He like totally changed the outcome of the Royal commission in like 4 questions man.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Politics Should Australia go nuclear?
- Thread starter DidakDelight
- Start date
- Tagged users None
He like totally changed the outcome of the Royal commission in like 4 questions man.
- Sep 30, 2014
- 18,956
- 40,126
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
The Fed libs don't really care about SA so I don't think they'll be bothered to stand in the way. In fact, if it means they can justifiably reduce our over reliance on GST revenue, they'll be all for it.
I think this will get up. Can't wait to hear what Sarah Hanson Young thinks.
I think this will get up. Can't wait to hear what Sarah Hanson Young thinks.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
what 4 questions were those?
bomberclifford
Importer/Exporter
- Sep 21, 2009
- 17,338
- 15,659
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Hopefully her head goes pop..
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
This thread is full of dickheads who don't know what they're talking about. We can't travel outside the earths atmosphere using rocket fuel or build a craft that will pass through the van allen radiation belt thats not nuclear or solar.
We havent even mastered the monorail
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
up to 7 million lives in the next four decades, along with substantial reductions in carbon emissions, were nuclear power to replace fossil fuel usage on a large scale. worth a debate..............
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...o-fossil-fuels-may-save-up-to-7-million-more/
“In the aftermath of the March 2011 accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the future contribution of nuclear power to the global energy supply has become somewhat uncertain. Because nuclear power is an abundant, low-carbon source of base-load power, on balance it could make a large contribution to mitigation of global climate change and air pollution. Using historical production data, we calculate that global nuclear power has prevented about 1.84 million air pollution-related deaths and 64 gigatonnes (Gt) CO2-equivalent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would have resulted from fossil fuel burning. Based on global projection data that take into account the effects of Fukushima, we find that by midcentury, nuclear power could prevent an additional 420,000 to 7.04 million deaths and 80 to 240 GtCO2-eq emissions due to fossil fuels, depending on which fuel it replaces. By contrast, we assess that large-scale expansion of natural gas use would not mitigate the climate problem and would cause far more deaths than expansion of nuclear power.”
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...o-fossil-fuels-may-save-up-to-7-million-more/
“In the aftermath of the March 2011 accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the future contribution of nuclear power to the global energy supply has become somewhat uncertain. Because nuclear power is an abundant, low-carbon source of base-load power, on balance it could make a large contribution to mitigation of global climate change and air pollution. Using historical production data, we calculate that global nuclear power has prevented about 1.84 million air pollution-related deaths and 64 gigatonnes (Gt) CO2-equivalent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that would have resulted from fossil fuel burning. Based on global projection data that take into account the effects of Fukushima, we find that by midcentury, nuclear power could prevent an additional 420,000 to 7.04 million deaths and 80 to 240 GtCO2-eq emissions due to fossil fuels, depending on which fuel it replaces. By contrast, we assess that large-scale expansion of natural gas use would not mitigate the climate problem and would cause far more deaths than expansion of nuclear power.”
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
yep, we shouldn't build 1950s and 1960s reactors without adequate sea walls and without hydrogen vents.
fukushima is a horrendous event that will cost billions but thankfully not one single death despite the magnitude of the disaster. Despite this event and Chernobyl, nuclear power remains the clear safest power generation source.
adding to this, we are now opening our eyes to see it is also one of the cleanest. Coal is widely known for its issue but the solar power and wind power environmental disaster has already become the largest environmental disaster on the planet.
It is so important for all global environmentalists stand up against nimby environmentalists to ensure we uphold the same environmental standards for all power generation sources. The cost of NIMBY environmental policy, like our poorly designed carbon tax, is exporting our pollution to lower regulated places around the world. How is that good for the environment?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/aug/07/china-rare-earth-village-pollution
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mos...er-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html
- Jun 22, 2014
- 11,178
- 9,681
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
To answer the question yes. Will we do it? Probably not.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/N...led-in-Chinas-new-Five-Year-Plan-2303166.html
Nuclear growth revealed in China's new Five-Year Plan
China's operating nuclear generating capacity will double over the next five years under the country's latest Five-Year Plan. The plan also calls for the preparation for construction of inland nuclear power plants and work on a reprocessing plant to start by 2020.
