SA Greenies

[Petzl]

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1
--
Petzl
Don't be "sheep to the slaughter"
ALWAYS Vote oligarchies Coalition, Labor, "Greens"
*LAST*, Federal State and Council!
Or you are voting for Islam and Sharia.

For Turnbull, ‘multi-faith’ only means Islam
https://is.gd/bunwYB

 

[pedro]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 21:33:51 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

On 10/02/2017 9:20 PM, Petzl wrote:

The "Greens" opposed the sale selling electricity assets to China.

**They opposed selling the assets FULL STOP.

Then Had the coal fired operations shut down

**The brown coal operations in Victoria are the most polluting on the
planet. They had to be shut down.

And Leigh Creek? Jay's outfit declared it had only three years of
coal fit for power generation, yet the real figure is 30. Politics at
its finest. Any excuse to suck up to the green/leftie vote.

With its power situation as it now stands, it wouldn't surprise me if
SA built a s##tload of desal plants to supplement the water supply,
only to power them from the ??? grid.

But they ARE building a separate power station to feed the submarine
project, underlining their confidence in their interconnected grid
power.

Q: What did SA use for lighting before candles?

A: Electricity.

 

[F Murtz]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 11/02/2017 8:56 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 4:40 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 12:49 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 10/02/2017 7:44 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Je�us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:23:24 +1100, F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:57:51 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 21:52:04 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

This SA green power supply works well does not it?

Where does the 'SA Greenies' or 'green' fit into the picture?

The greenies have made a system that relies on wind power etc,
have
shut
down a coal fired generator and rely on other states for backup
and if
the wind does not blow or they have a storm that damages things
their
setup does not work well.

So, who are these 'greenies' you speak of?

The south Australian government is inclined to greenie views
and is
attempting to run their power supply along green lines and it is
not
working so far.

You sure they're not commies too?

No, just inclined to green views,so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus .

**Far from it. That honour belongs to Tasmania.


Tasmania is not the most expensive SA is

**I was referring to the unreliable part.





I was referring to the most expensive and currently most unreliable.

**Goalpost change, duly noted.

No goalpost change, statement was "so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus . "which it is.

**You just inserted the word "currently". That is a goalpost change.
Based on last year's outage, which lasted several MONTHS in Tassie, that
qualifies Tasmania as having the least reliable power in the nation. If
you are (now) talking about which state has the most unreliable power
TODAY, then it may well be SA, though it is hard to say, since NSW's
biggest power consumer (the aluminium smelter in the Hunter) was asked
to power down. Had it not done so, then NSW may have had the most
unreliable power supply CURRENTLY.

The word currently was only for you as my statement without it was
correct I was talking about now NOT historically and the important bit
to me was the cost, you seem to put immense importance to unreliable
completely ignoring the cost.

Don't play idiotic semantic games with me. You will lose. Here are the
facts

put as many facts as you like, the debate is my statement which was
correct at this point in time, you are the one wandering off in time
quoting historical problems in fact Tasmania till recently has one of
the best systems

* Tasmania lost power for MONTHS. That makes their power system quite
unreliable. A day or two is fine, but not months.
* Electricity assets were sold off by various state governments (the
Libs in SA) and that action has brought us to the perilous position we
are in today.
* The Greens (which you seem to have an insane, irrational hatred
towards) are the only major political party which has consistently
fought against selling off electricity assets in every state.

 

Fran Snortilus <ask@itsahoot.com> live on stage:

On 12/02/2017 4:07 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 8:56 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 4:40 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 12:49 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 10/02/2017 7:44 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Je�us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:23:24 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:57:51 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 21:52:04 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

This SA green power supply works well does not it?

Where does the 'SA Greenies' or 'green' fit into the
picture?

The greenies have made a system that relies on wind power
etc,
have shut down a coal fired generator and rely on other
states for backup and if the wind does not blow or they
have a storm that damages things their setup does not work
well.

