Adam_S Posted August 11, 2016 Posted August 11, 2016 I'm hoping the census website crashes again, just for the lolz.
Ivanhoe Posted August 19, 2016 Posted August 19, 2016 You blockheads forgot to set the parking brake; http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36912700 Australia is to shift its longitude and latitude to address a gap between local co-ordinates and those from global navigation satellite systems (GNSS).Local co-ordinates, used to produce maps and measurements, and global ones differ by more than 1m.The body responsible for the change said it would help the development of self-driving cars, which need accurate location data to navigate.Australia moves about 7cm north annually because of tectonic movements.
Ssnake Posted August 19, 2016 Posted August 19, 2016 THIS. IS. AUSTRALIA!We're coming for you with RAMMING SPEEEEEED!
DougRichards Posted August 22, 2016 Posted August 22, 2016 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-14/doodlebug-joey-hugs-teddy-bear/6698616
Panzermann Posted August 22, 2016 Posted August 22, 2016 (edited) http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-14/doodlebug-joey-hugs-teddy-bear/6698616 Cat content was yesterday. Next big thing is kangaroo content! I tell you! Edited August 22, 2016 by Panzermann
DougRichards Posted August 23, 2016 Posted August 23, 2016 Sexy.... The problem is, that could be a male.....
Panzermann Posted September 29, 2016 Posted September 29, 2016 http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/84769346/state-in-the-dark-south-australias-major-power-outage It is dark in south australia.
Mike Steele Posted September 29, 2016 Posted September 29, 2016 http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/84769346/state-in-the-dark-south-australias-major-power-outage It is dark in south australia.More so than you thinkhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/state-of-despair/news-story/70c0b574a1da4b63ca3f31a1c4eb5b1c
Stuart Galbraith Posted September 29, 2016 Posted September 29, 2016 Australia, and Trains! Can life get any better! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYava7OvHYc
Panzermann Posted September 29, 2016 Posted September 29, 2016 http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/84769346/state-in-the-dark-south-australias-major-power-outage It is dark in south australia.More so than you thinkhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/state-of-despair/news-story/70c0b574a1da4b63ca3f31a1c4eb5b1cWell when you are sitting comfortably in parliament with electricity anything is a good excuse for speeches.
Mike Steele Posted September 29, 2016 Posted September 29, 2016 http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/84769346/state-in-the-dark-south-australias-major-power-outage It is dark in south australia.More so than you thinkhttp://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/blogs/tim-blair/state-of-despair/news-story/70c0b574a1da4b63ca3f31a1c4eb5b1cWell when you are sitting comfortably in parliament with electricity anything is a good excuse for speeches. “Let’s be very clear - renewable energy is not to blame for the power outages caused by these severe storms. The storm was fuelled by climate change and the power outages by the infrastructure damage those storms caused.”Meanwhile, states fuelled by fossil fuels have no power outages at all.
Adam_S Posted September 29, 2016 Posted September 29, 2016 Tasmania had similar problems recently in a way. They decided to go with hyro power with an interconnector across the Bass straight to Victoria for backup. The interconnector failed and the dams nearly ran out of water because of a prolonged drought. It's easy for a small state or country to say they are going to go 100% renewable when they've got a bit chunky interconnector to somewhere that has lots of spare base load capacity but it's decidedly more dodgy when you have to rely on renewables 100% of the time.
Panzermann Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Needs more contingency planning obviously than keeping a pile of coal on hand. I would be interested how and why the net failed in south australia. I would not be surprised that they built the net on the cheap with strings and bubble gum.
Ivanhoe Posted September 30, 2016 Posted September 30, 2016 Needs more contingency planning obviously than keeping a pile of coal on hand. Coal? Is that a bigoted "shrimp on the barbie" slam? I would be interested how and why the net failed in south australia. I would not be surprised that they built the net on the cheap with strings and bubble gum. Grid power seems to be a tricky thing, what with dynamic load shifting and all that; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Southwest_blackout Note that of the 6 FERC citations, 2 were issued to for-profit power generators but 4 were issued to regulatory and coordinating bodies. Even with expensive string, if nodes aren't coordinated fully, and the grid design tested against a broad spectrum of failures, stuff can happen. Of course, much of this nonsense happens because America and then the world chose to go with that Yurropean AC rather than good ol' reliable American DC.
Colin Posted October 1, 2016 Author Posted October 1, 2016 AC as i recall travels further than DC with less line loss, but submarine cables are DC.
