SA Greenies

[F Murtz]

felix wrote:

On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro, but one of
the problems here is whether the greens manage to block dams because of
the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 15/02/2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the liberals
and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source. The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work on
the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will see
who is the lying c***

**Examine all your posts in the threads you started. You hate renewable
energy and love coal and nukes, despite the very serious drawbacks
associated with those sources.

Renewable energy is good if it works, my problem is with it when it is a
waste of time or does not work efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap
till the bugs are worked out in renewables.

**What bugs would they be? Wind turbines work. Solar PV works.
Geo-thermal works. Solar/thermal works. They all work. They all deliver
energy at competitive prices. So much so, that no one will invest of
coal-fired power stations any longer. No insurance company on the planet
will insure a nuclear reactor. Wanna guess why?

I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And those sell-offs were fought against by the GREENS. The guys you
hate. You are an irrational idiot. You refuse to acknowledge the truth
when it is presented to you.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 15/02/2017 11:36 PM, F Murtz wrote:

felix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro, but one of
the problems here is whether the greens manage to block dams because of
the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[felix]

On Thursday, 16 Feb 2017 5:23 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 15/02/2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the liberals
and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely
source. The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due
to the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work on
the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will see
who is the lying c***

**Examine all your posts in the threads you started. You hate
renewable energy and love coal and nukes, despite the very serious
drawbacks associated with those sources.

you've been hanging around aus.cars too long Trev. you've adopted their
practice of telling ppl what they think, because you think it's what
they think

Renewable energy is good if it works, my problem is with it when it is a
waste of time or does not work efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap
till the bugs are worked out in renewables.

**What bugs would they be? Wind turbines work.

when the wind blows, and not cost effective

Solar PV works. Geo-thermal works. Solar/thermal works. They all work.
They all deliver energy at competitive prices. So much so, that no one
will invest of coal-fired power stations any longer.

pity, since we have lot of it we could sell

No insurance company on the planet will insure a nuclear reactor.
Wanna guess why?



I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but
I was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And those sell-offs were fought against by the GREENS. The guys you
hate. You are an irrational idiot. You refuse to acknowledge the truth
when it is presented to you.

but if the Greens had their way Australia would be flat broke in no time


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

 

[felix]

On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 11:36 PM, F Murtz wrote:

felix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro,

I agree

but one of the problems here is whether the greens manage to block
dams because of the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

they don't even need an excuse. they oppose them anyway. damming of the
Mitchell river in Victoria would prevent the flooding that happens
regularly in Gippsland, and harness millions of gallons of water, but
the greens have so far prevented it.

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs



Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

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

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 16/02/2017 11:46 AM, felix wrote:

On Thursday, 16 Feb 2017 5:23 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 15/02/2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the liberals
and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely
source. The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due
to the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work on
the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will see
who is the lying c***

**Examine all your posts in the threads you started. You hate
renewable energy and love coal and nukes, despite the very serious
drawbacks associated with those sources.

you've been hanging around aus.cars too long Trev. you've adopted their
practice of telling ppl what they think, because you think it's what
they think

**Nope. I just need to examine Murtz's posts. It's obvious.

Renewable energy is good if it works, my problem is with it when it is a
waste of time or does not work efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap
till the bugs are worked out in renewables.

**What bugs would they be? Wind turbines work.

when the wind blows, and not cost effective

**Once erected, they deliver power at no cost for decades.

Solar PV works. Geo-thermal works. Solar/thermal works. They all work.
They all deliver energy at competitive prices. So much so, that no one
will invest of coal-fired power stations any longer.

pity, since we have lot of it we could sell

**It is, indeed, a pity. But the facts are:

* Coal is a major contributor to global warming.
* Investment in coal infrastructure is rapidly falling to zero.
* Best to leave it in the ground.

No insurance company on the planet will insure a nuclear reactor.
Wanna guess why?



I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but
I was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And those sell-offs were fought against by the GREENS. The guys you
hate. You are an irrational idiot. You refuse to acknowledge the truth
when it is presented to you.



but if the Greens had their way Australia would be flat broke in no time

**Prove it. Cite whatever you wish from their policy documents to prove
your claim.

Or just fuck off. Like Murtz, you are happy to criticise the Greens,
without foundation and support the Lieberals, despite the clear damage
those cunts are doing to this nation.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[F Murtz]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 15/02/2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the liberals
and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work on
the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will see
who is the lying c***

**Examine all your posts in the threads you started. You hate renewable
energy and love coal and nukes, despite the very serious drawbacks
associated with those sources.

