continues to annoy me, as I have yet to see a properly researched sceptical document on this, and that is the ice extent in late mid summer in the Arctic Ocean.
Well, we all know the sea extent of the Antarctic is increasing and that is partial compensation.
I think the current situation in the Arctic is probably a combination of increasing levels of Northern Hemisphere soot and changing salinity levels, the latter being the more important factor.
The Arctic Ocean is underlaid by complex layers of salinity, with the least saline lying at the top – if it wasn’t for this and normal ocean salinity was present there would be a lot less ice.
I think what we are witnessing in the Arctic is a disturbance in the upper salinity levels making them more saline and therefore less prone to freezing. This could be caused by:
1. Changes in fresh water inflow from the region’s five mighty rivers.
2. Changes in ocean currents flowing into the Arctic.
3. Hydrothermal activity from the two big areas of spreading plates beneath the Arctic Ocean.
4. Increased precipitation and/or the effects of abnormal storms.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
51
Oops, I meant to say decreased precipitation.
10
Well, number 1 didn’t happen. Ironically, because the environmentalists thought it would cause either global warming or cooling. No one could decide which, so the project was abandoned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_river_reversal
00
How about conclusion drawn from deliberate avoidance of history? A quick read of this may have you asking why the Arctic has been so stable in recent years.
“a period when mean summer temperatures were 0.7 to 1.4 degrees Celsius higher than those of the 20th century”
The satellite averages of Arctic sea ice include a period of recovery fron the 70’s ice age scare.
It looks as if the Arctic minimum could have been reached this year already.
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi1_ice_area.png
Oh and which way is that recent trend from 2007 on going?
22
I have been in the Arctic during the spring and summer melt, this is what I saw. The first thing to go is the snow cover, the land based melt flows across the underlying frozen ground and onto the sea ice. This and the sea ice snow melt ends up covering the sea ice with layer of fresh water which absorbs sunlight and melts the ice from above. While the Arctic is a virtual desert in the winter any increase in snowfall will result in more water covering the sea ice, and any increase in dirty snow (soot/dust) will accelerate the spring melt. I am not suggesting that salinity is not important, only that what is happening on top also has to be considered. Interestingly seal holes suck the fresh water down adding heat and disrupting salinity below.
10
There is also the Atlantic Gulf Stream to be considered. I have not been following it closely, but I have seen a number of (reasonably reputable) articles claiming that the Gulf Stream has shifted northwards. If that is true, then there could be some melt on the underside of the sea ice. I am not sure how you would quantify it though.
00
Anthony Watts kindly published my Friday funny on WUWT 🙂
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/23/friday-funny-fracking-protestors-and-their-petro-sourced-belongings/
In the old days hippies and back to nature types actually made an effort to interact with nature. Nowdays its all petro-chemical synthetic comforts.
131
TonyfromOz –
thanx for the clear explanation. u should send it to the producer of the 7.30 Report! there’s no chance, with the low standard of journalism in the MSM today, that people like Butler will ever be challenged.
30
Pat,
Could try the ABC Factcheck unit.
They ask for facts to check.
Saw Krudd waffling on about computers in schools the other day.
Factcheck: June 2, 2013 – BYO laptop to school as funds dry up
However the funding agreement ends on June 30, creating headaches for schools when ageing computers need replacement.
.
Jonova factchecking done for free!
10
The whole scam will be gone in a decade or so but in the meantime, and with one eye nervously on the exit door, the scammers are now putting their best efforts into a blow off phase. Listen carefully around you now, and for the next few years, and you’ll hear the inch wise retractions which somehow don’t count as full-blooded recantations.
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/the-great-global-warming-con/
Pointman
100
If and when the scam does go,is that the end of this blog? I’d hope not..
20
I don’t think so. When you look at the parlous state of Science education in the West, we are likely to get an infinite number of scams coming down the pike. It is just too easy, for those in the know, to create a scare and then make a fortune selling tinfoil hats.
I just wish Jo could find a better class of troll. The current batch are just not up to par.
20
I thought I’d heard it all until somebody posted this link!
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/near-term-extinctionists-believe-the-world-is-going-to-end-very-soon
30
It always amazes me that the individuals in these protests have NO understanding whatsoever of the environmental damage renewables do. I honestly think they believe we “farm” turbines–plant seeds and turbines sprout. Ask them about the copper mines, the iron mines, the manufacturing plants and ask them how we build turbines without using billions of barrels of oil and you get that “deer in the headlights” stare. They are completely clueless. Worse, their clueless nature will bring extreme pain and suffering to their children and grandchildren should they succeed. It’s not the “Storms of our grandchildren” that will be the problem–its the tears of our grandchildren living in a world that lacks power and has limited resources. One hopes we can stop the nonsense, but if not, one hopes someone let’s these kids know exactly who was responsible for their plight. It wasn’t the Wall Street Bankers and the evil capitalists.
100
Unbelievable, I can’t understand the mentality behind this hogwash. I could hardly force myself to read it.
40
After the first couple of paragraphs I couldn’t.
30
The Beyond Zero Carbon mob are having a public meeting here locally next week. I won’t be going, partly because they get violent when reality is raised.
I point out yet again, one still night brings a “100% renewables system” to a stop. We don’t have enough hydro to keep the power flowing, so the grid stops. Next morning neither the Turbines nor the PV cells can deliver any electricity because they MUST be connected to the grid to work.
The turbines ALL have brakes and automatic shut down when the connection is not there. When they start up they HAVE to draw power from the grid to point the nacelle in the right direction and to synchronise the supply.
PV cells also MUST be connected to synchronise supply voltage. Ask anybody with solar installed what happens when there is an interruption to supply. They lose power just like everybody else.
The only way these “renewables” could be used is for there to be enough normal generation to keep the grid going. As TonyfromOz keeps repeating, that generating capacity has to be very near 100% of demand anyway, so why build unreliable ‘add-ons’ when all they do is make things more difficult and more expensive. We should concentrate on improving conventional generation methods which will reduce emissions far more than wind turbines ever will. IF CO2 is a problem, let the Greens push for nuclear.
The idea that we will ever get rid of CO2 forming energy methods entirely is beyond stupidity, and belongs in the realms of fantasy.
40
Agreed. People on other pages I frequent have been pushing the Beyond Zero plan as the next best thing since sliced bread,and when I post the Rebuttal to the plan available at http://attachment.fbsbx.com/file_download.php?id=520729771338842&eid=ASscueEjdJEYrzlIWn2yizN5Lx-olxfFnaB6Mk1RU_TSVBFFf4XpOL5cZMItkHYSmjU&inline=1&ext=1377427977&hash=ASu6abxgR4hrBYss it really annoys them.