The ruling Communist Party of China's National People's Congress endorsed the draft of 13th Five-Year Plan at its annual session earlier this month. The plan will be officially implemented in the next few months. A summary of the plan lists several targets in the field of nuclear energy.
Firstly, China will complete construction of the four AP1000 units currently under construction at Sanmen in Zhejiang province and at Haiyang in Shandong province. Sanmen unit 1 is expected to be the first AP1000 to begin operating, in September, while Haiyang 1 is expected to start up by the end of the year. Containment tests have already been successfully conducted at both units. All four Chinese AP1000s are scheduled to be in operation by the end of 2017.
The plan also calls for construction of demonstration Hualong One projects at China National Nuclear Corporation's Fuqing plant in Fujian province and China General Nuclear's Fangchenggang plant in Guangxi to be completed by 2020. First concrete for Fuqing 5 was poured last May, while construction on unit 6 began in December. Fuqing 5 and 6 are scheduled to be completed in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Construction of Fangchenggang 3 also began in December, while construction of unit 4 is scheduled to begin later this year. Those two units are also expected to start up in completed in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
The start of construction of a demonstration CAP1400 plant in Shidaowan, Shandong province, is also set to begin under the 13th Five-Year Plan. The CAP1400 is an enlarged version of the AP1000 pressurized water reactor developed from the Westinghouse original by State Nuclear Power technology Corporation with consulting input from the Toshiba-owned company. As one of China's 16 strategic projects under its National Science and Technology Development Plan, the CAP1400 is intended to be deployed in large numbers across the country. The reactor design may also be exported.
Site preparation is already underway for two demonstration CAP1400 units at Huaneng Group's Shidaowan site. The pouring of first concrete is expected to take place soon.
The latest Five-Year Plan also calls for construction of Phase III of the Tianwan plant in Jiangsu province to be accelerated. The State Council gave its approval for Tianwan units 5 and 6 - featuring 1080 MWe ACPR1000 reactors - in December. Tianwan units 1 to 4 are Russian-supplied VVER reactors.
Construction of Tianwan 5 and 6 was originally scheduled to start in early 2011. However, following the March 2011 accident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant, the Chinese government suspended the approval of new nuclear power projects. The Tianwan Phase III units were amongst those suspended.
In October 2012, premier Wen Jiabao announced that China would "steadily return to normal construction" of new nuclear power plants, based on a "steady advance in an orderly manner". The construction of previously approved projects began shortly afterwards.
Officially covering the period 2011-15, China's 12th Five Year Plan called for a "small number" of nuclear projects to be approved each year after full discussion. With only coastal plants being approved, significant rescheduling was made for inland projects at Taohuajiang, Xianning and Pengze, which had previously been expected to start construction before 2015.
The new plan also calls for the start of construction of a new coastal power plant, the location of which is not disclosed. It also says that preparatory work for inland plants will also be carried out.
Under the latest Five-Year Plan, China should have some 58 GWe of nuclear generating capacity in operation by 2020, up from the current capacity of almost 27 GWe. In addition, a further 30 GWe of nuclear capacity will be under construction by 2020.
The 13th Five Year Plan also calls for the construction of a demonstration as well as a large commercial scale reprocessing plant to be accelerated.
China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) and France's Areva signed an agreement in November 2007 to assess the feasibility of setting up an 800 tonne per year reprocessing plant for used fuel in China. This was followed by an industrial agreement for the project in November 2010, while in April 2013 a further agreement was signed setting out the technical specifications for the plant. Then in March 2014 another agreement was signed to continue planning the project and to complete the business case for it. A memorandum of understanding followed, in June 2015, which Areva said "formalizes the end of technical discussions, defines the schedule for commercial negotiations and confirms the willingness of both groups to finalize the negotiations in the shortest possible timeframe."
