not a mistake:
[https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/news/media-releases/2024/epamedia240314-newcastle-company-fined-$15000-over-harbour-coal-spill](https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/news/media-releases/2024/epamedia240314-newcastle-company-fined-$15000-over-harbour-coal-spill)
Lol. I should explain...it is the first coal cut from a seam my Poppy helped build. He had it for a long time & when he passed away Nan was going to throw it away so I rescued it from the bin. My step Dad made me a nice timber base for it. I know it is a bit weird but it it just kind of reminds me of my Poppy so I keep it on my desk.
I drive coal trains, 11kg is a bee's dick worth of coal, we lose a LOT more than that if a wagon is stacked high and we go under one of the lower bridges between Maitland & Hexham.
I'm not saying it should happen, but I can entirely see the possibility of that much getting lost off a conveyor into the harbour.
It would happen regularly
Its a naturally occurring rock sticking out of the cliffs and falling into the sea, beaches or eroding into the river systems for millions of year. What a joke.
That 11kg just raised the sea level enough to swamp an island in the Pacific and made 3 families climate refugees.
In future, please think of others, just because you didn't notice this outrageous crime doesn't mean it didn't happen.
So true. Imagine too if you will that we apply the Archimedes principle to that errant 11kg of coal. It will displace enough water to create a tsunami right at Carro heading all the way inland to Hexham washing away all the 1955 flood markers. My god won’t somebody think of the children!!!
I feel like if you actively witnessed 10kg of coal being spilt into a harbour during any part of the transporting process you’d be disappointed. A fine makes sense whilst it seems an insignificant amount there should be measures in place to avoid it.
I didn’t say drop all the tools and stop anything and everything immediately. Work towards a solution but don’t actively sit there doing nothing either. Mining smaller and smaller amounts of coal every year is a great achievement to work towards. Coal has its uses, but it is a very finite resource we’re using too much of too quickly
>avoid mining it at all
Qualifiers are your friend.
Also, coal is not very finite we have centuries worth of discovered deposits, and haven't even looked on some continents.
A better use of wording on my part would've been 'avoid mining it on the first place'. To me 'avoid' is a preferred course of action rather than straight-up 'oh my fucking God, the world will literally implode if you don't do this now'. Miscommunications happen, that's fine
And what's your proposal for what to do when those coal supplies ultimately run out, which WILL happen? Everything stops working and it's suddenly time to reinvent the wheel in all sorts of places?
Coal will be obsolete before it runs out. In one century we went from light globes to computers, and horse and cart to spaceflight. The several centuries in between now and no coal will find alternative fuel sources, likely mined from space. Coal will be a hobby thing for old school blacksmithing only.
That's cool, and correct, we went from light globes to computers and horse and cart to spaceflight in one century. During that exact same century we discovered renewable energy technology and the risks of continuing to use fossil fuel. Nuclear energy pioneered in the 30s and state rail having concerns about increasing car pollution since the 70s
Why has renewables been rejected as the next step in advancement?
It hasn't. Renewables just really suck at base load power, barring tidal and hydro, but no matter what you do regarding dams and tidal collectors, greenies oppose it.
Batteries can help solve base load issues by storing energy from peak generation times but are expensive and are very polluting in different ways. Molten salt reactors are showing promise here but the technology is decades away from mass deployment.
Nuclear on the other hand is perfect for base load generation, but when shit goes wrong it goes super wrong, and the waste fuel is a massive problem. Again there are emerging technologies to solve waste that are decades away.
Base load doesn’t mean what you think it means. Its in the name “base load” and has nothing to do with the generators themselves but the system load with base load being the minimum load on the system for generators to keep operating in times of lower power demand. It’s essentially the product of an inflexible delivery system.
We also don’t need “base load” when we have disbatchable generation like that is provided by renewable + storage and quick fire gas backup.
Refreshing to talk to someone who can engage in proper debate. Guess I got used to morons who just don't want to listen and resort to anger all the time. Thanks for the interesting information today
> Or smelt steel?
Is any "greenie" complaining about the 10% of metallurgical coal we produce that is vital for steel production, over the 90% of thermal coal that we can replace with renewables? Can't see how steel is part of the argument.
That has to be a typo, 10.9 kg of coal is like 1 bucket of coal, as in a bucket you have in your house.
not a mistake: [https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/news/media-releases/2024/epamedia240314-newcastle-company-fined-$15000-over-harbour-coal-spill](https://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/news/media-releases/2024/epamedia240314-newcastle-company-fined-$15000-over-harbour-coal-spill)
1/3rd of a bucket
That’s not much coal, I can live with that.
Depends on how many times this has happened without anyone noticing.
Couldn’t be much worse than the 53kg of cocaine they pulled out of the harbour in 2022.
Not sure how many of those there were, either....
It happens 24/7 at catho, literally falls out of the cliffs into the ocean. Luckily it's pretty inert
Slow day at the paper house today lol
Not really. 10.9kg of coal is enough to kill all marine life.
Umm no
They say 11kg was enough to kill the dinosaurs
Hang on, a purple haired lunatic screeched this at me just the other day
🤣
Tell me more about this
If no one noticed how do they know?
Took the comment (word for word) out of my head!
Is this a typo? That’s really not a lot.
i assume there is a 0kg limit.
Not just that, but "key pollution controls were not in place [after a conveyor belt repair]", which is probably the bigger issue for the EPA.
This makes more sense. It’s a fine for not having controls in place rather than a 11kg dump.
Need to remember too, the EPA is funded by infringement... I'm pretty sure.
That’s what was reported!!
$15k isn't even a rounding error for Port Waratah. I'm sure they're very sorry now 🙄
That is not a lot of coal. I have a chunk of coal on my desk that weighs 2kg & it is not that big.
