Wind Turbine Hazard to Aviation

[dutchroll]

Do you view your income tax expenses claims as 'government subsidies'? If you do then to you I guess they are. Basically you have your own personal definition.In contrast dutchroll the following groups believe that the Fuel Tax Credit Scheme is NOT a subsidy:

 

The Productivity Commission

 

The Australian Government

 

The Australian Treasury

 

Greenpeace Australia - report agrees that a tax rebate is not a subsidy & all funds go into general revenue.

 

No subsidy see? Only to you. But that's OK as I don't mind subsidizing you a little.

No's 1 and 3 are essentially the same thing, Treasury justifying that they don't think it's a "subsidy" even though others think it is (Richard Webb works for Treasury, by the way). I do love the Treasury wording in #3: "Fuel tax credits are therefore not a subsidy to businesses but, consistent with Government policy, it is a mechanism to ensure that, where possible, the incidence of fuel tax does not add to business costs". Oh lol! I spent 16 years working in a Federal Government bureaucracy and I couldn't have word-smithed it better myself. What do you call a financial exemption worth billions of dollars to a particular industry and not available to many other industries? Well call it anything but a subsidy!

Now let's get to #2 which was of the most interest to me. This is the reason I keep telling people that if they're going to link reports to me, they should read them carefully. The "G20 Fossil Fuel Subsidy Phase-out Report". Scroll down to page 5, Table 1. In Australia's column, you'll see that it states that while Australia had no reportable "inefficient" fossil fuel subsidies it did have a number of "efficient" fossil fuel subsidies (note: the report goes on to highlight that certain countries interpret "efficient" and "inefficient" fossil fuels differently, sometimes depending on their fossil fuel dependence).

 

The report goes on, on page 10, to specifically mention Australia's policy of excluding tax breaks from the definition of "subsidies". It's a fascinating read in some parts, when you see the complexities and machinations of how various nations weasel out of being accused of "subsidising" their industries. Subsidies are a political hot-potato and are very significant in things like free-trade agreements, so I totally understand the Australian Government's (and many other Governments) reluctance to acknowledge that it subsidises mining or fossil fuels to any great extent............even though it does.

 

As for the Greenpeace report, well contrary to what you may believe, I rarely listen to anything Greenpeace has to say.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

So you are happy to get food, but not happy to get every other physical object that makes your life worth living - it all comes from mining if it isn't made of wood. I really dont get it - why the attitude about mining?

the mining and petro-chemical industry lead the world in corruption. Its the management (profit without conscience) that is the problem.

 

 

[octave]

The Australia Institute are anti-mining activists run by the Greens.

So what are the true figures for subsidies to the mining industry? Are you asserting that they are zero?

 

 

[Geoff13]

Fuel Tax Credit Scheme - applies when you use diesel fuel for transport on non-public roads. Waives the diesel fuel excise. Government cost: $5.8 billion last year. Main Benefactor: Mining industry.Accelerated depreciation (statutory effective life caps) - Government cost: $1.7 billion last year. Main benefactor: Oil, gas, petroleum extraction industries.

 

Concessional excise rates, AVGAS and AVTUR - Government cost: $1 billion last year. Main benefactor: aviation fuel industry.

 

You're talking nearly $10 billion of subsidies to fossil fuel industries and projected to be well over that by 2017.

 

Makes solar and wind subsidies look a bit piddly really, doesn't it?

Interesting. The diesel fuel rebate that I claim is actually for transport on Public Roads and was introduced along with the GST to counter the fact that we were paying GST on fuel tax. Only to be claimed by Heavy Vehicles using public roads to carry freight.

 

Main beneficiaries every Australian because without it every thing you buy would cost about 10% more to transport.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Are you saying that farmers and miners don't fill up their road vehicles with off-road diesel?

I was aware of some that used to do so in northern WA, and they thought they were rather clever. One of their 'group' was rather timid about following the example but since they all had massive diesel procurement bills for generating their own power, pumping water and all that, they considered it was unlikely that they'd ever be caught so the odd man out (woman actually) got a pasting for being a wowser.

