Adani Coal Airport
Is FIFO to this mine very short term?
The village will be developed in three stages. Stage one will see the initial capacity of 250 beds, to be built at the start of construction activities.
Stage two will see the adding of 1000 beds to bring capacity to 1250 beds, which is expected to be needed in the second year of construction with stage three set to add 750 beds to bring the total capacity of the village to 2000 beds by the start of mining operations.
Adani outlined the workers accommodation village would be developed with an elevated sense of community, as a series of accommodation unit clusters to promote a community environment, with each cluster having access to its own recreation and other facilities.
The design philosophy for the workers accommodation village was centred on providing an attractive living environment for the construction and maintenance workers in the short term while also establishing a framework whereby the settlement can ultimately be integrated into the permanent workers accommodation village.
https://www.themorningbulletin.com.a...oming/3187188/
The village will be developed in three stages. Stage one will see the initial capacity of 250 beds, to be built at the start of construction activities.
Stage two will see the adding of 1000 beds to bring capacity to 1250 beds, which is expected to be needed in the second year of construction with stage three set to add 750 beds to bring the total capacity of the village to 2000 beds by the start of mining operations.
Adani outlined the workers accommodation village would be developed with an elevated sense of community, as a series of accommodation unit clusters to promote a community environment, with each cluster having access to its own recreation and other facilities.
The design philosophy for the workers accommodation village was centred on providing an attractive living environment for the construction and maintenance workers in the short term while also establishing a framework whereby the settlement can ultimately be integrated into the permanent workers accommodation village.
https://www.themorningbulletin.com.a...oming/3187188/
Folks,
I never cease to be amazed that so many people will not (even when it is explained) accept what proportion of air cargo travels as belly freight, and how much better and reliable services can be run with loads (and reduced risks of delays and disruptions) traveling in multiple aircraft, to multiple daily destinations, compare to getting one huge load together.
When the is "outsize" load that need the volumetric capacity, roll out the dedicated freighter ---- but for the daily fresh milk?
Tootle pip!!
I never cease to be amazed that so many people will not (even when it is explained) accept what proportion of air cargo travels as belly freight, and how much better and reliable services can be run with loads (and reduced risks of delays and disruptions) traveling in multiple aircraft, to multiple daily destinations, compare to getting one huge load together.
When the is "outsize" load that need the volumetric capacity, roll out the dedicated freighter ---- but for the daily fresh milk?
Tootle pip!!
Would the dedicated freighter be the train?
And if we have 1250 beds (workers) and run 12 hr shifts week on week off.
1250 / 2 = 625
625 / 7 = 89
But stager the shifts to a 6 hr overlap
and a 45 seat aircraft would cover.
Maybe a ATR 72 so you can carry the milk?
When its out for any reason find a charter on ATR 42 or Q400.
And if we have 1250 beds (workers) and run 12 hr shifts week on week off.
1250 / 2 = 625
625 / 7 = 89
But stager the shifts to a 6 hr overlap
and a 45 seat aircraft would cover.
Maybe a ATR 72 so you can carry the milk?
When its out for any reason find a charter on ATR 42 or Q400.
once government has committed funds, the hook is set. "the mine is not viable without indian guest workers". 'the mine is not viable without tax relief", 'the mine is not viable without (name your ask). And of course government, you invested public money in this project, so you bear responsibility if it fails!
The adani mine is obviously a development con act. i just cannot get over the stupidity of people who cannot see this.
to put that another way, if the project was profitable it would have been built in a heartbeat by now. miners are not idiots.
The adani mine is obviously a development con act. i just cannot get over the stupidity of people who cannot see this.
to put that another way, if the project was profitable it would have been built in a heartbeat by now. miners are not idiots.
Sunfish, my personal opinion is don't approve Adani.
But that is not to say parts of that area can not be mined to meet our energy requirements and some offshore sales.
But before all check all the numbers and look at the environmental risks - then have a coffee and talk it over to see if it is good to proceed or not.
I know it was called the Northern Australia something thing that had access to loans, but never thought India while being north was ever part of Australia (nor any company able to build it be in Northern Australia).
But that is not to say parts of that area can not be mined to meet our energy requirements and some offshore sales.