10
Link doesn’t seem to be working
00
Is this the one??
http://www.energyinachangingclimate.info/zca2020_critique.pdf
00
Thanks Heywood. I have already seen that piece by Tony Lang mincing the the first BZE plan. I reveal nothing in saying that BZE don’t send him a Christmas card.
Apparently they have taken some of the criticism on board and the latest (? I don’t bother to keep up with their waffle) plan and added 20% ‘biofuel’ to their plan in case the wind doesn’t blow as hard as they hope. This involved the left over straw from the wheat crop being anaerobically pyrolized to produce a “bio-fuel” which would be transported to gas turbines to cover any shortfall in electricity from wind, solar and hydro.
Such biofuel would be foul smelling, corrosive and of unknown toxicity. It would have to be transported in stainless steel rail tankers and you can imagine the drama if there was a derailment. The yield of the muck would be low and production concentrated in 2 months after harvest, hence horrendous capital cost. But that last has never stopped any of the green proposals being put up. They believe that somewhere the government has a big bag of money, which never runs out and is available to waste on their fantasies.
The whole thing is a farce, but that has never stopped any wishful thinking from the green lobby. Like Drax in the UK which has converted half its units (3) to burn wood chip from the USA. Adding in the harvesting, transport and stockpiling elements means this route will generate 20% EXTRA CO2 but be rewarded with roughly a billion pounds bonuses for being ‘green’.
NOTE: that in the best (sic) green practice no increase in hydro (the only practical storage method for excess electricity) is contemplated.
00
Graeme No.3,
that’s Peter Lang, and not me. No relation, but of similar opinions.
Tony.
10
So why are you not called TonfromOz?
00
Oops. Sorry.
Tony, is there any way we can get in touch? e.g via Jo? Possible piece on wind power, unusual angle.
00
OK something has been bugging me for a while, and I don’t think it gets enough attention. Hopefully with Labor likely to get the boot in September it becomes less of an issue, but here goes…
The NBN has been sold to us as this you-beaut must-have leap into the intarweb future. The price tag is quoted at different levels, but it is at least $40 billion, and supposedly around $46 billion. Simple rule of thumb:
Aussie population: appeox. 23 million
NBN cost: approx. $46 billion
Cost per man/woman/child: $2,000
So what do you get for your $2k? Well firstly you get to lose your copper connection (and cable, assuming you have it from another provider) … that’s non-negotiable, so you are forced onto fibre, like it or not, at your expense. Right now (on copper) I have ADSL2+ which has a theoretical speed of 24mbps (mega-bits per sec) but realistically the typical decent connection gets about half that. That costs me $69.95 per month with a 200GB limit from iiNet, which is fairly typical (naked ADSL2+ plan):
http://www.iinet.net.au/internet/broadband/naked-dsl/
When I get forced to fibre eventually (a couple years away at this stage), here’s an idea of what I get for the same price:
https://www.iinet.net.au/internet/broadband/nbn/plans
Basically I can get (set the sliders) a 200GB plan at equivalent speeds 25/5 (note the asterisk) for $64.95. Wooot! A $5 per month saving… shouldn’t take long to repay that $2,000 I invested … oh wait, make that $4,000 for me and my wife.
So basically we are paying $2,000 per man/woman/shild to get the “option” of higher internet speeds, but at higher cost. You want that max 100Mbps speed? That’ll be $79.95 per month thanks.
What makes me laugh is some of the “standard” plans you see quoted:
http://whistleout.com.au/Broadband/National-Broadband-Network-NBN-100Mbps-Plans
Note the 20-40-50 GB plans? How long will it take you to “clock” such a plan? Well let’s break it down simply:
40GB = 40,000 megabytes
4,000 megabytes * 8 = 320,000 megabits (8 bits per byte if memory serves)
So at 100Mbps speed (yes, bear with me on speed till later)
320,000 / 100 = 3,200 seconds = 53.333 minutes = under an hour
Even if you assume the NBN running a tad slowly you can blow a 40GB cap in a couple hours easily. When you consider people may look to “back-up”* movies and the like at 1080p when they get the NBN, it serves to remember that the typical 1080p movie rip would be circa 4-6GB.
What are we spending all this money for again? Can someone please assplain it to me slowly, cos I am a tech thicko when it comes to hardware… I must be missing something obvious…
* clearly no one downloads movies illegaly … I mean that would be like, illegal.
100
Movies? That’s funny.
Peak bitrate of a typical 720p HD movie in high quality H.264 codec? 4.7Mbps.
Average bitrate over the whole 1.4GB movie: just 2.2Mbps.
So even 3Mbps would be enough for streaming HD movies with just a 3 second buffer. Double that for Full HD 1080i and its still possible with current ADSL2, as I have seen on Vimeo. (Here is a superb example.) At 730kBps it completely maxes out my puny broadband connection, but clearly it works and the quality is no worse than a BluRay disc.
As for file downloads… they are basically unattended and so they don’t matter, they can take as long as they need. If you need it by a particular time and you know how large it will be, you just plan ahead and start the download in advance of when you need it. Just like we always did with dial-up.
I have never found a legitimate use for the 5.75Mbps line speed that I currently get on “24Mbps” ADSL2+.
The LTE wireless internet that NBNCo is already installing in some regional areas permits up to 10Mbps download speeds, bandwidth guaranteed regardless of other customers’ usage.
How on earth the 30+ billion dollar expense of putting fibre all the way to the premises for 80% of homes in the country can be justified on actual legitimate market demand I do not know.
The lower ping time on fibre versus wireless is the only advantage, and even then it’s typically the difference between a 20ms ping and a 60ms ping, which is still okay for realtime shoot-em-up gaming.
Except that’s all possible with current last-mile technology, Ruddy me lad.
Cisco reckoned download traffic in Australia was increasing by 50% per year. That’s a reason for the private network operators to spend *their* money to build more capacity, not go asking for a taxpayer handout.
In the best case a more free market in subscription-based and on-demand video may become possible if it’s not crippled by DRM, O/S restrictions, and Telstra, but note it is all the extra backhaul capacity which achieves this NOT the new fibre into the house.
In the median case we are just talking bread and circuses and jobs for mates in Telstra and some corporate welfare for the Telcos.
At worst… well there are possible sinister motives for the government to lure all Aussie internet traffic into the NBN’s 121 points of interconnect containing routers installed and operated by a government enterprise.
Everything the NBN is planned to deliver could be done without taxpayer expense.
80
And the laughable part is seeing what you can get in the US with Google Fibre, which will roll out based on demand:
https://fiber.google.com/about/
To quote from them:
Yeah that’s gigabit … not lousy NBN 100 megabit. What if you don’t want to pay monthly fees? They have that too:
And yet we are forced to operate in a closed system through the tiny orifice that is Telstra/NBNco, and we have to pay for the whole system up front.
