Author: admin

  • Nationals and Toot see eye to eye

    Nationals’ Senator Barnaby Joyce says, for the sake of balance, there is an issue the government does deserve credit for and this is its support for the development of the inland rail link.

    "It stands to reason that the straightest line between Melbourne and Brisbane (but preferably Gladstone) is not along the coast but through the inland," Senator Joyce says.

    "A locomotive with two drivers which pulls approximately 1400 tonnes is far more efficient than a truck with one driver pulling about 50 tonnes.

    “If you are standing at the traffic lights in Moree, NSW, or the roundabout at Goondiwindi, Qld, it becomes a clear fact the north – south transport of produce in the eastern states has to get off the road and onto rail.

    “I commend the allocation of $15 million of taxpayer funds towards the feasibility study of the standard gauge rail link.

    "I hope, if the government is truly interested in productivity, it goes a lot further than that and soon.

    “It will also be essential to make sure that in the development of the inland rail access is not monopolised.

    "Otherwise some of the potential benefits will be quickly lost.

    "The association of the movement of bulk produce, such as coal and grain, has a bad habit of playing into the hands of those who hold the commodity receiver infrastructure.

    “This has become glaringly apparent in the latest Senate Committee inquiry into the draft Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008.

    "When the sole mover of the produce in a region is also the sole purchaser, then the multiple sellers are in a bad position indeed, without transparency and equivalency of terms.

    “The government has become hesitant to deal with the regional monopolisations which have become established at the regional loading terminals of bulk commodities.

    "This must be changed so the inland rail is a great asset for all Australians, not just a couple.”

    SOURCE: Queensland Country Life

  • Toot joins Nats in call for inland rail

    See Barnaby Joyce’s view

    Study for Inland Rail Corridor to Proceed – Next Step, Putting the Casino-Murwillumbah Line Back on Canberra’s Map

    The Federal Government has announced that it will now fund the study for an inland rail corridor between Melbourne and Brisbane.

    If this project were to proceed, it would have the potential to significantly reduce the growth in trucks carrying freight through our region as well as reduce the need to create new B-double corridors through our communities

    TOOT welcomes the decision to proceed to the next stage in the development of the proposed rail corridor, however further effort is required to address the rail needs within the commuter and tourist markets, especially in high growth corridors on the fringes of major urban areas such as South East Queensland and Northern New South Wales.

    We hope the omission of the Casino-Murwillumbah line on the rail map included with the government’s press release is a reflection of the planning under the previous government and not an indication of their approach to addressing the urgent unmet travel needs within our region.
    For an actual map of the NSW rail network see:

    Operational lines are coloured green, disused lines red.

     

  • Soothing Gaia’s Fever

    Meeting Gaia

    James Lovelock is a scientist who invented a device in 1958 to detect minute concentrations of chemicals. It was used to show that pesticides like DDT accumulate in animals a long way from where they are used. He used it himself a decade later to show that ChloroFlouroCarbons (CFCs) were present in large concentrations in the Antarctic.

    Lovelock was hired by NASA to design instruments that could find life on Mars if it existed. Lovelock started designing very sensitive instruments. Then he realised that they would be unable to differentiate between the contamination brought to Mars on the space ship and any life already there on the red planet.

    He started to focus on ways to tell from the outside if life existed. He reached the remarkable conclusion that there is a very simple indicator of life and that is activity, or more accurately, instability.

    Life consumes nutrients, extracts what it needs and exhales what it does not. It reorganises the world around it. There is one very significant thing about that reorganisation. It is more complex as a result of life than it would be without it. Plants consume sunlight, dirt and water and create forests. Animals eat plants and drink water and create societies.

    When you look at a living thing from the outside you see change happening that cannot be explained by simple chemical processes. We see the seething compost and we know the worms are well.

    Lovelock reported to NASA that he had completed his experiments and had proven that there was no life on Mars. They sacked him and insisted that he did not report his findings.

    He went one step further. He founded a movement, named after the Greek goddess of the Earth, Gaia, based on the principle that the planet is alive. It is not just covered in life, it is, itself, a living organism.

    There is no doubt in my mind that it is a very useful way to understand the systems which operate on a global scale.

    When we describe the rainforest as the lungs of the planet we are using exactly such an analogy. When we look at the ocean currents and their interaction with the life that depends on them, it is a circulatory system we describe. David Suzuki reports that the Nitrogen in the temperate rainforests that blanket the west coast of the USA and Canada has all come from the sea in the bodies of salmon. On a planetary scale, I see small, salmon-shaped cells carrying nutrients through that circulatory system to an organ that helps the planet breathe.