So, who are these 'greenies' you speak of?

The south Australian government is inclined to greenie views
and is attempting to run their power supply along green lines
and it is not working so far.

You sure they're not commies too?

No, just inclined to green views,so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus .

**Far from it. That honour belongs to Tasmania.


Tasmania is not the most expensive SA is

**I was referring to the unreliable part.





I was referring to the most expensive and currently most
unreliable.

**Goalpost change, duly noted.

No goalpost change, statement was "so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus . "which it is.

**You just inserted the word "currently". That is a goalpost change.
Based on last year's outage, which lasted several MONTHS in Tassie,
that qualifies Tasmania as having the least reliable power in the
nation. If you are (now) talking about which state has the most
unreliable power TODAY, then it may well be SA, though it is hard to
say, since NSW's biggest power consumer (the aluminium smelter in the
Hunter) was asked to power down. Had it not done so, then NSW may have
had the most unreliable power supply CURRENTLY.

The word currently was only for you as my statement without it was
correct I was talking about now NOT historically and the important bit
to me was the cost, you seem to put immense importance to unreliable
completely ignoring the cost.

Don't play idiotic semantic games with me. You will lose. Here are the
facts

put as many facts as you like, the debate is my statement which was
correct at this point in time, you are the one wandering off in time
quoting historical problems in fact Tasmania till recently has one of
the best systems

Murtz, try using your brain sometime and stop always trying to change
the goalposts when you get caught out being sloppy in how you think and
what you write. You started this thread with this piece of idiocy: "This
SA green power supply works well does not it?" and now you're whining
like a toddler because you didn't put enough effort in to posting a
comment that wasn't idiotic right from the start of the thread.

*No, South Australian blackouts were not caused by renewables*
Published on 29/09/2016, 5:12am

"http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/29/renewable-energy-scapegoated-
south-australian-blackouts/"

"Media and political claims that province’s high proportion of wind
energy is to blame for power outages are completely unfounded"

When the sun is shining and the breeze trims the blades of the turbines,
it’s easy to forget that Australia remains a country with a deep native
suspicion of renewable energy.

How else to explain the extraordinary, unfounded response to a traumatic
Wednesday for South Australians when a huge storm ripped through state
and all the lights went out?

