Australian Politics Forum - Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream

philperth2010

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20403
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #165 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:02pm

Radioactive water could be a problem???

Quote:

Nuclear power and water consumption

The Nuclear Energy Institute estimates that one nuclear reactor requires between 1,514L and 2,725L litres of water per MWh. It equates to billions of gallons of water per year, and all this water requires filtering somehow.

https://smartwatermagazine.com/news/membracon/nuclear-power-and-water-consumptio...

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17706
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #166 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:09pm

Have a look at SMR requirements. Water is not absolutely necessary.

SMR's don't.

"Various coolant systems are employed in SMRs, depending on the reactor design and desired operating conditions. The three primary types of coolant systems utilized in SMRs are:

Light Water Coolant Systems
Gas Coolant Systems
Liquid Metal Coolant Systems"

https://small-modular-reactors.org/smr-coolant-systems/

Back to top

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41952

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #167 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:24pm

lee wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:35pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:00pm:

That is 200MW which is created by green means, Lee.

Providing the weather works.

The weather always works, Lee. Under what rock do you live? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Quote:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:00pm:

Why do you concentrate continually on the negatives?

Because we need RELIABLE electricity. Weather dependant renewables are NOT. Roll Eyes

Which is why weather dependent renewables is only part of the story. If the wind doesn't blow, the sun shines, if the sun doesn't shine, then water from the pumped hydro works, if the pumped hydro doesn't work the generated hydrogen works. Which is why I said they complement one another, Lee. You seem to think if the wind does not blow, the world stops. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Quote:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:00pm:

No, I am basing my comments on facts, facts you don't like.

Which facts? That renewables are not weather dependant? Roll Eyes

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:00pm:

All will complement each other, Lee.

So if you have a wind drought for 7 days and overcast conditions not being moved because there is no wind, so little solar energy, what is your back plan? The green hydrogen won't work under those conditions at all. Roll Eyes

"Climate influence on compound solar and wind droughts in Australia"

"We find that compound solar and wind droughts occur most frequently in winter, affecting at least five significant energy-producing regions simultaneously on 10% of days. The associated weather systems vary by season and by drought type, although widespread cloud cover and anticyclonic circulation patterns are common features. Indices of major climate modes are not strong predictors of grid-wide droughts, and are typically within one standard deviation of the mean during seasons with the most widespread events. However, the spatial imprints of the teleconnections display strong regional variations, with drought frequencies varying by more than ten days per season between positive and negative phases of climate modes in some regions."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41612-023-00507-y

Oh, dearie, dearie, me, there are other means than just wind or the sun to generate electricity. Have you ever been to Whyalla? No, I didn't think so. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41952

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #168 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:25pm

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:36pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:32pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 5:09pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:56pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:39pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:

Belgarion wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:10pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 1:11pm:

lee wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 12:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14^th, 2024 at 9:44pm:

None of those is operational as yet, Lee.

What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand? And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes

A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee. You seem to think 70 years is a long time. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674

What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass. You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years. Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion? Really? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Little waste is generated

Nuclear fuel is very energy dense, so very little of it is required to produce immense amounts of electricity – especially when compared to other energy sources. As a result, a correspondingly small amount of waste is produced. On average, the waste from a reactor supplying a person’s electricity needs for a year would be about the size of a brick. Only 5 grams of this is high-level waste – about the same weight as a sheet of paper.

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. In comparison, a 1,000-megawatt coal-fired power station produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of ash and more than 6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, every year.

https://world-nuclear.org/nuclear-essentials/what-is-nuclear-waste-and-what-do-w...

So, Soren, are you volunteering to store this nuclear waste in your home? Really? Oh, dearie, dearie, me. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

A very moronic question from a very moronic, spineless, vain idiot.

Do you store the waste products of your life in your home, cockwomble? No.

In your head, sure. But not in your home.

I expected nothing less from a coward like you, Soren. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

And, of course, I expect nothing more from you, moronic, spineless, vain deficit-riddled old fool.

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46562
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #169 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:28pm

Mr Dutton and the Coalition also came under fire on Friday from the nation’s top science body, the CSIRO, for criticism made about the organisation’s costing of various energy sources.

"At the moment, that report that was released, it doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables. I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep our prices down,” he told Channel 9.

“All I’m saying is let’s have a fair comparison, instead of a skewed one, and that’s why I was critical of that particular report, not of the CSIRO in general, and I think it was a fair point to make.”

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46562
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #170 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:28pm

Mr Dutton and the Coalition also came under fire on Friday from the nation’s top science body, the CSIRO, for criticism made about the organisation’s costing of various energy sources.

"At the moment, that report that was released, it doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables. I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep our prices down,” he told Channel 9.

“All I’m saying is let’s have a fair comparison, instead of a skewed one, and that’s why I was critical of that particular report, not of the CSIRO in general, and I think it was a fair point to make.”