    This is not a far-fetched notion, it is a practical tool.

    Diagnosing Gaia

    As an organism, our body can deal with a wide variety of external temperatures. It can also deal with wide fluctuations in internal temperature. The testicles, for example, shrink into the body cavity when it is cold, and hang low when the body is hot, to maintain an even temperature for their precious cargo. The temperature of our blood, however, rarely strays more than a fraction of a degree from 36.8 on the Celsius scale. The medical definition of a fever is an increase of half a degree Celsius.

    Scientists have reached a broad consensus that an increase of four degrees in the earth’s temperature will be fatal to life on earth as we know it. Humans will not be able to live north of Melbourne or south of Paris, the seas will become acid and will inundate almost all the great fertile river deltas of the world. The earth as a planet will survive. Living things will survive, but in the great planetary illness this represents, human civilisation will be thrown aside like a fevered patient sweats out body fluids.

    With the planet as our patient, it is possible to observe some alarming truths.

    Almost one per cent of the patient’s lungs are eaten away. More than ten per cent of the lungs have been damaged in the last decade alone.

    The immune system of the planet is the wide range of species that exist, ready to adapt to changes in the environment and fill new niches in ecosystems as they respond to change. Over 50,000 species of plants or animals disappear off the face of the earth each year, irreversibly weakening this immune system.

    More than 6.66% of the freshwater on the planet is consumed every year. This is rising above the rate at which it is replenished by rain and snow. That rate of replenishment is falling while the rate of consumption is rising.

    These are not the causes of the illness, they are the symptoms. The cause of the illness is a virus that has invaded the earth’s ecosystems and is affecting the vital organs. That virus is rearranging the natural flows of Gaia’s systems. The destruction of the forests, for example, leads to reduced rainfall that makes the forests drier and more vulnerable to fire. This indirect  damage amplifies the damage caused directly.The nature of the virus is to grow more voracious as it develops. In those areas where it is most densely populated, it consumes resources from other parts of the planet, starving some areas and poisoning the immediate vicinity with its excretement.

    For the good of the patient, the virus simply has to be brought under control. The supply of resources to those areas where the infection is most developed needs to be limited to give natural systems an opportunity to regain balance and to slow down the creation of toxic wastes. Those areas where the virus is multiplying rapidly need to be soothed to slow down the rate of infection. Mechanisms that encourage more benign strains of the virus to dominate need to be explored.

    Evolution has favoured pathogens that are not too effective. The most effective pathogens kill their hosts before they have time to spread and are eliminated from the gene pool as a result.

    With only one Gaia, we cannot afford to discover this law of evolution the hard way. We simply have to reduce our impact, quickly, or we destroy our civilisation.

    There is no other choice.

  • For your diary

    4-6 April, get to the Switch to Green expo in Canberra.

        Or the Sustainable Living Fair in Perth

    13-16 April, A climate for change, Sydney

    15-17 April, Water Down Under, Adelaide

    22-23 April Victorian Sustainable Devel’ment Conference

    5-8 May, Enviro ’08, Melbourne

    11-16 May, World Congress on Environmental Health, Brisbane

  • Silicon Valley shrinks cost of solar

    Mark Pinto, Applied’s chief technology officer and head of its new energy and environmental business, speaks with the enthusiasm of an inventor freed to make his dreams come true. “What is exciting about solar for our employees is that we feel like it’s in our hands, we can play a very big role,” he says.

    In his previous career as a scientist in Bell Labs, the research division of phone company AT&T, Mr Pinto was frustrated by a company culture that could not get great ideas into the marketplace. Now he is seeing the impact of combining his research efforts with business development in a fast-growing industry eager to embrace new methods and technology.

    With semiconductors, he says, Applied has been dependent on oth­ers to come up with “killer applications”, such as Apple and its iPhone, in order to drive industry innovation and sustain demand for transistors and the equipment that makes them.  “Solar provides way less than one-tenth of 1 per cent of the world’s energy needs, so the potential market is huge. The killer app is already there – if you lower the cost of solar, the market is there,” he says.

    Applied believes its technology is key to making solar energy cheap­er. Announcing its expansion into solar in September 2006, Mike Splinter, chief executive, promised to cut the cost per watt of generating solar power from $3-$5 to $1. “We plan to change the cost equation for solar power through adaptation of our existing technology and new innovation in order to help make solar a more meaningful contributor to the global energy supply,” he said.