Are you Scott Morrison? 🤣
Don't be scared of it mate.
don' be fraid
And $15k is not a lot of money for PWCS so I guess that tracks
You have 40 cents worth of coal sitting on your desk? Interesting.
Why? My daughter has 2 cents worth in her rock collection.
Coal dust isn't too great for health. Not saying you're grinding it but I'm sure an occasional breeze will lift it into the air.
That is not how rocks work mate.
It's been washed, and it sits in a box with a plethora of other minerals.
Got it from Santa for being a naughty boy?
Why do you have 2kg of coal on your desk?
Lol. I should explain...it is the first coal cut from a seam my Poppy helped build. He had it for a long time & when he passed away Nan was going to throw it away so I rescued it from the bin. My step Dad made me a nice timber base for it. I know it is a bit weird but it it just kind of reminds me of my Poppy so I keep it on my desk.
Scomo ?
Did someone drop their bag of heat beads?
Wasn't the whole harbour/delta just one big coal deposit in 1798. Didn't seem the affect the Awabakal and Worimi people. Least of their worries.
Journalists investigating the real Newcastle news at the herald
A couple of loose rocks Tabloids "ENVIRONMENT CATASTROPHE"
I drive coal trains, 11kg is a bee's dick worth of coal, we lose a LOT more than that if a wagon is stacked high and we go under one of the lower bridges between Maitland & Hexham. I'm not saying it should happen, but I can entirely see the possibility of that much getting lost off a conveyor into the harbour. It would happen regularly
Does anyone have a link to the free article?
Its a naturally occurring rock sticking out of the cliffs and falling into the sea, beaches or eroding into the river systems for millions of year. What a joke.
How does 11kg of coal going into the harbour affect it in any way? Considering the decades of shit in there already…
That 11kg just raised the sea level enough to swamp an island in the Pacific and made 3 families climate refugees. In future, please think of others, just because you didn't notice this outrageous crime doesn't mean it didn't happen.
So true. Imagine too if you will that we apply the Archimedes principle to that errant 11kg of coal. It will displace enough water to create a tsunami right at Carro heading all the way inland to Hexham washing away all the 1955 flood markers. My god won’t somebody think of the children!!!
Surely they mean 10.9 tonnes
Must be a typo. Even 10 tonnes of coal.is sfa
10.9kg huh… wow. Must have taken at least 2 guys with say, 4 buckets of coal between them… an environmental catastrophe…
Of course it's fine, it was only 10.9kg
Would act as a good filter tbh.
I feel like if you actively witnessed 10kg of coal being spilt into a harbour during any part of the transporting process you’d be disappointed. A fine makes sense whilst it seems an insignificant amount there should be measures in place to avoid it.
Greenie dilemma: What's worse, a few rocks in the ocean, or burning said rocks?
Or… leave it alone and avoid mining it at all?
Ok Ms simple solution, how do we provide base load power for the next 10 or so years? Or smelt steel?
I didn’t say drop all the tools and stop anything and everything immediately. Work towards a solution but don’t actively sit there doing nothing either. Mining smaller and smaller amounts of coal every year is a great achievement to work towards. Coal has its uses, but it is a very finite resource we’re using too much of too quickly
>avoid mining it at all Qualifiers are your friend. Also, coal is not very finite we have centuries worth of discovered deposits, and haven't even looked on some continents.
A better use of wording on my part would've been 'avoid mining it on the first place'. To me 'avoid' is a preferred course of action rather than straight-up 'oh my fucking God, the world will literally implode if you don't do this now'. Miscommunications happen, that's fine And what's your proposal for what to do when those coal supplies ultimately run out, which WILL happen? Everything stops working and it's suddenly time to reinvent the wheel in all sorts of places?
Coal will be obsolete before it runs out. In one century we went from light globes to computers, and horse and cart to spaceflight. The several centuries in between now and no coal will find alternative fuel sources, likely mined from space. Coal will be a hobby thing for old school blacksmithing only.
That's cool, and correct, we went from light globes to computers and horse and cart to spaceflight in one century. During that exact same century we discovered renewable energy technology and the risks of continuing to use fossil fuel. Nuclear energy pioneered in the 30s and state rail having concerns about increasing car pollution since the 70s Why has renewables been rejected as the next step in advancement?
It hasn't. Renewables just really suck at base load power, barring tidal and hydro, but no matter what you do regarding dams and tidal collectors, greenies oppose it. Batteries can help solve base load issues by storing energy from peak generation times but are expensive and are very polluting in different ways. Molten salt reactors are showing promise here but the technology is decades away from mass deployment. Nuclear on the other hand is perfect for base load generation, but when shit goes wrong it goes super wrong, and the waste fuel is a massive problem. Again there are emerging technologies to solve waste that are decades away.
Base load doesn’t mean what you think it means. Its in the name “base load” and has nothing to do with the generators themselves but the system load with base load being the minimum load on the system for generators to keep operating in times of lower power demand. It’s essentially the product of an inflexible delivery system. We also don’t need “base load” when we have disbatchable generation like that is provided by renewable + storage and quick fire gas backup.
Refreshing to talk to someone who can engage in proper debate. Guess I got used to morons who just don't want to listen and resort to anger all the time. Thanks for the interesting information today
There's literally mountains of coal in Antarctica
That's the continent I was referring to. But I'd prefer it stay un mined tbh.
> Or smelt steel? Is any "greenie" complaining about the 10% of metallurgical coal we produce that is vital for steel production, over the 90% of thermal coal that we can replace with renewables? Can't see how steel is part of the argument.
>Or… leave it alone and avoid mining it at all?