My spies tell me Jabiru has been sold

[turboplanner]

5 hours ago, FlyBoy1960 said:

Show me a highway in ANY city that is not stop and start, i would say they are perfect for this use.

When we are calculating to obtain the fuel burn against the fuel map and the gradability for flexible passing and steep climbs, the typical cycles we use are:

 

Highway Cycle:   No stops and starts.   Exponentially High power demand pushing the wind out of the                                                                          at 100 km/hr

Suburban cycle:  intermittant, regular stop start/acceleration up to around 80 km/hr, freeways 100

                                                                  Less power demand than highway.

City Cycle:           Intermittant, constant stop start, interruption by traffic, regular acceleration power

                                                                  More power demand than suburban, more braking

Idle:                      No power demand, no braking                                                                                             

 

Regenerative braking has a chance in City Cycle, much less change in Suburban cycle and on Highway for its 5 hour travel without stopping at maximum power demand/battery drain, only charges down hills.              

[BrendAn]

1 hour ago, aro said:

The big challenge for EV infrastructure will be managing peaks e.g. holiday weekends where everyone wants to travel.

 

I've seen petrol stations on the Hume with 16 pumps busy plus 20-30 cars queueing. It's going to be a while before electrical infrastructure can cope with that sort of peak. On the other hand, maybe many people will charge overnight at their accommodation rather than stopping along the highway.

The biggest hurdle in Melbourne is the amount of cars that park on the street and the power grid can not cope with thousands of EVs plugged in overnight.  Our base power grid has been depleted by a rundown network and hazlewoods closure .

We need nuclear power and a lot of improvement to the transmission of power around the state. 

I know all the talk about the expense of nuclear power stations but how else can you supply enough electricity to power the nation without coal . The sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow. I got an email today from ausnet with advice on how to prepare for power outages this summer. This state can't even supply reliable power even though we are paying a fortune for it. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by BrendAn

[LoonyBob]

Shortage drives up prices; simple Free Market economics...

 

The sun is nuclear, and it does shine all the time, just not continuously on any one bit of the earth's surface... the solutions are there, but the economic incentive is not.

 

[kgwilson]

I lived in London from 1973 to 75 a city of around 8 million people at the time. Most people didn't own a car. There was no need. There was a tube station or several in every suburb and in peak times there was a bus every couple of minutes. In Australia we have become addicted to cars and have failed to build decent public transport and continue to build more and more motorways while everyone buys more cars. Sydney is an absolute nightmare to get anywhere. Now the newly opened Rozelle tunnel complex to connect everywhere with everywhere else is a total initial disaster. It will eventually work but won't resolve the problem as more and more cars clog the streets until our addiction to private transport changes. That won't happen any time soon. certainly not in my lifetime.

[sfGnome]

I lived in Dublin for 3 years with no car, and it was great. Good public transport (the locals thought it was poor, but I was comparing it with Sydney), bike paths that actually joined up with each other and weren’t just under parked cars, and lots of hire-by-the-hour cars for those occasions where a car was necessary. It can be done, but it’s too late for Sydney, I fear. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by sfGnome

[FlyBoy1960]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

The biggest hurdle in Melbourne is the amount of cars that park on the street and the power grid can not cope with thousands of EVs plugged in overnight.  Our base power grid has been depleted by a rundown network and hazlewoods closure .

We need nuclear power and a lot of improvement to the transmission of power around the state. 

 

Trouble is no-one wants it in their backyard.   Why not put the plant on one of those little offshore islands ?

 

Whats the name ?

 

That's right, Tasmania!

[BrendAn]

victoria already has an extension lead from tassie.

we have a stable landmass, our own uranium and are politically stable.

perfect for nuclear power. 

[facthunter]

Except it one of the most expensive choices and has a disposal problem and can't change output very well and still need s a grid and would be better with about 5 plants. WE are perfect for sun and wind with some storage.   Nev

[BrendAn]

2 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Except it one of the most expensive choices and has a disposal problem and can't change output very well and still need s a grid and would be better with about 5 plants. WE are perfect for sun and wind with some storage.   Nev

whats with the caution, can't other people have an opinion. sun and wind can't run industry.  places like the onesteel mill in laverton . that mill uses as much power as geelong when it is in full swing. thats what they told us anyway. 