But before all check all the numbers and look at the environmental risks - then have a coffee and talk it over to see if it is good to proceed or not.
I know it was called the Northern Australia something thing that had access to loans, but never thought India while being north was ever part of Australia (nor any company able to build it be in Northern Australia).
Thread Starter
From last year:
"...A highly orchestrated, secretly foreign-funded group of Australian environmental activists opposing the $16 billion Adani coalmine in Queensland has “dampened” Indian investment interest in Australia and received heated criticism from the federal Coalition and Queensland Labor governments.
Indian Power Minister Piyush Goyal told The Australian yesterday the years of legal challenges to the vast Carmichael coal project, now revealed to have been funded by multi-million-dollar foundations in the US, “will certainly dampen future investments” from India..."
US donors funding activists to shut down Australian mines, ports and rail, approved by Hillary?s right-hand-man? « JoNova
.
flying B, i care not about mining coal, global warming, left wing green activists and all those other triggers.
My 'trigger' is that the way the Adani folk are going about this project indicates to me it is a development scam. I have seen these before.
The objective is to shake down government to make the project saleable to someone other than Adani, sell it, and trouser the profits. The key indicator is that, if the project was profitable without government support, Adani would already have the finance and be telling government to get the #$@# out of the way!
The fact that Adani is trying to wheedle a billion out of the State government and 30 million out of two shires for an airport is a dead giveaway. The idea is to see how desperate and gullible the politicians are for the promise of jobs, and if they are suitably gullible, you package up all the offerings and flog the project.
the mine is simply a plaything. it could just as easily be an amusement park, solar panel factory or resort, the idea is to have a big idea and sell it first to government and if they play ball to on sell to an investor, pocketing a massive commission in the process. This game is played by a lot of #@$% and they waste huge amounts of government time and money because the public service has to listen to all these dreamers and provide a reality check.
i lost count of the number of Ministers letters I had to write refusing assistance containing the sentence: "My government acknowledges the economic pressures of your situation and understands that you must make difficult decisions on a purely commercial basis".
Adani will play this game for years until he is finally told "no", then he will drop the whole thing and walk away without a care. the mine is a mirage.
My 'trigger' is that the way the Adani folk are going about this project indicates to me it is a development scam. I have seen these before.
The objective is to shake down government to make the project saleable to someone other than Adani, sell it, and trouser the profits. The key indicator is that, if the project was profitable without government support, Adani would already have the finance and be telling government to get the #$@# out of the way!
The fact that Adani is trying to wheedle a billion out of the State government and 30 million out of two shires for an airport is a dead giveaway. The idea is to see how desperate and gullible the politicians are for the promise of jobs, and if they are suitably gullible, you package up all the offerings and flog the project.
the mine is simply a plaything. it could just as easily be an amusement park, solar panel factory or resort, the idea is to have a big idea and sell it first to government and if they play ball to on sell to an investor, pocketing a massive commission in the process. This game is played by a lot of #@$% and they waste huge amounts of government time and money because the public service has to listen to all these dreamers and provide a reality check.
i lost count of the number of Ministers letters I had to write refusing assistance containing the sentence: "My government acknowledges the economic pressures of your situation and understands that you must make difficult decisions on a purely commercial basis".
Adani will play this game for years until he is finally told "no", then he will drop the whole thing and walk away without a care. the mine is a mirage.
Thread Starter
Sunfish, in post #44 you made the claim: "...if the project was profitable it would have been built in a heartbeat by now..." That comment has been thoroughly discredited. Now the discredited comment is expanded on...
The bankers via their scam charitable organisations and their greeny useful idiots are wrecking havoc in India where many people die because of lack of any electricity...
"...I have had a request from some colleagues at Greenpeace as they are facing a very serious situation in India. In a nutshell: an Indian Intelligence Bureau report was “leaked” alleging Greenpeace India was responsible for a loss of 2-3% of the country’s GDP..."
"...What’s going on in India is concerning. There are some interesting linkages between the coal industry there and in Australia..."
http://www.thehindu.com/news/interna...le16079501.ece
.
flying B, i care not about mining coal, global warming, left wing green activists and all those other triggers.
My 'trigger' is that the way the Adani folk are going about this project indicates to me it is a development scam. I have seen these before.
