111 thoughts on “Monday Message Board”

  1. @P.M.Lawrence
    Pm why dont you take you pro nuke arguments somewhere else?

    And this will be a invitation for a major tantrum but Im saying it anyway. Im over pety nuclear costers and arguers who cant cost accidents like Chernobyl (or any other nuclear accident thats happened on the planet).

  3. PMLawrence

    I think $A 20billion is unaffordable for 3.5 Gwatt generator capital cost. This is based on the magnitudes, and is prima facie a basis by itself.

    Solar capital costs are approaching $1 per watt [see

    SOLAR ]

    $20 billion would go a long way to researching and developing renewables.

    It still amazes me just how coy nuclear lobbyists are about costs and externalities.

    Most pro-nuclear tracts seem to be mostly poetic or hypothetical opinion pieces with no rigor.

  5. @Chris Warren

    So, are you saying you don’t want to be told about other material that might give you more specific details about the actual inherent costs and difficulties of available nuclear reactor technologies (i.e., not “poetic or hypothetical opinion pieces”), as opposed to the costs that reflect obstacles that have been put in their way? Not telling you up front isn’t being coy, it’s simply not dumping on you.

  6. Alice :
    @P.M.Lawrence
    Pm why dont you take you pro nuke arguments somewhere else?
    And this will be a invitation for a major tantrum but Im saying it anyway. Im over pety nuclear costers and arguers who cant cost accidents like Chernobyl (or any other nuclear accident thats happened on the planet).

    Alice, if you look closely you will see that, far from arguing for nuclear power here, I’m trying to encourage people to explore what really is and is not involved – to open up exploration and discussion of the topic rather than close it off or pre-empt a conclusion about it (which, of course, is why I am not – yet – in the business of trying to cost it, since this is all far too preliminary for that). And as for tantrums, may I suggest that you not indulge in any or try to provoke any?

  7. Tony “Turncoat” Abbott has set up an A grade opposition front bench. He’s picked the “Scary Spice” clones out of the Spice Girls, in the hope that he’ll get some enemy soldiers with a bazooka or two. Which brings me to Bronwyn “Bazooka” Bishop, didn’t she do well to get a leg-up? And Phillip “Undertaker” Ruddock and Kevin “Giggles” Andrews too! Even the architect of treachery, Nick “The Knife” Minchin, got a guernsey. All atheists or humanists to the last one them!

    At least the election campaign won’t be boring.

  8. PM Lawrence

    Huh?

    So, are you saying you don’t want to be told about other material that might give you more specific details about the actual inherent costs and difficulties of available nuclear reactor technologies.

    Please indicate exactly where I suggested that I don’t want to be told about details re costs and difficulties.

    And I suggest you do this pretty quickly, as it appears to me you are engaging in disruptive falsification.

    But I will wait for your clarification.

  9. I think we need to put some little-discussed environmental problems on the front-burner.

    1. Overfishing.

    2. Particulates in coal.

    3. Fresh water. Look why can we not get oversupplied with fresh water? Why not have endless fresh water to spare? If we have that, and the convincing evidence kicks in with the CO2, with massive oversupply of fresh water thats a problem we can quickly and cheaply deal with.

    We aren’t sure how things will work with our population. What if there is a nuclear war in the Northern hemisphere and we have tens of millions of refugees? We are going to have to have them as guest workers at the very least. My point is that why plan five to ten years ahead with fresh water? Why not put it on the front-burner and go for 100 years? Why not go for three, four or ten times what we really feel we need? To make sure it isn’t a bottle-neck of truly ghoulish proportions in some terrible future.

    4. Particulates in coal. If we can get rid of the particulates not only might it be healthier for many people. But it might open up a more competitive energy market. What I don’t get with the neoclassicals is they never seem to aspire to have a proper, organic, non-cronyist market?

    5. An electromagnetic pulse attack. This can come from a nuclear power. If they are not inhumane enough to actually wipe out Sydney they can close us down with a nuke many kilometres in the air. It would take down the whole East Coasts power grid. Burn out the electronics in all your modern cars. We wouldn’t have the electrical equipment to fix the elecrical equipment. We could go into freefall and never come out. It would be an open invitation for invasion.

    But the fact of the matter is that nature will come up with this EMP effect. And could do so at any time. So what we have to do is have ubiquitous surge-protection.

    In this regards Rudd may have gotten something right quite by accident. I doubt he was thinking of an EMP-event when he put together this idea of beefing up our underground communications network. It must be just dumb luck surely? Maybe I’m being mean-spirited. But to rely on satellites is just risky. Nice while you have them, but we must not rely on them. We must have excess capacity built up underneath the ground, and everything with built-in surge protection.

