The solar thermal proposal for Port Augusta

An Australian willing to encourage the adoption of alternative generation with entrepreneurial flair is backing a solar thermal power station for Port Augusta, in South Australia.

The site is very well suited for the proposal and this includes days and hours of available daylight, the need for the energy and accessibility.

The ABC broke the story, 9 August 2012, entitled Dick Smith urges federal funds for solar thermal trial. The story line follows that Dick Smith will be in Port Augusta to address a local meeting. He will also undertake another part of a documentary he is making on energy in Australia.

Of his support for a trail of this type of energy source (in his words the energy future), he is quoted as saying: “The solar thermal proposal for Port Augusta is a good one – there’s money coming from the carbon tax that we’re supposed to be looking at alternative energy and this would be an ideal way of doing it”.

CO2Land org is hopeful the change promised by the trail would be a very good demonstration of positive impacts of carbon price introduction. If the indications are correct the need for funding for the proposal will be a interim need and within a relatively short time the economics will see the power source being a sustainable alternative to conventional source reliance.

 

renewable energy sector’s ‘holy grail’ – DECC UK Subsidy

In a show of support for innovation, in the UK the Department of Energy and Climate Change is introducing a subsidy for energy storage in the September 2012. The subsidy is part of that government’s willingness to create a market mechanism to help firms become more competitive.

Energy Live News interviewed Ian Ellerington, Head of Innovation Delivery at DECC and he said: “We see that in the long term electricity storage is going to be important so through the innovation programme at DECC we’re going to be supporting electricity storage through a scheme of grants that I’m hoping to announce formally in September this year”. Later he added: “We’re going to be giving assistance to companies to demonstrate technologies so they can get funding and bring their costs down to make them more competitive and I would hope that suitable market mechanisms can be found.”

CO2Land org is aware many companies in Australia have sought similar assistance here, and often move offshore to get the opportunity to prove there products out of Australia. This could be one such opportunity through the UK package. You may have noticed through posts on electric vehicles that we in Australia are dubbed as having a grid network that makes alterative electrical power transport more polluting than similar petrol driven vehicles, and you might agree if it was possible to fit energy storage support into the energy grid it would be a real boost to the renewable industry, it could make the energy system more cost effective, and if storage can be part of that then it would be good to have the commercial mechanism in place to take advantage of the benefits that can be realised.

It follows that energy storage is seen as the renewable energy sector’s ‘holy grail’ for the role it can play in storing energy from renewables, for example by storing electricity produced at periods of high wind or during the day time from photovoltaics and then used as a high demand management response tool. Good move, as the component of peak demand where price is high is about 20% of the time and when renewable power struggles to make a contribution to base load. It also follows that about 5% of the time energy prices are traded at levels that would break most supply companies if sustained and is one of the reasons we pay higher bills than we could have otherwise.

Source: Energylive News (www.energylive.com) Energy Storage Subsidy to be announced in Autumn.

Vic Coalition at odds with Fed Coalition – CFI Direct Action compromised.

More barbed wire fences: At odds with the Federal Coalitions Direct Action Policy, the Victorian Coalition has a position that farmers need to be very careful of, it is effective now, and does impose imposts on farmers under Carbon Farming Initiatives. In an exclusive, Kate Dowler ( August 8, 2012 through weeklytimes Now) said Carbon farming could cost farmers, instead of making them money, and is the result of the Victorian Government tripling rate bills. Quoted: “The Victorian Government does not recognise carbon farming as a legitimate farming activity under land tax and valuation acts and has ruled out changing the laws”.

The impacts:

  • Carbon farming, as the main activity on a land title, could attract commercial council rates, instead of lower farming rates.
  • The Victorian Coalition’s move results in the federal Coalition’s Direct Action policy being ineffective in encouraging carbon sinks.
  • Treasury has advised farmers state and local governments did not “recognise carbon farming as a primary production activity for the purposes of land tax or council rates”.

Also quoted is Environmental Farmers Network spokesman and Ararat farmer Peter Forster: ”The news was very concerning…This is outrageous and means farmers trying to do the right thing (enter carbon farming Initiative programs) are going to be disadvantaged… People are already reluctant to go into carbon farming – this will be the nail in the coffin.”