The objective is to shake down government to make the project saleable to someone other than Adani, sell it, and trouser the profits. The key indicator is that, if the project was profitable without government support, Adani would already have the finance and be telling government to get the #$@# out of the way!
The fact that Adani is trying to wheedle a billion out of the State government and 30 million out of two shires for an airport is a dead giveaway. The idea is to see how desperate and gullible the politicians are for the promise of jobs, and if they are suitably gullible, you package up all the offerings and flog the project.
the mine is simply a plaything. it could just as easily be an amusement park, solar panel factory or resort, the idea is to have a big idea and sell it first to government and if they play ball to on sell to an investor, pocketing a massive commission in the process. This game is played by a lot of #@$% and they waste huge amounts of government time and money because the public service has to listen to all these dreamers and provide a reality check.
i lost count of the number of Ministers letters I had to write refusing assistance containing the sentence: "My government acknowledges the economic pressures of your situation and understands that you must make difficult decisions on a purely commercial basis".
Adani will play this game for years until he is finally told "no", then he will drop the whole thing and walk away without a care. the mine is a mirage.
My 'trigger' is that the way the Adani folk are going about this project indicates to me it is a development scam. I have seen these before.
The objective is to shake down government to make the project saleable to someone other than Adani, sell it, and trouser the profits. The key indicator is that, if the project was profitable without government support, Adani would already have the finance and be telling government to get the #$@# out of the way!
The fact that Adani is trying to wheedle a billion out of the State government and 30 million out of two shires for an airport is a dead giveaway. The idea is to see how desperate and gullible the politicians are for the promise of jobs, and if they are suitably gullible, you package up all the offerings and flog the project.
the mine is simply a plaything. it could just as easily be an amusement park, solar panel factory or resort, the idea is to have a big idea and sell it first to government and if they play ball to on sell to an investor, pocketing a massive commission in the process. This game is played by a lot of #@$% and they waste huge amounts of government time and money because the public service has to listen to all these dreamers and provide a reality check.
i lost count of the number of Ministers letters I had to write refusing assistance containing the sentence: "My government acknowledges the economic pressures of your situation and understands that you must make difficult decisions on a purely commercial basis".
Adani will play this game for years until he is finally told "no", then he will drop the whole thing and walk away without a care. the mine is a mirage.
"...I have had a request from some colleagues at Greenpeace as they are facing a very serious situation in India. In a nutshell: an Indian Intelligence Bureau report was “leaked” alleging Greenpeace India was responsible for a loss of 2-3% of the country’s GDP..."
"...What’s going on in India is concerning. There are some interesting linkages between the coal industry there and in Australia..."
http://www.thehindu.com/news/interna...le16079501.ece
.
flying b, Adanis website states they already supply coal to china. they plan to supply taiwan, vietnam, etc. it's on their website, so cut BS about humanitarian concerns for indias poor.
ADANI is a commodity trading company! Coal is a commodity! There is no sense in Australian government subsidy to a commodity trader!
ADANI is a commodity trading company! Coal is a commodity! There is no sense in Australian government subsidy to a commodity trader!
A couple of random points to consider.
If you use google earth, you can see there are already a number of mines within a 50km radius of the proposed mine.
If this coal seam is so good, why is it only Adani that is biding for it. Would people still have objections to the mine if it were a more reputable company. My Indian friends tell me that Indians consider Adani as crooks and shysters.
Coal v renewable. Here's what you need to know - Hack - triple j
This table is the cost of various forms of generation of electricity from coal to renewables. Coal is still the cheapest, wind still the most expensive. These numbers are backed up by what the Energy Market Regulator pays.
Renewables are indeed the future, they will be cheaper in 100 years, there's no argument to that. I will not be alive in 100 years, so i only want to pay for coal powered electricity today and the next day.
The environment debate is not about "the environment". it is a construct of Maurice Strong, a French Canadian UN Diplomat, he wanted to control oil, keep it away from the poor countries. He wanted to control the populations of poor countries,depopulate the world (poor countries) by making electricity (and therefore development) unobtainably expensive. if poor countries get rich, they consume more resources which means the rich countries would have less. A truly nasty character who hijacked environmentalism for sheer greed. He wanted to eliminate entire continents of people so the rich countries could have all the resources,in particular oil.