    Below is the full horror-story on the electro-magnetic pulse attack. Remember it can be caused by both humans and by nature. Nature will get around to attacking us this way. No doubt about that at all. If you don’t think our creditors will do this to us, this is neither here nor there. Because nature has this in store for us and most likely heading towards us from elsewhere in the galaxy as we speak.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIhfQ8cqzrU&feature=PlayList&p=97259EA922989014&index=0&playnext=1

  10. Chris Warren :
    PM Lawrence
    Huh?

    So, are you saying you don’t want to be told about other material that might give you more specific details about the actual inherent costs and difficulties of available nuclear reactor technologies.

    Please indicate exactly where I suggested that I don’t want to be told about details re costs and difficulties.
    And I suggest you do this pretty quickly, as it appears to me you are engaging in disruptive falsification.
    But I will wait for your clarification.

    I never claimed that; you have misquoted me, editing away the question mark and so on without indicating the cuts or the context of the previous question (not visible on this page). In fact I was purely and simply asking for clarification myself, since I had previously offered you links if you were willing to accept them but then you replied in a way that failed and omitted to accept or reject the offer – an offer to which you have still not replied, though to me your conduct suggests rejection. If there is any “disruptive falsification” going on, it isn’t on my part. So I ask again, quoting myself accurately this time from each relevant comment:-

    Would you like some other links, or would you rather go and check for yourself to be sure of not being biassed?

    and

    So, are you saying you don’t want to be told about other material that might give you more specific details about the actual inherent costs and difficulties of available nuclear reactor technologies (i.e., not “poetic or hypothetical opinion pieces”), as opposed to the costs that reflect obstacles that have been put in their way? Not telling you up front isn’t being coy, it’s simply not dumping on you.

    In the event that you still do not ask for further and better particulars – an offer I shall not repeat after this – and still more if you instead misquote me and/or accuse me of making representations about you, readers may infer what they will from that and from the rest of the context but it will be the facts speaking for themselves and will not constitute my accusing you of anything.

  11. PM Lawrence

    Cutting and pasting is not “misquoting”.

    You are being deliberately disruptive.

    I am well aware of all your tricky little tactics.

    I find them quite boring.

    If you have links to great wisdom, post it, don’t play silly games.

  12. @Donald Oats
    Donald – yes Bronwyn Bishop has done well to get a leg up. Astonishing. Its a wonder Abbott doesnt recall JH himself from retirement for an appointment as the doppleganger PM. That would save Abbott having to find new ideas or new people, which he clearly has trouble with.

  14. @Alice

    Think I’ll stop reading the e-news, stop watching the ABC news, and go do something else with the time saved, until the election where I vote “Not Liberal”. Easy-peasy.

    BTW, did anyone see how Abbott pulled in his gut whenever he realised the cameras were pointing his way, at the budgie-smuggling contest? He did it three separate times that I was unwillingly subjected to by the MSM. Not that he has much of a gut to worry about, but still…did he really think the camera operators wouldn’t notice? LOL!

  16. Chris Warren :
    PM Lawrence
    Cutting and pasting is not “misquoting”.
    You are being deliberately disruptive.
    I am well aware of all your tricky little tactics.
    I find them quite boring.
    If you have links to great wisdom, post it, don’t play silly games.

    One, cutting and pasting a genuine question to turn it into an assertion is misquoting – particularly since you went on to accuse me of making that assertion, and particularly since you didn’t provide the context that showed I was seeking an answer to my earlier question.

    Two, I am not being deliberately disruptive, I am trying to avoid getting tangled up wasting time and research effort on people who don’t want information.

    Three, none of that is “tricky little tactics” to anyone who actually wants information, though I can see how it might appear such to people who want to push the information away.

    Four, if you really are bored you wouldn’t have come back with any of that.

    Five, although I do not have “links to great wisdom”, I do have links to further information and to people who are well enough informed and educated in the energy area to assess what is out there. I am going to assume charitably that you are in fact asking for that, and over the next few days I shall make the effort to pull that together with brief notes describing each – unless I receive snarky feedback from you or anybody else in the interim, in which case I shall not take the rather considerable trouble. Or you can research it yourself and thus ensure that I am not selecting and introducing bias.

  20. Joseph

    …you arent suggesting I think that the lib rugrat and hard right organised email networks with multiple voting mechanisms (more than one computer in the Bradfield home and a few at work??) would do a thing like that are you?

    Come to think of it – they sure can stack a branch. Polls are probably much easier…the whole newspoll employees probably have 50 different ways of hitting buttons as well….it is Murdoch.

    I dont believe anything but the census now.

  22. @TerjeP
    Anyway Terje – you did a nice little tapdance on that link didnt you….keep tapdancing (exit stage left!)
    The question asked was whether they preferred Abbott to Turnbull NOT whether they preferred Abbott to Rudd (we know the clear answer there). Also two less percentage points of females think he would be worse leader (than Turnbull) than males….