40
Wow, all that for free, and the only thing you have to do in return is let Google spy on all your internet traffic on behalf of the NSA and corporate america! What a bargain? Not.
No such thing as a free lunch.
10
LOL if they are spying on me they are wasting a lot of resources.
40
Now this comes out … I haven’t watched the ad, but the story tells it all:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/rudds-team-resorts-to-spoof-to-cast-a-wider-net-20130826-2sma2.html
Rudd is desperate if he thinks this kind of rubbish wins people over on hid gold-plated NBN brain-gas-emission.
00
I think you will find the latest estimates for the nbn (Not Bloody Needed) is closer to $60 BILLION – $70 BILLION dollars….
31
BD,
I dont know anyone who illegally downloads movies i do however know a lot of people that share their movies over the internet 🙂
I here a lot of complaints about the Liberal plan but i suspect the complaints come from morons that have no idea what they are talking about.
The biggest problem (1 of 2) people have with Internet is capacity, take me for example i put up with 1MB from Telstra for two years even though i complained on a monthly basis (read rang Philippines)once my contract was up i rang the complaints department to give them a gob full before i switched providers and they fixed my internet now i get 14Mb.
Just to repeat that Telstra complaints department fixed my internet!!!!!!
It was simply capacity so now some other poor bastard has crappy slow internet 🙁
Both Lab/Green and Lib plans will fix this issue as they will both run fibre from the switching centres to the local exchange.
The second problem is the copper cable in both quality and distance from the local exchange, my copper cable is in good nick (25Db above S/N) and i am about a kilometer from the exchange which is why i now get 14/15Mb a sec. Problem is copper is not designed to carry ADSL frequencies therefore it has a high attenuation rate over a distance (longer the cable higher the attenuation) and if the pit fills with water when it rains and water gets in the cable through the rat chewed holes you get a shitty speed.
Therefore if you run the fibre out from the local exchange to a “node in the street” you will A) Shorter the copper cable run and B) Most likely remove the older copper runs with fibre and in the end increase both quality and speed for all users. If you halved the length of my copper cable i would get near 25Mb per second.
When you consider the majority of NBN costing is in pulling up copper cable and running fibre to every home………..its a no brainer whos plan is better is it not?
Cheers
22
HA i got a thumbs down dont suppose you want to debate me on this issue or are you more than happy just to sit there pullin yer pud?
11
My whole argument was not one of better tech, both parties offer that, it was that you really don’t get anything for the upfront cost. All you get is an option of higher speeds at much higher cost per month.
I didn’t thumbs you down BTW… I rarely use them.
00
Bulldust –
u may recall i mentioned long ago that an ex-military friend told me the following is why we have to have the NBN. i think it’s the most shocking, unnecessary waste of money in the middlle of a GFC, not to mention during a CAGW spending spree:
14 June: The Conversation: In the light of Prism, does the NBN enable systematic surveillance by friend or foe?
by David Glance, Director, Centre for Software Practice at University of Western Australia
***Of course, no one would accuse the Government of constructing the NBN in order to implement total surveillance of the nation. (pat – I would)
However, it is clear that the capability is there should it wish to do so. In fact, in a document produced by network equipment manufacturer Alcatel-Lucent on the security of the NBN, it discusses these very points. The document considers the security-based responsibilities of Government including managing information sensitive to national security; managing personal information on nearly every resident in Australia and; Supporting Law Enforcement agencies.
The document then outlines the convenience of the NBN in providing interception on behalf of network service providers (NSPs):
“NBN will also have an opportunity to provide universal standard lawful interception capabilities on behalf on NSPs (who would otherwise be obliged to each develop and deploy a solution). This will lower the barriers of entry for NSPs, and in turn, this should result in lower costs to the consumer. This might be some way off but with NBN it becomes a real possibility and even likelihood.”
So it is possible that centralised interception of communications could have been considered in the design of the NBN and is certainly a core capability of its centralised architecture…
http://theconversation.com/in-the-light-of-prism-does-the-nbn-enable-systematic-surveillance-by-friend-or-foe-15188
Alcatel-Lucent: Security on the NBN: Perspectives
http://pdf.aigroup.asn.au/sector/ict/ICT_SECURITY_Alcatel_Lucent_NBNSec_LowRes.pdf
60
It’s easy to imagine uses for the NBN. It would generate quite a lot of data traffic if everyone in the country made a phone call at the same time, wouldn’t it?
Read this, then remember who gives MIT the majority of its funding, and then realise the “future” is now. These “phones could serve you better”! Yes that’s true too.
Is it merely a co-incidence that President Carter’s foreign policy advisor predicted universal surveillance back in 1982, or that it’s just co-incidence that he also became Obama’s foreign policy advisor? This is the kind of guy he is:
The only unsupported assumption one has to make here for the argument to work is that the easiest way to predict the future is to control it.
As to the dual-use of surveillance systems it is probably enough to note that Wolfgang Schmidt, an ex member of the East German Stasi, has described the NSA PRISM system as “a dream come true“. The leaks by Edward Snowden this year have been simply the latest reminder in a string of warning signs that the spy grid “foreseen” by Brzezinsky has already been deployed in the USA, the UK, and most likely here in Australia too, since they are all part of the “Five Eyes” alliance.
Does anyone recall the Australian “Liberal Party” objecting to the rollout of this civil surveillance system?
People don’t want to believe this sort of stuff is real. They would rather not think about it. In a way it is psychologically useful to ignore or laugh at anything adverse which you cannot control. But there is another option. We should use this election to get some more people who aren’t (yet) entirely bought and paid for into parliament while we still have something resembling democracy.
Please tell as many Australians as you can to vote below the line in the Senate for minor parties and independents, ensuring to number every box. Our official government media channel is already trash-talking our fair and robust election system and front-running for electronic voting machines as a solution, a path which is more open to fraud than at present. The size of the Senate ballot paper may look daunting but it is absurdly easy to deal with compared to the long term alternative.
30
One wonders what The Sex Party’s position is on this issue … I mean they would have a lot of positions, yes?
50
Positions on everything. Policies
Studying though you may find is worse than the Greens on heat.
30
Position on science:
Why would they have that so up front in their short About Us blurb ?
Plenty of Tax Payer funded positions to carry on in University lifestyles.
20
Was that joke psychologically useful for you?