The piece also quoted: Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh “confirmed carbon farming was not classified as a farming activity and flatly ruled out reviewing it…He said recognising it could distort the market and produce ‘a managed investment scheme debate all over again…Prime agriculture land should be used for food and fibre production and people should be “very careful” about entering carbon schemes”.

The Victorian Minister then added when asked what he thought of the federal Coalition’s policies for carbon abatement; Mr Walsh repeated, “People need to be very, very careful about going into carbon farming”.

CO2Land org in a previous story on coalition positions and government outreach said you may be even more confused and equally reluctant to modify land use practices because of the politics – who can blame you – It may be time for the resilient to overcome the Neanderthals.

You can’t sit on a fence, a barbed wire fence at that, and have one ear to the ground

While reflecting on the days of Joh Bjelke-Peterson, those who had a life in Queensland then would be familiar with 3 particular characteristics that the Premier himself attributed: Running along a barbed wire fence with a foot on either side: ‘it doesn’t work and it’s not very comfortable’; you need to celebrate Queensland difference and treat outsiders with contempt; talking to the media he would ‘feed the chooks’ and watch them fight over the crumbs.

Then while lamenting another of his quotes ‘You can’t sit on a fence, a barbed wire fence at that, and have one ear to the ground’, a friend passed on a piece reported through Queensland Country Life (Story by Lenore Taylor 07 Aug, 2012) called Soil Carbon Sweetener:  The story is how the Coalition is planning to pay farmers to store carbon in their fields for, not 100 years under current plans, but 25 years. This is a measure still claimed to be capable of solving 60 per cent of Australia’s total efforts towards long-term greenhouse gas reduction.

Offered is a critic of the coalitions plan:

For:

  1. Reducing the time you lock-up your land if you choose 25 Years (optional).
  2. If a better solution were found for greenhouse reduction the problem would have gone away (but carbon process might be rebadged as some other national imperative).
  3. Farmers can still take relatively easy steps to increase the quantity of carbon stored in soils by different agricultural practices, tilling methods and by deliberately introducing a charcoal-like substance called biochar.

Against:

  1. Very low carbon prices proposed in the ”Direct Action” plan.
  2. Reduced long-term liability would transfer to federal government the needs and rights to find replacement programs after each 25-year contract expires (Government could simply impose more stringent liabilities more regularly) so less certainty of the liability.
  3. Scientists are still working on how to measure the amount of carbon stored and understanding how it might be reversed by drought or fire.
  4. Uncertainty would continue and an example is that some forestry projects have been allowed to offer temporary 10-year credits as part of the international clean development mechanism, and these credits have a low demand and not allowed to be traded in the European Union trading scheme. Australia is heavily reliant on offshore credits for its schemes to work.

The promises:

1. The Coalition has budgeted in its $10.5 billion ”Direct Action” policy, the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, has said not a dollar more would be spent over the 10 years of the scheme. He is silent on the need for review periods, as was the practice of when he was a cabinet minister in a previous coalition government.

Claims of the views of farmers:

  1. Michael Kiely (Carbon Farmers of Australia), said “farmers were very pleased to be offered a ‘more realistic’ 25-year timeframe, but would still need to be paid a lot more than $10 a tonne to take the offer up…I’d rather get $100 a tonne because I understand what it means”.
  2. Norman Marshall (Australian Soil Management), said his company was ”finding it very difficult at the moment to convince farmers that changing their soil management was worth their while….If the Coalition introduced 25-year credits ”at around the $10 mark … that should do it”.

Other influences that could destabilize any scheme:

  1. Andrew Macintosh (ANU) said “the Coalition was ignoring more promising sources of land use greenhouse abatement from reforestation or reductions in land clearing for agricultural purposes”.
  2. Farmers need to be very careful of the ramifications of any future government using the review to impose at the stroke of a pen greater imposts or take all rights away from farmers in earlier timeframes. This will effect succession planning in particular.

CO2Land org first looks at all the approaches and notes that each political approach is a form of modified feudalism – you just take the number as 25 or 100 years. By this is meant, you are in effect indentured and your children and possibly their children are bonded to the will of the lord and taxes. The second look is a considered intrepid analysis of where we could say nature will make all things right. With this in mind you could be resolute in saying while carbon-reducing land use changes are to remain in place for 100 years under greenhouse gas reduction schemes, I will do nothing and the guiding hand will fix all. If it was that simple! No, it is not because regardless of what your view on anthropogenic climate change, the reality of the necessity of economics will drive the need to change. Not participating in a scheme will not be an option in either side of politics.