Last September, CNNC said that it is selecting a site for the facility. Jinta county, north of Jiayuguan in Gansu province, had earlier been touted as a potential site for the complex. It also said construction of the reprocessing facility was expected to start in 2020 and to be completed in 2030.
Researched and written
by World Nuclear News
Nuclear growth revealed in China's new Five-Year Plan
China's operating nuclear generating capacity will double over the next five years under the country's latest Five-Year Plan. The plan also calls for the preparation for construction of inland nuclear power plants and work on a reprocessing plant to start by 2020.
The ruling Communist Party of China's National People's Congress endorsed the draft of 13th Five-Year Plan at its annual session earlier this month. The plan will be officially implemented in the next few months. A summary of the plan lists several targets in the field of nuclear energy.
Firstly, China will complete construction of the four AP1000 units currently under construction at Sanmen in Zhejiang province and at Haiyang in Shandong province. Sanmen unit 1 is expected to be the first AP1000 to begin operating, in September, while Haiyang 1 is expected to start up by the end of the year. Containment tests have already been successfully conducted at both units. All four Chinese AP1000s are scheduled to be in operation by the end of 2017.
The plan also calls for construction of demonstration Hualong One projects at China National Nuclear Corporation's Fuqing plant in Fujian province and China General Nuclear's Fangchenggang plant in Guangxi to be completed by 2020. First concrete for Fuqing 5 was poured last May, while construction on unit 6 began in December. Fuqing 5 and 6 are scheduled to be completed in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Construction of Fangchenggang 3 also began in December, while construction of unit 4 is scheduled to begin later this year. Those two units are also expected to start up in completed in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
The start of construction of a demonstration CAP1400 plant in Shidaowan, Shandong province, is also set to begin under the 13th Five-Year Plan. The CAP1400 is an enlarged version of the AP1000 pressurized water reactor developed from the Westinghouse original by State Nuclear Power technology Corporation with consulting input from the Toshiba-owned company. As one of China's 16 strategic projects under its National Science and Technology Development Plan, the CAP1400 is intended to be deployed in large numbers across the country. The reactor design may also be exported.
Site preparation is already underway for two demonstration CAP1400 units at Huaneng Group's Shidaowan site. The pouring of first concrete is expected to take place soon.
The latest Five-Year Plan also calls for construction of Phase III of the Tianwan plant in Jiangsu province to be accelerated. The State Council gave its approval for Tianwan units 5 and 6 - featuring 1080 MWe ACPR1000 reactors - in December. Tianwan units 1 to 4 are Russian-supplied VVER reactors.
Construction of Tianwan 5 and 6 was originally scheduled to start in early 2011. However, following the March 2011 accident at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant, the Chinese government suspended the approval of new nuclear power projects. The Tianwan Phase III units were amongst those suspended.
In October 2012, premier Wen Jiabao announced that China would "steadily return to normal construction" of new nuclear power plants, based on a "steady advance in an orderly manner". The construction of previously approved projects began shortly afterwards.
Officially covering the period 2011-15, China's 12th Five Year Plan called for a "small number" of nuclear projects to be approved each year after full discussion. With only coastal plants being approved, significant rescheduling was made for inland projects at Taohuajiang, Xianning and Pengze, which had previously been expected to start construction before 2015.
The new plan also calls for the start of construction of a new coastal power plant, the location of which is not disclosed. It also says that preparatory work for inland plants will also be carried out.
Under the latest Five-Year Plan, China should have some 58 GWe of nuclear generating capacity in operation by 2020, up from the current capacity of almost 27 GWe. In addition, a further 30 GWe of nuclear capacity will be under construction by 2020.
The 13th Five Year Plan also calls for the construction of a demonstration as well as a large commercial scale reprocessing plant to be accelerated.
China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) and France's Areva signed an agreement in November 2007 to assess the feasibility of setting up an 800 tonne per year reprocessing plant for used fuel in China. This was followed by an industrial agreement for the project in November 2010, while in April 2013 a further agreement was signed setting out the technical specifications for the plant. Then in March 2014 another agreement was signed to continue planning the project and to complete the business case for it. A memorandum of understanding followed, in June 2015, which Areva said "formalizes the end of technical discussions, defines the schedule for commercial negotiations and confirms the willingness of both groups to finalize the negotiations in the shortest possible timeframe."
