EcoRadio

Author: admin

  • Acidic water could be the final straw

     

    “It certainly is (a nail in the coffin),” Mr Galpin told The Australian. “It’s a negative as far as the area is concerned. It’s the last thing we need.”

    The 64-year-old, his wife, Sue, and sons Jarrad and Andrew have battled tough conditions for three years. They considered selling, but are “hanging in there”.

    There is little water left to pump from the river. When the pipes are not running dry, the water is too acidic. The farmer has spent more than $6000 buying water this year.

    “If we hadn’t been able to buy water from the Myponga Reservoir, we would have had to close down,” Mr Galpin said. “That’s more or less saved us at a price.”

    Health SA has advised that the acidic water could irritate the eyes, and has warned people to avoid contact with the tributaries. Landholders have been asked to keep stock away from the water and to provide alternate supplies.

    Modelling last year predicted Finniss River and Currency Creek would acidify once water levels dropped to 0.75m below sea level. River Murray Minister Karlene Maywald said last week water levels in the Goolwa Channel were well below that point and the tributaries had disconnected, allowing acidic material to build up.

    More than 300 tonnes of fine limestone have already been placed in Currency Creek, and 80 tonnes in the Finniss River to neutralise the acid.

    It is hoped temporary barriers across the Goolwa Channel from Clayton to Hindmarsh Island, and across the mouths of the Finniss River and Currency Creek, will prevent further acidification.

    The barriers have been approved by federal Environment Minister Peter Garrett to prevent a “bad environmental outcome” and to manage “acidification impacts”.

    The Ngarrindjeri Native Title Committee is opposed to any temporary or permanent barriers across any section of the Murray or Lower Lakes.

    “We do not want them because it’s going to have a huge impact on our country, on our culture and connecting to our stories,” chairman Matt Rigney told The Australian.

    “We do understand the importance of water for Adelaide and the major country towns, but we’ve been caught in a situation where we’re damned if we do, damned if we don’t.”

  • Are we moving towards a new oil crisis?

     

    The world is aware that the production of the existing oil wells is decaying and that new discoveries are more scarce and more expensive. Some experts consider that global oil production may have peaked at 94 million barrels a day [sic – the correct figure would be arround 84 Mb/d]. The current economic crisis can make the situation worse. The lower prices that we are enjoying now can be in fact bad news. At this price oil producers have been forced to postpone many necessary investments in new production capacity. These investments take decades to be accomplished. In consequence, if the current economic crisis finished and demand recovers we could be facing huge shortage of supplies that can lead to extremely high prices.

    How high? According to the Secretary General of the International Energy Agency (IEA), Nabuo Tanaka, oil prices could go up to as much as 200$ a barrel in the next 4 years. A quick look back on the situation of last year when prices were at a mere 147$ a barrel maybe gives an idea of what the consequences may be if the prices goes a 25% higher.

    The current relatively low oil prices give a respite to prepare for the coming new oil crisis. We have to reduce our dependency in all those areas in which black gold is not indispensable, such as heating, or electricity production. For those areas which will have to continue to depend on it, like transport, we need to accelerate the research for alternatives, like biofuels, electric cars or hydrogen. And in all sectors, we have to accelerate our efficiency being aware that every barrel of oil that we are using is one of the last.

    It is difficult to forecast when the next oil crisis is going to come. As Nobel Price Niels Bohr once put it “prediction is very difficult, particularly about the future”. But one thing is certain, one day we are going to run out of oil, and to prepare for that day we may be running out of time.

    There isn’t much to add to these lines, for anyone reading this post likely agrees fully with them.

    Taking the opportunity, it may be perhaps time to reflect on this Commissioner’s term. The Commission took office with oil prices below 40$ and saw them climbing above 140$, dealt with protests from professionals dependent on oil products: hauliers, fishermen, farmers. He leaves office during the worst economic recession since at least 1980. While during the first half of its term both the Commission and the Commissioner were reluctant to accept the hypothesis of serious Energy supply problems, they eventually aknowledged the situation.

    First with the setting of the 20-20-20 goals but especially with the second Strategic Energy Review, the Commission showed that it understood (even if partially) that Europe’s energy entitlement is at risk. Acknowledging the Union’s unsustainable dependence on imported Gas and the present importance of its Nuclear park, were two relevant steps. To that adds some interesting initiatives like the Mediterranean Energy Ring or the Solidarity Plan. But the most positive outcome to this Commissioner’s term ended up being the commitment to Energy Efficiency – the policy that can have most impact over the short term.

  • Zero immigration and sustainable populations

     

    If the economic case only benefits the capital owners and makes the average citizen worse off economically, without even considering environmental and sustainability impacts, why is it being done?

    The obvious answer seems to be that the capital owners are running the show for their own benefit, at the expense of the average Australian. And why shouldn’t they. Their goal is to maximise profits and high immigration helps them do that. High immigration increases the supply of workers. Increased supply of labour, lowers the cost of labour. Lower labour costs means an increase in profits.