Looks like you have been caught out again you can not show that I hate
renewable energy or love coal and nukes.Please give any instance of
where I have said I hate renewable energy and love coal and nukes
We know who is the liar.

You can remove nukes from the equation because,although they work they
are not for AU and I do not love them but they are an alternative I do
not love coal but until a reliable cheaper energy comes along,they fill
a gap,same with other non renewables,If you remove all non renewables
from the equation we would come to a halt,the existing systems with
existing technology can not work without them, it is just a case of
using the cheapest and workable combinations and work towards making
renewables work efficiently,someday we will make a breakthrough.

Renewable energy is good if it works, my problem is with it when it is a
waste of time or does not work efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap
till the bugs are worked out in renewables.

**What bugs would they be? Wind turbines work. Solar PV works.
Geo-thermal works. Solar/thermal works. They all work. They all deliver
energy at competitive prices. So much so, that no one will invest of
coal-fired power stations any longer. No insurance company on the planet
will insure a nuclear reactor. Wanna guess why?



I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And those sell-offs were fought against by the GREENS. The guys you
hate. You are an irrational idiot. You refuse to acknowledge the truth
when it is presented to you.

As far as green are concerned the problems are the loud vociferous
activists with the silly ideas that make up most of their political
party, real greens I have no problem with (farmers etc) and a high
percentage of normal ecologically inclined Australians who quietly get
on with their business and have absolutely no truck with the clowns in
the political parties.

 

[F Murtz]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

On 15/02/2017 11:36 PM, F Murtz wrote:
felix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro, but one of
the problems here is whether the greens manage to block dams because of
the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.




my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night




Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 16/02/2017 3:17 PM, F Murtz wrote:

Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 15/02/2017 11:36 PM, F Murtz wrote:
felix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said
that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said
any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available
for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro, but one of
the problems here is whether the greens manage to block dams because of
the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night

**Are you familiar with:

* Batteries.
* Solar/thermal.
* Geo-thermal.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Petzl]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:56:28 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

On 16/02/2017 3:17 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 15/02/2017 11:36 PM, F Murtz wrote:
felix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said
that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said
any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available
for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro, but one of
the problems here is whether the greens manage to block dams because of
the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

Not if you vole One Nation

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night

**Are you familiar with:

* Batteries.
* Solar/thermal.
* Geo-thermal.

Where is Australia Geo-thermal potential and how far from consumers

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

They got Labor to stop selling it then had the coal stations shut down

Q: What did SA use for lighting before candles?

A: Electricity.
--
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

 

[Gordon Levi]

Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth.

Not by any measure. By area, Antarctica has less rain and snow. By the
only sensible measure which is precipitation per capita, Australia has
ten times as much as Great Britain and three times as much as the
United States <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ER.H2O.INTR.PC>.

Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania.

Far North Queensland is wetter and there has been fairly consistent
rain
<http://www.ga.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0005/12569/GA14206.jpg>.
There is plenty of water in FNQ and it is time people and agriculture
were given incentives to move there.

They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

 

[Computer Nerd Kev]

In aus.electronics Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> wrote:

Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth.

Not by any measure. By area, Antarctica has less rain and snow. By the
only sensible measure which is precipitation per capita, Australia has
ten times as much as Great Britain and three times as much as the
United States <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ER.H2O.INTR.PC>.

Per capita figures won't help you much if you're trying to capture
that water.

--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 16/02/2017 5:55 PM, Petzl wrote:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:56:28 +1100, Trevor Wilson
trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

On 16/02/2017 3:17 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 15/02/2017 11:36 PM, F Murtz wrote:
felix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 Feb 2017 12:35 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 8:50 PM, F Murtz wrote:
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 12:24 PM, Xeno wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 14/02/2017 11:53 AM, F Murtz wrote:
Clifford Heath 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 all the fault of the liberals and AGW that the
liberals and
non greens caused

**Idiot. AGW has caused the drought in Tasmania. A fault in the
Basslink
cable caused the other part of the problem. It could be said
that,
perhaps, Tasmania should consider another back-up system, should
both
problems occur again.