    In other words, in changing its own business, it is also changing the economics of a new industry. Ap­plied was in a unique position to do this because of its knowledge of handling silicon – a base material for both semiconductors and solar panels – and because of a separate foray into making equipment for flat-panel display makers.

    Applied entered this business in 1991. In semiconductors, Applied’s core expertise is in making equipment that can create depositions – thin layers of insulating material on chip wafers. A similar deposition process is needed for flat-panel displays. Applied Materials and display manufacturers discovered they could be made more cost-effectively the bigger the size of glass from which the screens were cut. Applied’s machines for making the panels have grown so big they can no longer fit even on 747 jumbo jets and are mainly assembled on site. Now variations on this equipment have been adapted for solar panels.

    Mr Pinto says the company initally assumed only panels small enough to be carried up ladders and fitted on residential roofs would be needed. But the industry has told it that bigger panels are re­quired for utilities to assemble solar farms and for other commercial installations. He says a kind of Moore’s Law is at work, referring to Gordon Moore of Intel’s 1965 paper that predicted the number of transistors on a chip would double around every 18 months. This was really about costs coming down with miniaturisation. With display and solar panels, the economics are also about cost per area, with the costs falling if the panels can be cut from bigger sheets. Installation is also much cheaper with fewer, larger solar panels.

    Applied is focusing on thin-film solar, which exploits the photovoltaic effect of sunlight being absorbed by materials and converted directly into electricity. Silicon only 2-3 millionths of a metre thick is deposited on a glass substrate in the thin-film process. But Applied has also hedged its photovoltaic bet by buying companies that are expert in crystalline silicon, whose cells need more silicon, around 175 millionths of a metre thick. Its acquisitions in the past two years include Italy’s Baccini, which makes test systems for manufacturers of crystalline silicon, bought for $330m, and HCT Shaping Systems, a Swiss company that cost Applied $475m for technology that cuts silicon into pieces thinner than the slimmest salami slice.

    Paula Mints, solar analyst with Navigant Consulting, says Applied has done the right thing, since she expects thin-film will grab no more than 50 per cent of the market. “There is always a cost/efficiency trade-off,” she says, alluding to the fact that thin-film is cheaper in needing less silicon, but it is less efficient in converting the sun’s rays to electricity.

    In thin-film solar factories, Applied’s deposition equipment ac­counts for 70 per cent of the costs. It has therefore offered to equip com­plete factories for panel-makers, while integrating the other 30 per cent worth of equipment such as conveyor belts, sourced from other suppliers. The full solar production line it offers is another departure for Applied, says Mr Splinter: “We have changed the business model here too – when we started in thin-film solar there was basically no industry, so we started off a complete line. We’ve never done this before.”

    Tim Arcuri, Citigroup semiconductor equipment analyst, says the Chinese order shows Applied’s stra­tegy of offering large-scale complete solutions is working. “It has been something of a holy grail to build monster gigawatt factories using these big pieces of glass to achieve a very low cost per watt,” he says.

    The first Applied-fitted factories are coming on stream this month, equipment orders are expected to be worth more than $2.5bn by 2010, and Mr Arcuri says he can easily see solar accounting for a quarter of Applied’s revenues by then. But the company faces competition from rivals such as First Solar and Oerlikon Solar and the future path of solar technology has yet to be determined.

    “This is a huge gamble for us,” cautions Mr Splinter. “We are betting a lot of shareholders’ money as well as our own research and development that this is going to be big and very successful. So far, so good – it’s the greatest opportunity the company has had in many years, but I think we still have a long way to go.”

    The whys and hows of cutting what a watt costs

    Applied Materials’ venture into providing manufacturing equipment for the solar panel industry is part of a surge of interest in Silicon Valley in the alternative energy.

    Venture capitalists have funded start-ups trying new materials and methods to convert the sun’s rays into electricity, while Cypress Semiconductor span off solar-panel provider SunPower in 2005.

    Google has the largest solar panel installation of any US corporate campus and has launched an initiative to explore solar thermal power – concentrating the sun’s heat to produce electricity.

    With silicon currently the key material used in both semiconductors and solar panels, the Valley is in a good position to put its expertise to good use.

    Mike Splinter, Applied’s chief executive and a Valley veteran, says solar reminds him of the early days of semis.

