Alternative site for the power-station/data centre - Hume after all.

Thumper, miz: Belconnen images are here:

Wide area view (target area is Broadacre creamy-coloured zone to the extreme left/West):
http://www.canberrapowerstation.info/Images/Belconnen-1.jpg

Near view of target area:
http://www.canberrapowerstation.info/Images/Belconnen-2.jpg

Scan of sketch plan of site boundaries, power assets location etc:
http://www.canberrapowerstation.info/Images/Belconnen-3.jpg

Interpretation of site area (excluding power assets etc):
http://www.canberrapowerstation.info/Images/Belconnen-4.jpg

Who is talking about gas-fired power in isolation here, I am talking about co-generation (or combined heat and power (CHP). That is the use of heat normally wasted created as a bi-product of power generation that is put to a valuable use. Yes the CTC is an example of gas-fired co-generation, but traditional gas fired power stations simply allow that heat created as a bi-product to go up and away into the atmosphere.

For the simplest example of how this works consider you are boiling some potatoes. They are boiling away and the steam is going up the range hood. You also need to steam some broccoli, you could turn on another hotplate boil some more water and put your steamer or colander over the boiling water, or you could just use all that steam being wasted from the potatoes and put the steamer on top of the first pot of boiling potatoes and reduce your power consumption by half.

The same simple concept applies with co-generation.

CanberraMan: Your information on gas-fired vs. coal is applicable for mandatory power requirements i.e. community-dependent major utility power stations. We’re not talking apples and apples here with the power only being used to power computers in a private enterprise’s data centres (and therefore the power not being required if the data centres don’t exist or have such a high power requirement).

Here’s a nugget of information relating to the real statistics of how “clean” this gas-fired power station will be.
Letter to the Editor of the Canberra Times, by Dr Chris Klootwjik, visiting honourary fellow at the ANU Earth Sciences unit:

“The ACT?’s main climate change document ?Weathering the Change – ACT Climate Change Strategy 2007-2025? estimates current greenhouse gas emissions in the ACT at about 4.45 million tonnes per year.

The strategy aims for a reduction to the 2000 level (4.059 million tonnes) by 2025 and a further reduction to 60% of the 2000 level by 2050. However, CO2 emissions of the proposed Tuggeranong 28MW gas-fired power plant are estimated at 170,000 tonnes per year, adding yearly 4.2% to the 2000 emissions level.

CO2 emissions of the proposed Williamsdale 500 MW gas-fired power plant would add a further 74.8% to the 2000 emissions level (assuming similar emissions characteristics).

Adoption of the gas option to power Canberra would add 79% to the 2000 emissions level and begs the question how a 60% reduction by 2050 could possibly be achievable?

Clearly, alternative non-polluting renewable energy options should be pursued!”

It’s concerning that, according to what I have heard, the ‘new’ site proposed was only re-zoned to industrial recently. It is currently a pleasant piece of rural land just north of the tip. They tried to sell it recently to no avail (see link below).

http://www.lda.act.gov.au/uploads/home/business/lda_auction/Hume%20Block20%20Section23/JC000232_Blk20Sec23HUME.pdf

You can see it’s not really much of a move from the previous site (see ABC map below) so I wonder if they are still going to have to relocate the health facility?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/05/2438871.htm

If it was Nitrous Oxide we’d be beating them back with pointed sticks.

The theory is that a power station is co-located next to the data centre and it is announced as a data hub with no reference to the power station. The surrounding land can then be re-zoned and the power station upgraded to provide power for the new industrial estate. Just don’t ask about the impact of 24/7 nitrous dioxide emissions on nearby residences, particularly the kids.

Cheers. I hope everyone who kept saying it is a NIMBY issue is eating their hat right about . . . now.

Miz,

At one of the information sessions on the power station in Macarthur, one of the representatives of the development said, after a long and intense debate, ” You should be far more worried if you live on the Northside. The power station there will be much bigger and dirtier than the one in Macarthur”.

54-11: The irony is that the alternative site (let’s see some more alternatives please before we’re all told this is the only option and why!?) is now 1km further North towards the gas main at Narrabundah that they’ll take the supply from.

