The Nuclear debate

[SaintsSeptember]

The scare campaign by anti-nuclear zealot Dr Margaret Beavis a GP who just happens to be Co Chair of ICAN Australia · International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), has been completely discredited by former ANSTO CEO, Dr Adi Paterson, which is no surprise, and by Mark Schneider (an industry veteran who has worked at 8 nuclear reactors over 20 years), and by epidemiologist, Amy Berrington who is from the Institute of Cancer Research.

Would you not think Berrington may have some genuine insight? Maybe not on this board LOL

Beavis claims the cancers people contract living near reactors are not like typical cancers, as "they blend in with other cancers that happen". Could the link be any more spurious? As Dr Paterson said, "we have all grown up... in low level radiation that is all around us all the time. We have a large community of nuclear medicine specialists who use radiation everyday to diagnose cancers."

I want her to debate it with Dutton, just so we can have "Butthead and Beavis" debate.

 

[Saint]

If you have solar on your roof , ( home or business ) its not going through the meter , so they don't know how much self generated electricity you are using.

But it's probably worth considering the figure in reporting.

So when the AEMO says the grid is providing 50% renewables and 50% fossil fuels, they should maybe add a second statistic which says:
Overall, the power supply in Victoria is 70% renewables and 30% fossil fuels.

It would be fairly easy to estimate the demand being met in household solar.

 

[nut]

It would be fairly easy to estimate the demand being met in household solar.

What isnt visible is what is being self consumed from solar. .. at the moment I’m running the house and exporting zero because the feed in price is negative. The grid wouldn't know how much I’m consuming.

I was an advocate for a turn off your solar day … just to demonstrate the importance of roof top solar, I’m not anymore because it would literally collapse the grid, the loss of solar exports added to the extra consumption would cause a blackout.

 

[peetoo]

That article is a bit disingenuous or simplistic.

You just spent Saturday on a long drive, your EV is down to 20%, you want to charge it up before you go to work tomorrow.
You want to pump at least 30KWH into it.
Its overcast, and winter, your 8KW solar array only averages 4kw for 9 hours. ( It could get much worse ). that's 36KWh
It was cold , your house used 24KWH hour over the 24 hour period.
Lets assume that you used half of that during the day.
12KWH used , 24KWH into the battery.

You need to keep 12KWH to run your house overnight, and leave a bit in reserve , so that leaves 12 for your car.
If that's not enough to get you where you want to go, you're drawing from the grid.

In Melbourne, Winter, 10kW of panel gives an average of 36kWH.
On very overcast or rainy days its very possible it will give less than 10kwh.

If you frequently have long drives, the savings over ice equivalent get covered there

V2L seems to be cost justification for an EV when you don’t drive it that much

 

[QuietB]

The scare campaign by former Greens candidate and anti-nuclear zealot Dr Margaret Beavis a GP, who just happens to be Co Chair of ICAN Australia · International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), has been completely discredited by former ANSTO CEO, Dr Adi Paterson, which is no surprise, and by Mark Schneider (an industry veteran who has worked at 8 nuclear reactors over 20 years), and by epidemiologist, Amy Berrington who is from the Institute of Cancer Research.

Would you not think Berrington may have some genuine insight? Maybe not on this board LOL

Beavis claims the cancers people contract living near reactors are not like typical cancers, as "they blend in with other cancers that happen". Could the link be any more spurious? As Dr Paterson said, "we have all grown up... in low level radiation that is all around us all the time. We have a large community of nuclear medicine specialists who use radiation everyday to diagnose cancers."

Good luck with that public information campaign

 

[Saint]

What isnt visible is what is being self consumed from solar. .. at the moment I’m running the house and exporting zero because the feed in price is negative. The grid wouldn't know how much I’m consuming.

I was an advocate for a turn off your solar day … just to demonstrate the importance of roof top solar, I’m not anymore because it would literally collapse the grid, the loss of solar exports added to the extra consumption would cause a blackout.

It's not visible, but it's easily estimated. They could easily identify which houses are consuming drastically less on sunny days and estimate how much solar they're using.

 

[Sttew]

Good luck with that public information campaign

Albo has already distanced himself from the ALP authorised campaign, saying he is only focused on the economics.

What this scare campaign proves is that the ALP and Greens are peas in a pod.

Also proves Chris Bowen is a dangerous maverick.

 

[nut]

We are wasting so much excess renewables

It's not visible, but it's easily estimated. They could easily identify which houses are consuming drastically less on sunny days and estimate how much solar they're using.

Most new solar installations are over 10kw…. My max out put is about 13-14KW.. even on the worst days I can still produce 10% .. which still covers my household use for 7 hours in the middle of winter.

 

[nut]

Albo has already distanced himself from the ALP authorised campaign, saying he is only focused on the economics.

What this scare campaign proves is that the ALP and Greens are peas in a pod.

Also proves Chris Bowen is a dangerous maverick.

What’s scaring you?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

But it's probably worth considering the figure in reporting.

