Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

ADO

Click for more information

0.00%

2.7¢ anteotech ltd

Spectacular, measured analysis from someone who has wisely dug...

First 35 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
ArtVandelay

2,455 Posts.

37

07/02/19

07:02

Post #: 37356953
Share

Originally posted by PeterFred ↑

Originally posted by bourbasted
I've got an old boss who taught me a very valuable lesson a long time ago. You can be righteous or you can be rich, but very rarely can you be both in any sustainable way.

The simple fact of the matter is no matter how much people want us to be there, the infrastructure in most modern countries simply can't be supported by alternative fuel sources. As pointed out, to do what you are claiming to be right would likely bankrupt our nation relatively quickly.

PF also points out, quite correctly, that electricity has to be produced. I can tell you as of last year, coal-fired energy costs ~$14-$15p/kw hr to produce. The same kilowatt hour to produce in a very efficient hydro station located in QLD costs ~$25p/kw hr. The average retail price for power in QLD is $27p/kw hr. In my experience the hydro-plant only gets used to produce in emergency situations, or to meet contractual obligations where oversold. If we move to hydro to produce electricity, the retail prices will double. Can you afford that? I can't.

I believe the transition will be gradual. Getting viable batteries with large storage capacity and then affordable for the average Joe, it will take time. I believe ADO is well placed to be on the cutting (if not bleeding) edge of the change. Taking time to crawl/walk/run will be a good thing for shareholders imho.

It's great to have a noble cause in fairy tales, but in real life they most often get you killed. This ain't Disney...
Interesting figures, BB.
My interestin the issue of AGW was sparked back in 2010, when in response to my question,a friend responded with an interactive graphic of the globe, displaying theflooding from various extents of sea level rise. I did not think this was a thoughtful response, simply to quote an authority. (I think the source was from an IPCC or related website, but it had some currency at the time. This particular graphic was subsequently withdrawn, perhaps out of embarrassment.) So I decided to read the latest IPCC report (20017, I recall), and concentrate on temperature, sea level and ice. I chose those indicators as being comprehensible and pertinent. I read a selection of the scientific papers, as well as the Summaries for Policy Makers. Familiar as I am with reading all kinds of documents, I found a dissonance between the caveats expressed by the scientific authors about their work and conclusions, and the certainty expressed in the Summaries. The other concerning point was that sometimes in the midst of a scientific explanation there would be simple English statements such as “this is clear evidence of . . . “; “has this been edited in?” was the question that first occurred to me. Subsequently I found out that indeed the lead authors exercised the practice of applying edits without reference to the author. This was one of the practices to which Landsea in particular drew attention.
So myinterest was indeed piqued. Here briefly are some key matters I have discovered.
·
Carbon dioxide rise and fall followtemperature rise and fall, not the inverse, by 800-100 years.
·
Over the last century, ocean levels haverisen about 200-300 mm on average. At Fort Denison in Sydney Harbour, a geological stable region, the rise has been about 100 mm over the last century (anyone can readily check these figures from official sources). No acceleration in the rate of rise has been demonstrated – an significant point.
·
I had been quite unaware of theLittle Ice Age (with its peak around of around 1780-1820, I recall). Since then, the Earth has been warming again. We had a Minoan Warm Period, a Roman Warm Period, and a Medieval Warm Period (think Eric the Red, and Greenland settlements up the slopes, now being revealed as some of that ice melts), when temperatures were higher than they are now. And as Stockcount tells us correctly, carbon dioxide levels were much lower than at present. The period of cooling between the Roman and Medieval Periods explains for me why the Dark Ages – cold is tough on humans, they die from not enough food production, they are prone to higher levels of disease from crowding in shelter, and travel is restricted. No wonder it was such a dark period.
· Recent warming – well, we had awarming here in Australia from about 1910 to around 1940 (how I remember thosereally hot summer days as a child on the foothills of Sydney’s Blue Mountains),and then a cooling until the 1970s (when some scientists were tipping we were going to enter an ice age), then a warming until around 2000, and a relatively stable level since then (some Russian scientists are suggesting we may be about to enter a cooling phase, given the almost zero current sunspot activity.) Incidentally, a graph of temperature rise from the 1910-1940 period shows a similar rate of rise as from 1970-2000.
·
In the Western world, I think mostpeople under 40 years of age have received a consistent message about AGW, tothe extent that convictions have become embedded, and no questioning or deeperreading is undertaken. And most people, especially the tertiary educated, areconditioned to accept the authority of the “experts”.
·
Western meteorological organisationsgenerally ignore any temperatures prior to 1910 (in Australia, the spread ofthe Stevenson Screen), and then happily toss up phrases such as “warmest onrecord”. Haven’t read of the January 1896 temperatures in Sydney? Or those bushfires of the 1800s, or the temperatures so diligently recorded by our forebears?
·
The climate models which serve asthe basis for almost every prediction of increased and dangerous temperatures,are almost entirely wrong. Look them up if you don’t believe me. Observations must always take precedence over models.
·
Art Vandelay has already commentedabout the failed predictions – look them up also, if you wish.
·
I am reminded of the Y2k worries –remember when we were told that as we rolled over into the year 2000, a wholeraft of computer programs would fail because programs catered for dates in theddmmyy format, not ddmmyyyy. All hell would break loose. It didn’t. Hardly a hiccough. Some IT companies were smiling all the way to the bank, having made a pile of rewriting a lot of programs. Sound familiar?
So I don’t think the planet needs saving, atleast not in the way that the global warming scenario plays it. But I do think we need much better batteries for all the uses we can imagine, and as we are all wishing, Anteo should be pivotal in helping achievethat.

Expand

Spectacular, measured analysis from someone who has wisely dug beneath the layers of politicised scientific groups for their own understanding. Well done.
Will be curious to see @nashezz and @Stockcount respond to this post with anything more than, “yeah but scientists have found....”
I have always given the Y2K example as well. Identical synergies on how the masses can be “had”.
Nashezz, you can throw around terms like “right-wing” and “delusional” all you like. I argue dispassionately through logic and observation - not a predisposed political bent.

Last edited by ArtVandelay: 07/02/19

ADO Price at posting: 1.8¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
2 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

RBA holds rates as ALP election campaigning kicks off – expect more political focus

The ASX can overlook its Telecomm small-caps. Here’s one diversified brand with an international footprint

HXG

Harvey Norman may appeal ASIC Federal Court case – the third lawsuit on its plate

Palladium's the newest geopolitical hot commodity. But ASX exposure is limited

EBR

Timing will be everything for 'smashing' Hot Stock tip Judo Capital Holdings

There are more pages in this discussion • 37 more messages in this thread...

First 35 Last

Add ADO (ASX) to my watchlist

(20min delay)
Last 2.7¢		Change 0.000(0.00%)		Mkt cap ! $54.77M

Open	High	Low	Value	Volume
2.8¢	2.8¢	2.7¢	$8.552K	309.5K

Buyers (Bids)

No.	Vol.	Price($)
9	563106	2.6¢

Sellers (Offers)

Price($)	Vol.	No.
2.7¢	40657	2

View Market Depth

No.	Vol.	Price($)
1	100045	0.017
12	5392623	0.016
6	1570373	0.015
5	1270000	0.014
2	1045000	0.013

Price($)	Vol.	No.
0.018	165394	4
0.019	555555	1
0.020	469389	4
0.021	105917	1
0.022	1013156	4

Last trade - 13.53pm 05/11/2024 (20 minute delay)

ADO (ASX) Chart