|
|
Post by spinifex on Aug 25, 2019 11:13:51 GMT 10
Occasionally I like to take a moment to climb a high tree in the world of economic data and have a good look at the economic scenery. Here's something worth knowing. Open the link. Go to table 4b, page 27, (enlarge significantly to read it), scroll down and find the really big numbers, get a paper map of the world and circle the sources of those big numbers. Or better yet, download the excel data file and make a graph of where Australias fuels are sourced. www.energy.gov.au/sites/default/files/australian_petroleum_statistics_-_issue_269_december_2018.pdfThen compare what you saw above with this 'reassuring' publication from 2015 trying to tell us that we're not at any special risk. aip.com.au/resources/imports-transport-fuels |
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Aug 25, 2019 11:54:34 GMT 10
Mostly from Singapore, Japan, Korea and China. All of which could potentially be stopped with a China blockade of the shipping routes  Beef up the home grown production I say, get those refineries pumping again |
|
|
|
Post by SA Hunter on Jan 2, 2020 15:47:37 GMT 10
Fuel deal between Trump and Australia secures crucial backing. www.smh.com.au/world/europe/fuel-deal-between-trump-and-australia-secures-crucial-backing-20191223-p53mbe.htmlIn a nutshell - instead of spending billions of dollars on building storage sites/tanks etc, we are securing access to the US stores of fuel in a emergency. 1. Do you really think if there was a major international incident, and the fuel access was cut, that the US would give up her fuel over her own Nation? 2. It still has to get here from the US. Good luck in a shooting war with China! 3. Distribution issues - who gets first dibs/ ADF? Emergency Services? Major cities over regional centres? Just spend the billions and secure our fuel future! 10,683,838 people living in the Australia in 2016 were employed, of which 62% worked full-time and 36% part-time. If we had a one of tax per working person of $100, well, we just raised $1,068,383,800. But then, in the current climate, $100 is a lot of money for most. Thoughts? |
|
frostbite
VIP Member
Posts: 5,719 
Likes: 7,119
|
Post by frostbite on Jan 2, 2020 15:55:11 GMT 10
That's a big investment on a product that is declining in use.
|
|
bug
Senior Member
Posts: 2,316
Likes: 1,934
|
Post by bug on Jan 2, 2020 16:25:57 GMT 10
Australia is mad not to begin switching to electric vehicles. The technology is now mature and only awaiting the economy of scale to bring down prices. We'd be switching from imported oil (tankers are incredibly vulnerable to attack) to local electricity supply. Makes you wonder what money is trading hands in Canberra to keep the current dangerous situation unchanged.
|
|
spatial
Senior Member
Posts: 2,396
Likes: 1,560
|
Post by spatial on Jan 3, 2020 6:10:17 GMT 10
Electric vehicle have just as big an impact on the environment as fuel driven vehicles. The batteries, charging and manufacture are a problem.
The larges fuel usage in Australia is the rail network, and trucking and farming activities, that is where the fuel shortage will hit the hardest.
