The Nuclear debate
- Thread starter nut
- Start date
- Tagged users None
A diversion
Click bait
Black Diamond
Sleight of Hand
A diffusion
- Oct 1, 2014
- 5,512
- 11,631
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
California, the sixth largest economy in the world has managed 100% renewables for 17 out of the last 18 days.
reneweconomy.com.au
We simply don't need nuclear energy here. It is very expensive, has terrible risks and there is currently no solution to the problem of disposing of dangerous radioactive waste. I really can't understand why Dutton has made such a big deal about it. The numbers don't stack up.
California extends 100 pct renewables streak to 17 out of last 18 days
California extends its run of reaching a peak of more than 100 per cent renewables to 17 out of the last 18 days.
reneweconomy.com.au
- Nov 10, 2022
- 13,285
- 10,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Dutton should stick to the immigration refugee FUD.
Like when they lambasted the Gillard govt for letting it run out of control but did everything they could in parliament to make it hard to resolve it…with patsy Green support
Maybe the teals should not only entrench their seats, but go after green seats too?
I like to think the electorate is smarter now though
Like when they lambasted the Gillard govt for letting it run out of control but did everything they could in parliament to make it hard to resolve it…with patsy Green support
Maybe the teals should not only entrench their seats, but go after green seats too?
I like to think the electorate is smarter now though
- Oct 1, 2014
- 5,512
- 11,631
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
I wasn't sure where to post this, there was no thread that really suited it. Hydrogen resources are a factor in the nuclear debate so here it is. A number of Australian firms are starting to drill for 'natural' hydrogen both here and the US
www.hydrogeninsight.com
www.hydrogeninsight.com
For those who don't know, 'natural' or gold hydrogen often occurs in association with traditional fossil fuel deposits, though it can be created in other geological ways. For decades it was believed hydrogen didn't accumulate underground as it is a small, slippery molecule. This turned out to be wrong. Natural H2 was discovered while drilling a water well in Bourakébougou, Mali in 1987 and by 2012 it was used as an energy source. Estimates of reserves are pretty foggy and it's not clear whether it will live up to the hype. Time will tell.
Australian company will start drilling for natural hydrogen in the US this year | Hydrogen Insight
HyTerra has suspended trading of its shares ahead of a $4m fundraise
Australia's first well tests for natural H2 begin as Gold Hydrogen seeks insights on its underground discoveries | Hydrogen Insight
Start-up estimates its block of land could have 1.3 million tonnes of hydrogen accumulated under the surface
For those who don't know, 'natural' or gold hydrogen often occurs in association with traditional fossil fuel deposits, though it can be created in other geological ways. For decades it was believed hydrogen didn't accumulate underground as it is a small, slippery molecule. This turned out to be wrong. Natural H2 was discovered while drilling a water well in Bourakébougou, Mali in 1987 and by 2012 it was used as an energy source. Estimates of reserves are pretty foggy and it's not clear whether it will live up to the hype. Time will tell.
Upgrayedd
A Vote for Clive is a Vote for Justice
It's not only the cost to build, but we literally have no nuclear energy industry, its starting from scratch, So ignore the 370 Billion dollar estimate, It's much higher. The figure of 300-400 billion is just to build and start, nothing to do with basically no established industry
it's cost is higher then wind/Solar, We ignore other alternatives like tidal which would be amazing for places like north queensland, North West Australia and the NT
it's just a "whataboutism" There is a debate to be had, that's fine, but to launch it as policy is insane, Just say "Hey we want a look into if we could do this", yeah fine, or "We should make baby steps in the industry incase" yeah fine
proposing it? Batshit insane
it's cost is higher then wind/Solar, We ignore other alternatives like tidal which would be amazing for places like north queensland, North West Australia and the NT
it's just a "whataboutism" There is a debate to be had, that's fine, but to launch it as policy is insane, Just say "Hey we want a look into if we could do this", yeah fine, or "We should make baby steps in the industry incase" yeah fine
proposing it? Batshit insane
did you miss the Dick Smith debacle.California, the sixth largest economy in the world has managed 100% renewables for 17 out of the last 18 days.
