Opinion Climate change

Remove this Banner Ad

Lawnchair Larry said:
MG4 EV undergoing engineering testing in Sydney.
View attachment 1705270
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that its probably a feedback and evaluation vehicle for the local distributor. ( Though unlike many imported vehicles, SAIC distribute their own vehicles here ).
There wouldn't be much Engineering testing that the streets of Sydney would provide.

Its already released overseas, so its the finished article.

MG4 EV review 2024 | Auto Express

The MG4 EV’s sharp styling, spacious interior and impressive efficiency mean it’s one of the best electric cars around
www.autoexpress.co.uk www.autoexpress.co.uk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Wikipedia article on mass extinction events:
(meteor)
(volcanoes)
(Humans)

Animated GIF
 
Somehow the isolation of WA in the electricity market must be overcome. It operates under the WEM (Wholesale Electricity Market; basically WA) while the eastern states Tasmania, ACT and SA are coordinated via the NEM (National Electricity Market). The NEM basically plays roulette to make sure supply = demand. It's hairy due to the variability of renewables to date.
The desired inclusion of WA is obvious and based on geography. That 2 - 3 hr time lag between east and west is going to be important in bolstering peak hour usage in the eastern states and vice versa. Maybe not so much the other way!
Inclusion of WA will take a bucket load of cash.
The abundance of sunlight/ wind in that state, and its obvious potential, is enticing. To date the West Australians have been tardy because they are flush with gas, but they are finally firing up.
 
Last edited:
Lawnchair Larry said:
Somehow the isolation of WA in the electricity market must be overcome. It operates under the WEM (Wholesale Electricity Market; basically WA) while the eastern states Tasmania, ACT and SA are coordinated via the NEM (National Electricity Market). The NEM basically plays roulette to make sure supply = demand. It's hairy due to the variability of renewables to date.
The desired inclusion of WA is obvious and based on geography. That 2 - 3 hr time lag between east and west is going to be important in bolstering peak hour usage in the eastern states and vice versa. Maybe not so much the other way!
Inclusion of WA will take a bucket load of cash.
The abundance of sunlight/ wind in that state, and its obvious potential, is enticing. To date the West Australians have been tardy because they are flush with gas, but they are finally firing up.
Click to expand...

Its not just a matter of building transmission lines.
There are losses associated with distance, and you end up with greenhouse emissions associated with simply maintaining a link.

A link with New Zealand is nearly as viable as a link with W.A.

A DC link can be done with less losses, but you can't tap into it along the way.
 
SaintsSeptember said:
Its not just a matter of building transmission lines.
There are losses associated with distance, and you end up with greenhouse emissions associated with simply maintaining a link.

A link with New Zealand is nearly as viable as a link with W.A.

A DC link can be done with less losses, but you can't tap into it along the way.
Click to expand...
Energy is being shipped all around the NEM now. SA to Qld and between are all interlaced over very large distances.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sometimes I find it hard to reconcile the fact we're on a planet in the middle of a mass extinction crisis where lots of places will become unliveable in the next 50 years, with the fact that for the most part we're still doing heck all about it and if even the slightest change is proposed that inconveniences people just a little bit, people are absolutely up in arms.

Changing to electric cars? Not on my watch m8 I'd rather die than give up me V8.

Humans are a weird lot.

Feel like anyone bringing kids into the world these days is handing them a massive s**t sandwich.
 
sobrave said:
Sometimes I find it hard to reconcile the fact we're on a planet in the middle of a mass extinction crisis where lots of places will become unliveable in the next 50 years, with the fact that for the most part we're still doing * all about it and if even the slightest change is proposed that inconveniences people just a little bit, people are absolutely up in arms.

Changing to electric cars? Not on my watch m8 I'd rather die than give up me V8.

Humans are a weird lot.

Feel like anyone bringing kids into the world these days is handing them a massive s**t sandwich.
Click to expand...
Electric cars that are useful still aren't affordable for most people, who can barely even manage their weekly grocery shop any more.

If we really wanted to treat this as a crisis, we would just ban stuff - like private jets, yachts, cigarettes, soft drinks, North Melbourne. Completely unnecessary crap that has a large global footprint.
 
EskimoPAFC said:
Electric cars that are useful still aren't affordable for most people, who can barely even manage their weekly grocery shop any more.

If we really wanted to treat this as a crisis, we would just ban stuff - like private jets, yachts, cigarettes, soft drinks, North Melbourne. Completely unnecessary crap that has a large global footprint.
Click to expand...
One of the best moves the Federal government made is agreeing to let public servants work from home if they want (and it's applicable). Less cars on the road. All state governments need to do the same thing, for non public facing staff and heck the whingers who complain it'll wreck inner cities. The best car on the road, is no car on the road. Taking out both it's emissions and any in it's construction and the extra roads/road maintenance each one adds (Ie. EV's are MUCH better, but still contribute).

