Will 'petitioning' of the Federal Government to make 'renewable' generations systems 'practical ever notice that it is NOT a Government responsibility to do so? Also, the low energy yield of the 'utilities' is not suitable for use within the Metal wire grid, which is NOT a Government responsibility either; it is a physical fact of SCIENCE.

The limitation on the actual energy incident in solar radiation, to the planetary surface thought the Atmosphere limits any use of solar generation, again a PHYSICAL fact (see slides in my previous posts whilst the vagary of Wind limits this 'generation method'. Again little any Government can do to remove these physical facts.

Next, with regard to Coal, there is already action on Gas. The ACCC is now allowing AGL the ability to sell its share (with a '10% stake') of Gas from a 4 Billion Dollar PNG project, along with the joint venture partners, under a new marketing plan. (Daily Telegraph, page 26, May 9th 2006).

Also (page 27 in above paper), lobby is 'began' to allow offshore Gas to compete against Coal. The Federal Petroleum Resource Rent Tax on this Gas makes such 6 times more expensive than Coal. This is with a request NOT for special treatment, but equal treatment seemingly.

This would be seen as justified by the COMMUNITY as up till now the greatest COMMENT from the COMMUNITY has been regarding the WASTE as this Gas; it is only BURNT off, and not used due to the 'artificial cost'. With LPG now ~$0.50 litre, I see more conversion being done soon of private vehicles. There cannot be a 'greenhouse issue' either, as it is already being burnt, and this is KNOWN and understood already by the COMMUNITY.

No one likes open cut Mines, but even less wanted is a superfluous open cut Coal mine.

There was also the notice that Sydney Gas is going ahead with a 50 Million Dollar recapitalisation program. Although a fiscal program, not involving new infrastructure, it can only be that a "Gas" future is being seen on a shorter path now.

Also, speaking of shortening paths and with increasing murmurings from the PM down, there is more than enough to see that the path to Uranium as a major power production fuel is even shorter than a few months ago.

With comments regardful of new Uranium based utilities only now taking ~2 years to build (those 'modular utilities' I mentioned some months ago), and producing ~10% of the 'waste' of older presently used designs (as I previously mentioned), the often made comments that "a choice needed to be made tween Coal and Uranium" would seem now to be moving towards 'a choice of Gas and Uranium'.

Thus it is looking very likely that the 'Base Load' generation will be Gas and Uranium.

It is to garner this decision that I feel those larger businesses approached the Federal Government asking for an early decision. The businesses involved (inclusive of BP and AGL) would seem needing rationalisation of remediation of our aging electrical power generation infrastructure.

This too little power already, and the projected need for 300 Trillion watt hours NOT being revised down whilst we maintain use of the Metal Wire Grid distribution technology, action was needed. Else these large companies would be unable to be certain they could maintain operations within Australia after a few more years, or a Decade even.

PS: I notice in this mornings Daily Telegraph that there is now much interest in Uranium based technologies, and that the AGL pipeline from Papua-New Guinea has proceeded through vital comercial arrangements, now much closer to reality. Also large (very large) companies are 'firming' their investments in Gas. New interest in oil exploration is up, but perhaps the prospectors are hoping for more Gas than Oil. All the above details are in print in the NSW 'Daily Telegraph' within its issues of the last few days.

PPS: I would note here that NOW my Hartlod AND Peter K Anderson log-in both seems to be corrupted, so I cannot edit my articles to maintain currency with my discussions elsewhere, and I cannot find a contact for 'web site' maintenance, so I will need to remake them (with updates) I imagine, so look for new titles with more and better images/slides (some provided by interested and REAL people).

PPPS: I notice also that comments are being deleted, which is NOT going to make the outcome of events any different and is only depriving REAL people of the chance to discuss these REAL events which will seemingly proceed regardless of any 'opinion' from the few and whether discussion proceeds on this site, so such discussion can only make more REAL people better informed (and perhaps that is NOT what the 'few' wish).

Your's
Peter K Anderson aka Hartlod
hartlod@bigpond.com
(The word 'Hartlod' in the registered Trademark of Peter K Anderson.)