We simply don't need nuclear energy here. It is very expensive, has terrible risks and there is currently no solution to the problem of disposing of dangerous radioactive waste. I really can't understand why Dutton has made such a big deal about it. The numbers don't stack up.California extends 100 pct renewables streak to 17 out of last 18 days
California extends its run of reaching a peak of more than 100 per cent renewables to 17 out of the last 18 days.
Smith made a claim, which was wrong, for fact checked, got upset, got on Sky news
Then tried to rephrase it and still got it wrong.
We fact checked Dick Smith on whether a country can run entirely on renewables. Here's what we found
Entrepreneur Dick Smith says no country has ever been able to run on renewables, labelling the idea "impossible". What do the experts say?
www.google.com
All in all, Sky News backed another loser (topic)
- Aug 16, 2015
- 12,329
- 21,343
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
What seems to be lost in any talk of nuclear and the costs to set up is, the amount the French, Chinese or American company will charge in order to get a return on investment for funding the project.
- Aug 16, 2015
- 12,329
- 21,343
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
Australia is the worlds largest exporter of gas, yet we pay one of the highest prices in the world, politicians and lobbyists constantly use the high price of gas to push for the opening of more gas fields, which is then shipped overseas.
So when I hear anyone say nuclear wil be cheap, I think of the above and think it’s just another con
So when I hear anyone say nuclear wil be cheap, I think of the above and think it’s just another con
Australian gas is 87% foreign owned as well.
Young people pay more revenue from HECS than the government receives in Petroleum Resource Rent Tax.
It is beyond a con - it is a national disgrace.
- Aug 16, 2015
- 12,329
- 21,343
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Arsenal
I work in the Power industry, we are Hong Kong owned, the same company owns 3/4 of the Vic electricity grid, all profits go offshore and guess what, they don’t pay tax.
Great job and place to work though but people would be shocked at how old some of the stuff is, nuclear would be no different, foreign owned and run for max profit.
Nationals threaten to tear up wind and solar contracts as nuclear misinformation swings polls
Updated: Nationals threaten to tear up wind and solar contracts as the push against renewables and for nuclear power gains traction in polls.
reneweconomy.com.au
I can't believe this is the hill the LNP want to die on.
- Nov 10, 2022
- 13,285
- 10,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Nationals threaten to tear up wind and solar contracts as nuclear misinformation swings polls
Updated: Nationals threaten to tear up wind and solar contracts as the push against renewables and for nuclear power gains traction in polls.
I can't believe this is the hill the LNP want to die on.
Well they can’t run on competence
- Nov 10, 2022
- 13,285
- 10,723
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Coalition energy policy is to not have one, but pretend they do (or ar working on one) yet the greens combine and vote with them cos politics
CSIRO puts cost of new nuclear plant at $8.6bn as Coalition stalls on policy details
Report finds nuclear energy more expensive than renewable alternatives and calculates costs for large-scale reactors for first time
Dutton is flogging the nuclear dead horse because:
- He realises the electorate largely wants to go away from fossil fuels.
- He needs a way to show they have a plan for that
- He wants to keep the votes of people who hate the greens.
There is a 5th reason and it is the main reason - the gas and coal lobby dictate all Liberal and National Party policy.
Not at all - they will fully well know it is all too expensive.
But they are banking upon it being a good wedge / election winning issue for them.
Yep.
Pretend to have a plan to go nuclear.
Then after a year or so - "soz it costs too much, gotta stick with fossil fuels now, my bad"
- Mar 16, 2002
- 23,222
- 14,555
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #74
No they’ll blame the states
It is not even the cost, they will simply pretend to do nuclear for 10 years or so - grifting the whole time to their hearts content - and then blame the whole thing failing on the woke nimby's.
It will cost billions and the entire body of work at the end will have less content than Barnaby Joyce's water envoy text message.
