Tallest tower in the world planned for the Outback

Independent News UK ^ | 04 January 2003 | Paul Peachey

[MinuteGal]

Thanks for the photos. Quite impressive, indeed.

Leni

[paul51]

Sounds like a blackout for 200,000 homes waiting to happen

[gitmo]

Grill steaks?

[PAR35]

They are using "outback" in a broad sense. The site listed in the website shown in my post #7 looks to be about 200 miles east of Adelaide and about 300 miles NW of Melbourne.

[Age of Reason]

population drives
both a need for more power,
and innovation

Suffering and privation drive innovation.

[Alouette]

the Sears Tower is still the tallest building in the world

You are correct. They have extended the antenna on top several times to outreach the Malaysian towers. How many more feet above sea level is Kuala Lumpur than Chicago?

[TheOtherOne]

Fri Jan 3, 7:52 AM ET

The world's tallest man-made structure could soon be towering over the Australian outback as part of a plan to capitalize on the global push for greater use of renewable energy, as seen in this undated artists rendering. Australian power company EnviroMission Ltd plans to build a 1,000 meter (3,300 feet) solar tower in the southwest New South Wales state, a structure that would be more than twice the height of Malaysia's Petronas Towers, the world's tallest buildings. Photo by Reuters (Handout)

[ContentiousObjector]

destroying the environment?

It's in the middle of the australian outback, its baked mud.

It's not like they are building it in the middle of Central Park

[theFIRMbss]

>Suffering and privation drive innovation.

I've come to believe
this is why entertainment's
"evil geniuses"

always want to wreck
civilization -- they see
that tribulation

forces greatness out
from struggling people. They miss,
however, the real

other drives: style, grace,
elegance. In a working
civilization

many humans move
to those good imperatives.
Excess, peace, sucess --

these things also drive
innovation. Steve Jobs ain't
working to buy food...

[Willie Green]

about 200 miles east of Adelaide and about 300 miles NW of Melbourne.

Not too far to stretch transmission lines, I suppose.
Still, there'd be less loss if they generated it closer to where they needed to use it.

[aruanan]

You are correct. They have extended the antenna on top several times to outreach the Malaysian towers. How many more feet above sea level is Kuala Lumpur than Chicago?

No. Antennas are not counted in the height of a building, only the superstructure to which the antennas are mounted. The Sears Tower as originally built exceeded the Petronas Towers on superstructure. Also the height is not above sea level but above ground level.

Acccording to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitatat publicized in July 1997 the new rules to judge the height of a high-rise building.

Buildings' features were divided into four categories by
Cat. 1: height to structural or architectural top
Cat. 2: height to highest occupied floor
Cat. 3: height to top of roof
Cat. 4: height to tip of spire or antenna

The Sears Towers superstructure at the outset was higher than the Petronas Towers. The Sears Tower is the tallest building in categories 2 and 3. After 1 World Trade Center came down, the Sears Tower regained the record in Category 4.

[Age of Reason]

You can keep "greatness" and suffering.

[Age of Reason]

Good for you, Henk; I like thinking like that.

[Age of Reason]

My dad would have called this thing a giant dust collector.

Imagine all the Windex.

Of course, they could stop immigration to control population growth and so lessen demand for more power--but that would be too simple.

Anyway, they'll need all those immigrants to keep all that glass clean.

[Orbiter]

Prolly have some Oz version of the yard-mowing robot squeegeeing itself over the surface in a fashion similar to a needle playing over a vinyl record, only going counter-clockwise.