Shorter gas supply pipeline = less cost. It will need slightly longer overhead transmissions lines to Gilmore substation, but look at Chris Klootwjik’s pointers above from the Parsons Brinkerhoff findings that 7.5km of transmission lines = approx. 1.5m. So at most, to do an additional 1km would be about $200k. For the gas pipeline, for 7.5km being $3.75m, then to shorten the pipeline by about 1km would be a saving of about $550k. Overall, a saving around $350,000.

No wonder Treasurer Katy Gallagher is in a tizz with her maths on where the surplus is going to be; deficit for sure if they’re forking out $9.65m for free to the proponents for no reason.

miz: Sure, I’ll dig out some details I came across.

Includes a map of proposed site, notes from LDA (Land Development Agency) specifically to value the land with a view to it have a gas-fired power station option on it also, it’s close to water and gas mains and Stanhope’s media release of 27th May specifically stated during the mass-panic of the Tuggeranong community “There is now no longer the possibility of a gas-fired power station at Belconnen, for example”.

Given what’s going on, I’d not trust a thing you hear.

Digga, can you tell us more about the West Macgregor site? I have heard this but can’t find any info. I think it was mentioned at the tuggeranong community council meeting too?

I know Thumper was interested to know more.

This whole saga has a whiff of a “Watergate Affair” There are so many half truths or hidden lies behind this Data Centre.
Does it not set a precedence for passing special legislation to bypass planning legislation??
Why is the government giving so much support to this particular consortium? What about the other companies that have tried to push for clean energy industry in ACT.
Are they trying to finaincially support an ailing ACTEW?
Why was the govt independent Health Impact Assessment group disbanded?. This study was then completed by a company hired by the consortium. The results can only be seen as biased towards the consortium.
This would make a good film!

Today’s Crimes says that taxpayers may need to foot the $10m relocation cost.

It should come out of the pockets of Stanhope/Gallagher/Barr et al.

However Technical Real Estate director Andrew Campbell says the Hume site was not suitable to develop for a number of reasons.

He says the land was too small, under a flight path and too close to the Monaro Highway.

“The other thing about that site is that it’s low-lying and subject to a one in 100 flood zone,” he said.

“It’s a risk that data centre occupiers won’t allow when you’re developing a site for data centre use.”

I’m sick of this mob blackmailing the community. Campbell is not only a principal of TRE, he is a director of Galileo Connect, the other major partner of Canberra Technology City. So far it doesn’t appear that they have built any data centres despite what Campbell said. Just look at the two websites and find a photo of a data centre. Only computer mock-ups. Warning, seriously annoying musak.
http://www.galileoconnect.com
http://www.technicalrealestate.com.au
The man is carrying on like they’re doing us a favour rather than using our community for their own profit.

miz: great point – how did they decide on this site? John Mackay and his team (Scott Carr) from ActewAGL wrote to the Chief Minister to request this site in the first place. Hence they’d already invested the time and effort in selecting it. It’s the cheapest option for them to return to the site that was their first priority before Jon went to bump them across to Broadacre in Tuggeranong. Hence it does not mean they or the task force are looking for the best ethical site – they’re just pushing ahead from their original plan.

Hence the next question that follows is what other sites did they consider (and which the task force revisited) before ending up back at square 1 and why weren’t additional sites added to the list? I heard they were looking at a site adjacent to the prison at Symonston.

As for costs of relocation, this quote from Dr Chris Klootwjik (visiting fellow at the Geo Sciences unit at ANU) staties: “the government is not revealing the data leading to this proposition, yet it is caught out by its own feasibility study on the solar thermal option (pp 31/32). Engineering consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff estimates the costs of a 7.5 km high voltage transmission line and a 7.5 km gas pipeline at 3.75 million and 1.5 million dollar respectively. Such relatively minor costs at this long range surely allow many sites. This is born out by the three widely distributed sites earmarked by Parsons Brinckerhoff for a solar thermal plant and by alternative sites earmarked by the rival bid for a non-polluting data centre/solar thermal plant from Canberra high-tech developer Wizard Power. When is all this misinformation going to stop?”

I ask again, WHERE is the list of alternative sites they chose this one from? It will be made public, won’t it?

wheresmypowerstation said :

…a suburb inundated with barking dogs and littered with dog-shit.

If its that bad why do you choose to live there ?

Ha, I was looking forward to having the power station located next door.