[Litespeed]

 Never ever has a nuclear power plant actually made a profit in the real world.

They only work with massive state subsidies and guaranteed insurance by state against any risk and complete no fault liability. Never has one been closed and rehabilitated at true market cost anywhere on the planet. No one has even sorted waste storage after 70 years, we create power for 50 years and leave waste that kills for thousands of years, very dumb.

 

Without ultimate indemnity none would have been built. No new tech exists that makes them relevant unless you have a nuclear weapons program and it's still the most expensive power possible including cleanup cost which are never counted,ever.

 

Even the so-called small portable reactors have proven a dud, none exist and the industry leader has admitted defeat even with USA  subsidies. 70 years and still no good.

 

Consider the huge costs in development for a unproven tech of massive complexity with no local skills, if the USA has pulled the pin and said No, what hope do we have?

 

Don't forget they also need a huge amount of fresh cooling water on the driest continent which is a huge problem cost and environment wise. Building large desalination plants for cooling is absolute stupidity, but are essential to work in Oz.

 

It would be easier and far cheaper to give every house free solar and battery then solar farms,wind etc. This is the cheapest and most reliable system available and will only get cheaper and also sustainable.

 

Unless we an get fusion nuclear happening ie same as the Sun, then we have to rely on gathering the Sun's energy as our power plant. Even the pro fusion pundits admit it's far off and only solar,wind,waves will bring earth from the brink of global heating before 2050.

 

If the most nuclear advanced countries are running fast from it, how can we as ab initio expect to succeed?

It's a pipe dream from those that live in the past, not today and certainly not the near future.

 

If you believe in a nuclear future to save us soon, I have a bridge to sell you going cheap only 100 billion... and payments for thousands of years after it falls down. Any takers?

 

 

Nuclear, the dream of $100 power bills over 30 years that really cost $1,000 for a thousand years.

 

Don't be suckered, science does not lie but people happily do.

 

Ask the Japanese and see the $trillion dollar real word cost then a real discussion can be had.

[Litespeed]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

whats with the caution, can't other people have an opinion. sun and wind can't run industry.  places like the onesteel mill in laverton . that mill uses as much power as geelong when it is in full swing. thats what they told us anyway. 

Yes everyone is entitled to their opinion and it's welcome. 

 

However scientific facts don't care for anyone's opinion. 

 

Several large users like steel , aluminium. Plants and big miners are developing solar ,wind and battery for their power needs. They don't care about politics just profit in the future, there is proof of the economics of sustainability for power generation.

 

I would love nuclear to be the solution and cheap but alas just like humans growing wings to fly, it ain't going to happen.

[spenaroo]

I still don't get why we don't just store the nuclear waste at Woomera,
its not like its ever going to be open to the public, security and transport routes are already there including rail. And a proper storage facility might be able to help with Maralinga when they decide to try cleaning it again...
 

Edited November 29, 2023 by spenaroo

[BrendAn]

1 minute ago, spenaroo said:

I still don't get why we don't just store the nuclear waste at Woomera,
its not like its ever going to be open to the public, and a proper storage facility might be able to help with Maralinga when they decide to try cleaning it again...
 

and nuclear waste storage from other countries has been talked about as another form of revenue as well.  

[BrendAn]

Office of Nuclear Energy

WWW.ENERGY.GOV

---

The Office of Nuclear Energy advances nuclear power as a resource capable of meeting the nation's energy, environmental, and national security needs.

there is a lot of research going on to make nuclear viable .

 

[BrendAn]

 

[onetrack]

Nuclear power stations come at mind-boggling cost to build. They need to be earthquake-proof, flood proof, fire-proof, and have triple redundancy built into every system.

They consume tens of thousands of tonnes of concrete and thousands of tonnes of lead shielding.

They must be be made 100% foolproof, and breakdown proof, and this costs a fortune.

There has to be millions of tonnes of water available at all times for cooling. The cooling systems have to be mind-boggling in size and complexity.

