News location:

Wednesday, September 11, 2024 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

Only one emission-free, 24/7 generating system

“Australia has the natural advantage of a third of the world’s nuclear resources,” says letter writer ANTHONY HORDEN.

It’s good to see letter writers beginning to understand that intermittent solar and wind are not reliable sources of electricity that the developed world has grown used to over the last 140 years or so. 

Write to editor@citynews.com.au

But please call these forms of generation “intermittent”, for that is what they are. 

Despite some conceited politicians pretending they can change the world’s climate by tinkering with intermittent meteorological and astronomical electricity generators and giant chemical batteries, there is only one established, effective, emission-free, 24/7 generating system – nuclear energy steam-raising for turbine generators.

Australia has the natural advantage of a third of the world’s nuclear resources. And it needs no more fungible water than any other turbo-generating system!

I understand the fairy dust researchers have reached the same conclusions as Twiggy Forest’s hydrogen researchers and the many billion-dollar-spending fusion researchers.

Anthony Horden, Macquarie

Evaporation affects water cooling systems

John L Smith argues for nuclear power (Letters, CN August 1) but in doing so perhaps misleads readers. 

Even nuclear reactors with recirculating water-cooling systems need replenishment due to evaporation. This typically amounts to 75 million litres a day, the equivalent of 25 Olympic-sized swimming pools, according to the World Nuclear Association. Not an insignificant amount for the world’s driest inhabited continent.

While a key to the renewable energy transition is indeed storage, Mr Smith quotes the capacity of Snowy 2.0 to generate electricity (2.2 GW) rather than its storage potential. 

According to Snowy Hydro, the scheme will provide “approximately 350,000 megawatt hours [350 GWh] of large-scale storage to the National Electricity Market.” Enough energy to “power three million homes over the course of a week.”

Finally, while it is true that large-scale renewable energy systems will take up land, agriculture can continue around and under them. And it already is. 

Mr Smith should read up on agrivoltaics. Yes, land will be needed but it is often overstated. Andrew Blakers, Professor of Engineering at ANU’s Institute for Climate, Energy & Disaster Solutions has calculated that about 1200 square kilometres will be required. At 4.2 million square kilometres, the area devoted to agriculture is 3500 times larger. The area covered by coal and gas licences and applications is 2.85 million square kilometres – a far greater problem.

Ray Peck, Hawthorn, Victoria

A tougher line needed with India and China

Following Albanese’s fulsome and embarrassing welcome to Indian Prime Minister Modi, amply covered in a recent ABC Four Corners program, it is time for someone more suitable to take his place as the prime minister of Australia.

A tougher line needs to be taken with both India and China, both of which support to some extent Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and obviously see a need to set up spy agencies in a so-called friendly country. 

Australian migrant and refugee policy also needs a complete overhaul as it is allowing overseas disputes to become violent demonstrations back in Australia, thus fracturing an increasingly fragile democracy.

The rise of the far right in Europe and elsewhere should serve as a warning as to where Australia might head if something is not done to improve our version of multiculturalism.

This includes re-examining the provision of citizenship to migrants who have no intention of living in Australia and contributing to our development and growth. The fact that some 15,000 Lebanese with Australian citizenship are currently in Lebanon is just such an example.

Ric Hingee, Duffy

Don’t vote Labor: they’ll increase the cost of living

In response to Michael Delaney’s letter (CN August 1) regarding a 34 per cent rate increase: yes, Michael, my rates have been increasing every year to $5907.56 even though my UCV has gone down slightly for the last three years. 

I am also questioning what the $50 Safer Family Levy is for. 

Since you are also paying Land Tax, I assume you are renting your place out so I suggest you add every increase to your rental. 

If people complain about high rentals in Canberra send them to talk to Mr Barr. Land Tax is usually more than Land Rates, so it isn’t worth it renting out property. I have  complained a couple times in the last few years, but it was on deaf ears. 

I am an 88-year-old retiree, and have lived in my home for 54 years trying not to go into a nursing home, so what does one do? Eat less, heat less and maintain the house less. 

All I can say is don’t vote Labor: you’re asking for increased cost of living in this territory. Give the Liberals a go. Maybe they’ll cancel this useless extension of the rail to Woden, which we obviously all have to pay for with our ever increasing rates and taxes.

Monica Beran, Farrer

Common valuation principles will probably apply

Michael Delaney’s letter (CN August 1) asked for an explanation of his 34 per cent land tax increase. May I offer a possible explanation without knowing his specific circumstances.

