Comments for Tim Cinel http://www.timcinel.com It's my soapbox Wed, 04 May 2011 11:21:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 Comment on Cool Collective Nouns by lachie http://www.timcinel.com/2008/cool-collective-nouns/comment-page-1#comment-1049 lachie Wed, 04 May 2011 11:21:58 +0000 http://www.timcinel.com/?p=28#comment-1049 It is actually a murder of crows It is actually a murder of crows

]]> Comment on Cool Collective Nouns by Steve Sammartino http://www.timcinel.com/2008/cool-collective-nouns/comment-page-1#comment-508 Steve Sammartino Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:12:19 +0000 http://www.timcinel.com/?p=28#comment-508 You have too much time on your hands Tim - but yes, some of them are pretty funny. Steve. You have too much time on your hands Tim – but yes, some of them are pretty funny.

Steve.

]]> Comment on Decentralised Energy – The Economically and Environmentally Logical Solution by Tim Cinel http://www.timcinel.com/2008/decentralised-energy-%e2%80%93-the-economically-and-environmentally-logical-solution/comment-page-1#comment-18 Tim Cinel Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:12:03 +0000 http://www.timcinel.com/?p=59#comment-18 While it doesn't directly encourage the emergence of innovative, new industries, the 'decentralised' model could be a more feasible and rapid way to roll out renewable energy sources. For example, one common argument against wind power is the fact that it requires more area per watt to generate electricity - so powering an entire state from wind would require 100s of square kilometers. However, decentralised wind power would be idea for regional communities - each with a relatively small demand for power and availability of land. This still does not address the problem of consistent availability for renewable energy sources, unfortunately. One step at a time. While it doesn’t directly encourage the emergence of innovative, new industries, the ‘decentralised’ model could be a more feasible and rapid way to roll out renewable energy sources.

For example, one common argument against wind power is the fact that it requires more area per watt to generate electricity – so powering an entire state from wind would require 100s of square kilometers. However, decentralised wind power would be idea for regional communities – each with a relatively small demand for power and availability of land.

This still does not address the problem of consistent availability for renewable energy sources, unfortunately. One step at a time.

]]> Comment on Decentralised Energy – The Economically and Environmentally Logical Solution by Peter J. Merrick http://www.timcinel.com/2008/decentralised-energy-%e2%80%93-the-economically-and-environmentally-logical-solution/comment-page-1#comment-17 Peter J. Merrick Tue, 09 Sep 2008 04:27:21 +0000 http://www.timcinel.com/?p=59#comment-17 I agree 100% this would be ideal for australian towns and cities.However present vested interests may have a different barrow to push, but does it not open the door for brand new industries and all the jobs that would be created. I agree 100% this would be ideal for australian towns and cities.However present vested interests may have a different barrow to push, but does it not open the door for brand new industries and all the jobs that would be created.

]]> Comment on Decentralised Energy – The Economically and Environmentally Logical Solution by Tim Cinel http://www.timcinel.com/2008/decentralised-energy-%e2%80%93-the-economically-and-environmentally-logical-solution/comment-page-1#comment-16 Tim Cinel Mon, 08 Sep 2008 23:59:57 +0000 http://www.timcinel.com/?p=59#comment-16 I don't agree that Australia would "suck eggs" (whatever that's supposed to mean) in implementing decentralised energy. From my perspective, our concentration of Australia's population would make decentralised energy attractive in most populated areas, seeing that most (> 50%) of the population live in relatively densely populated areas regional, suburban and urban - even though those areas themselves are sparse. Of course, counties with consistently dense populations such as Japan and UK have even more to gain. We do appear to use more power with our larger households. It is also very energy expensive to cool, which we love doing in summer. I don’t agree that Australia would “suck eggs” (whatever that’s supposed to mean) in implementing decentralised energy. From my perspective, our concentration of Australia’s population would make decentralised energy attractive in most populated areas, seeing that most (> 50%) of the population live in relatively densely populated areas regional, suburban and urban – even though those areas themselves are sparse. Of course, counties with consistently dense populations such as Japan and UK have even more to gain.

We do appear to use more power with our larger households. It is also very energy expensive to cool, which we love doing in summer.

]]> Comment on Decentralised Energy – The Economically and Environmentally Logical Solution by Paul http://www.timcinel.com/2008/decentralised-energy-%e2%80%93-the-economically-and-environmentally-logical-solution/comment-page-1#comment-15 Paul Sat, 06 Sep 2008 09:21:10 +0000 http://www.timcinel.com/?p=59#comment-15 It'd be interesting to see some actual figures on this one. Australia is always going to suck eggs in the rollout of decentralised equipment because we're such a large land mass and the population is relatively sparse. However we probably use more energy than the average UK households because we have bigger houses - harder to heat/cool. Also bigger houses means more rooms, meaning more TVs, computers, etc. It’d be interesting to see some actual figures on this one. Australia is always going to suck eggs in the rollout of decentralised equipment because we’re such a large land mass and the population is relatively sparse.

However we probably use more energy than the average UK households because we have bigger houses – harder to heat/cool. Also bigger houses means more rooms, meaning more TVs, computers, etc.

]]>