 

There have been multiple nuclear power station accidents, of which 3 Mile Island was the worst in the U.S. We all know about Chernobyl. It only takes a pump to break down or a valve to become stuck - and no-one notices - and there's your nuclear power station accident.

Few countries are going ahead with major nuclear power station development, and the reasons are, it's the cost as well as the nuclear waste generated - which non-one wants.

 

We could build a few big solar power stations in the interior and they would take over from our coal-generated power. All that's needed is storage - and pumped hydro appears to be the best response for that requirement.

[BrendAn]

3 hours ago, onetrack said:

Nuclear power stations come at mind-boggling cost to build. They need to be earthquake-proof, flood proof, fire-proof, and have triple redundancy built into every system.

They consume tens of thousands of tonnes of concrete and thousands of tonnes of lead shielding.

They must be be made 100% foolproof, and breakdown proof, and this costs a fortune.

There has to be millions of tonnes of water available at all times for cooling. The cooling systems have to be mind-boggling in size and complexity.

 

There have been multiple nuclear power station accidents, of which 3 Mile Island was the worst in the U.S. We all know about Chernobyl. It only takes a pump to break down or a valve to become stuck - and no-one notices - and there's your nuclear power station accident.

Few countries are going ahead with major nuclear power station development, and the reasons are, it's the cost as well as the nuclear waste generated - which non-one wants.

 

We could build a few big solar power stations in the interior and they would take over from our coal-generated power. All that's needed is storage - and pumped hydro appears to be the best response for that requirement.

It's 2023. Why don't you do a bit of reading on the latest designs they are working on. Everything you wrote above is archaic. You would cover thousands of acres of Australia in solar panels and wind farms to make a fraction of the power one nuclear station can make.go for a drive through western Victoria and have a look at how many wind farms are sprouting up.

 

[turboplanner]

8 hours ago, BrendAn said:

The biggest hurdle in Melbourne is the amount of cars that park on the street and the power grid can not cope with thousands of EVs plugged in overnight.  Our base power grid has been depleted by a rundown network and hazlewoods closure .

We need nuclear power and a lot of improvement to the transmission of power around the state. 

I know all the talk about the expense of nuclear power stations but how else can you supply enough electricity to power the nation without coal . The sun doesn't always shine and the wind doesn't always blow. I got an email today from ausnet with advice on how to prepare for power outages this summer. This state can't even supply reliable power even though we are paying a fortune for it. 

That's pretty much the story for the whole of the east coast grid now.

The State and Federal Governments are out of cash and borrowing deeply due to the costs of the Covid epidemic.

There's no point debating Nuclear now because we've passed the lead time point of recovery and there isn't the money available to build plants anyway.

There's no point to more solar or nuclear projects either because they can only produce base load - idle load; they can't expand to peak load like a coal-fired plant can. If you want to see the proof of this, get onto the AEMO site (which covers the Easter Grid of Qld, NSW, Vic, Tas, SA.) and watch the power flow live. The dashboard shows the available power being shuffled to the State with the heatwave. In mild conditions you will see solar and wind making up about 15% to 50% of the grid on base power, the coal stations at idle. Sit there on a hot night and you'll see a vastly different situation, sometimes with power being pulled into South Australia from Victoria, which then pulls from Tas and NSW which then pulls from Queensland which then pulls from the sugar mills. I watched solar and wind one night when it could only produce 1% of the demand. The Federal and State Governments have subsidised the wind farms which have undercut the baseload economics which supported the coal-fired plants. The coal-fired owners have been closing plants and departing Australia, and the governments have allowed this to happen based on the UN global warming agenda. None of them have investigated the little group within the UN that decided in 1968 they could make their funding out of crisis creation; none of them seem to have found the report on ways this could be done and the part where the UN committee said "We've chosen global warming"; none of them have checked their own tidal gauges and found the ocean level hasn't risen since the 19th century in Australia, confirming that Australia isn't warming. So there's a power crisis coming this summer and a solution; Coal-fired power stations are cheap to build and quick to bring on line. Without the UN global warming agenda we don't have to look at an unaffordable fix to our power needs. The governments that have let us down haven't taken this route; they've just started issuing warnings of dire consequences of global warming this summer which will lead to huge blackouts this summer. They pointed to the heatwaves of Europe in their summer just past, even though the northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere weather has completely different patterns.