In my previous letter, I pointed out the double impact that homeowners were suffering from the ACT government annual rates program (comprising the universal annual increase from the government’s 2012 tax-reform policy, in addition to further increases if the land value was revalued upwards, as regularly occurs every two to three years).

In addition, as a result of the government’s 2024 announcement on the reconfiguration of huge areas of suburban residential land areas previously zoned as RZ1 to permit multiple developments, this new policy (whether deliberate or coincidental) has the undesirable effect of revaluing such redesignated land zoning to the value of its highest and best use. 

Unfortunately for landowners, this will mean further significant upward valuation of their parcels of land.

Whilst Treasury appears to claim that landowners will only receive these increases if they redevelop, common valuation principles would more likely apply, which would mean all landowners in redesignated RZ1 areas would be susceptible to these additional land valuation increases, irrespective of whether they redeveloped or not.

Khalid Ahmed and Jon Stanhope observed that this was also the likely potential impact in their recent CityNews article on rezoning and residential rates.

Ron Edgecombe, Evatt

This is revenue raising by stealth

In response to Michael Delaney’s letter (CN August 1) regarding a 34 per cent rate increase; we have suffered the same increase in rates without explanation.

Yet the ACT government claims are 3.75 per cent average.

This is revenue raising by stealth.

Christopher Wordsworth, via email

Is this the plan for housing at shopping centres?

Is this what Mr Barr has in mind for redeveloping Canberra’s shopping centres? Examples from Strasbourg (northern France) of “shop-top” housing.

Richard Johnston, Kingston

When four Greens became one

The ACT Greens have never forgotten that four Greens MLAs went to the 2012 election supporting light rail, and three of the four lost their seats.

Leon Arundell, Downer

There is a God, science says so

While agreeing with Herman van de Brug that there is a God (Letters, CN August 5) I would not argue on the tenuous evidence of statistics but on basic science, especially as governments of today are elected on their commitment to science (eg,. the cause of global warming).

There is now collective scientific evidence of a beginning of our universe (physical reality from nothing) and a transphysical intelligence that fine-tuned the initial conditions of the big-bang for life, begging acknowledgement that to be human has been determined by a Creator.

John L Smith, Farrer

Even the diehards think the ABC is biassed

Can’t believe I am agreeing with Eric Hunter after reading his column in CityNews (“Macklin is right about the ABC, but there’s more”, August 8). 

Even their diehard supporters are telling us that the ABC is politically biassed now.

Ian Pilsner, Weston

 

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Share this

3 Responses to Only one emission-free, 24/7 generating system

Jim says: 13 August 2024 at 8:42 am

“Transphysical intelligence that fine-tuned the initial conditions of the big-bang for life”

I’d love to see the evidence for this claim. Absolutely hilarious.

Reply
John L Smith says: 13 August 2024 at 3:47 pm

One of the earliest suggestions came from atheist Sir Fred Hoyle (see reference 39 in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hoyle) “a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and … there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.”[39]

The proposal is fully explored in Chapter 2 of “Science at the Doorstep of God” Ignatius Press, where all the competing theories are addressed.

Reply
Eric Hunter says: 16 August 2024 at 1:45 pm

I’m not sure it is wise to rely on Wikipedia for fully accurate information as its checking mechanisms are not always rigorous (in my university experience, Wikipedia was not acceptable as an assignment reference for this reason). Nor am I sure that Hoyle’s widely reported comment was intended to be taken literally. If there is clear evidence that it was, and in proper context, I’d be pleased to receive the authoritative reference that precisely confirms it. Even so, it doesn’t mean he got it right. Science still can’t fully answer the big question of the beginnings of our universe(s), but even less so, does faith, however unwavering.

Secondly, the author of “Science at the doorstep of God” is a retired American Jesuit priest and prolific author on religion and science, Fr Robert Spitzer. I am not denying him his deep interest and conviction in linking God and science, only to point out that he starts from a premise of faith (as do quite a number of scientists, some highly qualified ,who also somehow simultaneously maintain their strong beliefs). There is a world of logical difference between good science, which is based on constant questioning of what might appear to be the status quo, and faiths (of all types) who claim to have all the answers and there’s no need to question any further – just rely on the unprovable texts. I’ve never been able to understand how these contradictory stances can exist side by side, even though I don’t question the sincerity of those who do hold them.

Of course, the even bigger question is, how does every believer know that their particular faith, and theirs alone is the one true one while all the rest are wrong?

Reply

Leave a Reply

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews