At the risk of getting a spanking for going off topic, the problem with
coal power is not politics, so much as bankers. Coal plants need 40-50 year
depreciation to be economically viable. With the (unsubsidised) cost of
green power in a fast downward trajectory, no bankers will lend on a coal
plant for longer than ten years. They can't be economically viable to write
down over ten years, and nobody will finance them for longer.
The SA situation was completely out of government hands. The total power
system was sold in 1997, kit and kaboodle. Thus, prices and the blame
therefore had nothing to do with the State Government, or its green
leanings. The state government only got involved after the well publicised
failures and soaring prices happened - solely as a result of decisions by
the private sector.
On Wed, 18 Jul 2018, 06:10 Prescott lenkaprescott@...> wrote:
> I didn't know that the cost:benefit ratio was so poor. Well that
> pretty-much seals it until (if) Adelaide's economy comes more to life one
> day. With such a tentative hold on attracting patronage out of cars,
> Adelaide would do best to concentrate on corridors where they can offer
> something that has a strong power of attraction. One of these is the O Bahn
> with its ability to whip people in and out of more distant suburbs quickly
> and another is the South Terrace to Entertainment Centre corridor of the
> tram where a very strong downtown circulator and P+R patronage has been
> gained. I gather that these are respectively the first and second
> most-patronised public transport corridors in Adelaide.
>
> I don't know whether similar gains are possble anywhere else by bus or
> train. The city suffers from low-density, a relatively low level of
> activity and ease of parking. Buses can handle most of the present and
> future possibilities. The potential for further tram lines just doesn't
> seem to be there, though I think the Liberals were onto something in
> talking of extending the downtown circulator function which is the only
> part of the tram system that has been successful - the Glenelg line
> remaining in its long sleep.
>
> Sometimes I think that SA is embarked on some sort of suicide mission with
> its "green power" fetish. Fine in theory and as a long-term goal, but
> closing down coal-fired power stations prematurely and sending prices
> skyward and reliability down is death for attracting industry and
> investment, not to mention the terrible effect on ordinary people. Now I
> can't see any new coal-powered stations being built in Australia because
> they won't take the risk of Labor/Green governments getting into office at
> some stage and nixing it. What a right royal mess Australia has got itself
> into indulging these fantasies. Countries like Germany can afford to play
> with these ideals because they can fall back on drawing energy from
> surrounding countries that have retained their common-sense, but Australia
> is stuck all on its own in the South Pacific. Those photos a while ago of
> the stalled blacked-out trams in Adelaide with buses still running all
> around them sums it up pretty-well. You want electric transport - you need
> reliable electricity.
>
> Tony P
>
>
> On Tuesday, 17 July 2018 18:15:55 UTC+10, Mark Skinner wrote:
>>
>> The previous government undertook an economic analysis as part of the
>> (incomplete) business case for Infrastructure Australia. It was never
>> released. The benefit:cost ratio for the North Terrace extension was a poor
>> 0.7. So, it's not unreasonable to assume that the extension to North
>> Adelaide was much worse, since the cost per kM to North Adelaide was far
>> higher.
>>
>> With such a poor ratio of benefits to costs, it's not hard for an
>> unsympathetic government to scrap the whole thing. Or for a less than
>> competent government not to be able to lower costs to make it worth while.
>>
>> The previous Labor government favoured trams, but did not have the wit to
>> do it economically well enough. The new Liberal government has neither the
>> wit nor the inclination. Though, that does mean the taxpayer isn't saddled
>> with something uneconomic.
>>
>> If anyone wants to see trams running, they need to be thinking of ways to
>> reduce the gold plating, and increase the benefits.
>>
>>
>> Mark Skinner
>>
>> On Tuesday, July 17, 2018, Graham Jaunay prof...@...> wrote:
>>
>>> It is the current govt's policy not to extend trams. They are car
>>> orientated and use arguments like trams clog up roadways. I suspect even
>>> the plans to crate a city loop and Nth Adelaide extension will not happen
>>> under this govt.
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, 17 July 2018 14:21:15 UTC+9:30, Prescott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Somebody is claiming on the bus forum that the SA govt has said they
>>>> won't be building any more tram extensions. Have any Adelaidians heard
>>>> anything like this?
>>>>
>>>> Tony P
>>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email totramsdownunde...@....
>>> To post to this group, send email totramsdo...@....
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TramsDownUnder" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email totramsdownunder+unsubscribe@....
> To post to this group, send email totramsdownunder@....
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>