Wind generators on the west coast would be the most likely source.
The
west coast is the most consistently windy part of the state due to
the
Roaring Forties which blast onto the coast there. I used to work
on the
west coast of Tasmania some 4 decades ago and the most consistent
features of life there was the incessant rain and the equally
incessant
wind. They measure rainfall over there in metres.


**That would be unacceptable to Murtz. He has a pathological and
irrational hatred of any form of renewable energy system.

More Unprovable crap from the omniscient Trevor I have never said
any
such thing.

**Lying cunt. Many times over many threads, you have expressed your
hatred of the Greens and renewable energy. You have consistently
expressed your banal view that coal and nukes are fine and that AGW
does
not exist. You seem to forget that the crap you write is available
for
all to see.

Just put up your evidence that I hate renewable energy then we will
see who is the lying c***
Renewable energy is good if it works,

but what about the cost

That is part of if it works, the system has to be viable and reliable.
Probably the best renewable power system we have is hydro, but one of
the problems here is whether the greens manage to block dams because of
the lesser one eyed 3 legged newt or some such animal.

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

Not if you vole One Nation

**What does "vole" mean?

One Nation is populated by and voted for by morons. One Nation is a
symptom of the appalling state of the education system in Queensland.
Their glib, simplistic answers to complex problems betrays their
combined stupidity.

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night

**Are you familiar with:

* Batteries.
* Solar/thermal.
* Geo-thermal.


Where is Australia Geo-thermal potential and how far from consumers

**Australia is geologically very stable and has easily accessible
geo-thermal capacity to supply power for the next several thousand
years. Distance from consumers is not a major issue, as HV DC power
transmission losses are less than 3% per 1,000km.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

They got Labor to stop selling it then had the coal stations shut down

**Coal-fired power stations emit large amounts of CO2. CO2 is a major
contributor to global warming. Therefore, coal-fired power stations must
be shut down.

Q: What did SA use for lighting before candles?

A: Electricity.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Petzl]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 04:49:38 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

Not if you vole One Nation

**What does "vote" mean?

Typo for "vote"

One Nation is populated by and voted for by morons. One Nation is a
symptom of the appalling state of the education system in Queensland.
Their glib, simplistic answers to complex problems betrays their
combined stupidity.

So why are they gaining ground. Seems the others are much worse!

As for drought One Nation is going to drought proof Australia
http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/water

Or you think a better investment French submarines
or sending Waleed Aly on a taxpayer funded (via the Department of
Foreign Affairs) trip to the Middle East.
or DFAT paying $11485 for young Yassmin to swan about the Middle East
on her book-flogging/consciousness-raising tour. That was for travel
allowance and air fares.

Turnbull and co treat us taxpayers like they have broken the bank of
Monte Carlo!

Won't have the "mates" actual owner operators pay tax, 2015 Murdoch
took $1.5 billion out of Australia paid zero tax, Murdoch's media
don't tell you Murdoch is also a major investor in selling properties
(make $10K out of every home sold), Then there is Murdoch's returns
from Government vaccination programs.

my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night

**Are you familiar with:

* Batteries.
* Solar/thermal.
* Geo-thermal.


Where is Australia Geo-thermal potential and how far from consumers

**Australia is geologically very stable and has easily accessible
geo-thermal capacity to supply power for the next several thousand
years. Distance from consumers is not a major issue, as HV DC power
transmission losses are less than 3% per 1,000km.

The downside is maintenance Geo-thermal is maintenance intensive (the
steam is corrosive). Then there is as you suggest transmission costs
There are geological problems of cooling volcanic supplies.
http://www.nationalminingchronicle.com.au/news/31-news/othernews/1152-parachilna-geothermal-play-hots-up
https://is.gd/e1hlBp
6 year old story?

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

They got Labor to stop selling it then had the coal stations shut down

**Coal-fired power stations emit large amounts of CO2. CO2 is a major
contributor to global warming. Therefore, coal-fired power stations must
be shut down.

So why not sell them to Chinese THEN shut them down?
Knee jerking has cost SA a reliable power supply.
CO2 may not even be the or a player in Global warming.

Earth's axis tilt varies periodically. If it leans much, when the
northern hemisphere is turned towards the sun, is where the summers
are always so warm that the snow melts. Axis direction in the universe
determines which hemisphere is tilted towards the sun when its rays
are strongest.

Earth Line shape varies from elliptical to nearly circular. In the
latter case, the difference between winter and summer less, making
glacial possible.

Climate change due to natural variations over time in the sun's
activity in the earth's orbit shape of the Earth's axis tilt and the
cosmic radiation intensity.

