Gas-Fired Power Station component of Canberra Technology City to gas Canberrans

Digga 5 February 2009 37

To all those that sat idly, awash with BS from the Chief Minister and his buddy-buddy proponents’ of the gas-fired power station and data centre… The issue’s not with the data centre, it’s the huge natural-gas fired jet turbines and their more than 3 million tonnes of output a year and what that contains for Canberra!

Here’s a graph of the small particle pollution measured at Monash. We already blow the maximums, so why not add a polluting gas-fired power station on top? Slowly gasing the electorate so eventually you won’t have a need for consultation as they’ll all be gone. In case you missed it, PM 2.5 is very bad for you, triggering Asthma, Cancer and other niceties.

Graph of PM2.5 pollution in Canberra

This info from a bunch of crackpots? No, from Dr James Markos (Respiratory Physician, Chairman of the Tasmanian Branch of the Australian Lung Foundation), Dr Dorothy L Robinson (Armidale Air Quality Group) and Dr Chris Klootwijk (Honorary Visiting Fellow of the Research School of Earth Science at the Australian National University).

NEPM (National Environment Protection Measures) maximum is 25 micrograms per cubic metre and a maximum of 5 days exceeding of this level a year is dangerous. So, how about 14 days in 2004 and 2005, 19 days in 2006 and climbing. Great – let’s stick that power station in the mix, after all it’s all “just pollution”.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
37 Responses to Gas-Fired Power Station component of Canberra Technology City to gas Canberrans
Filter
Order
Digga Digga 9:46 pm 09 Feb 09

Skidbladnir: Actually, no – there are no points to be scored here, just awareness that needs to be increased. A lot of folk don’t know the Government’s had an ineffectual plan to reduce PM2.5 via home heating swaps from wood burning to gas-fired. The PM2.5 has continued to increase and as the area is already causing ill health, why compound the issue by not looking at alternatives to the massive gas turbines in this location?

caf caf 11:46 am 09 Feb 09

sepi: In the original plan, the power station itself would have been ~1km from the nearest point of the suburb – the 600m figure was to the site boundary. The new site places it another kilometre or two further away.

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 11:29 am 09 Feb 09

I’m sure Digga came here thinking that they had a point that couldn’t be argued with, but I’m yet to find it.

caf caf 11:24 am 09 Feb 09

On average, how many cars do you think are driving on the streets of Macarthur at any one time?

Digga Digga 11:10 am 09 Feb 09

caf: Home gas heaters don’t output 3.2 million tonnes of exhaust per annum as do these turbines (they output at least Nitrous Oxides equivalence to 75 cars running constantly, Carbon Emissions equivalence to 45,000 family cars being added to the roads and they don’t move like cars do)

captainwhorebags: It’s at the junction of the 3 valleys; Tuggeranong, Woden and Jerrabomberra valleys. As the scientist said “you wouldn’t normally built it in hills and ridges areas; you’d do it on a large open plain)

miz miz 10:50 pm 06 Feb 09

Nothing wrong with being a nimby. We all live in Canberra because we like its bush capital amenity. No one wants a big ugly noisy gas turbine near them. In NT, they had to move one (1) from near residents to 20km outside of town because the 24/7 whining noise drove them all crazy. In Vic, they are in the middle of an industrial area with no residents anywhere near – and if they move there, the power stations were there first. None of these things apply here. All the Tuggers resi’s have been doing is minding their own business for 30 years, enjoying the bush around them. No wonder they (including me) are upset.

And I can confirm the inversion layer is a major problem in the area proposed and should not be added to with this development.

sepi sepi 6:15 pm 06 Feb 09

this one is within 600m of macarthur, not a few km away.

deezagood deezagood 6:10 pm 06 Feb 09

chewy14 said :

yoyo,
.
http://www.actpla.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/9084/appendixk.pdf
If you really cared about air pollution in Canberra you would be lobbying the LA to ban wood fires.

I am, I am! I have a family of asthmatics!!!

caf caf 2:05 pm 06 Feb 09

Probably because in places close to most residential areas the higher cost of the land outweighs the benefits from being closer to the electrical load. I also imagine that if you tried to site it actually in a suburb (as opposed to within-a-few-kilometres-of) it would no longer pass the emissions standards (it wouldn’t be because of particulates, though).

captainwhorebags captainwhorebags 1:29 pm 06 Feb 09

Is the proposed location actually in the Tuggeranong Valley? I have always seemed to notice hills in the way.

sepi sepi 1:11 pm 06 Feb 09

So why not put these power stations all thru residential areas then?
(genuine question)

caf caf 12:55 pm 06 Feb 09

Have you stopped to consider why it is that a gas heater is the mooted replacement for wood-fired? It’s because they put out next to no particulates, unlike wood heaters – and particulates are what this whole post was about…

sepi sepi 12:51 pm 06 Feb 09

The LA is already trying to phase out wood fires – they offer a 600.00 rebate to remove one and replace it with a gas heater. This rebate was introduced to combat the bad air quality in tuggeranong valley in winter, when the smoke sits in the valley.

So it is weird that they now think the same valley is a great place for a power station.

chewy14 chewy14 12:07 pm 06 Feb 09

Digga,
so you are agreeing that the power station does comply with all current standards?

maybe you should be trying to get the standard changed.

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 11:37 am 06 Feb 09

You’re also using junk data and trying to use it to suport an opposing view, Digga.

Two wrongs just leaves everybody confused.

Digga Digga 11:35 am 06 Feb 09

chewy14: They took unverified data sources from remote locations including the airport, Wagga Wagga, Bega etc. and pumped it through computer models with second-best geo mapping sources.

Not much effort to get the real picture. No site-specific data.

chewy14 chewy14 11:11 am 06 Feb 09

Digga,
No the report is from professional consultants paid for their time and expertise.
Are you saying they deliberately falsified results in the report? If so you are even crazier than i thought.
Why would a consultant risk their professional reputation for the small fee they would have got for that report?

Mr Evil Mr Evil 10:39 am 06 Feb 09

If we all stopped eating meat then we wouldn’t have to worry about anything terrible happening in the world anymore.

It’s true: I saw it on a placard outside Parliament House!

Digga Digga 10:35 am 06 Feb 09

chewy14: You realise that report you linked to is from the proponents’ or their advisors?

Digga Digga 9:48 am 06 Feb 09

Sorry the graph was small, it came from one of the Dr’s submissions to ACTPLA (for whatever it’s worth).

Here’s a bigger version:
http://home.mysoul.com.au/dande1/aq/PM25_Monash_04_06.JPG

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site