    “People are jockeying for position; there are different technologies and materials and we are feeling our way,” he says.

    “As the cost comes down, the solar market should scale much faster as there’s a huge market electricity, whereas then there was no computer market.”

    According to Citigroup analyst Tim Arcuri: “There’s going to be a shake-out, with there being four or five different technologies and their different supply chains. But when there’s a scrum like this, I would not bet against the Valley.”

    Paula Mints, solar analyst at Navigant Consulting, offers a different perspective: “Silicon Valley is a marketing term.

    “I don’t think we have any more sand or processed sand than anywhere else. But we do have an area that draws interesting, capable, brilliant people to it.”

  • malthus may be right yet

    As the world grows more populous (6.6billion today) it also is growing more prosperous. The average person is consuming more food, water, metal and power. Growing numbers of China’s 1.3 billion people and India’s 1.1 billion are stepping up to the middle class, adopting the high-protein diets, petrol-fuelled transport and gadgets that developed nations enjoy.

    The result is that demand for resources has soared. If supplies don’t keep pace, prices are likely to climb further, economic growth in rich and poor nations could suffer, and some fear violent conflicts could ensue.

    Some of the resources now in great demand have no substitutes. In the 18th century, England responded to dwindling timber supplies by shifting to abundant coal. But there can be no such replacement for arable land and fresh water.

    The need to curb global warming limits the usefulness of resources such as coal. Soaring food consumption puts stress on the existing stock of arable land and fresh water.

    "We’re living in an era where the technologies that have empowered high living standards and 80-year life expectancies in the rich world are now for almost everybody," says economist Jeffrey Sachs, director of Columbia University’s Earth Institute.

    "What this means is that not only do we have a very large amount of economic activity right now, but we have pent-up potential for vast increases (in economic activity) as well." The world cannot sustain that level of growth, he contends, without new technologies.

    The West is already grappling with higher energy and food prices. There’s a growing consensus that this isn’t just a temporary surge in prices. Some experts foresee a long-term upward shift in prices for oil and other commodities.

    Today’s dire predictions could prove just as misguided as yesteryear’s.

    "Clearly we’ll have more and more problems, as more and more (people) are going to be richer and richer, using more and more stuff," says Bjorn Lomborg, a Danish statistician who argues that global warming is overblown. "But smartness will outweigh the extra resource use."

    Some constraints might disappear with greater global co-operation. Where some countries face scarcity, others have bountiful supplies of resources. New seed varieties and better irrigation techniques could open up arid regions to cultivation; technological breakthroughs, such as cheaper desalination or efficient ways to transmit electricity from unpopulated areas rich with sunlight or wind, could brighten the outlook.

    In the past, economic forces spurred solutions. Scarcity of resources led to higher prices, and higher prices eventually led to conservation and innovation. Whale oil was a popular source of lighting in the 19th century. Prices soared in the middle of the century, and people sought other ways to fuel lamps. By the end of the century, whale oil cost less than it did in 1831.

    A similar pattern could unfold again. But economic forces alone may not be able to fix the problems this time around. Societies face political resistance to boosting water prices to encourage efficient use. When resources such as water are shared across borders, establishing a pricing framework can be thorny. And in many developing nations, food subsidy programs make it less likely that rising prices will spur change.

    This troubles economists who used to be sceptical of the premise of The Limits to Growth. Thirty years ago, economist Joseph Stiglitz said: "There is not a persuasive case to be made that we face a problem from the exhaustion of our resources in the short or medium run."

    Today, the Nobel laureate is concerned that oil is underpriced relative to the cost of carbon emissions, and that key resources such as water are often provided free.

    "In the absence of market signals, there’s no way the market will solve these problems. How do we make people who have gotten something for free start paying for it? That’s really hard. If our patterns of living, our patterns of consumption are imitated, as others are striving to do, the world probably is not viable," Stiglitz says.

    Dennis Meadows, one of the authors of The Limits to Growth, says the book was too optimistic in one respect. The authors assumed that if humans stopped harming the environment, it would recover slowly. Today, he says, some climate-change models suggest that once tipping points are passed, environmental catastrophe may be inevitable even "if you quit damaging the environment".

    One danger is that governments, rather than searching for global solutions to resource constraints, will concentrate on grabbing their share.

    China has been funding development in Africa, a move some see as a way to gain access to timber, oil and other resources. India, once a supporter of the democracy movement in Burma, has signed trade agreements with the resource-rich country. The US, EU, Russia and China are all vying for the favour of natural-gas-abundant countries in politically unstable Central Asia.