Man can not control the climate. There will always be time varying due
to unavoidable, natural factors.
--
Petzl
Only one turnout that matters and that was on election day and Trump won.
So all you lefties sucking on your sour grapes. all the snowflakes cry babies,
a lot of them in the media who have been sent insane by Trumps mere presence in Washington.
Well they can just sit back and lap it up ,

Because the Donald has won,

And why because he's going to drain the swamp,
he's going to get rid of all the self serving semi-corrupt mob in Washington
and give the American people a new direction on border protection,
on job creation, on foreign policy,

Trump stands for a non-interventionist foreign policy,
something the left have been calling for since Vietnam.
The truth is they can't see that because Trump has offended the cult of identity politics,
judging everyone by their race gender and sexuality.

Trump judges people on their character, their work ethic
and has a very good chance to make America great again.

 

[Petzl]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 23:34:19 +1100, Gordon Levi
<gordon@address.invalid> wrote:

Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth.

Not by any measure. By area, Antarctica has less rain and snow. By the
only sensible measure which is precipitation per capita, Australia has
ten times as much as Great Britain and three times as much as the
United States <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ER.H2O.INTR.PC>.
Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania.

Far North Queensland is wetter and there has been fairly consistent
rain
http://www.ga.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0005/12569/GA14206.jpg>.
There is plenty of water in FNQ and it is time people and agriculture
were given incentives to move there.

"Our" Governmet is more interested in saving Moslem's and bringing
them and their deat cult here to destroy us like they have done
everywhere else for over 1,400 years., rather than invest in
Australia's future

--
Petzl
"Our" Goebellian media promote Islam and their refugees as a lovely
"religion" (in fact a death cult) that needs aid and sympathy! "Our"
media do have influence, look at the day in day attack on Trump.
Attacks on Rud/Labor were much the same.
https://is.gd/p7CYeV
It works

"We" need heads up to declare Moslems for what they are Trojan Horse
invaders!

Not only by bringing them here, but keeping them here is nothing less
than treason Moslems are at war with Australia by stealth, trojan
horse!

Major majority of the worlds refugees are created by Islam since the
days of Mohammad. Mainly because Islam is actually a violent political
process, not a religion at all.

Mohammad himself was once a (claimed) refugee taken in by the Jewish
city of Medina.

Within five years, Mohammad (with his other invading attacking forces
disguised as "refugees") had driven out, executed, or enslaved every
Jew living in Medina before The Rise of Islam, Medina Was Originally A
Jewish City..
Medina is more Jewish than Islamic. Talented Jews built Medina [then
called Yathrib] and made it one of the most prosperous areas in the
Arabian peninsula. Two polytheist Arab tribes settled alongside with
the Jews, who maintained a strong presence there until Muhammad and
some of his followers killed, enslaved, robbed and/or expelled Jews.

Medina then fell under Islamic backwardness and the Saudi regime is in
the forefront in promoting the Jihad against infidels

Islamic conquests have always been by infiltration
(Trojan Horse: "Al-Hijra", The Islamic Doctrine of
Immigration/invasion)

"Our" Government know this and Fraser was advised to ban them from
entering in 1974.

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 17/02/2017 8:40 AM, Petzl wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 04:49:38 +1100, Trevor Wilson
trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

Not if you vole One Nation

**What does "vote" mean?

Typo for "vote"

**Fuck me, that's one Hell of a typo.

One Nation is populated by and voted for by morons. One Nation is a
symptom of the appalling state of the education system in Queensland.
Their glib, simplistic answers to complex problems betrays their
combined stupidity.


So why are they gaining ground.

**In areas where people are as dumb as rocks, One Nation's simplistic
slogans appeal. It doesn't mean that they should be in government.


Seems the others are much worse!

As for drought One Nation is going to drought proof Australia
http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/water

**Sure they are. ON don't believe in AGW theory. They're idiots.

Or you think a better investment French submarines
or sending Waleed Aly on a taxpayer funded (via the Department of
Foreign Affairs) trip to the Middle East.
or DFAT paying $11485 for young Yassmin to swan about the Middle East
on her book-flogging/consciousness-raising tour. That was for travel
allowance and air fares.

**I think a better investment would be for taxpayers to cease funding
ALL ON Senators. They're morons and do not deserve any taxpayer funds.

Turnbull and co treat us taxpayers like they have broken the bank of
Monte Carlo!