It would have been poetic justice for a suburb inundated with barking dogs and littered with dog-shit.

Is it really possible that the rumour about the Govt having to bail out ActewAGL be true?

TransACT are going to split off from them and the 2 will end up as competitors in the data centre market?

ActewAGL are losing $1m a month, so desperately need assistance hence Stanhope digging deep in his pockets to throw additional money at them and act as their lawyer to get this thing through “whatever it takes”, even negating the controls and protections of the planning impact track in the “process”?

And what about the timeframe – they don’t need fast-tracking. They’re private consortium developers. They should know and expect risks when building a gas-fired power station; drop it and there’d be no drama! Put extra money in to solar thermal to stimulate that market and off-set your electricity requirements from the grid; oh, of course they can’t – they don’t have that money so need a “discount data centre” up and running ASAP.

me thinks mr stanhope acts before more reports against the project are released that will give him a good kicking.. he seems to be doing that a lot lately.

welkin31: The Mitchell data centre is just data centres being retro-fitted in to existing warehouse buildings in Mitchell’s industrial zone. It’s a 7,000 square metre facility. The Canberra Technology City data centre includes a gas-fired power station. It is the first of two sites – the other to be in Belconnen at West Macgregor alongside the new residential suburbs.

The one that was destined for Broadacre in Tuggeranong (now proposed to move to Hume as discussed today) is a 20,000 square metre facility. The proponent of the Mitchell data centre (Tretechnic – Mr Kelly) stated that Canberra “doesn’t need” a 20,000 square metre facility! His 7,000 square metre facility in Mitchell is also 30% greener than traditional data centres and they achieve that without having to have an on-site gas-fired power station.

The planning processes exist for a reason – fast tracking ANY building approval is a huge mistake. Political interference in due process is exactly what started this mess in the first place – two wrongs don’t make a right. Honestly – this really IS like an episode of ‘Yes Minister’!

welkin31 said :

I wondered what readers know about a data centre at Mitchell, it was mentioned on TV news Wednesday night. Anyone know of a map ? Is there a power station too ?

There are data centers all over the place without gas turbine power stations attached. It’s worth asking the question however don’t be surprised if its just a data center like the several that are around Canberra.

I wondered what readers know about a data centre at Mitchell, it was mentioned on TV news Wednesday night. Anyone know of a map ? Is there a power station too ?

PS: where is that report? Do only Labor-Greens get to see it?

Well, the Greens are claiming it as a win for the new ALP-Greens party:
http://www.rage.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/05/2438871.htm?site=canberra
(see the end of the article).

I can’t quite see why the Greens had to give government to achieve this, but apparantly they think they did. Makes them look like Labor-lite to me. I often wonder if the whole Greens-ALP stoush over the data centre was concocted just to make it look like they weren’t the same? (Libs opposed the data centre, and Greens therefore had to avoid being wedged)

True committment from the Greens to the open and transparent government they say they support would see more than them telling the great unwashed (us) to be grateful for them giving the crown back to JS.

Here is the ACT Government’s own pic released to the media:

http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200812/r321115_1431402.jpg

I seems to me that the two locations are not that far apart.

The Greens and Libs are going to have to continue the fight for their residents. “Remember Meg Lees and the Democrats”.

The CM is devious yet politically ingenious in an evil and vengeful way. This new site is a mere stone’s throw from the other, except it is now closer to Isaacs (Woden). IMHO, this sort of development should be far away from people’s homes.

As I stated before, it’s not the data centre, it’s the power station that goes with it that is the issue. Calling it a data centre (CM’s spin) is disingenuous – these are harmless warehouses, and there are several already in Canberra. A power station, on the other hand, is not harmless.

I want to know the list of sites to choose from. I will be irate if they are all Southside.

CanberraMan: It is the proximity to residential areas and the attempt to site the project on Broadacre (rural buffer) land in Tuggeranong vs. Industrial land in Hume that kicked this whole thing off.

It’s unlawful for ACTPLA to reach the decision to approve it on the controversial Tuggeranong site that has forced the Chief Minister to concede.

He’s just stating it’s due to political interference in an attempt to transfer his own liability to others; he facilitated the entire debacle around the Broadacre (vs. industrial) site from the word go, thus flying in the face of our Territory Plan’s controls for providing protective buffer zones and wildlife corridors.

so it’s just moving to the other side of the road? haha. This feels like a script from Yes Minister!