If you use google earth, you can see there are already a number of mines within a 50km radius of the proposed mine.
If this coal seam is so good, why is it only Adani that is biding for it. Would people still have objections to the mine if it were a more reputable company. My Indian friends tell me that Indians consider Adani as crooks and shysters.
Coal v renewable. Here's what you need to know - Hack - triple j
This table is the cost of various forms of generation of electricity from coal to renewables. Coal is still the cheapest, wind still the most expensive. These numbers are backed up by what the Energy Market Regulator pays.
Renewables are indeed the future, they will be cheaper in 100 years, there's no argument to that. I will not be alive in 100 years, so i only want to pay for coal powered electricity today and the next day.
The environment debate is not about "the environment". it is a construct of Maurice Strong, a French Canadian UN Diplomat, he wanted to control oil, keep it away from the poor countries. He wanted to control the populations of poor countries,depopulate the world (poor countries) by making electricity (and therefore development) unobtainably expensive. if poor countries get rich, they consume more resources which means the rich countries would have less. A truly nasty character who hijacked environmentalism for sheer greed. He wanted to eliminate entire continents of people so the rich countries could have all the resources,in particular oil.
Last edited by Guptar; 5th Nov 2017 at 03:44. Reason: Spelling
Thread Starter
A couple of random points to consider.
If you use google earth, you can see there are already a number of mines within a 50km radius of the proposed mine.
If this coal seam is so good, why is it only Adani that is biding for it. Would people still have objections to the mine if it were a more reputable company. My Indian friends tell me that Indians consider Adani as crooks and shysters.
Coal v renewable. Here's what you need to know - Hack - triple j
This table is the cost of various forms of generation of electricity from coal to renewables. Coal is still the cheapest, wind still the most expensive. These numbers are backed up by what the Energy Market Regulator pays.
Renewables are indeed the future, they will be cheaper in 100 years, there's no argument to that. I will not be alive in 100 years, so i only want to pay for coal powered electricity today and the next day.
The environment debate is not about "the environment". it is a construct of Maurice Strong, a French Canadian UN Diplomat, he wanted to control oil, keep it away from the poor countries. He wanted to control the populations of poor countries,depopulate the world (poor countries) by making electricity (and therefore development) unobtainably expensive. if poor countries get rich, they consume more resources which means the rich countries would have less. A truly nasty character who hijacked environmentalism for sheer greed. He wanted to eliminate entire continents of people so the rich countries could have all the resources,in particular oil.
If you use google earth, you can see there are already a number of mines within a 50km radius of the proposed mine.
If this coal seam is so good, why is it only Adani that is biding for it. Would people still have objections to the mine if it were a more reputable company. My Indian friends tell me that Indians consider Adani as crooks and shysters.
Coal v renewable. Here's what you need to know - Hack - triple j
This table is the cost of various forms of generation of electricity from coal to renewables. Coal is still the cheapest, wind still the most expensive. These numbers are backed up by what the Energy Market Regulator pays.
Renewables are indeed the future, they will be cheaper in 100 years, there's no argument to that. I will not be alive in 100 years, so i only want to pay for coal powered electricity today and the next day.
The environment debate is not about "the environment". it is a construct of Maurice Strong, a French Canadian UN Diplomat, he wanted to control oil, keep it away from the poor countries. He wanted to control the populations of poor countries,depopulate the world (poor countries) by making electricity (and therefore development) unobtainably expensive. if poor countries get rich, they consume more resources which means the rich countries would have less. A truly nasty character who hijacked environmentalism for sheer greed. He wanted to eliminate entire continents of people so the rich countries could have all the resources,in particular oil.
The latest example of what happens if the power lines aren't 'gold plated' to take solar and/or wind:
"...The WA government-run electricity provider (Horizon Energy) has called a halt to new solar installations in Broome, a town in Northwest WA that is not connected to the national grid, or even the main WA grid. (It’s 2,000km north of Perth). About 10% of the town’s power comes from solar but apparently the little grid can’t handle the fluctuations..."
Only 10% of power allowed from solar in Broome WA to stop grid ?fluctuations? « JoNova
"...a more reputable company..."
Guptar, Adani are also big players in solar power so that's a big mark against them in the integrity stakes. Though that don't mean yer don't deal with them. For example, when were the last time yer bought a house with out a lawyer involved or some paperwork that owes its existence to some government regulator. There are ways to safeguard things...
.
Thread Starter
flying b, Adanis website states they already supply coal to china. they plan to supply taiwan, vietnam, etc. it's on their website, so cut BS about humanitarian concerns for indias poor.
ADANI is a commodity trading company! Coal is a commodity! There is no sense in Australian government subsidy to a commodity trader!
ADANI is a commodity trading company! Coal is a commodity! There is no sense in Australian government subsidy to a commodity trader!
Sunfish, lets get back to yer comment in post #44: "...if the project was profitable it would have been built in a heartbeat by now..."
Looking at the issue from the aviation perspective: The Australian business aviation community is being denied another source of income because of the corrupt practices of those that fund and instruct the useful idiot greens.
More airports and passengers require more aircraft and pilots. And that leads to the requirement for more people to teach these new pilots and maintain these extra aircraft.
Some serious questions need to be asked about the damage that is being done to the Australian economy by the corrupt greeny groups. They are doing more economic damage then any islamic nutter terrorist group could dream of...
"...The Australian (newspaper) has been busy exposing how the supposedly grassroots anti-coal groups in Australia are being funded by the US and with the full knowledge and approval of John Podesta who used to be a special counselor to Barak Obama and is now Hillary’s campaign chairman. Thanks to Wikileaks for the info..."
US donors funding activists to shut down Australian mines, ports and rail, approved by Hillary?s right-hand-man? « JoNova
.
you are fixated on the airport and hate green groups. That is the source of your support for the project. when i say that the project should stand on its own feet without government support you just repeat your rubbish.
Folks,
The above is quite short, but plenty of references/examples, for anybody who actually wants an "informed" debate, on this or many other topics on pprune, it is well worth reading, and absorbing the message.
This goes double for anything involving "climate change" and "the science is settled".
The work on the same subject, by Harry G Frankfurt, former Professor of Philosophy at Princeton, are also well worth a read.
https://www.goodreads.com/author/sho...ry_G_Frankfurt
Tootle pip!!
The above is quite short, but plenty of references/examples, for anybody who actually wants an "informed" debate, on this or many other topics on pprune, it is well worth reading, and absorbing the message.
This goes double for anything involving "climate change" and "the science is settled".
The work on the same subject, by Harry G Frankfurt, former Professor of Philosophy at Princeton, are also well worth a read.
https://www.goodreads.com/author/sho...ry_G_Frankfurt
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting article by Brian Earp. All of us who have reached a certain age have seen many of the scenarios he alludes to played out.
So I don't come to blows with the usual suspects I just make this observation based on a couple of well known 'scientific' arguments that have occurred in my lifetime.
The ones who have the most money to lose are the best at muddying the water and they fight harder and dirtier. Take big tobacco and asbestos. Both made billions and the owners fought for years to prevent their products being banned. They didn't give a stuff how many people died long before their time. They had the evidence but hid it or bent it. The scientists trying to get the message out about the lethal nature of those products got no more or less pay whatever their findings were.
Perhaps these examples should be food for thought in the argument between the fossil fuel industry and climate scientists.
We know for sure that if fossil fuels are banned the companies (and Pollies?) will take a financial hit but what about the climate scientists. My guess is their pay would stay the same whether they found the the climate was warming, cooling or static.
So I don't come to blows with the usual suspects I just make this observation based on a couple of well known 'scientific' arguments that have occurred in my lifetime.
The ones who have the most money to lose are the best at muddying the water and they fight harder and dirtier. Take big tobacco and asbestos. Both made billions and the owners fought for years to prevent their products being banned. They didn't give a stuff how many people died long before their time. They had the evidence but hid it or bent it. The scientists trying to get the message out about the lethal nature of those products got no more or less pay whatever their findings were.
Perhaps these examples should be food for thought in the argument between the fossil fuel industry and climate scientists.
We know for sure that if fossil fuels are banned the companies (and Pollies?) will take a financial hit but what about the climate scientists. My guess is their pay would stay the same whether they found the the climate was warming, cooling or static.