Some amount of “Anti-X” lobbying is perhaps inevitable for the Senate since it doesn’t introduce new legislation, it just blocks bills occasionally. The reactionary parties are mostly a waste of time because they will have poorly thought-out policies on everything bar their special interest, plus they will support any bill outside their special topic. The Sex Party is surely a joke too, they are basically a None of The Above option. My only logic behind voting for minor parties is that representatives chosen by a random sampling would not be supportive of recent government encroachments, whereas members of the major parties are screened and supervised more closely to ensure they are… heheh… a Team Player.
There is also the prospect that… shock horror… the carbon tax isn’t the most important item to determine your vote.
Figuring out which of these clowns to promote in the Senate is tricky. My probable strategy is to pick the order of my top 7, bottom 3, and anyone not on that list will be randomly ordered somewhere in the middle. That’s because there are some parties I trust less than a random stranger. I’ll have 82 boxes to number but for something we only do once every 3 years it’s not a big deal.
Perhaps every vote is a vote for the Fog Party? 🙂
(Yes I found that psychologically useful.)
20
83 ! I hope they’re providing chairs & refreshments in those booths.
30
Some very interesting articles about this despicable obama character…..
Obama’s Secret $8 Billion Bribe To the Muslim Brotherhood
http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas-secret-8-billion-bribe-to-the-muslim-brotherhood/
Confirmed: Obama’s Brother In Bed With Terrorists
http://shoebat.com/2013/05/28/confirmed-barack-obamas-brother-in-bed-with-man-wanted-by-international-criminal-court-icc-for-crimes-against-humanity/
20
I note that the encryption method used by the NBN to ostensibly protect privacy is relatively weak, even by today’s standards. It’s akin to that of WPA2 used in most new wireless access points. Physically “tapping” into a connection, fibre or copper, isn’t an issue for governments and their operators. Nor for anybody willing to deck out their white van in NBN colours to appear to be doing maintenance on NBN fibre.
The multi-drop architecture chosen to deploy NBN to most neighbourhoods makes is trivial to intercept fibre signal at any other premises served by the same fibre. Encryption is necessary to at least offer some barrier to stop neighbours inadvertantly snooping on Internet traffic. It won’t prevent people deliberately imposing traffic on a neighbour’s account that may be unlawful. (WiFi access points, especially those with default/weak passwords, are often “hacked”.)
00
Is this Aussie voting system really so wonderful when it has animals voting and takes
four pages of comic and a bitch slapping Koala to explain ?
I’m evious from a ‘first-past-the-post’ , if less violent electoral tradition.
110
Even Mugabe might now balk at the Koala’s election strategy after the …peace and tranquility that characterised his recent elections
90
I would prefer optional fractional preferential.
You can vote just 1 vote in your electorate, but if you think your candidate might not get in, you can have further votes, but they are only worth 1/n 1st preference votes. Surely this would be pretty simple to do.
The “above the line” senate vote could work the same way, with only a partial vote being transferred to another column, but the whole vote applying within that column.
10
Don’t forget the dead people voting as well……
50
And all those voting for their, as yet unborn children & grandchildren.
50
btw meant to add i consider the surveillance has more to do with commercial/industrial espionage/sabotage than with fake terrorism. apart from the “insiders” in the Bloomberg article, just think of all the private contractors with security clearances! dismantle it all:
15 June: Bloomberg: Michael Riley: U.S. Agencies Said to Swap Data With Thousands of Firms
Thousands of technology, finance and manufacturing companies are working closely with U.S. national security agencies, providing sensitive information and in return receiving benefits that include access to classified intelligence, four people familiar with the process said…
Makers of hardware and software, banks, Internet security providers, satellite telecommunications companies and many other companies also participate in the government programs. In some cases, the information gathered may be used not just to defend the nation but to help infiltrate computers of its adversaries…
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-14/u-s-agencies-said-to-swap-data-with-thousands-of-firms.html
11 June: Reuters: Government reviews security damage from NSA disclosures
Director of National Intelligence James Clapper sent a message on Monday to intelligence community workers re-emphasizing the need to safeguard sensitive data and reassuring private contractors they are “an integral part of our workforce and are critical to our national security efforts.”
As of October 1, 2012, about 1.4 million people hold “top secret” security clearances, Clapper’s office says. Nearly 800,000 government employees had “top secret” clearances…
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/11/us-usa-security-idUSBRE95910O20130611
10
Of course there is always the argument put forth below regarding Big Brother Surveillance……
When governments use terrorism laws to silence journalists, anti-terrorism has run its course
http://www.infowars.com/when-governments-use-terrorism-laws-to-silence-journalists-anti-terrorism-has-run-its-course/
00
Joe V –
this is usually a tactic to disadvantage someone or other, but i don’t have any interest in trying to work it out!
18 Aug: Age: Tim Colebatch: Metre-long ballot paper means voters will need to read the fine print
Victorian voters will face a nightmare ballot paper a metre long and in very small print for the Senate on September 7 – requiring voters to be given sheet magnifiers so they can read it.
A record 96 candidates from 39 groups plus independents have nominated for the Senate contest – up from 60 candidates and 22 groups in 2010…
Each column will be just two centimetre wide – as wide as a thumbnail.
Each booth will be equipped with sheet magnifiers so voters can read the names on the ballot paper. The sheet is like a plastic lens that voters can move over the paper to magnify the print…
Many of the 39 groups on the Victorian paper have emerged only recently, amid rumours of wealthy outsiders offering to pay the nomination costs for new parties.
They include groups named after their policies, such as the Stop CSG (coal seam gas) party, Stop the Greens, Animal Justice, Smokers’ Rights, Australian Motoring Enthusiasts and the Stable Population party…
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/metrelong-ballot-paper-means-voters-will-need-to-read-the-fine-print-20130817-2s3yw.html
madness.
30
Ingenious, actually. Divide and conquer.
10
Don’t let your Senate fall prey to vultures…….
Last week more than 40 parties lodged their Senate ”group voting tickets” with the Australian Electoral Commission. Like native bird populations during a drought, these parties disappear in between elections only to magically appear at an election to funnel votes to the party lucky enough to benefit from back-room preference deals.
Now, if you would please tell me where your Senate above-the-line preferences go, I will be far more comfortable. But, be honest – you haven’t a clue.
Senate ballot papers are more than a metre long in some states. A record number of voters are set to put their vote ”above the line”, and then they won’t have preferences; other parties will determine them for them.
This is where the fun starts. Let’s start with Clive Palmer. Clive has billions of dollars worth of coal assets and a nickel refinery near Townsville. It is perfectly logical then that he has preferenced the Greens; a party that wants to phase out coalmining and shut down Clive’s nickel refinery.
Advertisement
Indeed, Clive’s preferences are a wild ride. In Queensland, if you vote for Clive Palmer, your votes go to Family First, then to the Socialists, then to the Greens, Fishing and Lifestyle, Katter, the LNP, One Nation, Democrats and finally to the Australian Christians, presumably to ask forgiveness.
