If the waste from nuclear power was spread evenly over all the land on earth, how bad would the radiation be? Would it be significantly above background levels?

---

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Nuke-power-is-no-certainty-Turnbull/2007/10/22/1192940972499.html

A nuclear-powered future is not a certainty in Australia, federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull says.

Mr Turnbull told reporters in Sydney on Monday that more research into clean energy technologies may show nuclear energy is not the cheapest option and therefore may never be adopted.

But even if it is, it's at least 10 to 15 years away, he said.

"If clean coal turns out to be a cheaper alternative then we may never have nuclear power in Australia," Mr Turnbull said.

Opposition environment spokesman Peter Garrett labelled Mr Turnbull's comments as an election act.

"Mr Turnbull today tried to suggest that nuclear reactors may never be built in Australia under a Liberal government," Mr Garrett said.

"Just hours after the prime minister supported nuclear power in the national televised debate ... Mr Turnbull is suddenly saying nuclear reactors may never be built in Australia.

"Only one thing has changed in the nuclear debate - that is an election is around the corner."

---

Nuclear the cleanest?

Interesting comments from BHP:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/Tradeoffs-needed-for-green-move-Argus/2007/10/26/1192941283843.html

After the meeting, Mr Argus said he believed nuclear power would be introduced in Australia one day, but only after people became more "educated" about it.

"The debate in the northern hemisphere is far more advanced than what it is in the Australian community," he said.

"I think once people see nuclear is the cleanest form of energy then they will move on to the (nuclear) waste debate, and that's where I think we should be concentrating.

It good that Germany is commited and all hope for success to them.

However, I suggest that biofuel will be viable for the rural townships only. In major cities they will remain nuclear. Germany is a population dense country with a townships every 5-10 km. Power distribution is viable there as the domestic structure allows for it. However many solar panels would be require to store enough energy to power say a city like Berlin or Frankfurt?

Having said all that, the EU are commited and actively persueing and innovating renewable energy technologies. The future is bright with them at the helm. Unfortunately, in Australia we do not see such needs for improvements with our reliance on fossil fuels and archaic energy generation.

Of course, my mistake and I stand corrected. Please change bio-fuel to renewable energy (ie: solar, wind etc) on my post as that is what I really meant.

LOL.

 

Electricity is really easy to transport from the rural areas into the cities.

Quote:


Martin Ferguson has been intoxicated with the NP lobby for years. 

He's lying - there hasn't been years of government indecision - this dump was planned all along and the only holdup was the location of the site.  They had 3 choices.

Before he won the election Rudd said we wouldn't have a NP dump in Australia.  There is going to be a lot of anger over this.

If they do go ahead with making us a nuclear tip, then I for one, will never vote Labor again.

Ferguson has always been a self serving union man, who seems enchanted by his courtship at the hands of the nuclear lobby.

The cynic in me has to wonder what dirty linen may come out in the wash?

The geothermal projects  or Uranium mines could provide a good location for a nuclear waste dump. Put the waste underground along with the natural stuff that has a higher activity anyway. What's the problem with that?