DB Posted October 1, 2016 Posted October 1, 2016 Not really Infrastructure primarily was set up using AC because it's relatively easy to transform voltages, and high voltages mean lower currents and lower currents mean lower losses. I think that if infrastructure was being created now, it would be more likely to be DC, because AC s actually more lossy for various reasons that I don't fully understand - capacitance in the cables, inductive coupling and such spring to mind.
sunday Posted October 1, 2016 Posted October 1, 2016 Not really Infrastructure primarily was set up using AC because it's relatively easy to transform voltages, and high voltages mean lower currents and lower currents mean lower losses. I think that if infrastructure was being created now, it would be more likely to be DC, because AC s actually more lossy for various reasons that I don't fully understand - capacitance in the cables, inductive coupling and such spring to mind. Still transformers are simpler to operate, and more robust than AC/DC converters, but for long distances and several other applications like submarine power transmission cables, or coupling between grid islands, DC is the way to go. Some reasons on these links: http://www.electricaltechnology.org/2013/05/comparison-between-ac-and-dc.htmlhttp://electrical-engineering-portal.com/advantages-of-hvdc-over-hvac-transmission
Adam_S Posted January 5, 2017 Posted January 5, 2017 It seems that the local golf course has been taking water hazards to a whole new level. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-04/willow-the-croc-finally-snared-at-north-queensland-golf-club/8161282
DougRichards Posted January 5, 2017 Posted January 5, 2017 As has the wildlife sitting on cars http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-05/fur-seal-dubbed-lou-seal-has-history-of-repeat-offending/8162116
mnm Posted January 5, 2017 Posted January 5, 2017 Not really Infrastructure primarily was set up using AC because it's relatively easy to transform voltages, and high voltages mean lower currents and lower currents mean lower losses. I think that if infrastructure was being created now, it would be more likely to be DC, because AC s actually more lossy for various reasons that I don't fully understand - capacitance in the cables, inductive coupling and such spring to mind. Still transformers are simpler to operate, and more robust than AC/DC converters, but for long distances and several other applications like submarine power transmission cables, or coupling between grid islands, DC is the way to go.Some reasons on these links: http://www.electricaltechnology.org/2013/05/comparison-between-ac-and-dc.htmlhttp://electrical-engineering-portal.com/advantages-of-hvdc-over-hvac-transmissionMaerklin* trains are AC, cheapo are DC, so you can kiss my Eisenbahn. *Sorry, no umlaut in this keyboard.
Panzermann Posted January 5, 2017 Posted January 5, 2017 Not really Infrastructure primarily was set up using AC because it's relatively easy to transform voltages, and high voltages mean lower currents and lower currents mean lower losses. I think that if infrastructure was being created now, it would be more likely to be DC, because AC s actually more lossy for various reasons that I don't fully understand - capacitance in the cables, inductive coupling and such spring to mind. Still transformers are simpler to operate, and more robust than AC/DC converters, but for long distances and several other applications like submarine power transmission cables, or coupling between grid islands, DC is the way to go.Some reasons on these links: http://www.electricaltechnology.org/2013/05/comparison-between-ac-and-dc.htmlhttp://electrical-engineering-portal.com/advantages-of-hvdc-over-hvac-transmissionMaerklin* trains are AC, cheapo are DC, so you can kiss my Eisenbahn. *Sorry, no umlaut in this keyboard.AC can better cope with differing and changing length of cable. Just think of all the devices connected and disconnected all the time from the electric power grid. When you have a known distance and known capacity requirements DC is in advantage. e.g. connecting an island to mainland power. pahh, Märklin. I swear by Trix!
Ivanhoe Posted January 5, 2017 Posted January 5, 2017 Train buffs arguing about AC versus DC (not to mention an AC/DC riff in a thread about Australia; ironic, eh mates?);
Coldsteel Posted January 6, 2017 Posted January 6, 2017 Tasmania had similar problems recently in a way. They decided to go with hyro power with an interconnector across the Bass straight to Victoria for backup. The interconnector failed and the dams nearly ran out of water because of a prolonged drought. It's easy for a small state or country to say they are going to go 100% renewable when they've got a bit chunky interconnector to somewhere that has lots of spare base load capacity but it's decidedly more dodgy when you have to rely on renewables 100% of the time. That's not completely correct. Tasmania was pretty much solely hydro powered for quite a while, there would have been more dam capacity but the state government got taken to court by the federal government to put a stop to dam construction. There was a backup oil fired power station that was eventually converted to gas, but it was mothballed for most of the time and for emergencies only. Basslink was seen as a way to sell power to the mainland at peak times and make a profit, and could also be used to cheaply import a percentage of base load. With that in place there wasn't seen to be a need to maintain a gas fired plant that would require a couple of weeks notice and considerable expense to bring it to a ready to generate power condition, and so it was sold off. There was a long drought and then Basslink failed, and that's a problem, but nothing like what SA got, the lights stayed on and some of Hydro's industrial customers were asked to throttle back their usage.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now