Woodlawn Power Station – Increased effectiveness

Since commissioning the bio-reactor site is credited with generating more than 68,000MWh and the output is increasing where gas capture volumes are getting more effective. Quoted by Henry Gundry (Woodlawn Environment and Operations Manager) in the Tarago Times August 2012 edition was that June 2012 was an all time high for gas volumes and power generation. The gas volumes for June were 1.37million cubic metres of biogas and 2535MWh of electricity generated.  The increase over May was 9% increase.

CO2Land was pleased with hearing some positive number coming out of the facility after some reports suggested a number of issues. If these numbers are continuing to improve it is information well received.

For those interested in the maintenance requirement of Woodlawn Power Station, after four and one half years of operation since commissioning. The schedule at 60,000 operational hours means all but the engine block, cooling system and generator housing is replaced. The major service interval is 20,000 operational hours where the cylinders, pistons, crank rods, turbo, and intercoolers are replaced or reconditioned replacements.

Carbon Training International will be road testing their newest short course on the 16th & 17th August 2012

Carbon Training International will be road testing their newest short course on the 16th & 17th August  – “Source, Evaluate & Purchase Carbon Offsets” (national course code CTICM402A).

We are invited to be participants and chosen from across industry and from a cross section of the market to be involved to QA the program and the content. This includes industry professionals who work across the value chain, including finance professionals, suppliers and end users.

Co2Land org has been asked to extend the invitation for its readers to participate and we have a great deal of respect for the chief presenter – Bill Mcghee.

The program outline and the registration details are available on the webpage setup for the Carbon Offsets Pilot course

Carbon Trade Exchange is assisting with additional candidate recruitment & providing the trading platform for the course.

If you want to know more contact Rob Nicholls:

  Robert Nicholls

Managing Director

Carbon Training International

GPO Box 3414, Sydney, NSW 2001, Australia

m: +61 (0) 403 806 779

www.co2ti.com

build a carbon-responsive workforce

 

Do you wait for government approval or go it alone?

Scenario: You have an idea to save the earth; it ticks all the right boxes – manageable, positive environmental impacts, economics drivers.  Then your problem becomes, it takes a government department to act in its pedant fashion a solid 12 months to determine you have a sound proposal; that the Minister will be interested and then forward through the Ministerial process for the policy announcement. So what is the cost? Personally, two major risks: Your funds dry up waiting and waiting has a cost; someone might leak out your proposal and a pro-active body will develop and package your idea.  Why would they do that – package your idea?

The next step of government once Ministerial approval is given is call for Expression of Interest (EOI) or a tender (RFT or RFQ), or if fortunate called as a select process (select meaning limited responses canvased).  Once called your package is most at risk – it is most likely the call will be a contestable program.  Yes, you may have guessed the problem; your idea is used as the basis of the call and offered as a framework for the development proposal. This means those that, during the 12 months hiatus, proactively developed your idea can now offer it to tender with many more questions fully answered or they may be better able to offer additional value of the proposal.

Why does this happen? Because in this country government cannot be seen to proactively encourage any industry to be innovative at the early adopter stage.  But, I hear you say taxpayers money is involved and at risk. But, we say that is not true, it is the innovator that is taking the risk, all that is required of government is encouragement and ensuring a sufficient procedure is in place for ethical behaviours.  If you look hard at current policy and find pleasure in the ‘bell curve’ it becomes very easy to see that current policy follows the pareto rule but it is skewed to mature or big brand programs only.  This inclination does make an absolute mockery of term ‘strategic direction’; it follows that known acceptable programs tend to be tactical in the response pattern and is likely to be reactionary and not proactive.

the Innovation Exchange SEROC and Zero Waste Australia

SEROC and Zero Waste Australia are daring all to be different with resources. Their staging an event named “the Innovation Exchange” at Queanbeyan Showground on Thursday the 6th September 2012.

They have great expectation the event will build on the successful Groundswell project. Product from the project includes the Groundswell compost process and on-farm weeds composting as well as the Bio Regen unit – turning food waste into foliar fertiliser. They are also planning a renewable energy/bio char demonstration and the launch of Zero Waste Australia’s Training Programs.

