Crankyhawk
Hall of Famer
A brain fart
The Nuclear debate
- Thread starter nut
- Start date
- Tagged users None
You cant talk about nuclear and just focus om economics. You have to also discus the risks. Now the probability of those risks may be extremely small but the impacts are so mind boggling devastating that they must be properly considered. Even if nuclear is cheaper (and my modelling suggest it isnt), then is it truly worth the risk to save a couple of bucks per mwh?
Coal is irrelevant. Gas is only for firming now. You need to compare nuclear with the cost of firmed renewables. And a proper ratio of firming which is quite small.
- Mar 16, 2002
- 23,222
- 14,555
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #30
Of course it’s about economics…
I think this report overestimates the costs of firmed renewables to play it safe. Its much likely to be noticably lower.Most recent completed nuclear plants I can see are Vogtle units 3&4 in the USA. They have a combined capacity of about 2230 MW. They cost US$35 billion.
Plant Vogtle: Not a Star, but a Tragedy for the People of Georgia
"Another energy advisory, Lazard from the US, calculated the levelised cost of nuclear and renewables – which means the average net present cost of electricity generation for a generator over its lifetime. It found that one-megawatt hour from solar power, including back-up storage, costs between $72 to $160 per megawatt hour, while a traditional nuclear plant costs from $220 to $347."
Is nuclear energy feasible in Australia (and how much would it cost)?
Debate has erupted over nuclear energy’s role in Australia’s shift from fossil fuels. Could it work? And why is it so controversial?www.smh.com.au
Also from the SMH link:
"A joint study by the CSIRO and AEMO, the GenCost report, calculated the future cost of energy generation for a range of technologies. It found that solar and wind energy generation would cost between $60 and $100 per megawatt hour by 2030, including back-up power from either batteries, pumped hydro or gas plants. (This figure also includes CSIRO and AEMO-termed “sunk costs” of new transmission lines.)
GenCost forecast that one megawatt hour of power from a small modular reactor in 2030 would cost between $200 and $350 per megawatt hour."
- Mar 16, 2002
- 23,222
- 14,555
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #33
No it’s not … its mathematics..
There is nothing in conservative views that has a caveat on the most viable and cost effective policies…
I do not care how cheap nuclear power is. Its a risk to civilisation. I do not want it built no matter how cheap it is. Thus its not just about economics. To say it is only economics is a very libertarian view to take. Nuclear power requires strong regulation, no wars (if a missile hits a nuclear plant its all over for everyone 100kms around) and no acts of gods like a tsunami (i.e. like the very one that hit japans nuclear power plant).
- Nov 10, 2022
- 13,285
- 10,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Should ships be nuclear powered? Uranium mined in australia transported by conventional powered ship?
Christian right are always anti science. Dutton is just doing what he is told.
CSIRO boss hits back at Dutton over nuclear power research
The CSIRO has rebuked politicians seeking to undermine its research showing nuclear energy would be much more expensive than solar or wind power, after Liberal leader Peter Dutton claimed that research had been "discredited".www.abc.net.au
I find this so disappointing, I get Dutton is trying to appeal to a certain subset, but why does he need to try and discredit places like the CSIRO.
Lots of ships are nuclear powered, the really really expensive military ones (subs and aircraft carriers). The cheap shipping liners are conventionally powered because it's 100's or 1,000's of times cheaper.
- Nov 10, 2022
- 13,285
- 10,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
So nuclear is not emissions free?
Gees media need to properly follow up with questions. Dutton says it doesnt include the cost of transmission so not comparing apples with apples. Problem is, it does include the cost of transmission. Dutton has either just lied or guessed cos he never read the report. Why are our journalists this poor at their job?
A proper follow up question could kill once and for all nuclear in this country.
There are very few journalists. They are all mostly mouthpieces for whoever pays them the most.
Think of the Sky after Dark Lineup;
Paul Murray - started his career with Marty Sheargold and Fifi Box on MMM
Rita Panahi - started her career on SEN
Peta Credlin - LNP staffer
Rowan Dean - ex advertising exec
Andrew Bolt - Uni dropout before taking up a sports writer cadetship at The Age
Yeah this.
Nine years and and scarcely a word about it.
Now they just put the thought bubble out there.