Who knew Clive had such a fondness for unreconstructed socialists? They are his second preference. He wants to be PM; perhaps he will be the Hugo Chavez of the South Seas. It is not just Queensland though. Clive is preferencing the Greens ahead of the major parties, and ahead of many minor parties, in all states. What a paradox? Clive’s entry may protect the balance of power of the Greens, perhaps one billionaire the Greens will learn to love.
The Katter party, which ostensibly is opposed to everything Green, is preferencing the Greens ahead of the Liberals in the ACT, and ahead of Nick Xenophon in South Australia. Bob Katter may be instrumental in helping the Greens keep the balance of power by helping a Green senator to be elected in the ACT.
Bob has also done a deal with the Labor Party in Queensland. Bob represents a conservative electorate where more than 60 per cent of voters preferred the LNP to Labor at the last election. Bob has been preparing the ground. He needs Labor’s preferences, and he needs the money of the trade unions. He has been voting accordingly.
This year Bob voted more with Labor in Parliament than with the Coalition. He supported right of union entry laws and the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, and opposed attempts to impose the same fines and penalties on union officials that are imposed on company directors who do the wrong thing. He failed to turn up to a vote of no confidence in the government.
Bob is now a member of the Green-Labor-Independent government, and Clive has lodged his application. The rainbow coalition continues through the back-room deals of preferences, against the interests of the people they represent.
Haven’t we had enough of this? The past three years show what a disaster it can be when minor parties and independents run things. Minority government is an experiment that has failed, but it will continue in a different form if people go shopping in the Senate. And, the Senate ballot paper does look like a shopping list. People like to go shopping. They like fishing, so they vote for the fishing party. Their garden is green, and they like their garden, so they vote Green.
The problem is that once you number ”1” above the line, what happens next remains a mystery to most. That vote for Clive Palmer may elect a Green and a vote for Bob Katter may elect Labor.
This is not democracy, it is the selection of a parliament by deals, not by votes.
Don Chipp once said the Senate was there to ”keep the bastards honest”. I think it is a little simpler this time; we just need to know which bastard their bastard is passing your vote to.
http://senatorjoyce.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ff2ebaedf0d3569f441cfef14&id=e84763a25c&e=3aa9b80edf
10
A vote for Katter or Palmer is like a lottery.
You could win a million or get Christine Milne, Sarah Hanson-Young or ALP.
This is not an option in Queensland, both these big hatted, big gutted guys have lost the plot.
10
Pat,
If I recall correctly the voting sheet in the US election of 1972 was about the size of a full centre page foldout of a broadsheet newspaper.
If Victoria can’t handle thiers ???
10
Is it true, if you just put just one vote, above the line and it doesn’t win, the big parties get to pick over & horse trade Your vote amongst themselves, like dingos squabbling over a carcase, turning Your vote into a mere commodity, rather than any sort of contract with You ?
Whereas not voting would at least deprive the system of such false currency. Ooohhh, its all beginning to resembe Carbon Trading.
150
Joe
I’m going to go through my preferred senate candidates and parties, then pick the one that matches the preference deal I would do.
The horsetrading occcurs before voting, not after. After the votes are all counted, the candidate who is coming last is eliminated, and the preferences from that candidates voting card (which you can nominate) are distributed amongst the remaining candidates. At this stage, the candidate who is running last gets eliminated, preferences are distributed, and the cycle continues until the senate seats are allocated.
You don’t have to vote “above the line” although it is a lot easier to do so. You just need to vote each individual candidate (all of them) in order of preference. Slow but it takes the power away from the party hacks.
Cheers,
Speedy
90
Is this just a sales pitch for MoneyWeek, an investment magazine that’s been going since 2000 with a circulation of just 50,000, or is it at least latching onto a few home truths about the Great British economy, with which readers here will not be unfamiliar from their appreciation of markets globally ?
The End of Britain
100
Yes.
10
Thanks MV. That’ll teach me to ask double barrelled questions.
First time I’ve seen these economic considerations promoted like this from a GB£ perspective though, to add to the perilous position of the now USless $ and the zombie €uro.
20
What about considering the Liberal Democrats this election. A lot of what is in their policy agenda resonates with me.
http://ldp.org.au/
I certainly like their views on small government, freedom of choice and free markets.
Sometimes they are so pro individual choice that they are a bit confronting! Take assisted suicide for instance. I think it can be hard to tell the difference from assisted murder, and I don’t want to provide a defense to people who might try that!
30
Peter C I am lead to believe that the senate ticket has them in the number 1 position on the page so they will end up with a lot of accidental votes in their favour.. I will have to validate that tho 🙂
10
Their pro choice of allowing people to carry concealed weapons for self defence is taking things a little too far!
I also believe in the government having a role in providing essential services and regulating the markets/banks.
Still at least they seem internally consistent!
10
Quite. Clearly, they should just allow themselves to be beaten up, permanently crippled or killed.
10
I believe that the LDP supports the policies of “free trade” & “legalized cannabis”……
10
___
Link to concise article (4 pages incl. 8 graphs) on natural decadal & multidecadal solar terrestrial sun climate attractors.
_
These results are *robust* even if the detail in the solar time series is thrown away by converting to simple “low” (-1) & “high” (+1) values.
_
The time for solar-terrestrial-climate obfuscation by darkly ignorant &/or deceptive solar & climate “experts” has passed. Please: Stand up to them firmly now.
40
Happy Birthday Bernd! I’ll blow the froth off a coldie for you on Tuesday. Suggest you have one yourself…
Cheers,
Speedy
20
Hello good Novarians, just asking for advice on what site to use to link photos to, Photobucket, Flickr etc, any ideas experiences would be welcome, thanks 🙂
10
I use ImageShack, but not very often. I haven’t had any issues, and cannot comment on any of the others.
20
Thanks Andy, I might just use trial and error.
FWIW I was called a “Novarian” by a local warmist and found it amusing but flattering also.
Kind of sounds a bit sci fi ish as well “Live long and emit”
50
I hope you all liked the image I linked. 🙂
20
Is that Michael or Blackbladder4th in the picture?
10
Their son, or daughter..
20
I like it. Has a good ring to it.
40
Come to think of it it sounds a bit ‘cult’ like…. lol.
40
I preferred Jonovians myself. It’s like Novocastrians but more respectable. ]:->
70
rip alp (Australian LIARS PARTY).
Can’t wait to vote early this week !
Some latest stories worth a read re the federal election…..
