freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2024 at 4:19pm:


As much mining as is required for the concrete, steel, aluminium, glass, copper, rare earth, plastics (ie petrochemicals) to make the units, to construct the transmission and storage networks.

How much did you think?

I don't think you can have a large scale solar panel and wind turbine producing industry powered by solar and wind. It would be like trying fly by gluing big feathers to your arm, and we know what happened to the last guy who tried that. Or powering hydro by pissing on the turbines.

Today's word: scale.

We HAD wind and hydro (creeks and rivers) powering shipping, mills, machinery. The age of sails, for all sorts of things. But then came the steam engine and then the combustion engine. Going back to wind and sails is daft in an industrial age. Why not go the whole hog,  back to candles and horses and treadmills.

John Smith wrote on Jun 26^th, 2024 at 5:50pm:



Wind turbines are old technology, Solar is old technology, Batteries are old technology, Dams are old technology. There are only incremental increases, not the kind of advancement needed.

Frank wrote on Jun 26^th, 2024 at 6:28pm:


And you accuse others of being ideologues...

Poor old Drudge, He couldn't even refute anything. Sort of like a poor man's Guido.

Frank wrote on Jun 26^th, 2024 at 5:39pm:


Looks like you understand the issues as well as the coalition understands the cost of nuclear power.

Frank wrote on Jun 19^th, 2024 at 3:51pm:


That's a relief. Just so.

It's okay, leftards, it's only proposed.

The states, of course, have all said no-go, so that's a relief too. It'll never happen.

Should be a real vote-winner, eh? A proposal.

Good show.

There are so many barriers to that nuclear reality.  At the moment, Australia still has a ban on nuclear energy through The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation act 1999.  And I believe each Australian state also have their own regulations and laws regarding this.   

For any of those nuclear power plant to get to the planning stage, these laws will first have to be repealed.  Otherwise you will struggle to find private investors.   In a project like this, even if the government owes the nuclear power plants, there has to be both public and private investments to make it work.   

In order for those laws to be repealed.  The coalition need to win the next election with a margin that would mean complete annihilation of labor and teal seats, in order to gain majority in the upper and lower house.  AND the same need to be repeated in all the states where the nuclear power plants going to be.    I am not confident that this would happen. 

But, let’s just assume that everything lined up okay, and this is going to happen.  Where are we going to source the talents from?  In Australia, we don’t produce nuclear scientists, or engineers.   We do have a nuclear reactor, but its smaller scale, and produces products for medical use rather than for power.    How are we going to attract talents to work in places like La Trobe valley, with no good educational or recreational facilities for the families?   And which country is willing to transfer those nuclear technology to us?  It’s not something that you can just buy “off the shelf”. 

I think what is really going to happen is that, even if the coalition wins the next election.  It would not have the majority to do any of this.  All our green energy plans will be on hold, filled temporarily by coal or gas.   They will probably start a study… or some thing like a “Australian Nuclear Authority” - to investigate the feasibility of purchasing land around the nuclear sites for future development.  And that would be it for 4 to 8 years.  This would keep the big mining magnates and liberal donors happy.