Also in a country where they are not paying their tradies $180k a year.
The Nuclear debate
- Thread starter nut
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Feb 18, 2017
- 4,454
- 5,979
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
AUKUS was all the Coalition
"Oh but Labor could have opposed"
LABOR HATES AUSTRALIA, OPPOSES SECURITY DEAL
Labor loses election
"Oh but Labor could have opposed"
LABOR HATES AUSTRALIA, OPPOSES SECURITY DEAL
Labor loses election
lol Labor are really just Liberal Lite.
- Nov 10, 2022
- 9,447
- 7,566
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Liberal not lazy incompetents mor like
This is the neoliberal reality - 43.40 same applies to Australia - “He knows to have a shot at power in this country, you have to do what you're told.”
Last edited:
I'm surprised the Liberal Party are backing in nuclear
Just seems a very hard sell and despite Murdoch cheerleaders, one the public will find hard to embrace when they start revealing sites
Just seems a very hard sell and despite Murdoch cheerleaders, one the public will find hard to embrace when they start revealing sites
There is an article in Renew about pumped hydro and Mr Turnball's company that is involved in it. The main reason I posted is because of the last paragraph
"....Turnbull has said on repeated occasions that Coalition leader Peter Dutton’s obsessions with nuclear is “bonkers”, as it makes no economic sense, and no engineering sense since nuclear is not a technology that can “firm” renewables, as claimed by its advocates.
He related a story when, as prime minister, he had invited National MPs into his office to talk to them about nuclear, and go through the numbers. The audience included Barnaby Joyce, Keith Pitt, and George Christensen, and Bridget McKenzie.
After the meeting, Turnbull said, McKenzie stayed in his office and told him: “I wouldn’t bother them with numbers … it’s a religion.” And, that, Turnbull says, is the main problem."
reneweconomy.com.au
"....Turnbull has said on repeated occasions that Coalition leader Peter Dutton’s obsessions with nuclear is “bonkers”, as it makes no economic sense, and no engineering sense since nuclear is not a technology that can “firm” renewables, as claimed by its advocates.
He related a story when, as prime minister, he had invited National MPs into his office to talk to them about nuclear, and go through the numbers. The audience included Barnaby Joyce, Keith Pitt, and George Christensen, and Bridget McKenzie.
After the meeting, Turnbull said, McKenzie stayed in his office and told him: “I wouldn’t bother them with numbers … it’s a religion.” And, that, Turnbull says, is the main problem."
Turnbull says CIS won’t work for long duration storage, nuclear support is “religion” for Coalition
Former PM turned aspiring pumped hydro developer calls for changes to the Capacity Investment Scheme, arguing long duration storage needs a separate category with looser time constraints.
reneweconomy.com.au
There is an article in Renew about pumped hydro and Mr Turnball's company that is involved in it. The main reason I posted is because of the last paragraph
"....Turnbull has said on repeated occasions that Coalition leader Peter Dutton’s obsessions with nuclear is “bonkers”, as it makes no economic sense, and no engineering sense since nuclear is not a technology that can “firm” renewables, as claimed by its advocates.
He related a story when, as prime minister, he had invited National MPs into his office to talk to them about nuclear, and go through the numbers. The audience included Barnaby Joyce, Keith Pitt, and George Christensen, and Bridget McKenzie.
After the meeting, Turnbull said, McKenzie stayed in his office and told him: “I wouldn’t bother them with numbers … it’s a religion.” And, that, Turnbull says, is the main problem."
Turnbull says CIS won’t work for long duration storage, nuclear support is “religion” for Coalition
Former PM turned aspiring pumped hydro developer calls for changes to the Capacity Investment Scheme, arguing long duration storage needs a separate category with looser time constraints.
They are talking to a portion of the population who don't care about facts and figures.
Mediawatch have a look at the nuclear debate. Who would have thought that News corp are nothing but shills? These are the same folks that spruiked ineffective Ivermectin, dangerous HCQ for Covid and encouraged you not to wear masks. They lied about all those.
www.abc.net.au
Has a go at Carbon Capture, which at this point in time resembles pixie dust.
Ep 16 - Nuclear Fantasy - Media Watch
Coalition media backers rubbish a CSIRO report that says renewables will still be cheaper than large-scale nuclear power.
www.abc.net.au
- Jul 13, 2015
- 37,234
- 41,579
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
If they are saying they will use old coal reactor sites maybe the long game is saying it doesnt work and then to turn the old coal reactors back on.
Though the costs being thrown around are less than Snowy 2 which doesnt generate new electricity, it just recycles it during off-peak times. For $13 billion and still rising. Not to mention no actual date of completion.
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
Are there any Labor supporters who believe we should consider nuclear power to supplement other power sources? Or is this just a politically / ideologically driven debate, i.e., if you vote Labor you are against nuclear power?
From my reading Nuclear power is expensive, but it is clean, lasts longer and leaves a much smaller footprint than solar and wind turbines. According to information from the World Nuclear Association, Australia is one of five G20 nations with no operating nuclear power plants, alongside Indonesia, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Turkey. But when you look closely on the 4 other countries there is a different story.
Italy banned nuclear power after Chernobyl, but in 2023 Italy's parliament reversed a decades-long nuclear ban, allowing the government to include nuclear power in the national energy mix to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels.
Germany shut down its last nuclear reactor in 2023 but could only do so because it buys so much power from France. France is the biggest exporter of power in Europe and 67% of its power is nuclear.
