MRAA (ie MRAV) bashing

Queensland legislation has not.

Boxer

 

Didn't think of that. Wonder how hard it would be to convince a
significant portion of Sydney to swap their roof tiles for solar panels
and a wire back to mains. You could have a huge collection area that way.

....snip

Thanks for the good info, I've not done a lot of investigation, just a
bit of general reading an a couple of documentaries seen by chance

JL

 

As it has always been, so will it always be

JL

 

JL wrote:

Aye, and can you see _our_ pollies actually collecting the money for
dealing with the left-overs and not pissing it against the wall on some
short term measure to be re-elected?

regards,
CrazyCam

 

<sigh> True.

JL

 

The size of the question mark which pops up over my head when the noise
produced by wind turbines gets trotted out as an objection has to be
seen to be believed...

....back in the day, one of the places I'd go to contemplate the universe
in the small hours of the night was Malabar in Sydney, where a single
30m wind turbine was set up on the cliffs as a trial. provided I wasn't
standing right under the thing, it was *inaudible* over the sound of the
wind driving it.

A few weeks ago, I did a service call in Crookwell. They have an
eight-turbine wind farm just outside of town, right next to the road,
with a little viewing area-thing some 100-120m from the nearest turbine.
It was a blustery day and the turbines were fair cranking, yet, again, I
had to concentrate to make out the sound of the spinning blades over the
wind when I got out of the car for a gawk.

 

So how come this is the first we hear of it...?

 

Green lobby, or a bunch of prejudiced locals who figured they'd get more
media attention if they included "Conservation" in the name of the body
they formed for their campaign.

On the way back from the GeePee last month, between the Island and
Leongatha, I clocked nine big turbines on the horizon off to my right
which I didn't remember as being there when I last passed through, six
months earlier, on my way home from the SBK's.

Good stuff.

In all seriousness, between, say, three local medium-size wind turbines
and a couple of hectares of solar panels, there wouldn't be a small
country town in Australia which would need to bother the national grid.

 

It disent matter to me...

Postman Pat

 

Another NIMBY furphee.

It could make Australia a force to be reckoned with on the global
mushroom market.

 

I think some of the opposition arises when one property owner in the
area does a deal to let the genrerating company set up a wind-farm, and
the neighbours get pissed off because the farm has about the same impact
on them as it does on the wind farmer, but they don't get paid.

Moike

 

Nah, they were there at Supers time this year - I spent a few hours
almost underneath them with a wallaby damaged RSV-R waiting for a
trailer to turn up...

big

 

In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 15 Nov 2005 17:41:22 +1100

According to a doco on the BBC, it's not that much of a furphy.

Although the doco was about using tidal and ocean current power, it did
have info on other methods, and wind farms have problems with bird
migration routes, and noise issues.

Zebee

 

Not SBS; it was a story on Four Corners, and what stunned my mullet
about it was the sequence detailing the current and long-term waste
sequestration strategy Sweden uses. The current specially-dug caverns,
bigger than suburban shopping centres, with football-field-sized
containment pools holding the waste submerged are to be replaced by
helical tunnels dug down to something like 4 vertical km below the
surface and entirely backfilled with concrete once the waste, encased
piece-by-piece in sabots of solid copper had been deposited in holes
drilled into the tunnel floor.

Consider the full gamut of costs this, or a similar approach, entails,
from the thousands of man-years of expensive mine-worker labour to the
cost of the thousands of tonnes of copper for the sabots and the cost of
building and running the specialised, drum-tight factory at which the
nuclear waste would be encased in these sabots (waste goes into a mould,
molten copper follows it in).

When a piece of pipework at a conventional powerplant becomes due for
replacement, it can be melted down and reused; a similar piece of
pipework at a nuclear powerplant, apart from having been manufactured to
a higher (and, thus, more expensive) spec to begin with, becomes a piece
of radioactive waste.

 

You would have heard if you had the power to change the legislation, no
point shouting from the rooftops to the masses if the masses are not
listening.

Boxer

 

Sounds reasonable to me.

Boxer

 

<SET OBJECT=IK MODE=Consultant>
How much of an impact would there be on the profit margin from a
$750-$1000 yearly grant to each of the adjoining proerty owners?

Anyone who complains on the basis of the presence of the wind farm
affecting the upcoming sale of their property, offer to buy them out at
current market rates. In five years, between the wind farm having become
a part of the scenery and the rise in rural property prices, how much
net profit can expect to be made by onselling the property?
</SET>

On another note, "small-town mentality" translates, with a slight change
in context, to a single word in Croatian... "malogradjansko"

 

Do you think you could show a smidge more contempt for the people you
recently tried to convince should send you to state parliament as their
representative?

 

I did not know that you were in the electorate.

I can of course muster up some more contempt for you inane ramblings.

Boxer

 

Me, personally, no, but a fair few of those masses you don't see the
point of trying to engage with would, though.

What I had in mind with my initial remark was that, despite the
blatherings in here having turned to environmental matters on a fair few
occasions in the past, you waited until this thread to claim that you've
been a behind-the-scenes champion of environmentally-friendly building
codes "for years"... not sure whether to just flat-out not believe you
or feel a tad additionally dejected that, in all this time, you didn't
see it fit to even mention this positive initiative you're pushing,
instead concentrating on your usual glib barbs.

As for confining your lobbying to those with "the power to change
legislation" (which, silly me, I keep thinking should, in a democracy,
mean "everyone", or "the masses", if you prefer), how much sense does
that approach make if what you're lobbying for stands to be seen as
onerous by the public? What, really, are the chances of a state
politician coming out before the public and, out of the blue, stating,
in effect, "Right; from tomorrow, building a house in Queensland is
going to be more complicated and will require compulsory involvement
from tradespeople credentialed in a set of currently very rare skills"?

This wasn't, like, a cunning plan to trick the current Qld government
into undermining its own popularity? Was someone in the party going to
owe you a beer if the government went for it?