The Federal Government should be going further to support WFH, but instead they are short sightedly cutting back what people can easily claim (via a daily rate, rather than itemising expenses). I've done WHF full time 2000-2007, part time 2008-2019 and full time 2020 onwards and have a great accountant who always gets me all I can claim for WHF, but it shouldn't require having that to get a decent WHF benefit.
 
The Atkinson article will be dismissed as right wing boomer whistling, but he also brings up a) not driving, and b) not buying new vehicles on average every three years, as solutions to vehicle emissions, which is... Reasonable?

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
 
edgie said:
V8 cars have never been less popular, and the world's climate situation has never been worse.

Weird place to focus on.
Click to expand...

FFS it's just an example. Electric cars aren't a panacea, I know that. I could have picked a million other things.

It's just if you propose anything to address climate change, you still have a large vocal proportion of the populace squealing blue murder, even if it has no effect whatsoever.

The scale of the crisis is almost unbelievable, but my point is that we still don't actually treat it as a crisis at all. We all just go about our business until the next time there's some major fire or flood... When the disasters we're experiencing now are small compared to what will be served up by 2100 or so. And we just keep going, because what else can we do? Nowadays you get thrown in jail for protesting lol
 
EskimoPAFC said:
Electric cars that are useful still aren't affordable for most people, who can barely even manage their weekly grocery shop any more.

If we really wanted to treat this as a crisis, we would just ban stuff - like private jets, yachts, cigarettes, soft drinks, North Melbourne. Completely unnecessary crap that has a large global footprint.
Click to expand...

Ugh I didn't actually want to talk about electric cars, that was just the most obvious example that came to mind.

And yes, we should just flat out ban stuff. we should have done it 20 years ago but now would be better than never.

There would probably be a massive contraction/disruption in the global economy. But we can't do that because neoliberal capitalism is god and growth must always be unlimited.

The economic costs of not doing things properly will end up in the quadrillions, not to mention the mass extinction, loss of so much that we love about the planet.... But we'd as a species rather than cop that so that some rich campaigners now can keep on getting richer.
 
edgie said:
There's other stuff we could have done decades ago too, but...

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yes m8 if we'd all just build thousands of nucular plants around the world she'd be sorted.

Funny how the libs are beating their chest about nuclear now they're in opposition, when it was little Johnny who shut it down to begin with. Back when it would have actually been a good option..
 
sobrave said:
Ugh I didn't actually want to talk about electric cars, that was just the most obvious example that came to mind.

And yes, we should just flat out ban stuff. we should have done it 20 years ago but now would be better than never.

There would probably be a massive contraction/disruption in the global economy. But we can't do that because neoliberal capitalism is god and growth must always be unlimited.

The economic costs of not doing things properly will end up in the quadrillions, not to mention the mass extinction, loss of so much that we love about the planet.... But we'd as a species rather than cop that so that some rich campaigners now can keep on getting richer.
Click to expand...
It's stuffed by human nature. Those in smaller (population) countries like Australia, wonder what's the point of them suffering, when whether we all started driving V8's or decided the agricultural revolution was a bad idea and everyone became hunter-gathers, it's barely going to shift the dial either way. Developing countries populations think why should they have to cut emissions and not get all the benefits of development.

China is by far the biggest cause of climate change, at more than a quarter of the worlds emissions, more than double the next (US). If they do nothing, we're pissing in the wind. In reality, the best climate change action countries could do, is slapping CO2 tariffs on them until they get their figures down, whether that's 'fair to a developing (ha!) country' or not.
 
Andre said:
It's stuffed by human nature. Those in smaller (population) countries like Australia, wonder what's the point of them suffering, when whether we all started driving V8's or decided the agricultural revolution was a bad idea and everyone became hunter-gathers, it's barely going to shift the dial either way. Developing countries populations think why should they have to cut emissions and not get all the benefits of development.

China is by far the biggest cause of climate change, at more than a quarter of the worlds emissions, more than double the next (US). If they do nothing, we're pissing in the wind. In reality, the best climate change action countries could do, is slapping CO2 tariffs on them until they get their figures down, whether that's 'fair to a developing (ha!) country' or not.
Click to expand...

I mean what right do we have to have a go at them when ours are way worse per capita? Ditto the states.

And that'd be a fair point from china.

The whole world needs to work together, but humans are campaignery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top