FMG - Fortescue Ltd

[Antirnator]

Labor is setting the mood for an under promise and over deliver news event. Talk around the place is of Australia meeting its target.

Yes, they promised under i.e. -$275 and delivered over i.e. +$1500 to get to net zero i.e. zero life

 

[JohnDe]

Yes, they promised under i.e. -$275 and delivered over i.e. +$1500 to get to net zero i.e. zero life

View attachment 208319

That was a misunderstanding, they meant to say that they are going to charge everyone an extra $275. I have overachieved and contributing even more from my home and business electricity government tax contributions

 

[basilio]

Where did you read that?

This is the story behind the infinity train review.
Long story short. The idea seemed right but when the engineers got into it it wasn't going to be as simple and cost effective as they had hoped. Back to the drawing board.

Fortescue culls electric train team but 'on track' for 2030

Andrew Forrest's miner is back to the drawing board to find a new solution that does not disrupt production and can be delivered by 2030.

www.boilingcold.com.au

Maybe doable, definitely difficult​

Extra locomotives would allow more electrical power to be stored; however some routes required up to nine units and Fortescue wanted no more than two.

There are limits on the length and weight of a so-called consist: the combination of locomotives and the ore cars they pull.

Longer or heavier consists are more at risk of the couplings between ore cars failing from pressure waves that go from car to car up and down the consist, causing derailment. Some sidings are also too short.

These limits meant that Fortescue could only add locomotives if the consist had less ore cars, and on its heavily used railway that would cut total production and hence revenue.

Fortescue also investigated installing a 65km-long stretch of overhead cables on the rail line to Port Hedland to charge the locomotives. However, the gantries to support the cables were large and expensive as they had to be some distance from the rail line for safety reasons and be able to withstand cyclones.

Also, the gantries and overhead lines could not be installed without at times closing the line to Port Hedland, adding massive amounts of lost revenue to the financial burden of the high capital cost.

Still on track?​

 

[divs4ever]

This is the story behind the infinity train review.
Long story short. The idea seemed right but when the engineers got into it it wasn't going to be as simple and cost effective as they had hoped. Back to the drawing board.

Fortescue culls electric train team but 'on track' for 2030

Andrew Forrest's miner is back to the drawing board to find a new solution that does not disrupt production and can be delivered by 2030.

www.boilingcold.com.au

Maybe doable, definitely difficult​

Extra locomotives would allow more electrical power to be stored; however some routes required up to nine units and Fortescue wanted no more than two.

There are limits on the length and weight of a so-called consist: the combination of locomotives and the ore cars they pull.

Longer or heavier consists are more at risk of the couplings between ore cars failing from pressure waves that go from car to car up and down the consist, causing derailment. Some sidings are also too short.

These limits meant that Fortescue could only add locomotives if the consist had less ore cars, and on its heavily used railway that would cut total production and hence revenue.

Fortescue also investigated installing a 65km-long stretch of overhead cables on the rail line to Port Hedland to charge the locomotives. However, the gantries to support the cables were large and expensive as they had to be some distance from the rail line for safety reasons and be able to withstand cyclones.

Also, the gantries and overhead lines could not be installed without at times closing the line to Port Hedland, adding massive amounts of lost revenue to the financial burden of the high capital cost.

Still on track?​

didn't the engineers do some study on the Queensland electric trains ( and their 'adventures' when used in North Queensland )

now sure that was designed for passenger transport , but to haul serious freight , flaws would only be magnified

let's see if Twiggy opts for a gas/hybrid ( gas to drive the generators to charge the batteries when needed )

the big issue will be cost effective ( and profitable to maintain )

 

[TimeISmoney]

didn't the engineers do some study on the Queensland electric trains ( and their 'adventures' when used in North Queensland )

now sure that was designed for passenger transport , but to haul serious freight , flaws would only be magnified

let's see if Twiggy opts for a gas/hybrid ( gas to drive the generators to charge the batteries when needed )

the big issue will be cost effective ( and profitable to maintain )

Brisbane City Council, Toll Transport, Veolia, all trialled electric trucks and have gone back to mainly diesel fleets in Brisbane. I've met the guy that runs one of the transport yards for BCC, and they told me the natural gas buses they had were a nightmare and kept on catching on fire.

 

[TimeISmoney]

What part of the decarbonisation are you talking about? Because it seems that the major part of of it eg the e solar panels and electric grid they are building is going really well, so much so that BHP is following suit.

I told you Twiggy was putting FMG in a vulnerable position by spending money on decarbonisation while others don't.

​

BHP scraps renewable energy projects, casting doubt on emissions targets​

Tue 9 Sep

Mining giant BHP has dumped plans to build a major renewable energy project at its flagship iron ore operations, sparking claims the company is slowly walking away from efforts to decarbonise.


BHP estimated the project would cut greenhouse gas emissions from its "inland" iron ore division by 15 per cent by the end of the decade and reduce overall emissions by about 2 per cent.

But internal BHP documents seen by the ABC show the miner binned the plans last year because of budget cuts.

The cancellation of the so-called 'Inland Solar PV' project comes amid what one analyst described as a "cooling" by BHP on broader decarbonisation efforts.

In its recent annual report, the mining colossus revealed it had pared back to $US500 million ($759 million) — from $US4 billion previously — the amount to be spent on "operational decarbonisation" by the end of the decade.

 

[divs4ever]

I told you Twiggy was putting FMG in a vulnerable position by spending money on decarbonisation while others don't.

​

BHP scraps renewable energy projects, casting doubt on emissions targets​

Tue 9 Sep

Mining giant BHP has dumped plans to build a major renewable energy project at its flagship iron ore operations, sparking claims the company is slowly walking away from efforts to decarbonise.


BHP estimated the project would cut greenhouse gas emissions from its "inland" iron ore division by 15 per cent by the end of the decade and reduce overall emissions by about 2 per cent.

But internal BHP documents seen by the ABC show the miner binned the plans last year because of budget cuts.

The cancellation of the so-called 'Inland Solar PV' project comes amid what one analyst described as a "cooling" by BHP on broader decarbonisation efforts.

In its recent annual report, the mining colossus revealed it had pared back to $US500 million ($759 million) — from $US4 billion previously — the amount to be spent on "operational decarbonisation" by the end of the decade.

that will depend on if FMG can deliver cost-effectively ( profitably ) , BHP loves big , grandiose , 'world class ' assets ( which often fail to live up to the 'excitement ' )

( i hold both FMG and BHP )