Thread Starter
Interesting article by Brian Earp. All of us who have reached a certain age have seen many of the scenarios he alludes to played out.
So I don't come to blows with the usual suspects I just make this observation based on a couple of well known 'scientific' arguments that have occurred in my lifetime.
The ones who have the most money to lose are the best at muddying the water and they fight harder and dirtier. Take big tobacco and asbestos. Both made billions and the owners fought for years to prevent their products being banned. They didn't give a stuff how many people died long before their time. They had the evidence but hid it or bent it. The scientists trying to get the message out about the lethal nature of those products got no more or less pay whatever their findings were.
Perhaps these examples should be food for thought in the argument between the fossil fuel industry and climate scientists.
We know for sure that if fossil fuels are banned the companies (and Pollies?) will take a financial hit but what about the climate scientists. My guess is their pay would stay the same whether they found the the climate was warming, cooling or static.
So I don't come to blows with the usual suspects I just make this observation based on a couple of well known 'scientific' arguments that have occurred in my lifetime.
The ones who have the most money to lose are the best at muddying the water and they fight harder and dirtier. Take big tobacco and asbestos. Both made billions and the owners fought for years to prevent their products being banned. They didn't give a stuff how many people died long before their time. They had the evidence but hid it or bent it. The scientists trying to get the message out about the lethal nature of those products got no more or less pay whatever their findings were.
Perhaps these examples should be food for thought in the argument between the fossil fuel industry and climate scientists.
We know for sure that if fossil fuels are banned the companies (and Pollies?) will take a financial hit but what about the climate scientists. My guess is their pay would stay the same whether they found the the climate was warming, cooling or static.
Hmmm... I'd love to see this so-called "argument" ..
rutan around, just so we can confirm yer not making things up as usual can we see an example of the "argument" as put by the "fossil fuel industry"..? Perhaps start with that solar power titan, Adani..
Meanwhile, I'll keep putting forward the "argument" from an Oz taxpayer perspective that understands that around 30% of Australia's tax income comes from the "fossil fuel industry" and associated suppliers etc. Also keeping in mind that it wern't that long ago that Oz had the worlds cheapest and most reliable coal sourced power.
And as an aside. When I see them global warming 'believers' refuse to take 30% of their taxpayer funded dole/pension/health-benefits/subsidys income due to the fact it is tainted coal money then I might take them more seriously.
.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: YMMB
Age: 58
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Flying_Binhi - you state :30% of Australia's tax income comes from the "fossil fuel industry" and associated suppliers etc".
You blatantly try to invent facts to suit your latest crazy rant or conspiracy theory.
Here is the ABS break down of Federal Government revenue sources.
ABS: MAJOR COMPONENTS OF TOTAL TAXATION REVENUE
Please substantiate your claim stated above. Web sites run by people wearing Tin Foil hats do not count as creditable sources of facts.
You blatantly try to invent facts to suit your latest crazy rant or conspiracy theory.
Here is the ABS break down of Federal Government revenue sources.
ABS: MAJOR COMPONENTS OF TOTAL TAXATION REVENUE
Please substantiate your claim stated above. Web sites run by people wearing Tin Foil hats do not count as creditable sources of facts.
Thread Starter
@Flying_Binhi - you state :30% of Australia's tax income comes from the "fossil fuel industry" and associated suppliers etc".
You blatantly try to invent facts to suit your latest crazy rant or conspiracy theory.
Here is the ABS break down of Federal Government revenue sources.
ABS: MAJOR COMPONENTS OF TOTAL TAXATION REVENUE
Please substantiate your claim stated above. Web sites run by people wearing Tin Foil hats do not count as creditable sources of facts.
You blatantly try to invent facts to suit your latest crazy rant or conspiracy theory.
Here is the ABS break down of Federal Government revenue sources.
ABS: MAJOR COMPONENTS OF TOTAL TAXATION REVENUE
Please substantiate your claim stated above. Web sites run by people wearing Tin Foil hats do not count as creditable sources of facts.
First we'll wait and see what call-sign rutan around comes up with..
.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binghi you just did a bum pluck like most of the rest of your misinformation. Try one half of one percent for coal and less for the other fossil fuels . I haven't had enough red to match your thinking so I'll go and rectify the situation.