    Does that answer your question? Well there obviously wasnt enough rugrats around to mess up this poll. His polling is pretty ugly compared to Rudd.

  23. Chris@41, I can’t find the original article which compared pre satellite as well as GRACE satellite estimates of Greenland and Antarctic ice loss – but was a news article, though with quoted figures.

    GRACE satellite data (from 2002) is referenced in articles in Nature and Geophysical Research Letters – paywalled, but from GRL “In Greenland, the mass loss increased from 137 Gt/yr in 2002–2003 to 286 Gt/yr in 2007–2009, i.e., an acceleration of ?30 ± 11 Gt/yr2 in 2002–2009. In Antarctica the mass loss increased from 104 Gt/yr in 2002–2006 to 246 Gt/yr in 2006–2009, i.e., an acceleration of ?26 ± 14 Gt/yr2 in 2002–2009” Not 4 times the rate, my mistake, but more than doubled for both Greenland and Antarctic icesheets over 7 years(?) and much more, even in 2002-3 than pre satellite estimates for mid 1990’s (IIRC more than doubled). ICESAT data (laser telemetry) seems to be consistent with rapidly increasing icesheet loss shown by GRACE (gravimetric). It’s a rapid acceleration over a period denialists want people to think shows no significant warming.

    On Nuclear, I think it needs to be on the table for consideration but shouldn’t be reason to fail to pursue renewables with vigour right now. I can’t see Australia leading the way on nuclear; that won’t happen, but the trouble is I don’t see us leading the way in renewables either. The kind of grid that supports intermittent renewables just isn’t happening – more like more grid upgrades that increase the future availability of coal fired electricity – such as the Bonshaw to Lismore Transgrid project that’s in the pipeline. That one looks to be coal-fired electricity production positioning itself to undercut proposed gas and cane waste co-generation on NSW’s far North Coast. Probably on the (behind closed doors) assurance that there won’t be a serious carbon price to impact their competitive advantage.

    But, having failed to develop an intermittents friendly grid, nuclear could be the energy companies’ option of choice when governments finally come to accept that CCS isn’t going to work and coal really does have to go; they can slot it into that existing grid over the top of sites that are probably already toxic beyond rehabilitation. I think I’ll leave the heated arguments over it to others.

  24. @Joseph Clark

    Joseph – in response I agree completely with Don at #13

    “Think I’ll stop reading the e-news, stop watching the ABC news, and go do something else with the time saved, until the election where I vote “Not Liberal”. Easy-peasy.”

    Am I crazy ? nope. I dont for crazies either.

  26. The bait and hook question Terje. Yes I swallowed it until I read it. Wooden spoon award to U tonight.

  27. Alice – I shared a link. It was topical because we have previously discussed Tony Abbott and his appeal (or lack of) amoungst the female population. However I did not ask any question.

  29. Now that’s a question. And the answer to that question is no. And in case you’re confused by this reply let me assure you that it, like the earlier comment, does not constitute a question of any sort. No drinking and no question.

  30. @Joseph Clark
    Only when I read what you write Joseph – who are you? Another troll? We get people like quite often…you can tell by the acid dripping off your snarks.

    Terje – I think you took Joseph’s snark as a question by me to you, by mistake.

    This is getting like Wonderland tonight!

  31. @TerjeP (say tay-a)
    Terje – OK there was no question (no question about it at all). I admit it – straight up – my mistake. So lets talk your poll link then Terje?

    Women prefer Abbott as leader of LP compared to Turnbull less than men do, per your link. I think I was right. Women dont like him as much as men according to this poll. However, they never asked the women whether they preferred Abbott or Rudd (landslide to Rudd Id say – and while ever he keeps rabbiting about Workchoices V2 no one is going to like him).

  32. Post at 29 should say “we get people like you quite often”. Two finger fast typing best I can do. (Joseph – the snarker – ??troll – is trying to suggest Ive been drinking – charming man – Im still up working on a paper and trying to make sense of the 1967 Metal Trades Wage case and look at the time…now I cant sleep)

  34. Tom Wigley receives death threats, credible enough to involve the FBI and UK police. Boy, the way things are going on this CRU SwiftHack the threats could be from the crazies on either side, or even some nutter with a delusional belief in the purity of scientists (ie scientists must follow some canonical scientific method, a mythical version of scientific research typically described in undergraduate textbooks from philosophy to sociology. A few of the late 19th century and early to mid-20th century scientific texts also define an overally simplistic notion of scientific method too, Pauling’s General Chemistry for example – an otherwise fine book.).

    Seriously though, this is a disturbing development.