So when the AEMO says the grid is providing 50% renewables and 50% fossil fuels, they should maybe add a second statistic which says:
Overall, the power supply in Victoria is 70% renewables and 30% fossil fuels.

It would be fairly easy to estimate the demand being met in household solar.

It can pretty easily be estimated by comparing the demand on a sunny day to the demand on a very overcast day, and some people that post data do estimate it.
AEMO are all about the grid, so they don't.

Victoria used around 720GWh of coal electricity in winter, compared to 450-500 in October with most other sources pretty constant. So that would give a good indication.

 

[Saint]

It can pretty easily be estimated by comparing the demand on a sunny day to the demand on a very overcast day, and some people that post data do estimate it.
AEMO are all about the grid, so they don't.

Victoria used around 720GWh of coal electricity in winter, compared to 450-500 in October with most other sources pretty constant. So that would give a good indication.

I think all the pro-nuclear people would be put back in their place a bit if they realised how many houses are so close to self-sufficiency.

 

[QuietB]

Albo has already distanced himself from the ALP authorised campaign, saying he is only focused on the economics.

What this scare campaign proves is that the ALP and Greens are peas in a pod.

Also proves Chris Bowen is a dangerous maverick.

Good luck with that.

In future Australian Politics history Dutton's nuclear brain fart will go down as one of the biggest own goals in history. They will never talk about John Hewson's cake again.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I think all the pro-nuclear people would be put back in their place a bit if they realised how many houses are so close to self-sufficiency.

The biggest industry in Victoria uses around half the Electricity that the S.A. grid has in total. ( Who knows how much and what electricity is used by miners in S.A. ).
It was never about a few homes going close to self sufficiency.

 

[peetoo]

Good luck with that.

In future Australian Politics history Dutton's nuclear brain fart will go down as one of the biggest own goals in history. They will never talk about John Hewson's cake again.

Where are todays Mike willesees?

 

[nut]

I think all the pro-nuclear people would be put back in their place a bit if they realised how many houses are so close to self-sufficiency.

Yep.. and we are about to get wave of affordable EVs onto our market, vehicle to grid making them batteries on wheels.

 

[QuietB]

Where are todays Mike willesees?

There are none - the media is the most partisan (favouring the Liberals - who represent the oligarch class) in history.

 

[Festerz]

The thing I hate most about Dutton's cynical nuclear energy plan is not that it was, as former LNP Federal Resources Minister and current senior LNP Senator Matt Canavan admitted yesterday, a joke', is 'not cost effective' and is just a sidetracking political ploy that the LNP are 'not serious' about implementing.

Nah, the thing I hate most is that it has yet again taken us to this simplistic binary either/or debate on energy and stopping informed and sensible discussion of the biggest issue effecting this plant - global warming - and a facts based intelligent discussion of ALL the long term energy options confronting us as a nation.

Australia, Europe and North America are embracing renewable power generation and transmission at a rate faster than even the most rampant campus greenie ever expected just a couple of decades ago.

But as UK author Ed Conway points out the rapid growth in current and expected solar energy in North America, Europe and Australia only tells one side of the story. The simple thing is VAST majority of the world's solar panels, components of wind turbines, EVs and storage batteries are made in China. And while China has lots of hydro and nuclear and a growing slice of renewables in its power mix, the foundation of Chinese power is COAL. Lots and lots of coal.

And while we all gloat about the huge uptake of renewables in parts of the western world and here in Australia, the cost of meeting that demand is a huge increase in greenhouse emissions in the coal fired plants of China that is sending the world backwards in meeting CO2 targets aimed at slowing down global warming.

It's something green politicians and those smugly plugging their new EVs into their home battery system powered by the solar panel array covering their roofs should think about.

And a reminder that binary either/or debates on anything are rarely reflective of reality.

Conway's twitter thread on this is worth a read:



Better still I like Billy Bob Thornton's oil man character's cynical take on this in the Landman series:

 

[Gavin Excell]

The thing I hate most about Dutton's cynical nuclear energy plan is not that it was, as former LNP Federal Resources Minister and current senior LNP Senator Matt Canavan admitted yesterday, a joke', is 'not cost effective' and is just a sidetracking political ploy that the LNP are 'not serious' about implementing.

Nah, the thing I hate most is that it has yet again taken us to this simplistic binary either/or debate on energy and stopping informed and sensible discussion of the biggest issue effecting this plant - global warming - and a facts based intelligent discussion of ALL the long term energy options confronting us as a nation.

Australia, Europe and North America are embracing renewable power generation and transmission at a rate faster than even the most rampant campus greenie ever expected just a couple of decades ago.

But as UK author Ed Conway points out the rapid growth in current and expected solar energy in North America, Europe and Australia only tells one side of the story. The simple thing is VAST majority of the world's solar panels, components of wind turbines, EVs and storage batteries are made in China. And while China has lots of hydro and nuclear and a growing slice of renewables in its power mix, the foundation of Chinese power is COAL. Lots and lots of coal.