Won't have the "mates" actual owner operators pay tax, 2015 Murdoch
took $1.5 billion out of Australia paid zero tax, Murdoch's media
don't tell you Murdoch is also a major investor in selling properties
(make $10K out of every home sold), Then there is Murdoch's returns
from Government vaccination programs.


my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night

**Are you familiar with:

* Batteries.
* Solar/thermal.
* Geo-thermal.


Where is Australia Geo-thermal potential and how far from consumers

**Australia is geologically very stable and has easily accessible
geo-thermal capacity to supply power for the next several thousand
years. Distance from consumers is not a major issue, as HV DC power
transmission losses are less than 3% per 1,000km.

The downside is maintenance Geo-thermal is maintenance intensive (the
steam is corrosive). Then there is as you suggest transmission costs
There are geological problems of cooling volcanic supplies.
http://www.nationalminingchronicle.com.au/news/31-news/othernews/1152-parachilna-geothermal-play-hots-up
https://is.gd/e1hlBp
6 year old story?

**All of which pales into insignificance beside the mess made of
coal-fired power.

Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

They got Labor to stop selling it then had the coal stations shut down

**Coal-fired power stations emit large amounts of CO2. CO2 is a major
contributor to global warming. Therefore, coal-fired power stations must
be shut down.

So why not sell them to Chinese THEN shut them down?

**They should simply be shut down.

> Knee jerking has cost SA a reliable power supply.

**I agree. When the Liberals sold electricity assets, they royally
screwed up.

> CO2 may not even be the or a player in Global warming.

**It is a major player. With a CO2 level of 300ppm, we wouldn't have a
problem.

Earth's axis tilt varies periodically. If it leans much, when the
northern hemisphere is turned towards the sun, is where the summers
are always so warm that the snow melts. Axis direction in the universe
determines which hemisphere is tilted towards the sun when its rays
are strongest.

**Strawman duly noted. The planet is warming due to excess CO2 levels.

Earth Line shape varies from elliptical to nearly circular. In the
latter case, the difference between winter and summer less, making
glacial possible.

**Strawman duly noted. The planet is warming due to excess CO2 levels.

Climate change due to natural variations over time in the sun's
activity in the earth's orbit shape of the Earth's axis tilt and the
cosmic radiation intensity.

**Strawman duly noted. The planet is warming due to excess CO2 levels.

Man can not control the climate. There will always be time varying due
to unavoidable, natural factors.

**Humans ARE, ALREADY controlling the climate, you moron. Our CO2
releases have caused the present warming!


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Trevor Wilson]

On 16/02/2017 11:34 PM, Gordon Levi wrote:

Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth.

Not by any measure. By area, Antarctica has less rain and snow.

**OK, you got me. Driest INHABITED continent.

By the

only sensible measure which is precipitation per capita, Australia has
ten times as much as Great Britain and three times as much as the
United States <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ER.H2O.INTR.PC>.
Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania.

Far North Queensland is wetter and there has been fairly consistent
rain
http://www.ga.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0005/12569/GA14206.jpg>.
There is plenty of water in FNQ and it is time people and agriculture
were given incentives to move there.

**There is plenty of water in FNQ, but the climate is changing. Rapidly.
We don't know what it will be like in the near future. Either way, my
point is that Tasmania was always regarded as reliably wet. It isn't.

They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

 

[Petzl]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 08:57:51 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:

On 17/02/2017 8:40 AM, Petzl wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 04:49:38 +1100, Trevor Wilson
trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth. Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania. They just
came out of a 10 year drought.

Not if you vole One Nation

**What does "vote" mean?

Typo for "vote"

**Fuck me, that's one Hell of a typo.


One Nation is populated by and voted for by morons. One Nation is a
symptom of the appalling state of the education system in Queensland.
Their glib, simplistic answers to complex problems betrays their
combined stupidity.


So why are they gaining ground.

**In areas where people are as dumb as rocks, One Nation's simplistic
slogans appeal. It doesn't mean that they should be in government.


Seems the others are much worse!

As for drought One Nation is going to drought proof Australia
http://www.onenation.com.au/policies/water

**Sure they are. ON don't believe in AGW theory. They're idiots.


Or you think a better investment French submarines
or sending Waleed Aly on a taxpayer funded (via the Department of
Foreign Affairs) trip to the Middle East.
or DFAT paying $11485 for young Yassmin to swan about the Middle East
on her book-flogging/consciousness-raising tour. That was for travel
allowance and air fares.


