"Im not anti-nuke in principle (as you are) nor am I pro-nuke. "

Wrong on two points.

Have the debate! What are we doing now? I keep asking questions, most of which you won't answer, and I'm none the better for it.

What on earth is it you want?

And if there is to be some sort of "public discussion", let it be wider than ziggy's agenda. Let it be an economic discussion about how to power Australia, without an emphasis towards one technology.

Ziggy only answered one question -  how many NPPs would he like to build.

That's why the discussion went nowhere after his pronouncement.

Even you have to accept he was given a good run by Howard, and it went nowhere.

So, why is Abbott saying that the nuclear debate will "tear Labor apart"!?

Does he think that his party is 100% united on their pro-nuke stance!?

We'll see, how many supporters the LibLabs lose to the Greens over nukes, shall we!?

In section 13, the Act defines “controlled persons” as:

    * a Commonwealth entity;

     This term is further defined in the legislation and includes:
         o Commonwealth Departments
           (eg Department of Defence, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade);
         o bodies corporate established for a public purpose by or under an Act (eg CSIRO, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation);
         o a company in which a controlling interest is held by the Commonwealth (eg Telstra); and
         o an employee of a person or body covered by any of the above.
    * a Commonwealth contractor;

     Means a person (other than a Commonwealth entity) who is a party to a contract with a Commonwealth entity. Refer to section 11 of the ARPANS Act 1998 for further information.
    * an employee of a Commonwealth contractor; and
    * a person in a prescribed Commonwealth place.

If you don't fit one of these definitions then you may need a licence with one of the state or territory regulators.

http://www.arpansa.gov.au/regulation/applicants/require.cfm#2

My reading is that the ARPANS act only covers commonwealth entities.

In section 13, the Act defines “controlled persons” as:

    * a Commonwealth entity;

     This term is further defined in the legislation and includes:
         o Commonwealth Departments
           (eg Department of Defence, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade);
         o bodies corporate established for a public purpose by or under an Act (eg CSIRO, Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation);
         o a company in which a controlling interest is held by the Commonwealth (eg Telstra); and
         o an employee of a person or body covered by any of the above.
    * a Commonwealth contractor;

     Means a person (other than a Commonwealth entity) who is a party to a contract with a Commonwealth entity. Refer to section 11 of the ARPANS Act 1998 for further information.
    * an employee of a Commonwealth contractor; and
    * a person in a prescribed Commonwealth place.

If you don't fit one of these definitions then you may need a licence with one of the state or territory regulators.

Miss Anne Dryst wrote on Dec 1^st, 2010 at 6:59am:

Jebus, how much credibility are you actually really trying to gain on the internets???

I'm guessing NONE!

I think you    must be the weakest link!   

 

Quote:


She's right. Have a look at the cost of setting up a NP station. $25 billion plus. How many NP stations do we need in each state to supply them. Two, three, four? How long do they last - 20 years?

You're whinging about the cost of the NBN - the cost of nuclear power will far exceed this per state - let alone nationally. For the 25 stations Howard declared we would need - that's a cost of $625 billion nationally for infrastructure with a short life span.

Go look the costs up for yourself before you spruik misinformation.

mantra wrote on Dec 5^th, 2010 at 7:24am:


I think you'd better do some research yourself mantra...
The lifespan of a nuclear power station is a minimum of 40 years....up to 60 years..

The average age of the 435 nuclear power plants that are currently operating worldwide is 25 years and in Western Europe, 75 percent of the plants are in the last half of their operating life, according to the Ifo Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.

If the number of active nuclear power plants is to remain constant, many new reactors will have to be built in the coming years. Given a life expectancy of 40 years, about 40 new plants will be necessary by 2015 -  - in addition to those already planned. Up to 2025, ca. 190 new reactors would have to go on line. With a planning and construction time of 15 to 25 years for a new reactor (estimate by Prognos AG in 2008), it seems difficult that these numbers will be attained.

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1018651.shtml

You are right Gizmo - the life expectancy is about 40 years, but I can't see how that makes so much difference to the argument. 25 years - 40 years - does it really matter in the scheme of things? They still have to be replaced after a relatively short period.

Read my response to Gizmo.