 

It took a few years but inevitably the rampies ended up on the local highway and a couple of the group got their Landcruiser tanks sampled and lo and behold the diesel dye wasn't the right colour. Not only did they get a massive fine (around $20K IIRC) and very damaging ATO audit, they were 'excluded' from being able to claim the Primary Industry fuel subsidy for five years as individuals and/or for any Company of which they were a Director.

 

The wowser had the last laugh ...

 

Don't ya love thread drift ...? It's OK, it's my thread, go for it, this all much more interesting than a few bumps downwind of a windmill

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Funny thing about the mining industry, where I have worked for 45 years. Haven't met any corrupt people yet. Have met ratbags and self-promoters and incompetents, but corruption seems to be the ambit of politicians, not miners. And I have worked in many countries. There are corrupt officials, corrupt suppliers, lots of people outside the industry who would like to be corrupt to get a bit of the action, but the people I have known have been hard working, honest people. The industry does not go in for wrong-doing because it cannot afford to. The capital investments are so big that it is not worth the risk of losing the social licence to operate, which just means if you do the wrong thing then the locals will kick you out.

 

 

[Marty_d]

So you are happy to get food, but not happy to get every other physical object that makes your life worth living - it all comes from mining if it isn't made of wood. I really dont get it - why the attitude about mining?

Not at all. My point is that farmers need the fuel subsidy - mining doesn't. Look at the books for Rio Tinto over the last 20 years and show me the farm that makes that sort of profit.

 

 

[facthunter]

It's everybody's thread once it gets going. Has a form of it's own. Nev

 

 

[Marty_d]

Like all conversations!

 

 

[skeptic36]

Not at all. My point is that farmers need the fuel subsidy - mining doesn't. Look at the books for Rio Tinto over the last 20 years and show me the farm that makes that sort of profit.

If you show me the farm that has that much invested, there is no reason why it won't have a reasonable profit.

Most of the farmers you here about that are making losses or barely breaking even is because they are under capitalized

 

 

[SDQDI]

If you show me the farm that has that much invested, there is no reason why it won't have a reasonable profit.Most of the farmers you here about that are making losses or barely breaking even is because they are under capitalized

Undercapitalisation can no doubt play a part but when you get payed in year 2 thousand odd, the same price for a commodity as you got in 1950 but the cost to grow that same commodity is greatly increased the profit margin only takes up so much slack before it becomes a loss margin.

We can't complain as being on a small irrigation farm production is a fair bit more 'secure'. Oh but wait a minute what will we get if our water is killed? I would dare say if our water was ruined that there is no way that everyone affected could be adequately compensated.

 

I am a huge hypocrite, I don't mind the mining if it is nowhere near my backyard/farm/aquifer/district! The trouble is everyone is the same, everyone appreciates what they have and don't wish it to be taken away by mines which as has been said, aren't there forever..

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Don't forget CSG poisons ground water, once its poisoned your food is poisoned.

 

 

[dazza 38]

Don't forget CSG poisons ground water, once its poisoned your food is poisoned.

How is the ground water poisoned when in nothing is pumped into the ground in 90 % of cases ?

Remember only 8 to 10 % of wells have hydraulic fracturing to fracture the coal seam.

 

Sound like another CSG miss informed post FT.

 

 

[facthunter]

Fugitive emissions dazza and the lakes of polluted water , Tailings dams etc that end up where they shouldn't when floods happen. Most CSG projects leak eventually. Are you sure they can be just left after they are no longer profitable, without any further harm being done. Methane is far worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas. Nev

 

 

[fly_tornado]

What about all that CSG that ends up escaping? Forget that the tracking fluid is so toxic the gas companies won't release the ingredients list.

 

 

[robinsm]

Instead of pedalling your political wheelbarrows which are all self interest garbage anyway, how about we GET BACK ON TOPIC. We are discussing wind farms and their effect on aviation, not the government subsidy of farmers, miners or any elses underpants whatever. STICK TO THE TOPIC or open a new one.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

There is no effect to the aviation industry unless your a crop duster pilot. That initial photo was an off shore wind farm, have a close look the turbulence doesn't actually rise up.

