Australian Politics Forum

Bowen attacks Dutton as ‘alternative PM from the alt-right’

Brisbane Times
July 17, 2023

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen will denounce Peter Dutton as the “alternative prime minister from the alt-right” in a major speech to an energy summit, which the opposition has condemned as childish, while attacking his support for nuclear power and accusing him of accommodating climate deniers and vaccine sceptics within the party’s ranks.

In an address to the Australian Clean Energy Summit on Tuesday, Bowen will accuse the opposition leader of presiding over a “cabal of climate denial that runs policy in the federal opposition”.

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen will accuse Opposition Leader Peter Dutton of being the “alternative prime minister from the alt-right”.

“In 2023, the alternative government of Australia is replete with climate change deniers,” Bowen will say, according to a draft extract of the speech.

The minister’s attack on Dutton, linking him to extremists, comes after Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney in June charged campaigners against the Voice referendum of spreading misinformation by “importing American-style Trump politics”.

Bowen will accuse Dutton of condoning fringe “alt-right” views within his ranks, highlighting the letter of endorsement he wrote for controversial Liberal Queensland Senator Gerard Rennick who was dumped by party preselectors earlier this month.

RELATED ARTICLE
Gerard Rennick says the committee will write to bank chief executives and ask them to front the inquiry.
Liberal Party
Anti-vax Coalition MP Gerard Rennick dumped
“The man who wants to be considered as the alternative prime minister of Australia strongly endorsed the candidacy of a man who engages daily in blatant conspiracy theory propagation and disinformation when it comes to climate and vaccines,” Bowen will say.

“He is the alternative prime minister from the alt-right.”

The term “alt-right” was originally associated with the resurgence of far-right white nationalist groups during the Trump era, but has since been used by some commentators to refer more generally to extreme right-wing ideologies and the crossover with conspiracy movements, particularly during the pandemic.

Dutton is on leave, but acting Opposition Leader Sussan Ley responded on his behalf, saying Bowen was “more focused on insults than solutions” and was diminishing the character of the Albanese government.

“It is time for Chris Bowen to grow up. It is time for him to take responsibility for the energy crisis that is spinning out of control on his watch and get on with the job,” Ley said.

Sussan Ley called Bowen’s accusations “juvenile” and said the energy crisis was “spinning out of control on his watch”.

“We are committed to strong action on climate change and to net zero and I reject Chris Bowen’s juvenile commentary.”

Bowen will name Coalition MPs Barnaby Joyce, Keith Pitt, Colin Boyce and Nationals Leader David Littleproud as the vanguard of the Coalition’s attack on renewables, but will single out Rennick and South Australian Liberal senator Alex Antic as revellers “in the climate-denying, vaccine-decrying, World Economic Forum-fearing, Putin-loving dark nether regions of the kooky right”.

“The fact that the Coalition is perfectly happy to accommodate these denizens of denial should fill anyone concerned about climate change with dread,” Bowen will say.

“The existence of this bloc in the Liberal National Party is a handbrake on sensible policy from the conservative side of the aisle and an indication that a conservative government, should one be elected, would be even worse than a return to the ten years of delay we so recently emerged from.”

Rennick, who argued in the past that COVID vaccines were unsafe and ineffective and that “climate change is junk science”, said Bowen’s comments were a “slur” and “childish” while Antic said the minister should “try turning his mind to the damage his policies have done to Australians’ power prices”.

Bowen will also use his speech to step up the government’s attack on Dutton’s push for nuclear power to be part of Australia’s energy mix, accusing him of failing to understand how renewables work and deriding nuclear as a “fantasy story”.

Dutton used his budget reply speech last year to call for a debate on nuclear power, and in a speech earlier this month proposed that Australia’s energy demands could be met cost-effectively by building small nuclear reactors on the site of ageing coal-fired power stations.

Dutton goes nuclear with budget attack on energy and appeal to women
Bowen will tell the conference that using nuclear to power Australian homes would be expensive, slow to build, unproven, not flexible, and produces enormous waste.

whiteknight wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:18am:

Dutton goes nuclear with budget attack on energy and appeal to women
Bowen will tell the conference that using nuclear to power Australian homes would be expensive, slow to build, unproven, not flexible, and produces enormous waste.