|
|
|
|
Post by spinifex on Jan 3, 2020 11:10:12 GMT 10
Fuel deal between Trump and Australia secures crucial backing. www.smh.com.au/world/europe/fuel-deal-between-trump-and-australia-secures-crucial-backing-20191223-p53mbe.htmlIn a nutshell - instead of spending billions of dollars on building storage sites/tanks etc, we are securing access to the US stores of fuel in a emergency. 1. Do you really think if there was a major international incident, and the fuel access was cut, that the US would give up her fuel over her own Nation? 2. It still has to get here from the US. Good luck in a shooting war with China! 3. Distribution issues - who gets first dibs/ ADF? Emergency Services? Major cities over regional centres? Just spend the billions and secure our fuel future! 10,683,838 people living in the Australia in 2016 were employed, of which 62% worked full-time and 36% part-time. If we had a one of tax per working person of $100, well, we just raised $1,068,383,800. But then, in the current climate, $100 is a lot of money for most. Thoughts? I think you summed it up nicely. I wonder if the ATO was consulted in this? If we lose fuel they lose multi-billions in taxes associated with the sale of the fuel. Really what we should do is stop selling our LNG for peanuts to Asian customers and convert much of our transport to running on it for cheap. It'd help make our entire economy more competitive. But of course that would require a few very rich, very influential companies to relinquish some of their easy money. So it'll never happen. If one day the fuel stops, everyone will be shocked and outraged and demand 'action'. The Government will announce a Royal Commission. Special investigators and lawyers will be paid millions to 'discover' the obvious. Fuel will be quarantined for EMS and cruicial ag and transport. The masses will adjust to the new normal of commuting by bicycle, getting up at early to pedal for an hour or two to get to work, the city air will clear due to fewer vehicle emissions and health will improve. Everyone employed in construction will be left scratching their heads as to how to keep the construction industry moving. The banks will be sad because there will be no snazzy new loans to make for new houses and SUV's and Pleasure Craft. Tourism industry will watch the tumbleweeds blow through their industry. Hotels and motels might become live in worker accommodation. We have horses and bikes and access to heaps of good food so we'd just keep plodding along. Might be a chance for horses to become profitable! |
|
frostbite
VIP Member
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 7,119
|
Post by frostbite on Jan 3, 2020 13:11:52 GMT 10
As the petrol runs out the uptake of electric cars will grow rapidly, and the govt will introduce a mileage tax on your vehicle. All sorted.
|
|
bug
Senior Member
Posts: 2,316
Likes: 1,934
|
Post by bug on Jan 3, 2020 14:53:37 GMT 10
Electric vehicle have just as big an impact on the environment as fuel driven vehicles. The batteries, charging and manufacture are a problem. The larges fuel usage in Australia is the rail network, and trucking and farming activities, that is where the fuel shortage will hit the hardest. I was talking about them from a national security, not environmental perspective. Your statement though that electric cars are worse for the environment is incorrect. www.motorbiscuit.com/are-electric-cars-worse-for-the-environment-than-gas-cars/It's trending even further away due to the evolution of battery technology and to the increasing percentage of renewable generation on the grid. Can you supply information to support your statement that the rail network has the largest fuel usage? |
|
|
|
Post by spinifex on Jan 4, 2020 9:30:47 GMT 10
I'm always quite wary of 'scientific claims' made in media articles. They so often cherry pick facts to support the view of the business/industry paying for the research.
There is a lot more to 'environmental friendliness' than just carbon emissions.
I bet electric cars use a lot more light alloy in their construction - and they use lots of electricity to refine into useable metals. Much more than steel.
I presume electric cars use a lot more copper (eg in windings in electric motors). The energy use in mining and refining the current copper ores which are very low % purity is huge. This is why copper is being switched out or minimised in every use - its getting very expensive because so much energy is used in its production.
I'm not familiar with Lithium mining and refining techniques but its possible they might be quite hard on the environment if not from a carbon emission point of view (although I expect they too need a lot of electrolysis) possibly from a chemical pollutant standpoint.
Then there is the problem of getting enough electricity from ANY and ALL sources to power a mass electrified transport fleet. Hell ... we can barely supply grid power to the existing housing stock and get subjected to brown-outs as it is. There are a few big businesses in our state (SA) which at times are being asked to curb their production in order to alleviate supply shortfalls. Imagine doubling the electricity demand to power cars as well - wouldn't we need huge (and invariably Chinese Government? - who else would pay?) investment to build all the generation and distribution infrastructure needed to meet that demand?
I'm not keen on big solar farms displacing agriculture from productive land 'California style' either. Although we have some good locations in arid areas where installations should be built.
I think the future (based on what already happens in Europe and Asia) is a lot more bicycles, mopeds and mass commuter rail.
|
|