**I think a better investment would be for taxpayers to cease funding
ALL ON Senators. They're morons and do not deserve any taxpayer funds.

Most certainly the salaries and benefits/perks to Politicions and
Government salaries need looking at Pauline Hanson is doing this.
https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/malcolm-turnbull-kills-life-gold-pass-former-mps/3140489/

bludge Government jobs she is calling for sacking the board of
Australia Post

5 There’s a simple solution for the largesse of Australia Post. Their
CEO walked away with $5.6 million this year while five other
executives were paid between $1.3 million and $1.8 million. It’s owned
by the government — that means you and me. The Minister of
Communications should ask the board and CEO for their resignations. If
they won’t resign, sack them.

Turnbull and co treat us taxpayers like they have broken the bank of
Monte Carlo!

Won't have the "mates" actual owner operators pay tax, 2015 Murdoch
took $1.5 billion out of Australia paid zero tax, Murdoch's media
don't tell you Murdoch is also a major investor in selling properties
(make $10K out of every home sold), Then there is Murdoch's returns
from Government vaccination programs.


my problem is with it when it is a waste of time or does not work
efficiently,Coal is fine as a stop gap till the bugs are worked out in
renewables.


I have a view that reliance on renewables to the exclusion of
any other methods when it is obvious that the current state of
renewable
energy generation is not enough except in some rare situations is
folly.

**Only because your kind continues to to support coal-fired power.
Australia could easily transition to fully renewable energy within a
couple of decades.

Only at considerable cost with your carbon tax, mining tax,extremely
high power costs

**Bullshit. Solar costs are now competitive with coal.
Yes lets have only solar and not use electricity at night

**Are you familiar with:

* Batteries.
* Solar/thermal.
* Geo-thermal.


Where is Australia Geo-thermal potential and how far from consumers

**Australia is geologically very stable and has easily accessible
geo-thermal capacity to supply power for the next several thousand
years. Distance from consumers is not a major issue, as HV DC power
transmission losses are less than 3% per 1,000km.

The downside is maintenance Geo-thermal is maintenance intensive (the
steam is corrosive). Then there is as you suggest transmission costs
There are geological problems of cooling volcanic supplies.
http://www.nationalminingchronicle.com.au/news/31-news/othernews/1152-parachilna-geothermal-play-hots-up
https://is.gd/e1hlBp
6 year old story?

**All of which pales into insignificance beside the mess made of
coal-fired power.

You ever smelled Geo thermal emissions (you would die if you did)?




Renewable energy generation is definitely something to aim for but I
was
pointing out where it is not working because it is not up to the
point
yet and needs not so green assistance till such time,which SA has
not
allowed for.

**And again: The SA problems began when YOUR mates in the Lieberal
Party
of SA sold off electricity assets to private industry. Do you
understand
and acknowledge that?


I will acknowledge that the power has been sold off everywhere bit by
bit when I would rather it not

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

**And the guys you hate (the Greens) tried to stop it.

They got Labor to stop selling it then had the coal stations shut down

**Coal-fired power stations emit large amounts of CO2. CO2 is a major
contributor to global warming. Therefore, coal-fired power stations must
be shut down.

So why not sell them to Chinese THEN shut them down?

**They should simply be shut down.

Maybe but not yet. Also there are coal powered that have zero CO2
emissions.

Knee jerking has cost SA a reliable power supply.

**I agree. When the Liberals sold electricity assets, they royally
screwed up.

oligarchies Coalition, Labor, "Greens" do no better ever.

CO2 may not even be the or a player in Global warming.

**It is a major player. With a CO2 level of 300ppm, we wouldn't have a
problem.

[snip actual web page below]
**Humans ARE, ALREADY controlling the climate, you moron. Our CO2
releases have caused the present warming!

Your credibility as a Climatologic is?
Or you just copying Ordung?
Mine is from a Criminologist Scientist (Doctor and Professor)
translated from Swedish
https://is.gd/NzPGOu
original
http://klimatsans.com/2017/02/05/klimatfragan-grundad-pa-vetenskap-eller-dogm/
https://is.gd/7iZhfG
--
Petzl

--
Tiberius Caesar who reigned for 22­ years,
and his last year was AD 37. wrote:
"The extremities of Spain, the various parts of Gaul, the regions of
Britain which have never been penetrated by Roman arms, have received
the religion of Christ."