    The rise of China and India already has changed the world economy in lasting ways, from the flows of global capital to the location of manufacturing. But they remain poor societies with growing appetites.

    Nagpur in central India once was known as one of the greenest cities in the country. Over the past decade, Nagpur has grown to roughly 2.5 million from 1.7 million. Local roads have turned into a mess of honking cars, motorbikes and wandering livestock under a thick soup of foul air.

    "Sometimes if I see something I like, I just buy it," says Sapan Gajbe, 32, a dentist shopping for an airconditioner at Nagpur’s bazaar. A month earlier, he bought his first car, a $10,000 Maruti Zen.

    In 2005, China had 15 passenger cars for every 1000 people, close to the 13 cars per 1000 that Japan had in 1963. Today, Japan has 447 cars per 1000 residents, 57 million in all. If China ever reaches that point, it would have 572 million cars, 70 million shy of the number of cars in the entire world today.

    China consumes 7.9 million barrels of oil a day. The US, with less than a quarter as many people, consumes 20.7 million barrels.

    "Demand will be going up, but it will be constrained by supply," says ConocoPhillips chief executive James Mulva. "I don’t think we are going to see the supply going over 100 million barrels a day, and the reason is: where is all that going to come from?"

    Harvard economist Jeffrey Frankel says: "The idea that we might have to move on to other sources of energy; you don’t have to buy into the Club of Rome agenda for that."

    The world can adjust to dwindling oil production by becoming more energy efficient and by moving to nuclear, wind and solar power, Frankel says, although such transitions can be slow and costly.

    There are no substitutes for water, no easy alternatives to simple conservation. Despite advances, desalination remains expensive and energy-intensive. Throughout the world, water is often priced too low. Farmers, the biggest users, pay less than others, if they pay at all.

    In California, the subsidised rates for farmers have become a contentious political issue. Chinese farmers receive water at next to no cost, accounting for 65 per cent of all water used in the country.

    In Pondhe, an Indian village of about 1000 on a barren plateau east of Mumbai, water wasn’t a problem until the 1970s, when farmers began using diesel-powered pumps to transport water farther and faster.

    Local wells used to overflow during the monsoon season, recalls Vasantrao Wagle, who has farmed in the area for four decades. Today, they top off about 3m below the surface, and drop even lower during the dry season.

    Parched northern China has been drawing on groundwater supplies. In Beijing, water tables have dropped by more than 100m.

    China’s farmers need water because China needs food. Production of rice, wheat and corn topped out at 441 million tonnes in 1998 and hasn’t hit that level since. Sea water has leaked into depleted aquifers in the north, threatening to turn land barren. Illegal seizures of farmland by developers are widespread. The farmland squeeze is forcing difficult choices. After disastrous floods in 1998, China started paying some farmers to abandon marginal farmland and plant trees. That grain-to-green program was intended to reverse the deforestation and erosion that exacerbated the floods.

    A growing taste for meat and other higher-protein food in the developing world is boosting demand and prices for feed grains. Hundreds of millions of people are making the shift to protein, introducing heavy competition for food worldwide.

    It takes nearly 9kg of grain to produce 1kg of pork – the staple meat in China – and more than four times that to produce a kilo of beef, according to Canadian geographer Vaclav Smil. The number of kilojoules in the Chinese diet from meat and other animal products has more than doubled since 1990, according to the UN. But China still lags Taiwan when it comes to per-capita pork consumption. Matching Taiwan would increase China’s annual pork consumption by 5billion kilos, as much pork as Americans eat in six months.

    The 1972 warnings by the Club of Rome struck a chord because they came as oil prices were rising sharply. Oil production in the continental US had peaked, sparking fears that energy demand had outstripped supply. Over time, America became more energy efficient, overseas oil production rose and prices fell.

    The dynamic today appears to be different. So far, the oil industry has failed to find new sources of crude. Without new discoveries, prices are likely to keep rising, unless consumers cut back. Taxes are one way to curb appetites.

    New technology could help ease the resource crunch. Advances in agriculture, desalination and the clean production of electricity, among other things, would help.

    But Stiglitz contends that consumers eventually will have to change their behaviour even more than then did after the ’70s oil shock. He says the world’s traditional definitions and measures of economic progress – based on producing and consuming ever more – may have to be rethought.

    The Wall Street Journal

    Additional reporting by Patrick Barta and Andrew Batson.