Turkey also banned nuclear power following Chernobyl, but plans to restart the nuclear power industry are a key aspect of the country's aim for economic growth, and it aims to cut back its vulnerable reliance on Russian gas for electricity.
Indonesia has committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2060 and this includes nuclear power.
In March 2024 Saudi Arabia announced plans to establish a civil nuclear power industry.
So that just leaves Australia...
From my reading Nuclear power is expensive, but it is clean, lasts longer and leaves a much smaller footprint than solar and wind turbines. According to information from the World Nuclear Association, Australia is one of five G20 nations with no operating nuclear power plants, alongside Indonesia, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Turkey. But when you look closely on the 4 other countries there is a different story.
Italy banned nuclear power after Chernobyl, but in 2023 Italy's parliament reversed a decades-long nuclear ban, allowing the government to include nuclear power in the national energy mix to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels.
Germany shut down its last nuclear reactor in 2023 but could only do so because it buys so much power from France. France is the biggest exporter of power in Europe and 67% of its power is nuclear.
Turkey also banned nuclear power following Chernobyl, but plans to restart the nuclear power industry are a key aspect of the country's aim for economic growth, and it aims to cut back its vulnerable reliance on Russian gas for electricity.
Indonesia has committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2060 and this includes nuclear power.
In March 2024 Saudi Arabia announced plans to establish a civil nuclear power industry.
So that just leaves Australia...
- Nov 10, 2022
- 9,447
- 7,566
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
How deliverabl is it? Can it be switched on and off quickly?
Let’s not forget what comes from the sun is a form of nuclear energy, and is 24/7 around the globe on a daily basis
Nuclear is not a viable solution.
1 - It is too expensive.
Liberals claim they can build one for $15B. The first problem with that is they can't. The second problem is you need to build two of them (shutdowns, maintenance, etc. - and this ignores that WA is not even connected to the East Coast) So even if they can build them for $15B each it is minimum $30B + WA (where nuclear makes less than zero sense).
2 - You have to add the cost of building a nuclear industry. Give the the anti-intellectual commitment of the Liberals I have no idea how they would even achieve this. But given the anti-intellectual commitment of the Liberals and their general incompetence they would probably just build it anyway.
3 - You have to add the cost of dealing with the waste. Australia cannot even manage basic recycling. Politically this is almost impossible.
4 - You have to deal with the politics. States decide and the Feds and the States do not get on at the best of times. Currently we have 5 Labor state governments and one Liberal government (Taz) who already has energy security from renewables. It is close to politically impossible. The LNP in Queensland have already said they will not support it. It is difficult to see a state like Victoria ever supporting it.
5 - Given the cost of the above nuclear can never be price competitive unless it is hugely subsidised - ie. more public debt.
5 - There is the small issue of time. There is no way to achieve all of the above (it will take way over a decade just to resolve the politics) before the coal fired power stations shit themselves forever.
It is simply not a viable option. It cannot be done.
Sttew
Brownlow Medallist
Hmmm. Massive hurdles. It's a pity...
Hmmm. No answers as usual. Also a pity.....
- Mar 16, 2002
- 21,987
- 13,724
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #117
Snowy 2 On track for 2028 ….
It’ll store extremely cheap renewables that is currently being wasted.
And there is also a thing called rain that comes from the sky. It’s generally regarded as free.
How is the Reactor the UK is building at Hinkley point going? Has it hit 40billion pounds yet?
It’s a complete disaster and will
Lock the Pomms into high energy costs for decades…
Hinkley Point C nuclear power station - Wikipedia
- Jul 13, 2015
- 37,234
- 41,579
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Snowy 2 On track for 2028 ….
It’ll store extremely cheap renewables that is currently being wasted.
And there is also a thing called rain that comes from the sky. It’s generally regarded as free.
How is the Reactor the UK is building at Hinkley point going? Has it hit 40billion pounds yet?
It’s a complete disaster and will
Lock the Pomms into high energy costs for decades…
Hinkley Point C nuclear power station - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
"On track"... it was meant to be done in 2022 and cost $2b to $3b. Now they claim its only 4 years away and maybe $13b.
The original Snowy scheme project which was significantly bigger and with far poorer technology was built on time and on budget.
It's hard to consider the policy in any good faith
It's clearly a mechanism to delay renewables and keep coal in the picture past 2030
- Mar 16, 2002
- 21,987
- 13,724
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #121
So just to confirm what you are saying;
1/ Liberals cannot be trusted to deliver on budget or on time? It is their project after all.
2/ Neoliberal economics fails again.
Noted
- Jul 13, 2015
- 37,234
- 41,579
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
What are Labor doing to turn things around? They've had a few years now and its gotten far worse under their watch.
What Labor projects can you think of where it didnt end up massively over budget and massively over time?
Its all governments. Its what they do now. Hand over fistloads of money to everyone because it makes everyone happy - except taxpayers who have to pay for it. But we dont count.
Yeah, and Im sure the unions get nothing out of it... with lollypop holders earning $120k a year...
Everyone sucks at the government teat. Its not just consultants or unions. They are all stealing from us.
Private sector being more efficient is a myth from the early 90s when there was horrific waste in the public service but endless reforms have changed that (particularly for service delivery). I was in organisations being outsourced around 93/94 and you could cut 60%of the workforce and still deliver- outsourcing was a key driver to achieve that. But by the late 90s, in house òptions were consistently competitive or winning tenders but not given the work because industry must be cheaper.
On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
- Mar 16, 2002
- 21,987
- 13,724
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #125
But you said that the original Snowy was done better?