Before residents’ power was even returned politicians and journalists
were lining up to suggest, with no evidence, that South Australia’s high
concentration of renewable energy was in some way to blame for the
crisis...."
~~~~

OK, I know it is _old news_...but it is so typical of the LNP creeps
pushing their fossil fuel centric propaganda.
Even though the public service has provided a precise report on the
blackout event and its actual causes Turnbull came drumming the beat and
pushing the lies next morning unashamedly.

Hence I wonder how many shares he, his wife and his party mates own in
the mining and energy generation sectors.

Yep, Trumbull may have dazzled some among the voters but he is just
pushing the same despicable lieberal policies Tony Abbott had cooked up
before him. Mr Harbourside Mansion can't wash himself squeaky clean from
the doings of his party and pretend to by our moral leader...if he was
not a such a typical bloody hypocrite he would resigned from that party
long ago and for all I care returned to his business of manufacturing
loot for his own exclusive benefit to hell with everyone else in the
country.


--
Ördög

"Ut sementem feceris, ita metes"(Cicero)

 

[Fran Snortilus]

On 12/02/2017 4:07 PM, F Murtz wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 8:56 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 4:40 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 12:49 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 10/02/2017 7:44 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Je�us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:23:24 +1100, F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:57:51 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 21:52:04 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

This SA green power supply works well does not it?

Where does the 'SA Greenies' or 'green' fit into the picture?

The greenies have made a system that relies on wind power etc,
have
shut
down a coal fired generator and rely on other states for
backup
and if
the wind does not blow or they have a storm that damages
things
their
setup does not work well.

So, who are these 'greenies' you speak of?

The south Australian government is inclined to greenie views
and is
attempting to run their power supply along green lines and it is
not
working so far.

You sure they're not commies too?

No, just inclined to green views,so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus .

**Far from it. That honour belongs to Tasmania.


Tasmania is not the most expensive SA is

**I was referring to the unreliable part.





I was referring to the most expensive and currently most unreliable.

**Goalpost change, duly noted.

No goalpost change, statement was "so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus . "which it is.

**You just inserted the word "currently". That is a goalpost change.
Based on last year's outage, which lasted several MONTHS in Tassie, that
qualifies Tasmania as having the least reliable power in the nation. If
you are (now) talking about which state has the most unreliable power
TODAY, then it may well be SA, though it is hard to say, since NSW's
biggest power consumer (the aluminium smelter in the Hunter) was asked
to power down. Had it not done so, then NSW may have had the most
unreliable power supply CURRENTLY.

The word currently was only for you as my statement without it was
correct I was talking about now NOT historically and the important bit
to me was the cost, you seem to put immense importance to unreliable
completely ignoring the cost.

Don't play idiotic semantic games with me. You will lose. Here are the
facts

put as many facts as you like, the debate is my statement which was
correct at this point in time, you are the one wandering off in time
quoting historical problems in fact Tasmania till recently has one of
the best systems

Murtz, try using your brain sometime and stop always trying to change
the goalposts when you get caught out being sloppy in how you think and
what you write. You started this thread with this piece of idiocy: "This
SA green power supply works well does not it?" and now you're whining
like a toddler because you didn't put enough effort in to posting a
comment that wasn't idiotic right from the start of the thread.

 

[felix]

On Sunday, 12 Feb 2017 4:40 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 11/02/2017 8:56 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 4:40 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 12:49 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 10/02/2017 7:44 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Je�us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:23:24 +1100, F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:57:51 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 21:52:04 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

This SA green power supply works well does not it?

Where does the 'SA Greenies' or 'green' fit into the picture?

The greenies have made a system that relies on wind power etc,
have
shut
down a coal fired generator and rely on other states for
backup
and if
the wind does not blow or they have a storm that damages
things
their
setup does not work well.

So, who are these 'greenies' you speak of?

The south Australian government is inclined to greenie views