Much like Dutton himself.

whiteknight wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:18am:

So what if it produces enormous waste?? Why is that lying hypocrite Bowen suddenly pretending to be concerned about that?

Quote:

expensive, slow to build, . . . not flexible

Enormous waste leaves high costs for centuries.

I am not against nuclear power but it is not a panacea for our needs.

We have lots of coastline—off shore wind energy, tide and wave energy too can be harnessed

We have lots of drylands in the N, NW of the country—idea for solar.

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 9:58am:

[quote]

Enormous waste leaves high costs for centuries.

Really? Duh! Then why did you vote for Labor?

Well - what a surprise!

I think we're all more interested in hearing how the bills will come down... alongside how many of these pricks and their families actually hold shares in power provider companies.

Now then - giving the peons temporary relief with a cash grant lasts one bill - NEXT!!

I'll go radical and say resume the bloody lot and tell 'em all to get stuffed.

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 10:00am:

We have lots of drylands in the N, NW of the country—idea for solar.

Yeah. We will see how they ruggedise them against cyclones. ::)

whiteknight wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:18am:

Bowen will tell the conference that using nuclear to power Australian homes would be expensive, slow to build, unproven, not flexible, and produces enormous waste.

So what is the amount of this "enormous waste"?

New designs mean they are producing far less waste.

"The generation of electricity from a typical 1,000-megawatt nuclear power station, which would supply the needs of more than a million people, produces only three cubic metres of vitrified high-level waste per year, if the used fuel is recycled."

https://www.world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-we-do-with-it.aspx

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 3:09pm:

whiteknight wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:18am:

Bowen will tell the conference that using nuclear to power Australian homes would be expensive, slow to build, unproven, not flexible, and produces enormous waste.

Given that it takes that waste thousands of years before it's safe again, what happens when that 3m2 builds up to 300000m2?

How much nuclear fuel is recycled?

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

Given that it takes that waste thousands of years before it's safe again, what happens when that 3m2 builds up to 300000m2?

Cubic metres. ::)

So if it were 300,000 cu metres it would take 100,000 years. And planet earth may not last that long. But it can be recycled.

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

Given that it takes that waste thousands of years before it's safe again, what happens when that 3m2 builds up to 300000m2?

Cubic metres. ::)

So if it were 300,000 cu metres it would take 100,000 years. And planet earth may not last that long. But it can be recycled.

Planet earth definitely won't last that long if idiots keep pushing nuclear . Are you saying it's 100% recyclable?

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:27pm:

Are you saying it's 100% recyclable?

Nope. But it is low level radiation which usually has a short half life.

"The wastes generated at nuclear power plants are rather low in activity and the radionuclides contained therein have a low radiotoxicity and usually a short half-life. "

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull31-4/31404683742.pdf

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

Given that it takes that waste thousands of years before it's safe again, what happens when that 3m2 builds up to 300000m2?

Cubic metres. ::)

So if it were 300,000 cu metres it would take 100,000 years. And planet earth may not last that long. But it can be recycled.

A good visual for this is a shipping container, which is about 30m3. A very large container ship can carry about 20000 TEU so that's about 15 container ships, but we're talking 100k years of waste. Next the retard will hold his pinky to his mouth and say, 1 million years.

Lets not forget, that is total waste and some has a half life of 30 years.

Future designs are also much more efficient at using recycled material so it's just no where near as big an issue as people make out.

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 7:02pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:27pm:

Are you saying it's 100% recyclable?

A half life is still thousands of years.

Quote:

A very large container ship can carry about 20000 TEU so that's about 15 container ships, but we're talking 100k years of waste

And your talking one plant. If everyone in the developed world went nuclear how many ships is that? Will we need bigger oceans for those ships? :D

And let's not forget, currently only about 30% of nuclear waste is recycled. When you account for the 70% that doesn't that 15 ships quickly builds up

Why would anyone even consider a nuclear plant to be in operation for 100000 years?

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:25pm:

A half life is still thousands of years.

