Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study (Read 3552 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
May 30th, 2007 at 6:44pm
 
I actually participated in this research. They got a gorup of people in a room, listened to their views, then gave them a spiel about carbon sequestration and other options, then took views again. The presenters were definitely very 'pro coal' but I can't remember anything obviously wrong or misleading about what they told us. They even said it would be used to justify CSIRO investment into clean coal research, although I think they framed it more in terms of whether the communty might be 'accepting' of it, rather than what the community currently preferred. What they gave us probably did lack a bit of perspective and omitted the obvious problems inherent in going down the clean coal path, most notably risk.

CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/CSIRO-denies-bias-in-cleancoal-study/2007/05/30/1180205328236.html

The CSIRO has rejected claims it used an industry-commissioned study of community attitudes towards coal-fired power to promote clean coal technology over solar power.

Australian Greens senator Christine Milne used a Senate estimates hearing to accuse the peak science body of framing research to manipulate public attitudes on energy generation, overly emphasising the advantages of coal while downplaying solar.

She said participants in the survey gave their views and were then presented with information that talked up the benefits of clean coal technology and pointed out difficulties with using solar power.

"When the community answered that they thought solar was a good idea ... why was there then a series of information which actually promoted one technology, namely carbon capture and storage, and pointed out a whole lot of difficulties with the other technology, as in solar?

"I thought market research was about what the community thought, not framing what the community might think."

CSIRO group executive of sustainable energy and development Stephen Morton denied the claims.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
AusNat
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #1 - May 30th, 2007 at 6:48pm
 
Why dont we all cut the crap, and go nuclear.
Back to top
 
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
oceans_blue
Ex Member


Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #2 - May 30th, 2007 at 7:49pm
 
Ausnat wrote on May 30th, 2007 at 6:48pm:
Why dont we all cut the crap, and go nuclear.



it will go that way anyway evetuntually, when they fibally do decide to cut the crap and get on with it..


If they dont bl oody well hurry up it will be too late. Angry
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39433
Gender: male
Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #3 - May 30th, 2007 at 10:18pm
 
I think the nuclear or clean coal is a furphy. We are being sold a pup. 
Can't see the difference between clean coal and what we have now. clean coal is a theory at best, there is no clean coal powered station working in the world currently.
Coal is a very powerful political lobby
Solar and wind are my picks for genuine renewables. Solar towers esp.

Anyway, why are we going to suddenly need SO much more power than we use now ?
We could also aim for more efficient use of what we are generating.
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
AusNat
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #4 - May 30th, 2007 at 11:14pm
 

Quote:
Coal is a very powerful political lobby


Yes it is. and it is also the backbone of our economy.

Quote:
Solar and wind are my picks for genuine renewables. Solar towers esp.


When solar can produce enough power it'd be good.
But windmills are an eyesore so i cant support that.


Quote:
Anyway, why are we going to suddenly need SO much more power than we use now ?
We could also aim for more efficient use of what we are generating.


Because the population is growing.
Back to top
 
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
Lucyness
New Member
*
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 4
Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #5 - May 31st, 2007 at 1:42am
 
Clean Coal is a misnomer, it should be Cleaner Coal.

Whatever happens, it still ends up in the air though.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39433
Gender: male
Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #6 - May 31st, 2007 at 10:29am
 
Aussie - well, good points.
(Always tough when people bring up valid points against my thoughts.)

I thought our birth rate was stabel and we would be luck y to maintain our population.

Apparently solar towers can produce a lot of power.

I'ld prefer to look at a number of smaller power stations located optimally than a few huge nuclear power plants that will have only a short life anyway. And are VERY expensive.
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: CSIRO denies bias in clean-coal study
Reply #7 - May 31st, 2007 at 10:35am
 
Our net immigration rate more than makes up for our low birth rate, so our population will continue to increase.

I don't mind the look of wind farms. I've seen massive farms in California, up in the hills. I actually thought they looked pretty cool. There is also one on the North side of Newcastle which I used to drive past regularly.

From what I recall, clean coal would be almost as 'good' as natural gas, in terms of greenhouse emissions. It is a big improvement on what we have now.



Clean coal technology 'a furphy'

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Clean-coal-technology-a-furphy/2007/11/01/1193619020396.html

The major political parties have sold voters a furphy by claiming clean coal technology will be a reality in Australia one day, a well-known scientist says.

Scientific commentator and broadcaster Karl Kruszelnicki, who is running for the Senate on the Climate Change Coalition ticket, on Thursday said clean coal technology was physically impossible.

Dr Kruszelnicki said the major parties were lying to the Australian people when they claimed carbon dioxide could be removed from the burning of coal and then compressed and stored underground or underwater.

He said this would require one cubic kilometre of compressed carbon dioxide to be stored every day.

"It's just not technologically possible.

As well, any storage facility would eventually wear down and would release the stored carbon dioxide back into the environment, he said.

Underground thermal energy accessed in South Australia could provide 100 per cent of Australia's baseload electricity for the next 75 years and then be supplemented by other renewables, he told reporters.



Dr Karl admits mistake over clean coal

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Dr-Karl-admits-mistake-over-clean-coal/2007/11/08/1194329350399.html

Celebrity scientist and senate hopeful Dr Karl Kruszelnicki has admitted he was wrong to describe clean coal technology as a complete furphy.

Dr Kruszelnicki now admits clean coal is a worthwhile solution to climate change and not similar to National Socialist party propaganda, as he said on the campaign trail in Sydney last week.

The error comes from incorrect data found in the first edition of Australian of the year Tim Flannery's best-selling climate change book The Weather Makers, which has subsequently been corrected.

"We're stuck with the fact that we have still got to make electricity in the short term from carbon of some sort," he told the paper.

"Something is better than nothing, so sequestering carbon dioxide is better than just letting it go out.

"I see it as a stop-gap, short-term thing rather than a long-term solution because the more you store it away the more the chance that it will escape," he said.

Dr Kruszelnicki said clean coal technology was an interim technology that should be explored.



NSW govt faces clean coal dilemma

http://news.smh.com.au/nsw-govt-faces-clean-coal-dilemma/20080205-1q4j.html

The federal government is facing a dilemma over its funding of the world's leading clean coal experiment after the US ended its commitment.

The Bush administration blamed budget blow-outs for its decision to stop funding the $US1.8-billion ($2 billion) FutureGen project, Fairfax reports.

The US decision is a blow to the Australian coal industry's hopes that a commercially viable clean coal plant would be built in the foreseeable future.

Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton and Xstrata have contributed more than $50 million to the project, which the former Howard government committed $15 million to before the election.

Energy and Resources Minister Martin Ferguson must now decide whether to fulfil the $15 million pledge, but refused to respond on Monday night to questions on the issue.

But Greens senator Christine Milne called on the Rudd government to pull taxpayers' money out of FutureGen and other projects, saying the Howard government's clean coal strategy had collapsed.

"All the government money in the project from the Low Emissions Technology Demonstration Fund has all come to nothing," she said. "Government funding for FutureGen and any other clean coal pipedreams should be withdrawn in favour of renewable technologies that are up and running now."
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 5th, 2008 at 12:17pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print