and is
attempting to run their power supply along green lines and it is
not
working so far.

You sure they're not commies too?

No, just inclined to green views,so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus .

**Far from it. That honour belongs to Tasmania.


Tasmania is not the most expensive SA is

**I was referring to the unreliable part.





I was referring to the most expensive and currently most unreliable.

**Goalpost change, duly noted.

No goalpost change, statement was "so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus . "which it is.

**You just inserted the word "currently". That is a goalpost change.
Based on last year's outage, which lasted several MONTHS in Tassie,
that qualifies Tasmania as having the least reliable power in the
nation. If you are (now) talking about which state has the most
unreliable power TODAY, then it may well be SA, though it is hard to
say, since NSW's biggest power consumer (the aluminium smelter in the
Hunter) was asked to power down. Had it not done so, then NSW may have
had the most unreliable power supply CURRENTLY.

Don't play idiotic semantic games with me. You will lose. Here are the
facts:

* Tasmania lost power for MONTHS. That makes their power system quite
unreliable. A day or two is fine, but not months.
* Electricity assets were sold off by various state governments (the
Libs in SA) and that action has brought us to the perilous position we
are in today.
* The Greens (which you seem to have an insane, irrational hatred towards)

there's nothing irrational about despising the Greens. they are a bunch
of loopey nut cases

are the only major political party which has consistently fought
against selling off electricity assets in every state.

--
http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://www.barenakedislam.com/
http://www.siotw.org

 

[Petzl]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:44:52 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone, but vested interests/politics gets in
the way, as usual. Basslink is a complete con for Tasmanians.

Just pointing out the new generation Windmills could put out 170 MW's
with 25 instead of 56
The genrators have advanced in leps and bounds low maintanece smaller
much more effiecent, even the Hydro would have power genration
increases by us new generation, generators.
--
Petzl
We are advised to NOT judge ALL Moslems by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.
Funny how that works.

 

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:55:44 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:44:52 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone, but vested interests/politics gets in
the way, as usual. Basslink is a complete con for Tasmanians.

Just pointing out the new generation Windmills could put out 170 MW's
with 25 instead of 56
The genrators have advanced in leps and bounds low maintanece smaller
much more effiecent, even the Hydro would have power genration
increases by us new generation, generators.

That's true, wind, solar and turbines/generators have come a long way,
as have batteries.

 

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:45:55 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

On Sunday, 12 Feb 2017 4:40 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

* The Greens (which you seem to have an insane, irrational hatred towards)

there's nothing irrational about despising the Greens. they are a bunch
of loopey nut cases

Yeah, those lentil-eating commies should be put down.

 

[felix]

On Saturday, 11 Feb 2017 4:45 PM, Fran Snortilus wrote:

On 11/02/2017 11:58 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 10/02/2017 10:06 PM, Fran Snortilus wrote:
On 10/02/2017 5:26 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Fran Snortilus wrote:
On 10/02/2017 12:42 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 9/02/2017 9:52 PM, F Murtz wrote:
This SA green power supply works well does not it?

It's not helping us in NSW, with the AEMO warning of rolling
blackouts
later today as people return home from work and turn on air
conditioners
just as the solar panel output is dropping because the sun is going
down.

And that is part of the problem. People who can't cope without
air con
and other than
reliance on such a fragile thing.

Let us go back to the old days where the old and infirm died because
they don't have any other strategy for coping with heat

READ the thread! People coming home from work and turning on their air
con WILL NOT BE THE OLD OR THE INFIRM you twit!

The old and infirm are the only ones who should be allowed to turn on
their aircon in the current situation.


The only reason we have a problem is that people run air-conditioners.

why shouldn't ppl be able to run air conditioners? it's up to government
to provide as much electricity at affordable cost as the community needs

Yep. Alhthough possibly not the ONLY reason but certainly hugely
exacerbated by running air con.

If only the old and infirm ran them then we'd have plenty of generation
capacity.

Yep.

and if they all died we would have far less health care cost. stupid
argument

Except that if that were the practice in the past, the generation
capacity to cope wouldn't have been built, and we'd simply have the same
problem but with less comfort.

You've got that arse about. If using air con had been the practice in