    High immigration also increases the supply of consumers. Increased demand means higher prices. Higher prices mean increased profits. It’s a double bonus. Higher profits from lower labour costs and higher demand. Whoopee.

    But something that obvious would be quickly exposed by the ever diligent media. Or perhaps they have other incentives. On October 28, the Sydney Morning Herald ran an editorial entitled “Keep the doors open”. The sales pitch is that Australia needs high immigration to have solid economic growth and then the implication is that this economic growth will benefit every Australian. But it just isn’t so. The editorial writer’s trick is to say that “the 2006-07 migrant intake benefited the economy by $516 million in the first year” and then we are supposed to think that we got some of that $516 million. The SMH is smart enough to make sure they don’t mention that the average Australian gets none of that massive $25 per person.

    With a significant part of newspaper profits coming from real estate advertising, it is not hard to understand why newspapers pump up the housing market, but how far can their logic be stretched. They admit that there is a housing shortage, rents are too high and finance is hard to get in the current climate, so the answer is … wait for it … bring in a lot more people to increase the demand for housing. That will make housing harder to obtain, rents will become higher and finance harder to get, but it will increase profits for the housing industry. At least we know who comes out ahead.

    Another angle we hear is that we need immigration because we have a skills shortage. What that really means is: we have a skills shortage at the salaries we are willing to pay. We never have a skills shortage for investment bankers. We always have plenty of them, because they get paid a motza. We have a shortage of qualified tradesmen because it is a really tough job that doesn’t pay very well. If the pay was increased, there wouldn’t be a shortage of qualified tradesmen, but that would reduce the profits of the construction companies and factory owners. The easier solution, for business, is to call for increased skilled immigration to keep wages down and profits up.

    The skills shortage is a major change from the usual “can do” attitude of business. For example:

    • ask business what we should do about climate change and they respond, “Business can sort that out – use market forces with a carbon trading scheme and use geosequestration in coal fired power plants”;
    • ask business what we should do about water shortages and they respond, “Business can sort that out – build new desalination plants, dams and pipelines”;
    • ask business what we should do about Fossil Fuel depletion and they respond, “Business can sort that out – replacements for petroleum will be found as soon as the price gets high enough”;
    • ask business what we should do about depletion of farmland and they respond, “Business can sort that out – market forces from higher food prices will give farmers incentives to repair their land”; then
    • ask business what we should do about the skills shortage and they respond “Oh, nothing we can do. Government needs to bring in lots more skilled migrants or the Australian economy will fall apart.”

    Another issue sometimes associated with immigration is the ageing population. Most commentators know that increased immigration doesn’t significantly slow the ageing of the population, because the average age of migrants is only a little less than the average age of the overall population and migrants age, just like existing residents. Not everybody is clear about that, though.

    A few years ago, Louise Markus, Federal Liberal Member in the seat of Greenway, rang me in response to a letter I wrote her regarding the negative environmental impacts of increased population. She said something like “But Eric, we need increased immigration to battle the effects of our ageing population.” I said immigration doesn’t do anything for the ageing population and the phone went quiet for a few seconds. She then said “Well I don’t think most of the people in Greenway agree with you on population.” Game, set and match.

    What really mattered to her, and to all politicians, is what the majority of voters think. Politicians don’t need to clutter their minds with logical arguments, as long as they are on the same page as the electorate.

    It would be easy to blame business for lowering our standard of living and politicians for being their accomplices, but that is wrong. It is NOT up to business to make Australia sustainable (although it would happen more quickly if they led the way). It is up to the citizens of Australia to vote in the politicians who will best serve their interests. Both major parties now serve the interests of big business.

    We have given business the goal of making profits for themselves and they have done that very well, and provided us with the goods and services that make Australia one of the best places on earth to live. When business is given limitations and guidelines, they adapt to those guidelines and continue to produce the high quality goods and services that make Sydney such a great place to live.

    If Australia adopted net zero immigration and made efforts to become more sustainable, business would adapt and smart businessmen would continue to make millions and billions, because the changes would not be that great. It is also likely that the average Australian would be better off and the average Australian’s children and grandchildren will be better off in the future.

  • Dobozy reveals AquaDam plans

    Designed to minimise energy consumption, the approach will allow cities to capture stormwater and reuse waste water. By capturing the water downstream of the city it focuses people’s mind on the state of the water being sent down the drain and captures the extra rain now falling on our cities. Dobozy has interest from Dubai and Japan and is working with German and Chinese companies to develop a second stage prototype. As well as capturing water, Dobozy thinks that the platform cant be used to and potentially desalinate sea water, generate energy and farm algae.

    A sound file of the interview is available here.

  • Study Halves Prediction of Rising Seas

     

    They also uniformly called for renewed investment in satellites measuring ice and field missions that could within a few years substantially clarify the risk.

    There is strong consensus that warming waters around Antarctica, and Greenland in the Arctic, will result in centuries of rising seas. But glaciologists and oceanographers still say uncertainty prevails on the vital question of how fast coasts will retreat in a warming world in the next century or two.

    The new study combined computer modeling with measurements of the ice and the underlying bedrock, both direct and by satellite.