Last September, CNNC said that it is selecting a site for the facility. Jinta county, north of Jiayuguan in Gansu province, had earlier been touted as a potential site for the complex. It also said construction of the reprocessing facility was expected to start in 2020 and to be completed in 2030.
Researched and written
by World Nuclear News
I'm an advocate for nuclear power in Australia. It will create jobs, secure a stable income for waste storage, provide an almost CO2 free energy source, and take up a fraction of the space that multiple coal burners would take up for the same power output. Australia is so backwards in many aspects but this is one we should embrace as we have everything to run successful nuclear power plants. We have a stable environment, stable government, stable economy and plenty of uranium and space to utilize it.
We need to transition from coal to Gas in the short term, like we did from oil to coal to facilitate a strong economy, while we focus on investing in renewable energy. Nuclear energy could also be used during this transition to keep the economy rolling and meet emissions targets. We can't allow the greens to go full scale renewable, and we can't allow economists to go full scale nuclear, or keep pushing coal and gas.
I don't know much about this type of technology but what about a Molten Salt Reactors? Saw it on a post on Reddit a week ago.
https://www.kacare.gov.sa/en/FutureEnergy/RenewableEnergy/Pages/default.aspx
Examples in here
Saudi Arabia is a perfect example of a country that is building a strong economy on the back of non renewable energy, but having a plan to transition into renewable energy. What are we doing?
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
yep a strong and sustainable energy policy will introduce a range of energy production solutions. wind for 15-23%, solar has question marks but batteries and a clean source for rare earths will be a game changer, gas for peaking and hydro or nuclear for base load depending on what the jurisdiction has to offer and needs.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 11,652
- 17,649
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Nuke up? Absolutely. A Power Plant? There does need to be a form of clean energy available. The only issue I can think of is where to place it. It's easy to say stick in the desert but it will require a shit load of long term specialist committed workers and just sticking them in the middle of God knows where without supporting industries and a realistic lifestyle will not work.
- Oct 30, 2010
- 5,582
- 4,498
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Power Raid, how much nuclear waste is created in modern stations? compare it to, say, a barrel of oil. how many "barrels of oil" would be created to satisfy all of X's needs per year? X can be any metric you like.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
the logical places for traditional large nuclear power plants is right where our existing coal power stations are due to the power infrastructure (power lines, water). The qualification is you want a twenty kilometre buffer in the case of an incident and not over the top of fault lines.
in practice australia will not build a generation 3 or a generation 3.5 reactor and nor should we. We are better served waiting 10-20 years a focusing on generation 4 reactors (also large but fundamentally different as the use 100% of the U not 0.3% as per gen 3.5) and or small modular reactors.
Generation 4 would be suitable for places like the pilbara (very energy hungry), port pirie (roxby, desal and adelaide).
Small modular reactors are safe for use in suburbs and simply sunk 2m below the surface and can be refueled by simply pulling out a sealed module and replaced with a refueled module in a few hours. The old sealed module is then taken away for reprocessing and fueling. Very clean, very safe and perfect for australian cities and townships.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
a gen 3.5 reactor using 1kg or uranium would produce waste the size of a golf ball.
the average person would require 1.5g of uranium per year if reliant on nuclear power which equates to 100g-150g over a lifetime. multiply this by 6 if total energy consumption (all industry not just personal use) was nuclear meaning over a lifetime we would need 1kg of U each and thus produce a golf ball size of waste in a lifetime.
a gen 4 reactor would reduce this ball to something quite minuscule.
its getting late so I won't research the numbers but from memory a 1Gw gen 3.5 requires 200t of U and requires 1/3 of the rods to be recycled each year meaning 60t are required to refuel. On a coal equivalent you would need 3,000,000t of coal and would generate 7,000,000t of CO2.
Power Raid
We Exist To Win Premierships
very interesting to hear from a scientist
Similar threads