 

Unfortunately for the governments this is Australia, and if we do have a hot summer this year and solar and wind reliance causes regular blackouts and the general public swings into attack mode, that'll be it for most of the governments and the new governments will know their survival depends on getting to the bottom of this mess.

 

As for electric cars as a means to remove CO2 from our atmosphere, the numbers are already being crunched and starting to appear. We don't generate enough power to charge them and we don't have the 3-phase infrastructure to charge them fast enough. More and more people in the electrical industry have been doing power calculations based on the kilwatt hour demand and consumption of EV, and confirming that Australia will need double to triple the amount of power output three phase power to every street and more substations per suburb. So the EV industry, apart from applications only requiring partial and single phase power, or charging from their own solar system has a finite upper limit where they'll be told to get lost in favour of households, businesses and industries.

 

Now you might say "That's only your imagination; there will be breakthroughs; that's never going to happen".  I say "Be my guest and invent these changes to the laws of physics and you'll be a millionaire."

 

Do we have any evidence of issues similar to what Australia is facing?

 

The UK moved harder and faster than us being one of the countries which banned ICE vehicles after 2030.

They committed to wind power with ocean based generation around the coast which was going to meet the power requirements of every house in Britain by 2021. They outlawed coal mining and shut down coal-fired power stations as fast as they could.

The policy has failed; they couldn't generate the peak power they needed so they started buying power from France, Belgium and Norway, installing undersea power cables.

They reversed the legislation banning coal mining and have encouraged fast construction of coal-fired plants.

The UK automotive manufacturing industry has been left hanging with, assuming they had trusted the government, existing platforms (complete car designs) of ICE cars set to shut down by 2030, and EV platforms rushed through design for about 3 years so far with exponential development cost to a 2030 production run, now facing a 2030 market which may be demanding ICE.

In the US the manufacturers have been more cautious, hitting social media with plans of their "new all EV plants for the modern era."  When you look at the number of employees, it's a fraction of a mainstream plant, so easy to shut down if they need to.

The EV industry has been touting "Zero Emission" like most promoting EV around the world, but EV only emit zero CO2 if they are charged by CO2-free means. US EV promoters covered that by quoting California, which almost has zero CO2 charging, whenever they could. When this argument fell apart, they quoted a national level which seemed too low to me so I went looking for power generation emissions State by State. Sure enough, like most things in the US, the figures were readily available. For many of the most dense industrial states the power generation was 100% coal-fired.

 

We are hovering in a situation where a lot of chickens are going to come home to roost quite fast. Best to keep up with what's really happening and why.

 

 

 

 

[RFguy]

Look.

1) electric cars are nice, but as highway cruisers they are marginal ROI . 

2) For city stop start folk that can use regenerative braking effectively, they are fantastic.

and they are price comparible with ICE cars as they havea small battery.
but

if we take the highway cruiser : 

The 50k electric car (with a 300km battery)  once youve done 300,000km in it  is going to have cost you $66,000 (electricity costs from the mains at night) . plus perhaps $500/year service (15 years) = 73.5k
The 30,000 hybrid car at 4.5l/100km is goign to be $27,000 in fuel at 300,000km, so $57,000

(plus alot more in servicing, say $1200/year x 15  = 18k  = 30+27+18 = 75k

 

But to be apples with apples for highway cruising, you really do need at least 450km range or a 65 ish kwh battery .. really you do.... so you really need the 65k electric car.  so you electric car is another 10 grand. 

 

this is all assuming you are not paying any sort of CO2 polluting tax If you have a massive solar array at home say 15kW   your electricity costs are goign to be much lower, eventually) payback time on investment not to be forgotten !

 

so....

 

 

[turboplanner]

7 minutes ago, RFguy said:

Look.

1) electric cars are nice, but as highway cruisers they are marginal ROI . 

