Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Climate scientists for nuclear (Read 1578 times)
bogarde73
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Anti-Global & Contra Mundum

Posts: 18443
Gender: male
Climate scientists for nuclear
Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:36am
 
The upcoming Paris summit will hopefully reflect the true value of Nuclear.

Here's a nice bit of irony:
James Hansen, the scientist who was first to raise the alarm about climate change, fueling calls to shut down coal-fired power plants, will later this week urge the expansion of nuclear power. In other words, depending on how things work out, utilities that were forced to close down or convert their coal-powered operations because of Hansen's work, could soon find themselves thanking him for encouraging policymakers and regulators to approve plans to build new nuclear plants.
Hansen will issue his call in Paris, during the two-week climate conference that kicks off Monday. The conference is expected to draw some 20,000 attendees, including President Obama and 120 or so other world leaders. . . .

. . . .Joined by several other top climate scientists, Hansen is expected to present research showing that renewables alone cannot realistically meet the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees C, and that a major expansion of nuclear power "is essential to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system." While nuclear power is on the mitigation list for China, the U.S. and India, Hansen will call for more, including the deployment of light-water reactors.
Just as significantly, he and his fellow scientists will challenge environmental leaders to support their position.
As noted in a news release announcing the press conference, the Climate Action Network, which represents major environmental groups, "still insists despite all evidence to the contrary that `nuclear has no role to play in a fully decarbonized power sector.'"
"The anti-nuclear position of these environmental leaders is in fact causing unnecessary and severe harm to the environment and to the future of young people," Hansen and his fellow researchers say in their news announcement.
Of course, Hansen and his colleagues are not alone.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Energy Agency, the UN Sustainable Solutions Network and the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate have all argued for more nuclear energy.
This might surprise some people, but nowadays so is President Obama, who has made climate change a focal point of his second term.
In fact, although it attracted far less attention, the Obama administration hosted an important summit on nuclear energy in early November at which it announced a number of steps it was taking to help sustain and finance nuclear energy, including:
•earmarking $900 million in the Department of Energy's 2016 budget to support commercial nuclear energy;


•making construction of advanced nuclear reactors, small modular reactors and other projects eligible for DOE loan guarantees;


•launching the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN), to accelerate commercialization of the latest nuclear reactor designs by providing outside researchers access to expertise within the DOE;


•providing support to small modular reactor licensing, simulation and control room development for light-water reactors.

The administration's efforts generated praise from, among others, the Nuclear Energy Institute.
The institute said it appreciated the "administration's efforts to spotlight the fact that nuclear energy is key to reducing carbon emissions in the electric sector," adding, "If the U.S. is to substantially reduce carbon emissions, the nation cannot afford to prematurely shut down any more operating nuclear plants because of flawed electricity markets."
That's not mere hyperbole. Amid all of the fawning attention showered on wind and solar energy, nuclear power last year generated about 60 percent of the carbon-free electricity in the U.S.
And if that strikes you as ironic, you might not have been paying attention

http://www.energybiz.com/article/15/11/obamas-nuclear-play


Back to top
 

Know the enemies of a civil society by their public behaviour, by their fraudulent claim to be liberal-progressive, by their propensity to lie and, above all, by their attachment to authoritarianism.
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #1 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am
 
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pantheon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Woke

Posts: 1256
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #2 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:09am
 
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Like the article said renewables alone cannot realistically meet the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees, Australia is no exception.

And public opinion of Nuclear energy has been softening over the years.

Nuclear is the future, Once nuclear fusion is cracked we will have a power source as clean as safe, as stable and environmentally friendly as wind power but with an energy output that would dwarf current coal and nuclear power combined.

The future is Nuclear.
Back to top
 

[b][center]Socialism had been tried on every continent on earth. In light of its results, it's time to question the motives of its advocates.
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #3 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:26am
 
Pantheon wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:09am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Like the article said renewables alone cannot realistically meet the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees, Australia is no exception.

And public opinion of Nuclear energy has been softening over the years.

Nuclear is the future, Once nuclear fusion is cracked we will have a power source as clean as safe, as stable and environmentally friendly as wind power but with an energy output that would dwarf current coal and nuclear power combined.

The future is Nuclear.


Some places are obviously going to suit renewables more than others. It's not as no country can rely 100% on renewable energy.

Fusion technology is still a way from being viable for energy production. I'm not anti-nuclear, but I don't think Australia needs it at this point in time compared to the other options available.

