Important role … NSW has the potential to build its economy on inexpensive, gas-based electricity. Photo: Ben Rushton

The transition from coal-based electricity generation to gas-based electricity, which emits less carbon dioxide, has become a fraught issue in NSW.

The NSW economy was built over the past 50 years on relatively cheap, coal-based electricity. Like Queensland, we have the opportunity to build our economy over the next 50 years or more on low-carbon, relatively inexpensive, gas-based electricity.

Queensland has taken the lead in developing its coal seam gas resources and is now well advanced to move from coal into large-baseload, combined-cycle gas turbines. And Queensland is moving into gas even though it already has the lowest carbon dioxide-emitting coal-based power stations in Australia.

By comparison, NSW is lagging, with no clear direction as to where our future baseload electricity generation will come from.

The development of the coal seam gas industry in NSW obviously requires much closer co-operation between the government, the gas industry and land owners.

The recent protests by communities directly affected by the potential development of coal seam gas are testimony to the lack of consultation. In the Hunter Valley, for example, winemaker Bruce Tyrrell and others are campaigning for the area to be ”ring fenced” from the industry to protect the wine and tourism industries.

Our natural heritage of land and water and its ecology must indeed be protected and a way of mining gas found that is in complete harmony with this heritage. I am a member of the NSW Greens and opposed their policy of ”blanket” opposition to coal seam gas.

Of course some strategic areas of prime farming land and national or state parks should be preserved. But as an engineer, I don’t accept that the problems of water contamination and treatment, and of gas leakage, are insurmountable. These are engineering problems and can be resolved at a cost. If the cost for any gas mine is too high, it won’t be mined.

There has been a lot of publicity about the development of shale gas in the US – particularly in recent days with an ABC Foreign Correspondent story and an international conference happening now in Canberra – but its experience is of little relevance to Australia. The mining of shale gas is technically different and the legislative framework of American states is of no relevance in NSW.

Tapping the resource safely in NSW is all a matter of stringent regulation combined with excellent engineering, irrespective of the cost.

Our Asian neighbours in China and India are planning for a future fuelled by lower carbon emissions by continuing with coal-based electricity from advanced technology power stations and moving into gas and nuclear, with a minor component of renewable energy.

Renewable installations usually look impressive because the capacity to produce energy is quoted rather than the actual energy produced.

The cost of renewable energy is very high because these resources have limited availability of wind and of sunlight over the course of a year – about 20 per cent.

A claim by the Beyond Zero Emissions report that Australia has the opportunity to have a totally renewable-based electricity system within this decade lacks economic and technical credibility. It is extremely unlikely to be a reality this century. Renewable energy is simply not the best economic development strategy for NSW or Australia.

A low-carbon, sustainable-energy future for the world is possible, according to the International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook 2011 report. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can be stabilised at 450ppm in 2035 by both a reduction in the use of energy and a primary energy mix in 2035 of coal (16 per cent), oil (25), gas (22), nuclear (11), hydro (3), biomass and waste (16), and modern renewables of wind and solar (8).

There will be an economic penalty for NSW if it does not develop its gas resources. And there is no need to incur such a penalty from a global atmospheric perspective. I have as much interest as anyone in protecting the home of humanity, planet Earth. It is possible to protect our shared home with a low-carbon sustainable-energy future, and gas is an important part of that future.

John Williams is a former executive in the NSW electricity industryand a PhD student with Charles Sturt University researching climatechange, energy and its impact on the earth. Paul Sheehan is on leave.

Powertrekk … allows you to charge your mobile using water.

It is the nightmare of the wired world – a smartphone low on battery.

Now Swedish group myFC says its water-powered charger could be the fix anywhere while battery giant Duracell is championing a push for cars and even stadiums to be built with energy “mats” that would power up phones.

A Californian firm, meanwhile, has launched a phone that it claims can remain charged for up to 15 years, making it the perfect spare in emergencies or disasters.

“The difference between the energy on a phone and the energy we consume is increasing. We need to charge more often but you don’t want to be hooked onto a wall,” said myFC chief executive Bjorn Westerholm.

His firm has therefore come up with a portable fuel cell charger which is slightly larger than a compact camera and which uses just one spoonful of water and a small metallic device called a fuel puck, to fully charge an iPhone.

The PowerTrekk could appeal most to campers, aid workers or the military, said Westerholm, who is exhibiting the charger at the world’s biggest mobile fair in Barcelona.

“It could be sea water, fresh water. You need to carry water with you to survive anyway and the PowerTrekk needs just one spoonful,” he said.

“So you can Facebook, email even when you’re in the outdoors for hours.

“Our value proposition is that you don’t need to go to the grid. You don’t need to wait to charge your phone.”

Competition for solutions to power up phones is fierce.

XPAL Power rolled out a phone with a battery that “lasts 15 years,” said Christian Scheder, chairman of the Californian firm.

The so-called Spareone, which will be commercialised in March, remains charged for up to 15 years if the phone is turned off, and for two months if it is on.

“This is great for emergency, disaster situations,” Scheder said.

Battery giant Duracell meanwhile has its own vision to keep the world charged.

It is championing the PowerMat system, a mat which looks like a small tablet that plugs into the power source and which has sufficient space to charge two phones which are equipped with special protective covers.

But that is just the beginning, Stassi Anastassov, Duracell President, said.

Beyond just targeting consumers with the charging kit, Duracell is at the Mobile World Congress to talk phone manufacturers into designing a slot for a special chip or even build it into the telephone, thereby doing away with the protective covers that are currently required to dock with the mat.

The company further wants to fit the mats in public places, for instance, build them into tables at fast-food chains, thereby allowing anyone with equipped phones to charge up anytime.

It already has a deal with General Motors to fit all vehicles from 2013 with the charging mat. Likewise, it has an agreement to equip New York’s Madison Square Garden, starting with bar tabletops.

“Of course it will take many years, the whole ecosystem will not be up tomorrow,” said Anastassov.

“But our vision is that you will be able to never go out of power, simply by facilitating the whole charging process for you.

“It’s very similar to banking and money. If you want to have cash, you can either have a very big wallet full of money or you have an ATM card,” he said.

AFP