the past, we'd have built the capacity and we wouldn't have the
current problem as we'd have built the capacity way back then when we
were turning on air con.

There's no reason we, as consumers, should have to manage with less
power than we want to consume.

Say how precious we are and it's our right to have access to air con,
won't work. Most of our States have sold most of it off and private
enterprise is a law unto itself and even with supposed guarantees of
service levels extracted before sale, it's amazing how many and varied
are the excuses to be found after sale. The best we can probably do
is to buy shares in the power companies.

the reason governments have to sell assets is because stupid voters keep
voting in Labor governments who run up massive debt

It is the responsibility of the
government to ensure that enough capacity exists, either by adjusting
the market parameters to encourage the construction of sufficient
capacity, or, as a last resort, constructing that capacity themselves.

Except that to do that from scratch is the very reason given for why
the infrastructure was sold in the first place (old and too expensive
to replace/upgrade). States do not have that sort of money any more.

The alternative is that those who can afford to do so will install
backup power systems, and those who cannot will suffer outages. That's
hardly an equitable result.

No, but you are right in saying that is what will most likely happen.

I'm a bit sceptical as to whether the market can really handle this on
its own, because having enough capacity for the extreme events implies
having capacity that's very rarely used. People build generators to earn
a profit, and it's hard to determine whether a profit can be made when
the requirement for the capacity is so rare.

Yep.

It maybe that the only way is for the government to build generators
that it guarantees will sit idle except for the occasions when the spot
electricity price reaches its maximum allowed value (currently $14 per
kWh) and there is still insufficient capacity. The cost of that would,
of course, ultimately have to be born by consumers.

And tax payers. IMO, not gunna happen in my lifetime. The good old
days of government thinking it was there to provide services is now gone.

Sylvia.

--
http://thereligionofpeace.com
http://www.barenakedislam.com/
http://www.siotw.org

 

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone, but vested interests/politics gets in
the way, as usual. Basslink is a complete con for Tasmanians.

 

[SG1]

"Jeßus" <j@j.net> wrote in message
news:0ac2acl0jcu6thv4obfius5rrfc2a2vdif@4ax.com...

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:45:55 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

On Sunday, 12 Feb 2017 4:40 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

* The Greens (which you seem to have an insane, irrational hatred
towards)

there's nothing irrational about despising the Greens. they are a bunch
of loopey nut cases

Yeah, those lentil-eating commies should be put down.

Don't insult lentils, they are much better than greenies aka snot.

 

[Petzl]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 15:06:57 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

The only reason we have a problem is that people run air-conditioners.

why shouldn't ppl be able to run air conditioners? it's up to government
to provide as much electricity at affordable cost as the community needs

Power Plants are sort of State operations but funded by Federal. The
only funding seems to be for wind mills and solar and jumping the gun
in shutting down coal.

A gas fired one near me was stopped being built because of "NOx"
emissions (sort of nonsense they can easily be lowered/removed, often
by simply adding controlled water/steam injection to the gas turbine)
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/power-plant-will-put-lives-at-risk-experts-warn-20090821-etsl.html
This is just gutlessness by Governments who would easily know this and
where or who are these political appointed experts? I'm one and don't
agree concerns should be raised and stacks monitored and latest Tech
allows Everything to be monitored cheaply.results recorded by
computer. These scanners have what not is asked for not recorded
because of "expert ""Don Quixote's".

Wind Mills though are improving in leaps and bounds costing less and
churning out more energy with less maintenance. So shouldn't be
totally disregarded.
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
In this case it's the generators are smaller putting out higher
capacity fo less "fuel" sun/wind/fossil.
--
Petzl
"To Be A Politician You Need Three Things. Be a Good Liar, A Great Cheat
and a Brilliant Thief." Malcolm Turnbull

Its time for Malcolm to kick some arse....his own!!!

Australian MPs now among the highest paid in the world
http://www.news.com.au/national/australian-mps-now-among-the-highest-paid-in-the-world/story-fncynjr2-1226681596923
https://is.gd/nOyfr9

Turnbull draing the swamp!
http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/cc61ccd180d35f931bae6ced5e4febaf?width=1024

ALWAYS Vote oligarchies Coalition, Labor, "Greens"
*LAST*, Federal State and Council!
Or you are voting for Islam and Sharia.

For Turnbull, ‘multi-faith’ only means Islam
https://is.gd/bunwYB

 

[Clifford Heath]