    It did not assess the pace or the likelihood of a rise in seas. The goal was to examine as precisely as possible how much ice could flow into the sea if warming seawater penetrated between the West Antarctic ice sheet and the bedrock beneath.

    For decades West Antarctic ice has been identified as particularly vulnerable to melting because, although piled more than one mile above sea level in many places, it also rests on bedrock a half mile to a mile beneath sea level in others. That topography means that warm water could progressively melt spots where ice is stuck to the rock, allowing it to flow more freely.

    Erik I. Ivins, a scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, described the new paper as “good solid science,” but added that the sea-level estimates could not be verified without renewed investment in satellite missions and other initiatives that were currently lagging.

    A particularly valuable satellite program called Grace, which measures subtle variations in gravity related to the mass of ice and rock, “has perhaps a couple of years remaining before its orbit deteriorates,” Dr. Ivins said. “The sad truth is that we in NASA are watching our Earth-observing systems fall by the wayside as they age — without the sufficient resources to see them adequately replaced.”

    Robert Bindschadler, a specialist in polar ice at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, said the study provided only a low estimate of Antarctica’s possible long-term contribution to rising seas because it did not deal with other mechanisms that could add water to the ocean.

    The prime question, he said, remains what will happen in the next 100 years or so, and other recent work implies that a lot of ice can be shed within that time.

    “Even in Bamber’s world,” he said, referring to the study’s lead author, “there is more than enough ice to cause serious harm to the world’s coastlines.”

  • Algal biodiesel claims examined

    >Algae-based technologies could provide a key tool for reducing
    >greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants and other
    >carbon intensive industrial processes.


    Algae has a lot of potentially good applications. “Cleaning”  carbon from coal-fired stations isn’t one of them. Shawn and I went over this about 4+ years ago and our basic conclusion is that while the CO2 is “double used” by using it to promote the algae grown, it still end up in the atmosphere. In short, assertions
    that this approach can reduce greenhouse gas emissions are dis-ingeneous in the extreme.

     

    >Using an intricate photosynthetic process, trendsetters have
    >developed biodiesel and ethanol from an unlikely source –
    >algae – that, given optimal conditions, can double its
    >volume overnight. Up to 50 percent of an alga’s body weight
    >is comprised of oil, whereas oil-palm trees–currently the
    >largest producer of oil to make biofuels–yield just about 20
    >percent of their weight in oil.


    This is starting to become clear : these guys are hyping the subject for investment purposes.

    Firstly : there is nothing complex about getting bio-diesel from algae. The oil is pretty much the same as most other forms of vegetable oil. You then either have to heat treat it or esterify it with an alchohol such as methanol or ethanol to get a liquid with the right kind of physical properties. The processes for doing so are quite old and well established, yet these guys are trying to slant this like it’s something new.

    Secondly : you can’t get optimal growth conditions without very expensive support facilities. I’ll come back to this a little bit later. My point here is that they are, quite literally, trying too hard to “sell” the idea. As a
    bio-algae advocate, I’m very suspicious of heir motivations simply because they are trying to instill an un-realistic expectation of what this can actually do.


    An oil content of 25% – 35% by mass is more realistic and while this might seem like “splitting hairs” to some people, the reality of the situation is that a large scale _commercial_ process can be very sensitive in terms of it’s profitability to relatively minor shifts in the composition of it’s feed stock. Any Chemical Engineer will tell you that, and their insistence on only quoting the most optimistic values possible is fishy.

    >Soy produces some 50 gallons of oil per acre per year;
    >canola, 150 gallons; and palm, 650 gallons. But algae are
    >expected to produce 10,000 gallons per acre per year, and
    >eventually even more.

    The relative numbers for algae bio-diesel production are well known. A realistic rate of about 30 times the oil
    production per meter per day is accepted as a realistic value. On that basis alone I would question the values in the above paragraph and regard 3,000 gallons per acre per year as the upper limit for commercial production without enclosures ( see below for more on enclosures ).

    >Algae are the fastest-growing plants in the world. But if
    >it were easy to extract the fuel, most of the world’s
    >biodiesel would already be made from microalgae grown on
    >nonagricultural land, close to coal-fired power plants.


    No : the majority of the worlds transportation vehicles use petrol, not diesel and until recently the cost of
    producing bio-diesal from algae was expected to be muchhigher than production from crude oil.

    >It’s critical to understand how to select the right algae
    >species, create an optimal photobiological formula for
    >each species, and build a cost-effective photobioreactor
    >that can precisely deliver the formula to each individual
    >algae cell, no matter the size of the facility, or its
    >geographical location.


    Finally, we get to the point.

    You can’t “select the right algae” species unless you are growing them in environmentally controlled enclosures ie, special tanks. Otherwise, local algae species will contaiminate the tank and substantially reduce the yield. Special enclosures reduce but do _not_ eliminate this problem and periodically the enclosures must be emptied and sterilised.

    The problem with building such specialised enclosures is that they add considerably to the capital fabrication
    cost of the facility ( and thus, to the dollar cost of the product ).