2) For city stop start folk that can use regenerative braking effectively, they are fantastic.

and they are price comparible with ICE cars as they havea small battery.
but

if we take the highway cruiser : 

The 50k electric car (with a 300km battery)  once youve done 300,000km in it  is going to have cost you $66,000 (electricity costs from the mains at night) . plus perhaps $500/year service (15 years) = 73.5k
The 30,000 hybrid car at 4.5l/100km is goign to be $27,000 in fuel at 300,000km, so $57,000

(plus alot more in servicing, say $1200/year x 15  = 18k  = 30+27+18 = 75k

 

But to be apples with apples for highway cruising, you really do need at least 450km range or a 65 ish kwh battery .. really you do.... so you really need the 65k electric car.  so you electric car is another 10 grand. 

 

this is all assuming you are not paying any sort of CO2 polluting tax If you have a massive solar array at home say 15kW   your electricity costs are goign to be much lower, eventually) payback time on investment not to be forgotten !

 

so....

 

 

You make an important point.

 

In selecting a motor vehicle the first thing you do is look at the culture of the Manufacturer; that will help you avoid a lot of maintenance cost from manufacturers who sell cheap and build cheaper.

 

The next step is the most important; you look at your Application, which you have done here.

 

It's not that hard and it doesn't take that long. I've done Application Ananlysis for more than 12,000 vehicles.

 

In one case a fleet was buying Vehicle A which was 20% cheaper than Vehicle B and the fleet manager told me he was saving tens of thousands of dollars per year.

 

Vehicle A's price advantage was due to a smaller, cheaper engine which needed to be replaced at 80,000 km wheras Vehicle B's engine was lasting to 800,000. I was able to show him, and his own records confirmed that from year 3 he would save $500,000 per year buying vehicle B.

 

Aircraft Anaysis is the same; if you are flying solo the analysis will point to one aircraft, usually smaller and slower, but if you can take four passengers on a cost-shared basis, the lowest hourly travel cost will come from bigger, faster aircraft.

 

EV is no different as your calculations show.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RFguy]

and EVs right now, with their pricey tags, owner's  expect they're not bottom row, are also at a luxury  'ghia' etc

 

Not the bottom line vehicle like a very cut down Hyundai Excel , there's no such thing as a Hyundai Excel rock bottom car  that's an EV...

 

On the aircraft. yeah. the 180hp Piper is good for going to see clients  (sometimes full to the brim with gear), family,  or crossing endless tiger country or water

however for going and seeing friends by myself regularly say 450nm, something like a old J160 costing 30k, wouldnt bother insuring it , and costing about 160mL/nm compared to 260 ml/h (best)... 
Which is why I am selling the J230. (halfway between the two requirements) 

Edited November 29, 2023 by RFguy

[kgwilson]

1 hour ago, RFguy said:

Look.

1) electric cars are nice, but as highway cruisers they are marginal ROI . 

2) For city stop start folk that can use regenerative braking effectively, they are fantastic.

and they are price comparible with ICE cars as they havea small battery.
but

if we take the highway cruiser : 

The 50k electric car (with a 300km battery)  once youve done 300,000km in it  is going to have cost you $66,000 (electricity costs from the mains at night) . plus perhaps $500/year service (15 years) = 73.5k
The 30,000 hybrid car at 4.5l/100km is goign to be $27,000 in fuel at 300,000km, so $57,000

(plus alot more in servicing, say $1200/year x 15  = 18k  = 30+27+18 = 75k

 

But to be apples with apples for highway cruising, you really do need at least 450km range or a 65 ish kwh battery .. really you do.... so you really need the 65k electric car.  so you electric car is another 10 grand. 

 

this is all assuming you are not paying any sort of CO2 polluting tax If you have a massive solar array at home say 15kW   your electricity costs are goign to be much lower, eventually) payback time on investment not to be forgotten !

 

so....

 

 

Well my EV has a 64kWH battery & cost 50k, has a 450km range & will get me 400 km at 110kmH. It just did 3 weeks ago. It has a 7 year unlimited km warranty & the first service is at 40,000 km. CATL who make the battery say with appropriate battery management it should last about 1 million km. Battery management software is built in to the car so that's easy. If you have 6-8 kW rooftop solar the running costs can be reduced to a fraction of the grid price, less than 20c a litre of petrol equivalent. Add to that the quiet comfortable ride and excellent driving dynamics.