On 13/02/17 13:44, Je�us wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone,

That was true before they had a ten-year drought.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 13/02/2017 2:45 PM, felix wrote:

On Sunday, 12 Feb 2017 4:40 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 8:56 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 4:40 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 11/02/2017 12:49 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 10/02/2017 7:44 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Je�us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:23:24 +1100, F Murtz <haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 14:57:51 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

Je?us wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2017 21:52:04 +1100, F Murtz
haggisz@hotmail.com
wrote:

This SA green power supply works well does not it?

Where does the 'SA Greenies' or 'green' fit into the picture?

The greenies have made a system that relies on wind power etc,
have
shut
down a coal fired generator and rely on other states for
backup
and if
the wind does not blow or they have a storm that damages
things
their
setup does not work well.

So, who are these 'greenies' you speak of?

The south Australian government is inclined to greenie views
and is
attempting to run their power supply along green lines and it is
not
working so far.

You sure they're not commies too?

No, just inclined to green views,so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus .

**Far from it. That honour belongs to Tasmania.


Tasmania is not the most expensive SA is

**I was referring to the unreliable part.





I was referring to the most expensive and currently most unreliable.

**Goalpost change, duly noted.

No goalpost change, statement was "so far it has cost SA the most
expensive and unreliable power system in Aus . "which it is.

**You just inserted the word "currently". That is a goalpost change.
Based on last year's outage, which lasted several MONTHS in Tassie,
that qualifies Tasmania as having the least reliable power in the
nation. If you are (now) talking about which state has the most
unreliable power TODAY, then it may well be SA, though it is hard to
say, since NSW's biggest power consumer (the aluminium smelter in the
Hunter) was asked to power down. Had it not done so, then NSW may have
had the most unreliable power supply CURRENTLY.

Don't play idiotic semantic games with me. You will lose. Here are the
facts:

* Tasmania lost power for MONTHS. That makes their power system quite
unreliable. A day or two is fine, but not months.
* Electricity assets were sold off by various state governments (the
Libs in SA) and that action has brought us to the perilous position we
are in today.
* The Greens (which you seem to have an insane, irrational hatred
towards)

there's nothing irrational about despising the Greens. they are a bunch
of loopey nut cases

**And yet, the Greens were the only major political party which tried to
stop electricity privatisations.



--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:27:23 +1100, Clifford Heath
<no.spam@please.net> wrote:

On 13/02/17 13:44, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone,

That was true before they had a ten-year drought.

It was true before, during and after the 'drought'. The problem is/was
that the water is poorly managed.

 

[Xeno]

On 13/02/2017 6:34 PM, Je�us wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:27:23 +1100, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

On 13/02/17 13:44, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/
https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone,

That was true before they had a ten-year drought.

It was true before, during and after the 'drought'. The problem is/was
that the water is poorly managed.

It's very hard to *manage water* when it doesn't fall from the sky and
fill the dams. The drought in Tasmania was unprecedented. Even the
easterly wind rains that fed the entire Midlands area failed and rivers
dried up. The Macquarie River being one such notable river - it just
disappeared. That 10 year drought will not be the last. Worse droughts
are to come.

--

Xeno

First they ignore you,
Then they ridicule you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win.

Mahatma Ghandi

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 13/02/2017 7:41 PM, Xeno wrote:

On 13/02/2017 6:34 PM, Je�us wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:27:23 +1100, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

On 13/02/17 13:44, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/

https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone,

That was true before they had a ten-year drought.

It was true before, during and after the 'drought'. The problem is/was
that the water is poorly managed.

It's very hard to *manage water* when it doesn't fall from the sky and
fill the dams. The drought in Tasmania was unprecedented. Even the
easterly wind rains that fed the entire Midlands area failed and rivers
dried up. The Macquarie River being one such notable river - it just
disappeared. That 10 year drought will not be the last. Worse droughts
are to come.

