Posts
No doubt most of you have heard or read the media versions of today's disastrous public announcements.
Actually there were, in the usual style of Anna Blight's exuberance with public monies, no less than six media releases extolling the virtues of sinking billions of dollars of taxes into more roads and tunnels, and how great life will be in the Sunshine State when $4,800 million is spent to save some motorists 15 minutes of travelling time.
To assist you to locate this flood of fantastic foolishness, here is the link to what was said -
http://www.cabinet. qld.gov.au/ MMS/StatementSea rch.aspx? tog_id=5
and type "Airport Link" in the search field. All the statements were issued today.
Of course, in the course of one of the darkest days in the history of this State, there was strangely no mention of the fact that the price of a barrel of oil has increased by more than 30% in just the last 20 months, or of the fact that there is just no substitute for aviation fuel.
So, even if travellers are going to the airport via Airport Link in electric cars in 10 years, how many of them are going to be able to afford the $2000 airfare in today's prices to Sydney?
While solar-powered cars with a limited range are likely to be a reality within 10 years, there is no possibility of solar-powered aircraft unless science discovers how to manufacture aircraft constructed by using a substance so light it is yet to be created.
Even if such an alloy is created, the cost of its production will be prohibitive at a time when non-renewable energy will have to be rationed due to scarcity and tough restrictions on emissions.
Nuclear-powered commercial aircraft? How many will be willing to fly in one? Or live under a flightpath with the risk of a nuclear meltdown if a plane crashed?
Whichever way you look at it, Airport Link will inevitably become the Road to Nowhere. Mad Max's Highway to Hell.
And scholars will later record that today - 19 May 2008 - the biggest mistake in the history of this State was made by short-sighted dumb politicians who ultimately came to realise, probably after they retired or resigned, that wise intelligent leaders make decisions for the long-term benefit of the people rather than for short-term profit, perceived political advantage and patronage.
The really strange thing is that Minister McNamara is just about to make a statement that basically follows the line I've composed above.
More on this to come...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Restructuring society on the massive scale that "sustainable development" advocates talk about will involve a lot more than building some more roads, and so cost many times more.
Fuel prices are not going up due to scarcity. There is no scarcity. It's fairly common knowledge that those prices are being dictated by the producers.
"Peak Oil" was devised by an employee of Shell Oil on a paper napkin during a lunch break in 1956. He predicted the peak to occur around 1970, and today's advocates, 38 years later, are still predicting it about the same number of years from now.
Have you not noticed that the government is falling over itself to install sustainable development? We even have a minister for it. Almost nothing but is being promoted and discussed in the mass media. I never know when I'm reading a green pamphlet or a Murdoch newspaper. They are just doing it in a reserved manner so as not to alarm the non-alarmists.
That's why we have a minister for it - McNamara. Why would he say what you said unless his government meant it? Why would he and his department be there at all?
Aircraft will not need to go nuclear, but I see that you are perpetuating the same old myths about nuclear power. Do you even know what a "meltdown" is?
Nuclear power plants don't explode (except if there is a chemical explosion in the plant, as at Chernobyl.) It is impossible to have a nuclear explosion with nuclear material with the enrichment level used to generate power. Weapons material is far more highly enriched for that purpose.
A meltdown is merely an overheating of the fuel, which results in it merely melting within it's container.
There are more security and safety measures in nuclear plants (by regulation) than they would ever need, which is one of the reasons they are so expensive to build.
The shields around them can withstand a jet plane crashing into one. The Soviets considered them so safe they didn't bother to build shields, but it would have contained the Chernobyl blast.
You'd need a truck to carry the fuel out of the plant in it's ten-tonne container.
Post a Comment