 

The percentage of cars driving on main highways is tiny. Once you are out of the city there are not many & I am talking Pacific Highway between Coffs & Brisbane. This all changes at holiday time but I avoid this like the plague. Toilets overflowing and stinking of urine/excrement, queues at pumps and food outlets. But for most travellers going on holiday, they leave with 100% charge & get to their destination & just use the granny charger plugged in to a standard wall socket overnight.

 

The problem lies with successive governments. Australia has the highest uptake of rooftop solar in the world and one of the the lowest EV percentage though that is changing. In 2022 EVs made up only 1.8% of new vehicles sold This year by the end of September that had jumped to nearly 9%. Also Australia is one of only 2 countries without an emissions standard & we share that unenviable title with Russia. This means car companies can dump their dirtiest cars here at very cheap prices because they can't sell them anywhere else.

 

We have to stop burning stuff if we are to survive. The planet won't care that we have used all the resources it took 4.5 billion years to generate in 3-400 years. It will continue around the sun for billions of years to come without us.

[RFguy]

KG what are your  total  estimated servicing costs over 300,000 km ? just wondering

[turboplanner]

20 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Well my EV has a 64kWH battery & cost 50k, has a 450km range & will get me 400 km at 110kmH. It just did 3 weeks ago. It has a 7 year unlimited km warranty & the first service is at 40,000 km. CATL who make the battery say with appropriate battery management it should last about 1 million km. Battery management software is built in to the car so that's easy. If you have 6-8 kW rooftop solar the running costs can be reduced to a fraction of the grid price, less than 20c a litre of petrol equivalent. Add to that the quiet comfortable ride and excellent driving dynamics.

 

The percentage of cars driving on main highways is tiny. Once you are out of the city there are not many & I am talking Pacific Highway between Coffs & Brisbane. This all changes at holiday time but I avoid this like the plague. Toilets overflowing and stinking of urine/excrement, queues at pumps and food outlets. But for most travellers going on holiday, they leave with 100% charge & get to their destination & just use the granny charger plugged in to a standard wall socket overnight.

 

The problem lies with successive governments. Australia has the highest uptake of rooftop solar in the world and one of the the lowest EV percentage though that is changing. In 2022 EVs made up only 1.8% of new vehicles sold This year by the end of September that had jumped to nearly 9%. Also Australia is one of only 2 countries without an emissions standard & we share that unenviable title with Russia. This means car companies can dump their dirtiest cars here at very cheap prices because they can't sell them anywhere else.

 

We have to stop burning stuff if we are to survive. The planet won't care that we have used all the resources it took 4.5 billion years to generate in 3-400 years. It will continue around the sun for billions of years to come without us.

That's the EV "I'm all right Jack attitude"

You can do what you want but the country people, the people who need to travel for business, the tradies who need to tow heavy loads long distances, anyone with a family and caravan doing Melbourne-Cairns and back for the school hollidays, the horse events, and so on can get stuffed.

You haven't allowed for the pushback.

[onetrack]

I'd suggest dragging a caravan from Melbourne to Cairns is one of the stupidest ideas out and the economics don't stack up.

These people pay $100K for a van, $100K for a massively overpowered 4WD to haul it, pay out $300 a day in fuel costs for dragging their hated highway clogger the 3000kms to get there - and when they get there, the school holidays are half over, they get a few days in Cairns, then have to depart again and clog the highways on the way back.

 

I've owned plenty of vans for work purposes and they're a constant PIA, with high maintenance costs, insurance, licencing, tyres - and plenty of them are poorly built as caravan manufacturers pop up everywhere, trying to get a share of the RV dollar. Caravan parts are always half the size and twice the cost.

 

My holidays involve no $100K van, no $100K fuel-hogging 4WD, and no clogged highways stress.

Airline fares are the cheapest method of going long distances, accommodation is available in most places, and hire cars are cheap, and always the latest model with good reliability. 

It's about time people woke up to the idiotic "RV dream", it's not a dream, it's an expensive nightmare, and it means stress-filled holidaying.