  35. Terje – I think you took Joseph’s snark as a question by me to you, by mistake.

    Yes I did. The fact it was prefixed with your name is what confused. Sorry about that.

  36. Alice – regarding the poll. This is what it says:-

    26% of females think Abbott is better than Turnbull.
    18% of females think Abbott is worse than Turnbull.
    46% of females think Abbott is about the same as Turnbull.
    10% of females are uncommitted.

    On those numbers it seems pretty clear that females slightly prefer Abbott over Turnbull. Do you agree?

    In terms of comparing female attitudes and male attitudes it is clear that more males than females rate Abbott as better than Turnbull. However more males than females rate Abbott as worse than Turnbull. All this really says is that men have more intense feelings both positive and negative about Abbott.

    Of course if this poll had been done before Abbott was leader of the Liberal I would expect a very different result. His status as leader will elevant his standing in many peoples eyes. However this isn’t the point. The point is that there is no evidence that Abbott has a specific problem with female support. He does however have a problem with general support with only 23% of people prefering him over Rudd.

  37. @TerjeP
    That wasnt at all what we were initially discussing Terje – it was whether they preferred Abbott as potential prime minister over Rudd. Dont poll boogie with me you twister!. LOL. We were also discussing whether women (a particular gender) preferred him less (relative to another gender – males).

    They do as you say prefer him less than males – I think he does have a problem with female support but he also appears to have a slight lack of youth support as well..

    Im not overexcited about this poll. Its the question – something like “without thinking about the leadership of the fed lib party etc do you prefer Abbott over Turnbull as leader” (ie of the nation) etc its not exactly a sharp question –

    As regards the choice Turnbull – he just lost the fight for leadership of libs and Im sure he would lose some poll votes over that and Abbott was the only other selection to choose…on your numbers above the majority of females are indifferent. Yes it may pick up as you say – but its not exactly a warm female response he gets, is it?.

  38. Hey everyone, I am brand-new to this forum, but I have been looking for this site for a long time ‘n I’m so grateful I finally found it.

    I’m 23 years of age and doing my bachelors at Columbia.

    I’m the kind of guy who enjoys to taste fresh stuff. Presently I am constructing my hold solar panels. I’m doing it all alone without the aid of my staff. I’m using the internet as the only path to acheive this. I saw a very brilliant website that explains how to build photovoltaic panels and so on. The website explains all the steps involved in constructing solar panels.

    I’m not exactly sure about how correct the info given there is. If some people over here who have xp with these things can have a look and give your feedback in the page it will be grand and I’d really value it.

    Tnx for reading this. You people are great.

  40. Re Joseph Clark’s denial of Newspoll push polling, I should ask this humorist what HE drinks, before attempting to post?

  45. Red wine for breakfast,

    white wine with lunch,

    port with dinner,

    marsala with desert,

    beer as required.

  48. Well just so much humbug: the NSW Minister for Community Services apologises for not protecting a 2 year who is murdered and stuffed into a suitcase after 34 risk of harm reports to the NSW Department of Community Services.

    Then complains that the child protection workers are over-worked. And yet the NSW government finds money for V8 Super cars and other circuses instead of child protection. Interesting priorities.

  49. @boconnor
    Well – what do we expect boconnor when public services and public expenditure on anything is so “out of fashion” to the land of neo liberal Mordor? V8s have priority over this kids life. No wonder 12000 people signed the poll to sack NSW Labor and their phones were jammed all day with people wanting to sack them after Kristina “the puppets” promotion. It makes me sick too. Marie Bashir – where are you. Apparently he didnt even want to attend KKs swearing in. It should be a swearing out of the lot of them and idiot loonie right ideological mates state. V* super cars ?? They have dug their own grave.. spinmeisters. How many complaints calls gotted logged on that poor kid before he was murdered? Something like 27. I dont blame docs staff. Try looking higher up at those who, in their suits, consider themselves above this and only fit to hob nob with the wealthy (Obeid, Tripodi, the puppet, Roozendaal, Della Bosca, Robertson, – all pathetic self interested right wing – or left wings that couldnt give a damn about privatisation or unions like that joke Robertson – creeps).

    Poor kid. Just an example of the utter degradation of NSW Labor and their filthy private sector marketeering priorities.

    Get the broom and sweep out the neo liberal rubbish. Ive lost it.

  50. Alice, two state elections ago, many trad ALP voters in NSW vowed to vote Liberal such was their disgust with and anger at Labor.

    That sentiment’s reaching an unprecedented crescendo now even among public servants such is their horror at NSW ALP corruption and shenanighans.

    There’re a few bright spots in the gloom. Elizabeth Farrelly is still employed by the SMH and her piece today travelled widely and is dynamite.

Leave a comment