**Don't tell Murtz that. He still doesn't accept the words of every
climatologist on the planet.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Petzl]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 20:00:39 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

On 13/02/2017 7:41 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 13/02/2017 6:34 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:27:23 +1100, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

On 13/02/17 13:44, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/

https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone,

That was true before they had a ten-year drought.

It was true before, during and after the 'drought'. The problem is/was
that the water is poorly managed.

It's very hard to *manage water* when it doesn't fall from the sky and
fill the dams. The drought in Tasmania was unprecedented. Even the
easterly wind rains that fed the entire Midlands area failed and rivers
dried up. The Macquarie River being one such notable river - it just
disappeared. That 10 year drought will not be the last. Worse droughts
are to come.


**Don't tell Murtz that. He still doesn't accept the words of every
climatologist on the planet.

Not seen ANY government appointed State or Federal "protection" agency
as employable. All have heads stuffed with wool and a political
doctrine. Time to fire them.
Remember Scientist Tim Flannery who was going to wipe out life on
Earth with his proposal?
<http://www.smh.com.au/news/global-warming/radical-climate-action-would-change-skys-colour/2008/05/19/1211182695948.html>
https://is.gd/KIouqL
All the other Government employees are much the same, I have found all
are unemployable and cannot get real jobs. Look at Australia post? Yet
the nonsensical "CEO" (Ahmed Fahour) gets 6 million a year on a job
he can't get fired from and would not find employment in real world!
--
Petzl
"To Be A Politician You Need Three Things. Be a Good Liar, A Great Cheat
and a Brilliant Thief." Malcolm Turnbull

Its time for Malcolm to kick some arse....his own!!!

Australian MPs now among the highest paid in the world
http://www.news.com.au/national/australian-mps-now-among-the-highest-paid-in-the-world/story-fncynjr2-1226681596923
https://is.gd/nOyfr9

Turnbull draing the swamp!
http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/cc61ccd180d35f931bae6ced5e4febaf?width=1024

ALWAYS Vote oligarchies Coalition, Labor, "Greens"
*LAST*, Federal State and Council!
Or you are voting for Islam and Sharia.

For Turnbull, ‘multi-faith’ only means Islam
https://is.gd/bunwYB

 

[Xeno]

On 13/02/2017 9:40 PM, Petzl wrote:

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 20:00:39 +1100, Trevor Wilson
trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

On 13/02/2017 7:41 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 13/02/2017 6:34 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 18:27:23 +1100, Clifford Heath
no.spam@please.net> wrote:

On 13/02/17 13:44, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 12:09:38 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 11:24:48 +1100, Jeßus <j@j.net> wrote:

On Sun, 12 Feb 2017 10:00:01 +1100, Petzl <petzlx@gmail.com> wrote:


Repairs to Basslink cable were happenining and the hydro dams were
getting loow. But the survived

That Basslink cable is one of the dumbest ideas ever. Personally
speaking, I'd like to see it chopped up into a thousand pieces and
forgotten about. Tasmania would be, on the whole, far better off
without it.

Well tasmania needs 100Mw generator without it.
Latest tech Wind Generation could do this?
http://reneweconomy.com.au/super-conductor-turbines-could-slash-australian-wind-energy-costs-84828/

https://is.gd/sbtNM1

Tasmania is perfectly capable of generating more power than it needs
with just hydro and wind alone,

That was true before they had a ten-year drought.

It was true before, during and after the 'drought'. The problem is/was
that the water is poorly managed.

It's very hard to *manage water* when it doesn't fall from the sky and
fill the dams. The drought in Tasmania was unprecedented. Even the
easterly wind rains that fed the entire Midlands area failed and rivers
dried up. The Macquarie River being one such notable river - it just
disappeared. That 10 year drought will not be the last. Worse droughts
are to come.


**Don't tell Murtz that. He still doesn't accept the words of every
climatologist on the planet.

Not seen ANY government appointed State or Federal "protection" agency
as employable. All have heads stuffed with wool and a political
doctrine. Time to fire them.
Remember Scientist Tim Flannery who was going to wipe out life on
Earth with his proposal?
http://www.smh.com.au/news/global-warming/radical-climate-action-would-change-skys-colour/2008/05/19/1211182695948.html
https://is.gd/KIouqL
All the other Government employees are much the same, I have found all
are unemployable and cannot get real jobs. Look at Australia post? Yet
the nonsensical "CEO" (Ahmed Fahour) gets 6 million a year on a job
he can't get fired from and would not find employment in real world!

I think you will find that *any government employee* can be fired. This
has always been the case. The only variable is the degree of difficulty
associated with doing so. These days it is very easy.

--

Xeno

First they ignore you,
Then they ridicule you,
Then they fight you,
Then you win.

Mahatma Ghandi