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 46562 Gender:	Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream Reply #171 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:31pm Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:25pm: https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img673/4087/gIlzsx.jpg 🤣🤪 Degenerate old biddy, you. Look what the Army did to you, decrepit old duffer. It turned you into a pouting, frowning hag in your drooling old age. And you are proud of it!
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49091 At my desk.	Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream Reply #172 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:33pm Lee do you know what half life means?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41952

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #173 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:33pm

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:28pm:

Mr Dutton and the Coalition also came under fire on Friday from the nation’s top science body, the CSIRO, for criticism made about the organisation’s costing of various energy sources.
"At the moment, that report that was released, it doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables. I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep our prices down,” he told Channel 9.

“All I’m saying is let’s have a fair comparison, instead of a skewed one, and that’s why I was critical of that particular report, not of the CSIRO in general, and I think it was a fair point to make.”

Oh, dearie, dearie, me, he was the one that made the criticism. What a fool both he and yourself are, Soren. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46562
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #174 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:38pm

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:33pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 8:28pm:

Mr Dutton and the Coalition also came under fire on Friday from the nation’s top science body, the CSIRO, for criticism made about the organisation’s costing of various energy sources.
"At the moment, that report that was released, it doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables. I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep our prices down,” he told Channel 9.

“All I’m saying is let’s have a fair comparison, instead of a skewed one, and that’s why I was critical of that particular report, not of the CSIRO in general, and I think it was a fair point to make.”

Oh, dearie, dearie, me, he was the one that made the criticism. What a fool both he and yourself are, Soren. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

You do not understand even simple hand signals, silly old duffer, let alone text right before your swivelling, unfocused eyes.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Belgarion

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5429
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #175 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 9:10pm

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:

Belgarion wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:10pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 1:11pm:

lee wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 12:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14^th, 2024 at 9:44pm:

None of those is operational as yet, Lee.

What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand? And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes

A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee. You seem to think 70 years is a long time. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674

What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass. You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years. Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion? Really? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

You obviously missed the bit about 96 % of the spent fuel being recyclable and the remainder being vitrified, thus rendering it safe for long term storage. Roll Eyes

Back to top

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18529
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #176 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 9:54pm

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:

What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass. You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years. Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion? Really? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Uranium 238 has a half life of 4.5 billion years. After 9 billion years it will decay leaving 25%.

Uranium is radioactive before it's mined there is no problem with it while it's in the ground.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41952

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #177 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 10:05pm

Belgarion wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 9:10pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:

Belgarion wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:10pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 1:11pm:

lee wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 12:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 14^th, 2024 at 9:44pm:

None of those is operational as yet, Lee.

What part of operational 2025 didn't you understand? And you still can't provide a source for reliable energy. Grin

Don't you think 70 years after nuclear tests, we have that data? How long do you think? 1,000 years? Roll Eyes

A figure of 24,000 years has been mentioned as the half life of Uranium waste. I reckon that would be a fair number to work on, Lee. You seem to think 70 years is a long time. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Watch and learn....

https://www.tiktok.com/@theradguyglows/video/7302016199993445674

What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass. You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years. Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion? Really? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

You obviously missed the bit about 96 % of the spent fuel being recyclable and the remainder being vitrified, thus rendering it safe for long term storage. Roll Eyes

I doubt it, the vitification process does nothing to remove radioactivity. Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Brian Ross

Gold Member

Online

Representative of me

Posts: 41952

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #178 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 10:08pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 9:54pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:

What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass. You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years. Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion? Really? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Uranium 238 has a half life of 4.5 billion years. After 9 billion years it will decay leaving 25%.

Uranium is radioactive before it's mined there is no problem with it while it's in the ground.

So, are you prepared to move to near a Uranium mine and work underground, Baron? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Back to top

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour. Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 18529
Gender: male

Re: Coalition's 10 Year Nuclear Claim Is A Dream
Reply #179 - Mar 15^th, 2024 at 10:17pm

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 10:08pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 9:54pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 4:28pm:

What he doesn't mention is that the nuclear waste is still radioactive, even if encased in glass. You still have to store it for it's life, which is over 24,000 years. Are you going to guarantee it during that period as safe, Belgarion? Really? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

Uranium 238 has a half life of 4.5 billion years. After 9 billion years it will decay leaving 25%.

Uranium is radioactive before it's mined there is no problem with it while it's in the ground.

So, are you prepared to move to near a Uranium mine and work underground, Baron? Tsk, tsk, tsk... Roll Eyes

I wouldn't be scared like the bedwetters in this forum Bwhine Roll Eyes

.

Gamma radiation is harder to protect against.

Quote:

Radiation protection

Almost any material can act as a shield from gamma or x-rays if used in sufficient amounts.

For example, a practical shield in a fallout shelter with ten halving-thicknesses of packed dirt, which is roughly 115 cm (3 ft 9 in), reduces gamma rays to 1/1024 of their original intensity (i.e. 2−10).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_protection#:~:text=A%20quantity%20known%...

We bury humans deeper than that.

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged