And France did it in the 70/80s without the need for Tesla. Its almost as if we had the solution 50 years ago and simply refused to do it for idiotic reasons.
Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
101–110 of 257 posts
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#102Australia also has a remarkable tax incentive that lets you buy EVs basically tax free (fringe benefits tax exemption for novated leases, in bureaucratese). Basically, instead of paying $70k for a Tesla post-tax, you can get it deducted directly from your paycheck for around $45k pretax. The exact math depends on your income, and perversely enough the subsidy increases the more you earn and the higher your taxes, but…
> the subsidy increases the more you earn and the higher your taxes What's the name of this law called that does this? Seems like quite the oversight.
It is Salary Sacrifice, where an employer agrees to swap salary for some non-cash reward. Employee gets less cash and the benefit (eg. a car). Employer pays Fringe Benefits tax on the benefit, employee doesn't pay tax on the salary they sacrificed. The trick is that there is no fringe benefits tax on electric cars, in one of the few ways Australia is actually promoting them.
https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Fringe-benefits-tax/Salary-s...
So people in the highest tax bracket can get cheap luxury cars, and everyone else left out in the cold while we wait for government to incentivize affordable electric vehicles on the market. You can still count on one hand the number non-luxury electric car models on the market (<$70,000 AUD). Cheapest is still $50,000 AUD ($33k USD)
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#103Funny that the article doesn't mention the word "export" once.
As is always the case with green energy, local changes don't matter if you're shipping the CO2 emissions somewhere else.
Interestingly enough Australia's coal export are at their lowest in 7 years, but this is mostly because coal companies have been able to maintain very high profits selling less as the price of coal has been high (because there is a lot of global demand) [0].
The real question is, as always with fossil fuels, how much of your proven reserves do you plan to keep in the ground? The only way (outside of sequestration fantasies) to keep CO2 out of the air is to keep it in the ground. But I don't know of any examples where plans for future extraction have been shuttered.
0. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/dec/15/australi...
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not actually making that assumption, I linked an article with the numbers as [1] in an edit to my initial reply. Nuclear is renewable :) [2] But yes, adjusting demand is far more efficient than adjusting supply. However it seems there's limited appetite. > No nuclear is required to decarbonize. No but it's less expensive, and better from a space utilization and environmental impact perspective. It's the best ener…
I’m not against nuclear but it is a long way from being cheap and easy. Look at the recent andventures with Hinkley C. And that’s with an existing industrial base for nuclear power. 25 bn pounds is 45 billion AUD which is what previous governments paid to wire the whole country up with a patchwork of broadband (inflation unadjusted). And don’t say they small modular will step into the breach because it is not a prove…
> recent andventures with Hinkley C
Building individual prestige one-off projects will always be a bad idea. This is the kind of things government do if they just need to hand out pieces of the pie to everybody.
A better example would be what South Korea has done in the UAE. Building 4 reactors 1 after the other in a country with no experience and no labor force. They did it pretty quickly and the unit price and unit speed goes up with every one.
In the UAE, construction started 2012, commissioned 2020. But importantly, after that they finish every year.
In reality, nuclear is not actually that slow if a government is really willing to do it and build a plant that has been built before.
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can politically thank The Greens for no nuclear power plants in Australia (apart from Lucas Heights, medical). Ironically, their 100% outright, non negotiable no nuclear policy has pushed heavy carbon emitting coal power plants for the last 30 years until the recent policy shift of winding them down in lieu of solar.
Is this true? Greens sometimes have influence in balance of power, but ultimatly they are a smaller party with limited influence or policy making decisions. Logically that view seems to look at one side of the position only, if they had the power to stop nuclear you'd have to think they also have the power to significantly reduce/replace coal, which hasn't been the case. Generally doesn't seem fair statement to me bu…
I think generally it wasn't the 'Green Party' but rather the wider environmental movement that then had a wide influence on the left in particular. The right meanwhile generally is just happy with fossil fuels and does whatever is cheaper.
That was always the problem with nuclear, it didn't have a political ally.
In one of the few cases where it did have political allies, it was in France when the realized how much control over oil is in the middle east. So French elites turned on fossil and invested in nuclear. And within 20 years they solved the problem. Its pretty instructive.