Rudd’s goose is cooked:-
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/rudds_goose_is_cooked/
Beenleigh small business owner has sweet revenge on sour Labor Government and ‘blow-in’ Peter Beattie:-
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/beenleigh-small-business-owner-has-sweet-revenge-on-sour-labor-government-and-8216blowin8217-peter-beattie/comments-fnihsrf2-1226702347292
Oh and yet ANOTHER poll suggests that Chairman rudd will lose his own seat!
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/abbott_will_be_pm_poll_lead_grows/
20
Angry,
I visit my mum in Beenleigh and interesting to find most in the area are very anti Beattie and Rudd. Said to a few shop keepers they where lucky with having an ex state premier running in the federal election for them, well the responses weren’t printable. Seems the larger older sections of the community haven’t forgotten Peter big mouth at all.
Peter Beattie is about as popular as Peter Slipper where I come from.
Mum, also reckons the getting rid of the CO2 tax is the best thing since sliced bread, and will not vote for the ALP ever again. She’s hated Gillard but absolutely gets into a furry when Rudd is on the TV, and quickly changes channel. Refuses to listen to Beattie or Rudd.
Calls them bare faced liars. She’s one year short of 9 decades and I think she’s definitely right.
So Beattie is a no show for sure in Queensland.
Just need people to understand that the RET etc has to go as well as the CO2 Tax.
40
Good post Dave.
Peter BEATUP ruined Queensland and then took off to the US to hide out at.
Now he has returned and has the gall to expect Qld voters to support him.
I DON’T THINK SO !@#$%^
50
Angry
My version
“Bandaids” Beattie.
Never fixed anything IMO, just stuck a plaster over it.
And they all lifted – ask Anna
40
anna BLIGHT…..
41
“the RET etc has to go as well as the CO2 Tax”
Unfortunately, persuading the Liberals will take some doing. 🙁
They MUST dump Greg Hunt as environment minister… maybe Barnaby?
And hire Bob Carter as climate advisor. 🙂
81
AndyG55,
Thumbs up on Hunt.
Greg Hunt and Malcolm Turnbull must be dumped.
The 1st will be a definite.
The 2nd maybe be a chance.
Barnaby will be around as long as Bob Katter.
Bob Carter would be an ideal choice.
31
.
Interestingly, the person in the Liberal Party most likely to be rolled after the election, is Tony Abbott. The Libs are just as divided between “left” and “right”, as Labor, it’s just that they have had the good sense to bury their party divisions until after the election.
Once the election is over, the real battle for control will begin. The public face of the Wets (Left) are Graham Turnbull, and Greg Hunt, and the public face of the Dries (Right) are Joe Hockey and Arthur Sinodinis. Expect one of these four to probably be PM within 12 months of the election, probably sooner. Timing will depend on the diminishing possibility of a double dissolution.
Tony Abbott is from neither faction, so, like Rudd, is simply a temporary figurehead for an electioneering “united front” facade. Ditto Julie Bishop. Both are expendable, and will be expended.
33
MV,
I gave a thumbs up because I’m not sure what will happen, and you may well be right, but this is my scenario:
* Tony Abbott if he wins will move to get rid of the CO2 Tax very quickly
* It will get passed if he has a majority in the Reps.
* It will be rejected by the senate (Greens and ALP)
* Tony Abbott will put it through until a Dissolution is required.
* He will do this ASAP, and none of the LIB wets or dries will be brave enough to challenge (because they’ve shown their bravery is lacking in the last 3 years).
*The ALP will be in a mess and Christine will also not want an early dissolution of the senate, but it will be too late for them both.
* The dissolution will occur and all the wets, ALP and Greens will be annihilated.
* The Abbott crew will get rid of the wets (especially Hunt) and move to a removal of the RET also.
Now I’ll play the QANTAS (I still call Australia home) song in hope.
But maybe you’re right, and it all turns to POO. But I haven’t got a song for that.
30
Dave, from the top:
Hardly rocket science. Krudd has already stated the same thing as Labor Party policy.
It will get passed – he will have a majority in the House of Reps.
Forget the Greens – Labor rejecting it would require Labor voting AGAINST something (scrapping the carbon tax) that formed one of the major planks of their election campaign. They would have to immediately go into an election campaign explaining their hypocrisy. End result: further slaughter of Labor in both the House, and the Senate.
Labor will support it the Senate. They really have no choice now.
End result: There will be no double dissolution. Things will remain pretty-much as the status quo.
Some time soon after all that is sorted out, Abbott will have to move on Gonski, the NBN, the NDIS, or his beloved PPL. All are despised by the Dries, and supported, in one form or another, by the Wets.
At that point, the real battle commences. The winners will be whichever side has the numbers. The losers will be the Australian Electorate, which will either get get more of the same profligate waste as under KRudd/Gillard/KRudd, (Wets win), or some far right version of Workchoices/retrospective legislation (Dries win).
Abbott will be collateral damage.
31
MV, If that happens. Labor wins the 2016 election.
12
Andy,
Yes, a distinct possibility.
10
from MV post above:
I had doubted that, but the Sun King has now acknowledged that the Gillard/ALP Govt had no mandate for the CO2 tax
Notwithstanding his cynical backflip here, we all remember that when Gillard finally pushed the CO2 tax through the Reps, the Sun King “high-fived” her in the Parliament. That photo was on the front page of every newspaper, the ABC ran it as the lead story in their “news” … etc etc
20
Ian,
Don’t know about a high five, but I certainly remember the kiss of death.
20
MV you’ve lost the plot.
Give me odds for an Abbott premiership of 9 years.
20
About 50,000 to 1.
However, since I will not be around to either collect, or pay, it will have to be a “no bet”. Sorry.
.
Perhaps to help me “find the plot” again, you might care to list all the things that are going to change, as a result of a change of government. I don’t mean mother-in-law statements like “reduced red tape”, “smaller, more efficient public service”, and all the other crap we hear from both sides every election.
I mean actual CHANGES that might just affect, or possibly even reverse, this country’s slide into political and economic oblivion.
00
The ALP are so desperate that their candidate in my electorate (Laura Hardy) actually rang me tonight for a brief chat. Completely out of the blue. What? Actually listening to the people? This is unheard of!
So it’s a shame I was in the middle of programming and couldn’t get my head out of the code enough to think of any decent questions or issues to raise.
Her side of the conversation reminded me of some sort of Non-Player Character in an adventure game – you know the type that can only make canned responses and only to a limited number of questions. 🙂
NPC:
What sort of issues concern you?Player: “Oh, errrmmm I guess it’s mainly the federal deficit and the economy.”
NPC:
Well we did come out of the GFC with a AAA credit rating.Player: “Yes, yes, well, that’s fine, but… didn’t we have to borrow all the money for that stimulus package, so now we have to pay back the interest on that loan for the stimulus packages?”