And while we all gloat about the huge uptake of renewables in parts of the western world and here in Australia, the cost of meeting that demand is a huge increase in greenhouse emissions in the coal fired plants of China that is sending the world backwards in meeting CO2 targets aimed at slowing down global warming.

It's something green politicians and those smugly plugging their new EVs into their home battery system powered by the solar panel array covering their roofs should think about.

And a reminder that binary either/or debates on anything are rarely reflective of reality.

Conway's twitter thread on this is worth a read:



Better still I like Billy Bob Thornton's oil man character's cynical take on this in the Landman series:

The Coalition has never been committed to net zero. They've waxed and waned on energy for years and at best been half hearted about it all.

The binary polar positions now as you put it, is exactly the outcome they wanted. Muddy the waters, create uncertainty about the future direction to ensure coal and gas continues. Its quite Ironic that what might bring their plan undone over time, is their God of the free market

 

[Festerz]

The Coalition has never been committed to net zero.

All Dutton and his front bench have is the politics of division - imported directly from Trump HQ.

BTW, this month marks the 50th anniversary of the groundbreaking work that made solar a viable source of renewable energy. It was pioneered at the University of NSW by one of Australia’s unsung heroes, Professor Martin Green.

 

[Carringbush2010]

But as UK author Ed Conway points out the rapid growth in current and expected solar energy in North America, Europe and Australia only tells one side of the story. The simple thing is VAST majority of the world's solar panels, components of wind turbines, EVs and storage batteries are made in China. And while China has lots of hydro and nuclear and a growing slice of renewables in its power mix, the foundation of Chinese power is COAL. Lots and lots of coal.

And this never ever gets talked about in msm, or hardly. It's crickets and tumbleweeds.

TBH I'd fairly speculate that anyone with a modicum of knowledge about renewable energy will know about the high intensity of emissions to 'create' renewable components like wind turbines, batteries, ev's and solar panels.

But shh, let's not talk about that. Coz that'd be an admission that we don't have the technology to scale without emitting huge amounts of co2 to achieve it.

In saying all that, we have to start somewhere and we have and that ship has sailed. So yeah we have to fart and burp to create components that release zero emissions and hope we get to that net zero point in time.

The other options.

- nuclear, too late for aus at least, not to mention how to deal with the waste (admittedly, there's waste with renewables as well) or even its reliability. I'm no expert but how reliable is it.

- The collective world adopts to living a nomdic life style, of course this is way too much for human kind to accept.

 

[QuietB]

And this never ever gets talked about in msm, or hardly. It's crickets and tumbleweeds.

TBH I'd fairly speculate that anyone with a modicum of knowledge about renewable energy will know about the high intensity of emissions to 'create' renewable components like wind turbines, batteries, ev's and solar panels.

But shh, let's not talk about that. Coz that'd be an admission that we don't have the technology to scale without emitting huge amounts of co2 to achieve it.

In saying all that, we have to start somewhere and we have and that ship has sailed. So yeah we have to fart and burp to create components that release zero emissions and hope we get to that net zero point in time.

The other options.

- nuclear, too late for aus at least, not to mention how to deal with the waste (admittedly, there's waste with renewables as well) or even its reliability. I'm no expert but how reliable is it.

- The collective world adopts to living a nomdic life style, of course this is way too much for human kind to accept.

I assume you know that the emissions created to produce renewables are because they use energy from fossil fuels to do it?

 

[Gough]

I assume you know that the emissions created to produce renewables are because they use energy from fossil fuels to do it?

Pretending to be concerned about the carbon footprint of materials used for renewables is the new climate change doesn't exist for the knuckle draggers.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I assume you know that the emissions created to produce renewables are because they use energy from fossil fuels to do it?

The exact actual amount? No, do you?

The fact that it is impossible to create zero emission technology without emitting, yeah I know that, I assume you know that too. For whatever reason it is hardly ever discussed, certainly not reported in msm. Why is that?

Like I said, emitting to create the components that emit zero is necessary, only morons would argue that it isn't. Or we go nuclear, well obviously nuclear is not an option, too late too expensive, or we go back to a nomadic lifestyle. Well that ain't happening.

So, what is your point?

 

[nut]

And while China has lots of hydro and nuclear and a growing slice of renewables in its power mix, the foundation of Chinese power is COAL. Lots and lots of coal.

This sentiment is not reality.
China is closing petrol stations by the thousands..
in China Clean energy generated a record-high 44% of China's electricity in May 2024, pushing coal's share down to a record low of 53%, despite continued growth in …

There is not a country on the planet that has done more for climate change in the last 10 years…
They are rolling out more solar than any other country.

 

[Festerz]

This sentiment is not reality.

Err my post (and the link it reference)d makes reference to the growing shift to renewables in China but the 'reality' is that whilst coal consumption is not rising exponentially like solar - instead it's just grinding higher - mainly because it's starting from a much higher base.

Here's the reality. And data to back it up. As I said, take the time to read the whole thread and the data it references. Do that and it will provide you, as it did me, with a fuller understanding of the whole picture rather than the same old one sided 'pick a team' narrative.