100% agree with the poster(s) saying they need to question them hard on this to expose the fact they have NFI
because the far-right, US style morons of Sky News and the IPA say he must attack science. It shore's up his favourable treatment by that far-right cabal.CSIRO boss hits back at Dutton over nuclear power research
The CSIRO has rebuked politicians seeking to undermine its research showing nuclear energy would be much more expensive than solar or wind power, after Liberal leader Peter Dutton claimed that research had been "discredited".
I find this so disappointing, I get Dutton is trying to appeal to a certain subset, but why does he need to try and discredit places like the CSIRO.
Tony Barry, a former Liberal strategist, former director of the Victorian Liberal Party and a director of the RedBridge Group reckons that Dutton’s nuclear bid is “the longest suicide note in Australian political history”.
Albanese and the ALP are giving the dogwhistler plenty of room to continue making a fool of himself. This is Dutton and the LNP's "negative gearing and franking credits" death spiral.
Albanese and the ALP are giving the dogwhistler plenty of room to continue making a fool of himself. This is Dutton and the LNP's "negative gearing and franking credits" death spiral.
Market operator explains why the lights won’t go out with wind, solar and storage
The federal Coalition insists the lights will go out in transition to wind and solar. AEMO has now released a video explaining why they won’t, following CSIRO’s defence of science.
reneweconomy.com.au
LNP going full bore on this. How many vites csn it afford to lose to get into power .
With power bills coming down across the country, he's (Dutton) going to have to change tack and pretend this all never happened. He's already called to boycott Woolworths, so he can't step foot into that debate.Market operator explains why the lights won’t go out with wind, solar and storage
The federal Coalition insists the lights will go out in transition to wind and solar. AEMO has now released a video explaining why they won’t, following CSIRO’s defence of science.
LNP going full bore on this. How many vites csn it afford to lose to get into power .
The strangest thing about the "nuclear debate" is that there's absolutely nobody in the business world proposing to build a nuclear plant here. At least the gas and coal lobby have miners, power producers and others who employ and earn money here pushing for expansion. But with nuclear, it's just a political party pretending something is viable to justify a political position. No nuclear plant will ever be built, they're just pretending one might, maybe, could be, at some point decades in the future and therefore they're going to scream against renewables.
One of the really challenging arguments in the nuclear debate is that the Australian market is so small the nuclear plant would way too concentrated (unless the mythical smaller plants actually become a reality).
This means that any problem with a single plant and your entire grid stability is threatened. This might be an accident, a fault or simply planned maintenance.
It is not the correct answer for Australia in any way.
Not in anyway.
- Oct 1, 2014
- 5,512
- 11,631
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
The Fukushima reactor is still posing terrible problems. Apparently these are the first drones to have got inside the reactor and survived. I guess it's the radiation, of all places you reckon Japan would have robots capable of working in high radiation environments. Where's Astroboy when you need him?
apnews.com
Images taken deep inside melted Fukushima reactor show damage, but leave many questions unanswered
Images taken by miniature drones from deep inside a badly damaged reactor at the Fukushima nuclear plant show displaced control equipment and misshapen materials.
apnews.com
- Oct 1, 2014
- 5,512
- 11,631
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Another fact free piece from the AFR spruiking nuclear power while trying to appear balanced. Funny that a business focussed publication should ignore the costs of nuclear, and as always doesn't factor in the cost of disposing of nuclear waste for centuries. He does a good spin job of making nuclear sound less risky than renewables though I'm sure the folks around Chernobyl would disagree. The quality of articles in AFR continues to fall, this is a propaganda piece.
Alan Finkel, ex chief scientist and not at all 'anti nuclear' has a much better article in the Guardian.
www.theguardian.com
Alan Finkel, ex chief scientist and not at all 'anti nuclear' has a much better article in the Guardian.
Here’s why there is no nuclear option for Australia to reach net zero | Alan Finkel
Any call to go directly from coal to nuclear is effectively a call to delay decarbonisation of our electricity system by 20 years
- Nov 10, 2022
- 13,285
- 10,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
The liberal PM who would deliver nuclear power isn’t even in parliament yet, probably not born.
We should capture all the energy expended going up these blind alleys
We should capture all the energy expended going up these blind alleys