NPC:
Oh, well I don't know about that. Were there any other issues concerning you?Player: “I’m also in favour of repealing the carbon tax.”
NPC:
Well you know that's moving to an ETS next year.Player: “Yeah. Uh, see that’s the problem. When people said they wanted to cancel the carbon tax they weren’t specific enough. What they meant was, there shouldn’t be a price on CO2 emissions of any kind.”
NPC:
Riiight. Were there any other issues concerning you?Player: “Well there’s also a few civil liberties issues which concern me, but there hasn’t been many political parties that have made that an election issue.”
NPC:
Yes, that's true.Player: “That’s about all I can think of at the moment.”
If I’d had my wits about me I should have asked her if Rudd was going to chuck a Howard and announce “forward deployment” of our troops to Syria before the USA had even weighed anchor. I could have asked about reforming the way surveillance is done in this country to ensure any use of the system is warranted by specifics instead of the current CIA free-for-all.
She did say to call back if I had any issues, so I could call back Thursday if I want to get an extra black mark next to my name in the ALP’s “concerned citizen” database. Actually that will happen anyway within 15 minutes of me posting this comment due to the Google-Government close working relationship.
20
<img src="” alt=”kev” /> I hope this works 🙂
10
Crap, maybe this time http://i1295.photobucket.com/albums/b626/Yonniestone/DSC_0204_zps3394ff63.jpg
30
yay it works, BTW I took that photo at the cinema, as soon as I saw it I LMAO and had to get a shot, people around me were laughing too, I guess Kev’s not that popular after all 🙂
20
It even looks like him! The smile could be a bit more forced, a little cheesier though…
10
If the Greens subscribe to global governance as a solution to the climate ‘problem’ (as Bob Brown has stated,) then why is it not in their platform?
40
.
Because one cannot boil the frog too quickly.
40
The sheeple would take even longer.
40
UN Agenda 21
32
greens – global governance
http://greens.org.au/policies/global-governance
22
Thanks Angry. So we put our lives in the hands of strangers on the other side of the planet with a depopulation agenda.
Now there’s a plan. Can’t wait.
30
Protest in PNG over asylum seeker deal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoSYTSoP6WU&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DIoSYTSoP6WU&nomobile=1
30
Lets do a o boy!
No warming between 1982 and 2006 says this paper http://www.ears.nl/user_files/04-Rosema_b.pdf
70
Since 31 years now before present !
Is this a recent paper , or has it just taken the last 7 years to clear for publication ?
72
Are we about to see rather more such papers as journals seek to recover their lost credibility after having succumbed to the Team blocking tactics for so long ?
40
For the record
http://hro001.wordpress.com/2013/08/25/coming-soon-busy-bees-in-the-hive-ipccs-ar5-the-movie/
10
More gibberish from the gibberererererers
http://iceagenow.info/2013/08/sea-levels-fell-2011-australia-soaked-water-sponge-scientist/
meanwhile back in reality
http://iceagenow.info/2013/08/slowest-start-hurricane-season-record/
http://iceagenow.info/2013/08/nw-passage-season/
(I love it when morons do things like this)
And something a little closer to home
http://iceagenow.info/2013/08/tasmania-coldest-august-day-41-years/
22
Sorry to inform you that most people want action on climate change.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-26/vote-compass-climate-change-environment/4908224
—————————————–
REPLY: Yes self-selected sample on ABC answers questions with no connection to consequences. If fairies could fix the weather for free, would you agree? Ask them if they want to spend more than $10 a month and watch the numbers plummet. – Jo
110
Yeah. Nailed it ! He, he.
50
Thats a very good point and here is another, exactly how many people were polled?
remember Wally has gone out on a limb here and parroted the headline by saying “most” people, so it could be “most of the 300 people polled” or “most of the 35 people polled”. Once again Wally shows us just how stupid he is.
30
Sorry forgot to add, 919,000 odd people have gone through the process on that web site even me and i was not specifically asked “do i want to spend billions on changing the temp by a poofteenth” or words to that affect.
What a joke you are Wally
52
.
It is also interesting that the overall results seem to be heavily weighted towards the Greens responses. It’s almost as if 1,000 Greens responded, and only 100 or so from everybody else combined.
40
MV,
If i read this correctly they have had 900,000 odd responses by through weighting they effectively only have 402 odd K responses. Does this leave the results open to manipulation?
40
.
Statistics are not my strong point. Hell, I don’t even know enough to count stats as a weak point. However, if they had 900,000 responses, and current polls show about 10% intend voting Greens, then there should have been about 90,000 responses from Greens voters.
As I understand the process, significantly more than 90,000 (say 200,000) responses would be evened out in the weighting process if that demographic was included. Ditto for Labor voters. However I note that “political affiliation” is specifically excluded from the supplied list of demographics used in the weighting process.
Given the readership of the online ABC is probably at least about 50% Labor and 25% Greens, any failure to adjust results according to political affiliation would almost certainly skew the results.
It is therefore reasonable to assume the results have been skewed, not by deliberate action, but by deliberate inaction.
60
Where’s Wallace’s brain ! ?
41
Why do you feel the need to apologise?
20
Many would still presume that $10 not to have to come from themselves, but from that OPiuM of the parasitic, bureaucratic, ‘guvmint’ funded masses.
40
Use Wallace as poster boy for “Climate Change Action”:
“Hi, I’m Wallace, a gullible dolt who believes every stupid thing he is told. Won’t you join me in bankrupting this Country?”
40
Ask them how many are already doing something for climate change–like halving their electric consumption, walking or biking to work, have lost their job due to environmental rules but are a-okay with that because they are saving the planet. Ask them about their lifestyles and how much they personally have given up. If they have done nothing significant, who cares about their opinion? I am up to demanding that people live off grid before they get any comments on wind turbines or solar–if you don’t care enough to take action, why should I?
00
Swiss law to slash firms’ offset buying, spurn U.N. credits
LONDON, Aug 23 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Swiss fuel importers will slash their annual offset purchases by 76 percent under a new law that forces them to source domestic offsets costing up to 100 francs (81 euros, $108 mln) per tonne, rather than cheaper U.N. carbon credits…
http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2533385
re above – love how Point Carbon ends the summary without mentioning the prices of those U.N. credits:
25 Aug: Reuters: John Irish: EU’s Rehn says France should stop raising taxes
The French government on Friday rushed to assure tax-weary companies and consumers that a new form of green levy meant to encourage industries and households to cut energy consumption would not amount to new tax increases.
The announcement landed the same week taxpayers began receiving income tax bills, some of which have been inflated by past tax hikes or reductions in tax exemptions…
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/08/25/uk-france-tax-rehn-idUKBRE97O04820130825
00
the big numbers sound impressive, but may not tell the full story!