For which radioactive isotope?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_radioactive_nuclides_by_half-life

Edit: "The main wastes arising during the operation of a
nuclear power plant are components which are removed
during refuelling or maintenance (mainly activated
solids, e.g. stainless steel containing cobalt-60 and
nickel-63) or operational wastes such as radioactive
liquids, filters, and ion-exchange resins which are con-
taminated with fission products from circuits containing
liquid coolant."

ibid

Cobalt-60 half life 5 years
Nickel-63 half lihe 100 years.

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 9:04pm:

For which radioactive isotope?

Plutonium ... half life of 24 000 yrs

Gordon wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:52pm:

Why would anyone even consider a nuclear plant to be in operation for 100000 years?

vying for the idiot of the year award are you turdie?

Vying? The slimy grub is mounting the podium to get his prize.

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:27pm:

And let's not forget, currently only about 30% of nuclear waste is recycled. When you account for the 70% that doesn't that 15 ships quickly builds up

Ah - so that's what's behind boring Abo rest stop long drops out west.....

"Ere, Errol, don' poo an piss dat creek dere, might git da runny-run and die - give 'im to all da tribe, you know - what dat Ross fullah 'im call dysentery.... use dis little shed 'ere - it even got it's own light in da hole!!"

John Smith wrote on Jul 19^th, 2023 at 6:59am:

Plutonium ... half life of 24 000 yrs

Which plutonium isotope? They last from microseconds onwards.

Plutonium ²³⁹P (the 24,000 year one) amounts of about 60% from the nuclear reactor. You need 95% to make Nuclear bombs and that needs a breeder reactor ::)

"Plutonium containing high quantities of fissile material i.e. Pu-239 in the order of 90-95 %, is known as weapon-grade plutonium. Plutonium containing lower concentrations, in the range of 50-60 % is known as reactor-grade plutonium."

https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/pu-isotope.htm

lee wrote on Jul 19^th, 2023 at 1:22pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 19^th, 2023 at 6:59am:

Plutonium ... half life of 24 000 yrs

Does it matter which one? You don't know what they are going to do in 5 yrs time let alone 50 to 100yrs time and nuclear once it's in will he here to stay.

John Smith wrote on Jul 19^th, 2023 at 5:53pm:

Does it matter which one?

Of course it does. If its half life is a millisecond it's gone before you can blink.

John Smith wrote on Jul 19^th, 2023 at 5:53pm:

You don't know what they are going to do in 5 yrs time let alone 50 to 100yrs time and nuclear once it's in will he here to stay.

And it can be safely vitrified and buried. ::)

whiteknight wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:18am:

Climate denier. What a moronic, mindless formulation.

I am a proud zealotry denier.

Bowen's interpretation of how climate change works is so slow, his attack on Dutton resembles that of someone doing tai chi.

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

Given that it takes that waste thousands of years before it's safe again, what happens when that 3m2 builds up to 300000m2?

Cubic metres. ::)

So if it were 300,000 cu metres it would take 100,000 years. And planet earth may not last that long. But it can be recycled.

Into what? Something that is not radioactive?

freediver wrote on Jun 28^th, 2024 at 1:30pm:

Something that is not radioactive?

Something after it decays is no longer radioactive. ;)

Gordon wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 7:02pm:

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:20pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:

Given that it takes that waste thousands of years before it's safe again, what happens when that 3m2 builds up to 300000m2?

Cubic metres. ::)

So if it were 300,000 cu metres it would take 100,000 years. And planet earth may not last that long. But it can be recycled.

I know, right? Some isotopes have a half life of 30 years.

They're the ones which don't have a half life of 25,000 years, no?

Sure, some nuclear waste will fit in a teeny tiny shipping container - made of lead, covered in salt, buried in ice, and stored for 50,000 years in an electorate that - hopefully, by then -still votes Labor.

You?

Quote:

Sure, some nuclear waste will fit in a teeny tiny shipping container - made of lead, covered in salt, buried in ice, and stored for 50,000 years

that doesn't sound like that much of a concern to me

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl General Discussion >> Federal Politics >> Bowen Attacks Dutton As Alternative PM http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1689632307 Message started by whiteknight on Jul 18^th, 2023 at 8:18am