Adani mine - environmental impact

Hahaha dramatic much? It’s a finch.

 

I think there's a misunderstanding that we can just STOP digging coal TODAY and switch to renewable energy sources - it's just not the case, yes renewable energy is the way forward but the change isn't going to happen overnight.
I also feel that if Adani didn't proceed here in Aus then they would be getting their coal from somewhere else, possibly somewhere that has less protections in place for the environment...

 

Globally, if we really wanted to, we could have 0% coal in 5 years.

 

Tell us how? Assume all coal fired power stations were shut off today.

 

Sorry, in 5 years.

 

I find that hard to believe, that in 5 years we could build renewable energy power stations to replace all current coal power stations globally - Happy to be proven wrong with actual numbers, the best I've seen are 70% renewable in Aus by 2030 if we really worked at it, that's just australia, what about India, China etc
Maybe with a radically re-think of the way we all live, back to sustainable living? Not sure, wish there was an easy answer

 

Pity Australia has it's head stuck in coal-thought-process and may miss the boat.

Don't need renewable energy power stations - every rooftop, ridge line, wind-funnelling-gully, geothermal zone and flowing waterway is a power generator.

What is needed is efficient storage ability and micro grid networks (not the bulky pylons networks currently in use)

How do I know? I have many friends who are using a combination of the above - some are connected to the network and producing twice what they need so are feeding in - some are completely off grid and doing very comfortably thank you.

I don't know that 5-years is viable as would require enormous change of direction and mindset by governments and consumers ... it's physically possible, but probably not socially.

If you want to know about India and China - do some googling and reading. They are streets ahead of Australia in their ambitions and targets

Impressive list of countries and mass populated areas that already are at 90+% of renewables ... some are even producing so much they are exporting.

100% renewable energy - Wikipedia

 

They're probably CSIRO modeling or similar.
I'm talking if we gave it a real shot. So basically put a significant amount of money into it, perhaps as much as we spend on defense.
Solar and wind farms can be built in 2-3 years.
Note, I also didn't say 100% renewable, I said zero coal.

 

Get past your focusing on the Finch ... the Finch is simply the pinnacle of a much larger concern.

Repeat again:
We are destroying our planet - safe drinking water and clean air via death by a thousand cuts ... it's not just the bird ... it's the life of the entire ecosystem that exists around the Carmichael River and the large nearby Doongmabulla wetlands, right down to the Barrier Reef.

Traditional owners vow to take their fight over Adani to The Hague

Already Adani are causing environmental damage and they haven't even started mining

Mining giant Adani fined for polluting 'beautiful' Queensland wetlands during monster storms
"The flood water, released into the Caley Valley Wetlands from the Abbot Point coal point, contained almost double the amount of debris allowed under the Port's Environmental Authority."

And before you say it was a freak storm - monster storms are a common occurrence in Queensland, and are becoming more frequent due to climate changes

 

Let’s be real, the finch is just a point of leverage used by the environmentalists to delay the mine. I am sure the finches will be able to fly a few hundred meters further into the bush as activity ramps up.

I can see why it is disappointing for the greens that the mine is going ahead, but I think it is not a total loss. The years of legal arguments, protests, delays, regulatory demands and government posturing all make the next mining company and finaciers think twice about their next investment and helps drives the move to renewables.

 

Below is from the renewable energy link you posted;
"Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University and director of its Atmosphere and Energy program, says that producing all new energy with wind power, solar power, and hydropower by 2030 is feasible, and that existing energy supply arrangements could be replaced by 2050. "
So not 5 years, but do-able yes, which is great.

In a perfect world we wouldn't need to spend even half as much on defense, or any, I agree it could be done but it's unrealistic is what I'm saying.

 

To quote a recent interview with a "twitcher" - if the birds could thrive in the area put aside for them, they'd already be living in that area (which they're not).

 

I read the article - as I do all articles - which is why I said it is physically possible but not likely

 

Wasn't saying you didn't read it - not a personal attack, sorry if it came across that way Lizzie. Using statements such as "we could be coal free in 5 years" as an argument against Adani detracts from credibility and real solutions. By that I mean if it's extremely unlikely to happen it's irrelevant to the discussion in my opinion, we should look to real solutions that can actually be implemented and within realistic time frames.

 

"Could" as in a possibility, not as in a likelihood. Neither I nor anyone else that I know of, thinks that it will happen, though it's definitely possible.

 

How is it relevant to use that in say an argument about why Adani shouldn't proceed though?

 

The point is that coal is not a growing industry. There are indicators that point to us being past peak coal. I'm not going to say that we are, as I don't have updated figures, but I certainly wouldn't discount it.
The mine will be an environmental catastrophe and not just from scope 2 carbon emissions.

Since this is an real estate investing property: Would you do a development with the world's largest number of residences in an area that had a declining population and no excessive demand?
I certainly wouldn't.

And the point is also that while we're not leaving coal behind quickly, we certainly could and should be doing so.

 

Not to sure that coal is a declining industry.

Explaining the increase in coal consumption worldwide

This is an alarming trend, because despite increasing international awareness of the risks of global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions, some major economies are unable to substitute their coal-based electricity with less carbon-intensive energies. Indeed, coal is mainly used for electricity production, with two-thirds of world consumption going to electricity production; this proportion rises to three-quarters if China and India, which traditionally have more widespread uses, are excluded; the rest of consumption goes to industry (mainly steel).

Explaining the increase in coal consumption worldwide

 

Even the article you linked shows it as declining!

 

That is a graph showing the % of coal used is declining not that the total amount is declining.