Speakers booked for the event include Eric Lombardi from the United States and Richard Denniss from the Australia Institute. It should be a good afternoon and evening includes dinner. You can register on the Zero Waste Australia web site at: wwwzerowasteaustralia.org

The event is limited to about 200 seats and it should prove popular – maybe to early register is advisable.

For more information, contact Gerry Gillespie on 0407 956 458 email: gerry.b.gillespie@gmail.com or Kay Hewitt on 0409 464 788 email: kay.hewitt@bigpond.com .

CO2Land org applauds this group as Zero Waste is about the art of innovation and the creative development of new business in your community through the use of new technologies. The Innovation Exchange is for people who want to stop talking and start doing!  The motto is – Innovation Exchange – providing support for community initiative.

Qualification – gap filled for AHC10

There is a qualification that fills the gap in the current Rural Production Training package AHC10. In conjunction with NSW Dept. of Education and Training and George Gundry (g.gundry@bigpond.com), a course in Holistic Management has been developed to meet the needs of land managers for accredited training in holistic management. George supplied a background on the founder of holistic management (developed over a period of 40 years by Alan Savory) and the facts to support the importance of the principles that include:

  • Over 12 Million hectares worldwide are managed using holistic principles
  • Since 1994, 250 people in Australia have attended training in holistic management.
  • The principles are sound and are suitable for people who want to make decisions on ecological, financial and socially sound land use in the short and long term for what they manage.

The course starts at TAFE Goulburn Campus on 24 &25 August 2012. There will be 8 workshops in total. The delivery pattern is two consecutive days off-farm with a reasonable interval to focus and achieve the outcomes desired of the course. Cost $231 plus textbooks.

CO2Land org is happy to alert where worthwhile learning structures are put forward. While we do what we can to determine whether the material is factual, it cannot be verified as suitable for what you intend and cannot be seen as a recommendation to participate. However, unashamedly we give credit for effort when the material is for the purpose of building sound practices.

Sequenced – a banana genome

Looking at a banana you might ask, how did this monoculture, a cultivar derived from only one seed become a major source of food (eighty-five percent of banana production is consumed locally in tropical and sub-tropical countries), and is a major source of income for over 500 million people.  You might then fairly come to the realisation a banana is a staple food and food security issues abound.

With a little research the prime issues surface as: Pests and diseases have gradually adapted to the cultivar that is predominating in banana production; the two main diseases at the moment are the Panama Disease and the Black Sigatoka Disease. The Black Sigatoka is now all over the world and the Panama Disease – a new type – is in Asia only, but it will probably extend to other areas.

The potential solution is reported by DW and according to Zulfikar Abbanyin: “France’s CIRAD – a centre for agricultural research for development – and the National Research Agency (ANR) say they have sequenced the DNA of banana. Led by CIRAD’s Angélique D’Hont, the researchers were able to map the genome of a wild Asian strain called Musa acuminate – a component in every edible variety of bananas. They say their work is an important step toward understanding the genetics of the crop – and toward improving varieties and strengthening them against fungus and pests. But Angélique D’Hont says CIRAD is focused on cross-breeding rather than genetically modifying bananas”.

So, how can the findings help farmers and cultivators beat the pests?

The work has the objective to breed new banana varieties – new cultivar. CIRAD say this type of breeding is quite complicated, as bananas have to produce sterile fruit – that is, fruit without seeds to make them edible. And to make new bananas you have to perform crossbreeding, so you need a fertile plant. So far CIRAD has sequenced one banana genome type and have identified 36,000 genes and the exact position of these genes on the chromosome. And, more work is required to find the specific genes that confer resistance to the main diseases and also for conferring good fruit quality.

Now comes the interesting question: Will they want to genetically modify…? No.

The answer comes in the term transgenesis – to modify current cultivar and then attempting to breed new cultivar by crossing different cultivar with different types of resistance. This breeding approach is possible because of knowing which gene and which genotype has the important gene that will help the breeder to create new cultivar by classical breeding techniques.

CO2Land org can see the approach to protect this important food source as most important and the other value added aspects for the environment become apparent including the reduced need for using pesticides and reducing cost for agriculture.  But a surprising barrier to the adoption of the new cultivar is the process for transporting and conserving bananas for export. The fact is current refrigerated means of transport are developed for one cultivar, the Cavendish banana. An interesting case of need for adaptation to changed needs, and the change will all come down to the money- Yes!