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#106Funny that the article doesn't mention the word "export" once. As is always the case with green energy, local changes don't matter if you're shipping the CO2 emissions somewhere else. Interestingly enough Australia's coal export are at their lowest in 7 years , but this is mostly because coal companies have been able to maintain very high profits selling less as the price of coal has been high (because there is a lot…
Australia's CO2 emissions are down when accounting for trade. https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/australia
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cost however remains remarkably high. A combination of renewables and giant piles of lithium is more expensive than nuclear, by quite a bit. [1] Anyways, the future is a mix of all sorts of things and this is a strict improvement so it's hard to be anything other than supportive. [1] https://spectrum.ieee.org/what-energy-storage-would-have-to-...
It doesn't matter that nuclear is cheaper if you can't build a nuclear plant . The difference is that a lithium battery facility can be installed and functional in 12-24 months. A nuclear plant takes 12-24 years . Much like World War I strategies, a solution that nobody has the political will to implement isn't a solution.
It takes 12-24 years if its a lazy one off with little political support.
We also shouldn't measure time for a single plant, but for many.
Fact is, France built like 50 in 20 years. And if you look at the UAE, its much more instructive. A country with no experience.
Handed out a bid in 2009, first plant active 2020 and then plants going online 2021, 2022, 2023. And if you just keep going like that eventually you can finish 2 or more per year. France was finishing like 5-6 plants a year.
If you look at Germany in 2000 for example. Had they done what France did in the 70/80s, Germany would have carbon free right now and they would have spent far less money then the 'Green Revolution' that they are engaged with now (and all the massive cost they will be paying the next 20 years). If you just do the math, based even on the prices that South Korea charged ULA, nuclear would be a no brain. And nobody can tell me Germany wouldn't have the engineering skill to do this.
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, you’re saying that it’s cheap, but then responding to criticism they’re bespoke by presenting an untested technology that has further lead time delays and may even be vapourwear. You still can’t spin up an industrial base in less than 5-10 years, and there sure as hell isn’t the political will to ask the Chinese to build it for us
I didn't say it was cheap. I said current nuclear reactor technology is cheaper than a mix of renewables and lithium batteries. They're both quite expensive, and headline renewable 'low costs' exclude storage. But that's ok, I think the fact it's expensive isn't a reason to avoid either of them. I then said that we can also make it significantly cheaper than it is to construct nuclear plants, and offered a path prese…
They are actually quite cheap. I did some basic calculations on what it would have cost Germany if they in 2000 had started a the 'Gründewende' with nuclear. And it would have been massively cheaper then what they have been doing.
Modern CANDU reactors can be really great. There is some new Thorium/Uranium based fuel that will revolutionize CANDU operations. One of the biggest issues with CANDU is that it high labor cost to change the fuel bundles. Some new fuels will allow the reduction of those operations by like 4x, saving on labor cost.
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
> perversely enough the subsidy increases the more you earn and the higher your taxes Isn't this because those who are going to buy EVs today (which are premium if not luxury vehicle prices) are those who have more money to do so? There is not yet a widely available entry level priced EV that is broadly popular.
no, its because in a higher tax braket you pay more tax its the sane in britain - if you earn $200,000 income-tax-free means 50% off, but if you earn $20,000. it means like 5% off Also in Uk id you want to buy a e car, you get a grant of a few grand, if you want an e motorbike you get like $300, and if you want an ebike, the most wco friwndly option, you fuck right off
> and if you want an ebike, the most wco friwndly option, you fuck right off
The most eco friendly option is still a bike. Not an ebike.
Re: Australia is quitting coal in record time thanks to Tesla
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
lithium is mined in US and australia, not so much africa. And, unlike coal, only needs to be mined once
[Edited my original comment to include processing plants]. There is a secondary stage of processing after extraction which is highly toxic, that is the polluting part. Have a look at the huge tailings dams they set up to hold the toxic waste. These things just kick the can down the road for future generations. They also probably leak into groundwater. Lucky you don't have to drink that water.
Non of the processing plants are in Africa. So I have no idea what you are talking about. There is like 1 lithium mine in Africa and I'm not even sure it produces lithium for batteries. As far as I now not a single lithium refinement facility is in Africa.
The waste majority of lithium comes from Australia, China or South America. If you look at industry statistics, 90% of lithium refinement is done in China.
Lithium refinement isn't actually that dirty or polluting. Please provide with evidence of what is so bad about it if you want to make that claim. Where in China can people not drink the water because of these plants?
I am seriously questioning where you get the data for any of the claims you make.
If you want to talk about Africa, the real issue is not lithium but rather cobalt from the Congo. And the issue there is not refining as this is done in China. The issue there is artisanal mines employing children.