 

 

[kasper]

There is no effect to the aviation industry unless your a crop duster pilot. That initial photo was an off shore wind farm, have a close look the turbulence doesn't actually rise up.

Not quite ... not an issue for many here when the wind turbines are not near your airfield however Stoke Airfield on the Medway in the UK faces a few challenges where a proposed turbine farm was the last straw:

 

Stokes features include:

 

1. Its a few feet under sea level with an 8-10ft sea wall to the south holding back the Medway ... mostly, it leaks but they have a big pump

 

2. The sea wall is under 15m off you wing tip (at best) when flying the centreline of the runway

 

3. The hangars along the runway are less than 10m from the centreline to the north

 

4. Directly behind the hangars is a rail line raised about 6ft above runway

 

5. Directly behind the rail line are bloody great big transmission towers

 

6. About 20m past the eastern end of the runway is a 60ft wide hangar

 

7. the runway is curved over its whole length ... about a 15deg difference end to end ... and the sea wall, hangars, railway and transmission lines all follow the curve ... and continue curving around on the approach and departure lines

 

8. It has a coal fire power station 1 mile off EACH end of the runway ... I told you they were BIG transmission lines

 

9. Nearly all land on the northern side of the airfield is RSPB Bird sanctuary

 

So when they announced that they wanted to put multiple 500ft wind turbines less than 800m off the end of the strip when they closed one of the powers station ... directly in line with the prevailing wind where weightshift aircraft train ... that 'little' disturbed air spilling off and spreading for hundreds of metres down wind that you see in the first post picture becomes much more important.

 

I have flown deliberately downwind of the Thanet offshore windfarm in a weightshift and its not nice at all - in fact its bloody dangerous - and that's with lovely smooth water meaning the only turb was from them.

 

When they are along a hill line like some in Australia the added mechanical turb from the hill is even more pronounced when there are turbines ... tested that one too in Nth France just south of Saint Omer when flying up from Abbeville ... you have miles of hill line without turbines and then lots of turbines ... the result is a seriously different airmass and turbulence several miles downwind of the line of the turbines and its disturbed well above the top of the turbines.

 

So yes, the actual mechanical wind disturbance is not huge (especially if you are in a fast fixed wing ultralight) BUT if you are a low slow ultralight (particularly weightshift) its going to be something to look out for ... and the EclipseR I was flying is not a low performance weightshift - its a 415kg 912 heavy that cruises at over 60knts and it is still thrown around by them.

 

So look out in the future - turbine near airfields are a bigger issue and even now keep away from down wind of them ... not usually a problem in OZ with the height of air available to us.

 

 

[facthunter]

As are clumps of Trees, Hangars Billboards near an aerodrome and distant up wind Hills which can affect the turbulence for tens of Kilometers. Try downwind of the Yu Yangs. The Grampians and Mt Macedon. Standing waves right across the countryside Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...Stokes features include:...7. the runway is curved over its whole length ... about a 15deg difference end to end ... and the sea wall, hangars, railway and transmission lines all follow the curve ... and continue curving around on the approach and departure lines...

Crickey, I looked it up on GE and he's right! A curved airfield!

 

 

[SDQDI]

Crickey, I looked it up on GE and he's right! A curved airfield!

I perfected the curved landing technique early in my career:hide:

 

 

[Geoff13]

I perfected the curved landing technique early in my career:hide:

So did I. Its a pity none of the runways were curved though

 

 

[Kununurra]

For sale wind farm anyone interested

 

 

[Methusala]

Mos' probly the on'y reason ya don' heeah abaat crupshun in tha minin' inustry is b'cuz the capitalists own tha meja, heh? I believe that there is a move underfoot to investigate (via Senate committee) corruption at high levels in companies such as BHP Leighton hldgs Rio Tinto etc...more to come on this. (Surely these companies are not involved in the mining industry? Nooo...)

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Pardon my obvious ignorance, but would Solar energy be less costly to establish in a country which has somewhat more reliable sunshine per day that we do up here at around 52 degrees North. . . . ?

 

Educate me please.

 

Phil