It would require significant costs in setting up and subsides as well.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #4 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:36am
 
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Actually, Australia is one of the best suited to nuclear energy.
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #5 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:46am
 
gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:36am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Actually, Australia is one of the best suited to nuclear energy.


Not in terms of cost vs renewables it isn't
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10982
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #6 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:48am
 
James Hansen I would trust that cockroach as far as I could throw him.
Back to top
 

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
gizmo_2655
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #7 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 11:12am
 
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:46am:
gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:36am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Actually, Australia is one of the best suited to nuclear energy.


Not in terms of cost vs renewables it isn't


As part of a combined power grid, renewables/nuclear instead of renewables/fossil, it certainly is.
Back to top
 

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat
 
IP Logged
 
bogarde73
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Anti-Global & Contra Mundum

Posts: 18443
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #8 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 11:15am
 
Ajax wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:48am:
James Hansen I would trust that cockroach as far as I could throw him.


Maybe it's just another delicious irony or maybe he's always thought this, I don't know.
Back to top
 

Know the enemies of a civil society by their public behaviour, by their fraudulent claim to be liberal-progressive, by their propensity to lie and, above all, by their attachment to authoritarianism.
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #9 - Nov 30th, 2015 at 8:39pm
 
So scientists are suggesting nuclear power to reduce the impact of Climate Change

It stands to reason that anyone who question nuclear power is a CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER??  Shocked Shocked Shocked
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
Prime Minister for Canyons
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #10 - Dec 1st, 2015 at 8:52am
 
Maqqa wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 8:39pm:
So scientists are suggesting nuclear power to reduce the impact of Climate Change

It stands to reason that anyone who question nuclear power is a CLIMATE CHANGE DENIER??  Shocked Shocked Shocked



No they are a whole different order of idiot.
Back to top
 

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 29967
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #11 - Dec 1st, 2015 at 9:42am
 
Pantheon wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:09am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Like the article said renewables alone cannot realistically meet the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees, Australia is no exception.

And public opinion of Nuclear energy has been softening over the years.

Nuclear is the future, Once nuclear fusion is cracked we will have a power source as clean as safe, as stable and environmentally friendly as wind power but with an energy output that would dwarf current coal and nuclear power combined.

The future is Nuclear.


When will that be exactly?

You won't be around to see it.

Meanwhile we have all these nuclear reactors around the world that are either built in high earthquake or Tsunami zones or both.

Although that wasn't the case for Chernobyl.

And little nuclear accidents only affect the local area don't they?

FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT :-

Back to top
 

Fukushima1.jpg (82 KB | 25 )
Fukushima1.jpg

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
Prime Minister for Canyons
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #12 - Dec 1st, 2015 at 9:45am
 
Gnads wrote on Dec 1st, 2015 at 9:42am:
Pantheon wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 10:09am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 30th, 2015 at 9:40am:
There are likely some good candidates for Nuclear energy, Australia however isn't really one. We are probably better off selling the fuel to others and using renewables at home. 


Like the article said renewables alone cannot realistically meet the goal of limiting global warming to 2 degrees, Australia is no exception.

And public opinion of Nuclear energy has been softening over the years.

Nuclear is the future, Once nuclear fusion is cracked we will have a power source as clean as safe, as stable and environmentally friendly as wind power but with an energy output that would dwarf current coal and nuclear power combined.

The future is Nuclear.


When will that be exactly?

You won't be around to see it.

Meanwhile we have all these nuclear reactors around the world that are either built in high earthquake or Tsunami zones or both.

Although that wasn't the case for Chernobyl.

And little nuclear accidents only affect the local area don't they?

FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT :-



MMMM, is that the picture of the spread of the fallout from Fukushima?
Back to top
 

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)
 
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 29967
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #13 - Dec 1st, 2015 at 9:52am
 
Ahhhhh yes ... It's written on the bottom line of my post

IN BLOODY CAPITALS

FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT  Roll Eyes  Tongue
Back to top
 

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
Prime Minister for Canyons
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Climate scientists for nuclear
Reply #14 - Dec 1st, 2015 at 9:56am
 
]Gnads wrote on Dec 1st, 2015 at 9:52am:
Ahhhhh yes ... It's written on the bottom line of my post

IN BLOODY CAPITALS

FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT  Roll Eyes  Tongue



So it bears no resemblance to this photo from the NOAA
http://www.noaa.gov/features/03_protecting/images/Energy_plot_japantsunami.png
Back to top
 

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print