26 Aug: ABC: Antony Green: Climate change looms as challenge for all parties
Vote Compass put the proposition to respondents that “the federal government should put a price on carbon” and asked them to agree or disagree.
Of the more than 800,000 respondents so far, about 400,000 answered this question as well as providing the demographic data that allows the sample to be weighted against the 2011 Australian Census.
Overall the survey revealed the electorate leaning toward supporting a carbon price, as shown below…
A second related question asked in Vote Compass, “How much should the federal government do to tackle climate change?”, produced a very different response as shown in the graph below…
The answer to the Vote Compass question on climate change reveals why the Coalition has stuck to having a policy on the issue and has not moved to a climate change sceptic position…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-26/antony-green-vote-compass-climate-change/4909774
26 Aug: ABC: Vote Compass: Australians want more action on climate change
FAQ
What is this? (Vote Compass, that is – pat)
***When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd called the federal election for September 7, the ABC immediately launched Vote Compass.
Since then, we have received more than 900,000 responses, as people used the tool to see how their views compare to the parties’ policies.
Between now and election day, the ABC will reveal weighted data gathered using the application…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-26/vote-compass-climate-change-environment/4908224
Vote Compass: About Us
http://australia.votecompass.com/about
00
Does it bother anyone that “climate sensitivity” is not related to any conservation law?
All of Physics expresses the conservation of some quantity – except this. Governments are “taxing” based on a quantity with no physical meaning –
And this forms the basis for calling somebody a “denier”?
How in the world did so few people stupefy so many?
30
There’s not even the law of conserving your freedom from jail, for not paying the carbon tax, because it’s passed on to you through the cost of goods of goods & services, which you pay as you buy them.
I thought climate sensitivity relied on the idea of conservation of energy though, energy which either hangs around, escapes to space, or god forbid even gets to hide in the deep oceans 😉
30
Brian,
“climate sensitivity” IS related to a conservation law?
It is known as “The Law of conservation of Incumbency”
The winner after a couple of terms as the “Incumbent” gets a life pass to the Australian Treasury Incumbency Support Program and a free trip to the UN every 2 years.
KK
30
Speaking of that, I thought you were losing Evan Krudd to the UN.
Didn’t they like is audition as Secretary General? Isn’t he unctuous enough for their tastes? What more does this man have to do to prove that he is sleazy enough to fill the position?
10
Coalition promises to waste $9M to make NO difference to climate if voted in
Ever wondered where some of those man made global warming “science” funds go?
.
August 24, 2013
“Griffith University has welcomed the announcement that a Coalition Government would provide renewed funding of $9 million to the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF).
NCCARF is Australia’s peak national body on climate change adaptation and has produced more than 200 major publications on the topic in the last four years.”
200 ‘major’ publications?
A black hole of 4 years of wasted research funds listed for posterity.
Said Professor Pankhurst, “NCCARF’s government funding formally ceased in June and since then its various partners, including Griffith University, have been seeking ways to keep the
facility operationalgravy train operational.”There, fixed that for you, Professor.
And shame on a conservative, “financially responsible” political party for wasting what amounts to billion$ on the latest failed fashionable cause, just to look “fashionably progressive.”
30
From the linked Griffith University Press Release:
The more things change . . . .
.
Somebody please remind me (again) how voting in the Coalition (again), is going to make everything just peachy (again).
21
The Liberal’s moronic stand on climate change will be annoying many Liberal voters.
They could lose voters to the “informal” party if they keep this up.
Enough to affect the election result? .. who knows !
The way they are going… who cares !!!!!
13
Now voting informal.
The Libs obviously don’t want my vote.
So be it. !
05
Actually Handjive, NCCARF and ACCARNSI are actually the people involved in getting all those stupid coastal development rules into councils.
They are linked in with the UniNSW climate propaganda division.
They are the ones pushing up coastal insurances with “risk management” excuses.
While they generally avoid the “extreme” predictions, they nevertheless push the scaremongery for all its worth.
I know this, because I’ve been to a couple of their conferences.
I now block all their emails, because they make my blood boil !
41
The fellow in charge of the UNSW set up payed his dues when Kev was setting out for Copenhagen, if memory serves OK.
For several days he rattled the Global Warming cage and made everyone sit up and take note.
It wasn’t hard to see that a DEBT was being repaid.
KK
20
Throw out the UN-IPCC climate models!
Junk Climate Science reaches a new low and it’s worse than we thought!
Scientists identify new factor in global warming
“A scientific study released today highlights a factor in global warming which has not previously been taken into account – and the news is not good.
It shows that, as the acid levels in sea water change, oceans will release less of a gas which protects against climate change.”
20
Throw out the ABC, if it thinks this is news.
Just dumb or duplicitous ?
Are they still trawling for scarey stories and haven’t heard this one before, or are they just spinning it again for effect ?
The ocean acidification meme that has been done to death so much already.
20
The remarkable thing is, no where is it mentioned that the ocean IS alkaline because of CO2 – the salts of weak acids are basic in solution (with a neutral cation, the exception being Al3+ which is acidic, but less acidic than carbonate is basic).
The primordial ocean was probably slightly acidic, from the presence of H2S, but became and remained alkaline in the presence of life, when the atmosphere became oxidizing rather than reducing. I thought everyone know this.
There is more than enough Ca2+ in the ocean to neutralize all the CO2 in the air that there is – for the life of me, this one remains a mystery
10
The thing is its not so much the scientific studies being released today, it’s the latest IPCC report breathing new life into long discredited ideas that supported its purpose. But don’t expect hack churnalists to appreciate the distinction.
20
The thing is its not so much the scientific studies being released today, it’s the latest IPCC report breathing new life into long discredited ideas that supported its purpose. But don’t expect hack churnalists to appreciate the distinction.
30
And just what is this magic gas????????
First time I’ve heard of a gas that PROTECTS AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE!!!
00
dimethysulphide
Which is produced mostly by phytoplankton – the little microscopic critters which give us 80% of our oxygen. dimethysulphide is highly volatile, and quickly breaks down into various sulphur oxides on contact with air.
Put another way, we are all now doomed because global warming means less acid rain, which for those of you old enough to remember, was THE “global environmental threat” thirty years ago.
.
The more things change . . . .
00
Watched Q&A just now. Soooo cringeworthy.
I think I’m going to take my voting directions from Bill Shorten actually.
“Government in this country never goes well when one party has absolute control of both houses of Parliament.”
Yes, quite, Bill. Could that be because neither the Labour nor Liberals have our best interests at heart?
Sept 7 is Shake’n’Bake time.
10