 

[Fran Snortilus]

On 16/02/2017 11:34 PM, Gordon Levi wrote:

Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:


**Dams only work if you have plenty of water, you clown. Australia is
the driest continent on Earth.

Not by any measure. By area, Antarctica has less rain and snow. By the
only sensible measure which is precipitation per capita, Australia has
ten times as much as Great Britain and three times as much as the
United States <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ER.H2O.INTR.PC>.
Rainfall is highly variable and
unreliable. Look at the wettest place in Australia - Tasmania.

Far North Queensland is wetter and there has been fairly consistent
rain
http://www.ga.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0005/12569/GA14206.jpg>.
There is plenty of water in FNQ and it is time people and agriculture
were given incentives to move there.

Move to a place so far from civilisation and with high humidity????? Ya
gotta be pulling the chain......

 

[Xeno]

On 17/02/2017 10:04 AM, Petzl wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 08:57:51 +1100, Trevor Wilson
trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
snip

**All of which pales into insignificance beside the mess made of
coal-fired power.

You ever smelled Geo thermal emissions (you would die if you did)?

If you clean up those geothermal emissions by removing the toxic and
smelly substances, usually by either oxidation or reduction, you will
end up with *more* carbon dioxide and water, not less. This is *basic
chemistry*!

<snip>

They got Labor to stop selling it then had the coal stations shut down

**Coal-fired power stations emit large amounts of CO2. CO2 is a major
contributor to global warming. Therefore, coal-fired power stations must
be shut down.

So why not sell them to Chinese THEN shut them down?

**They should simply be shut down.

Maybe but not yet. Also there are coal powered that have zero CO2
emissions.

There are no (none, zero, zip) coal fired power stations that have zero
CO2 emissions. There is no such animal as *clean coal*. What you are
stating is a chemical impossibility.

http://tinyurl.com/q5x2yey

Look on the above link for graphic of the perfect combustion of methane.

CH4 + 2O2 ----> CO2 + 2H2O

In case you don't get it, in perfect combustion you get carbon dioxide
and water. The ratio depends on the fuel consumed.

Look at the formula under this heading in the above link;

Stoichiometric combustion of a hydrocarbon in oxygen

Then look at the formula under this heading in the above link;

Stoichiometric combustion of a hydrocarbon in air

In your car you get somewhat less than perfect combustion so toxic
substances are produced, most notably NOx, CO and HC. In these
straightened times, it is the role of the catalytic converter in your
car to convert these substances to neutral substances - notably water
and carbon dioxide.

http://tinyurl.com/jzrkxk3

Reduction of nitrogen oxides to nitrogen and oxygen: 2NOx → xO2 + N2
Oxidation of carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide: 2CO + O2 → 2CO2
Oxidation of unburnt hydrocarbons (HC) to carbon dioxide and water:
CxH2x+2 + [(3x+1)/2]O2 → xCO2 + (x+1)H2O.

The above link will serve to prove just how naive you are.

Knee jerking has cost SA a reliable power supply.

**I agree. When the Liberals sold electricity assets, they royally
screwed up.

oligarchies Coalition, Labor, "Greens" do no better ever.

The *only* way to control or minimise CO2 emissions is to minimise use
of fuel. Why do you think vehicle emission control bodies around the
world include fuel consumption reduction measures in emission standards?

CO2 may not even be the or a player in Global warming.

**It is a major player. With a CO2 level of 300ppm, we wouldn't have a
problem.

[snip actual web page below]
**Humans ARE, ALREADY controlling the climate, you moron. Our CO2
releases have caused the present warming!

Your credibility as a Climatologic is?

You don't need to be a climatologist to understand the effects of excess
CO2 in the atmosphere.

Or you just copying Ordung?
Mine is from a Criminologist Scientist (Doctor and Professor)
translated from Swedish
https://is.gd/NzPGOu
original
http://klimatsans.com/2017/02/05/klimatfragan-grundad-pa-vetenskap-eller-dogm/
https://is.gd/7iZhfG

If he is the one saying that it is possible to burn coal without
producing CO2, then I have to dismiss his credibility entirely.

Might I respectfully suggest that you learnt nothing from your high
school chemistry classes. Fret not for it seems you are not alone. You
can redress this significant lack by undergoing some remedial studies.
Start with the links I supplied.


--

Xeno

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

Mahatma Ghandi