I just find it unbelievable that such an innovative technology (co-generation, sometimes called combined heat and power or CHP in Europe and the UK) which is supported by the clean energy council, and indeed Greenpeace is vilified so heavily

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/files/efficiencity/index.html

http://cleanenergycouncil.org.au/info/Cogeneration%20Fact%20Sheet%20-%20Clean%20Energy%20Council.pdf

http://mysolar.cat.com/cda/files/154908/7/dscp-ucsd.pdf

It seems to me that both sides in this grubby dispute are equally happy to sing the praises of due process when it suits them, and to end-run around it when it doesn’t.

Stanhope is just maintaining his dummy-spit blame-game trying to regain political points with his own party and the community at the expense of the Liberals and Greens. However because Greens were so stupid to support a Stanhope minority Government, they will keep getting it in the neck from Stanhope for another 3 1/2 years when he may again relise that he cannot keep treating the community and opposition parties/cross-benches as irrelevant fools. What a farce. Blame the Liberals and Greens for political interference as a pretext to bully them into allowing him to continue his own political interference, that he has done so since HIS Day 1 selection of an inappropriate broadacre site, but now he wants to legislate to avoid due-planning-process appropriate to this alternative site-selection for his mates colossal fossil-fuel polluting power-station, but lets call it a co-generation/data centre so no one notices.

Although some might think the discovery of another suitable site is simply a victory for democracy, I think we should spare a thought for the tragedy that is playing out in Stanhope’s mind.

He pulled out his main game for this one, yet didn’t get his way in the new Assembly.

Surely even Prince Jon must realise that indeed, the Kingdom is lost.

With Katy waiting in the wings keener than a Labrador pup, I wonder how long Sonic will stay.
(Is that diplomatic post in Liechtenstein still open?)

And finally, let’s not forget that the proponents themselves stated they cannot consider this Hume site due to flood risk, gas turbine exhausts affecting the Canberra Airport flight paths etc.:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/18/2307734.htm?site=canberra

However Technical Real Estate director Andrew Campbell says the Hume site was not suitable to develop for a number of reasons.

He says the land was too small, under a flight path and too close to the Monaro Highway.

“The other thing about that site is that it’s low-lying and subject to a one in 100 flood zone,” he said.

“It’s a risk that data centre occupiers won’t allow when you’re developing a site for data centre use.”

ABC have chimed in and have a map provided by the ACT Government showing how much further away from residential suburbs the power station will be:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/05/2438871.htm?site=canberra

P.S. CPR covered this “fast-track” concept as being dangerous/against the principles of planning i.e. you don’t just move a power station without site-specific studies and the planning process being followed to protect the community.

They sent a letter to the Liberals and Greens on 14 November:
http://www.canberrapowerstation.info/letters/Letter%20to%20Liberals%20and%20Greens.pdf

Fast-track the move including power station, to avoid the very planning processes he has been espousing for months… and strong-arming the other parties to break the rules too? Surely not!

As for relocation, it’s about 1.5km further North and importantly would be on industrial land and not rural Broadacre (as in the Tuggeranong side of Mugga Lane).

What a donkey. Call his bluff. He can’t proceed on Broadacre anyway – it’s unlawful.

Purely political purposes? Like, um, representing the interests and stated wishes of the um you know, RESIDENTS?

funny freudian slip there, I think.

How much of a move is the Hume site – will it make enough of a difference to keep the CPR people happy?

I am pleased to be vindicated regarding my concern for the auction of this site, held on 8/8/08.

It apparently didn’t sell, much to Sonic’s chagrin I am sure, and is still now available for the data centre.

Karma, pure karma.

P00t – that should be * I suspect*

It’s going to be the first of many sprays is suspect.

The important part is the warning about not standing in the way of his ‘Special Legislation’ that appears to be specifically to get around all the usual boring ‘due process’ stuff.

Poor, poor JS.

Imagine it: politicians politicising something that was founded in political goings on from the beginning.

Imagine polticising it further by briefing only one oppositions Party (the Greens) and not the other (Libs).

And then imagine the opposition Parties keeping an election promise about the site – just how politicised can it get?

More seriously, though, does anyone know where to access the report?