Australian Politics Forum - Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables

Captain Nemo

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 10340
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #120 - Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 12:03pm

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:50am:

Communities vent frustration at Coalition's nuclear plan for their towns Shocked

..."sentiments about renewable projects are echoed by farmers in other parts of Australia including Therese Creed, who is a beef cattle producer from Queensland's Callide Valley.

"It's using up and consuming large tracts of agricultural land," Ms Creed said.

"In a country like Australia where we have so much uranium, we have the ability to be self-sufficient in power production rather than outsourcing our power to foreign companies.

"I think it's clearly a choice that nuclear is going to be preferable [to] the move towards renewables if we're trying to reach net zero." ...

Cool

Back to top

The 2025 election could be a shocker.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17669
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #121 - Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 12:32pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Now you are actually denying your claim that AGW-CO2 is a "hoax" , and that fossil pollution is not injurious to health.

And yet you can't show where I have said it. Of course that is easy to answer as I haven't. That makes you a liar and a fraud, but that's repetitious. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Dummy, you said economics is not a science, I agree; as to peak oil, it depends on discoveries of new oil and whether we leave it in the ground or not.
Your lack of logic is egregious; estimates of peak oil are also related to political decisions re transitioning from oil.

You finally got something right. It is all about Political decisions first and foremost. One the political decisions have been made, it makes it clearer on the costs involved. But not the other way around. Roll Eyes

Like renewables and subsidies and their effects on cost of other energy products. Have you come up with that eponymous PM2.5 study by the EPA yet? Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

[I promote a major role for government plannng in the economy, because there is no shortage of resources which woud actually enforce poverty, ie. poverty is a political choice benefitting the wealthy.

You promote? Oh the idiot serving the idiotcracy. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

But obsolete orthodox economists insist a carbon tax will most efficiently engender the transition to a green economy - despite making electricity even more unaffordable for the poor.

And yet you can't even show where the green e;ectricity is cheaper, why is that? Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Too funny; a range of AGW-CO2 projections arrived at by scientific consensus isn't unscientific, even if not absolute like scientific laws of physics;

Ah the consensus. Now what are the physics behind the models, what are the assumptions behind the models, why is neccessary to take the mean of a number of climate models? Only one model can be right, if at all. All taking the mean of a number of wrong models does is to make the closest one an outlier. And if it is not physics it is not climate science. Grin

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

and correlations between fossil use and harm to health ARE based on scientific observation.

And yet you can't show that either. Estimates are guesses, so what is uncertainty range on thes guesses? Is wood a fossil fuel? Is dung a fossil fuel? Try reading about their effects on health. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Not guess work; you ran away from the studies which have shown a positive correlation between poverty and youth crime, BECAUSE you can't grasp the meaning of projections and estimates based on proven correlations.

And you don't know science - Correlation is NOT Causation. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Or - closer to the topic of this thread - estimates of the quantity of pumped hydro storage required, as we approach 100% renewables, estimates which will be firmed-up (pun?) as we approach 100% renewables...despite your low IQ assertion 100% renewables are impossible "because PVs wear out".

So is your assertion that renewables don't wear out? Estimate of pumped hydro? Oh dear. Snowy 2 is running years late amid vast cost overruns, but you have a way to do it. Cheaper and faster? You still haven't shown renewable can be made from renewables. Roll Eyes

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Excess storage of free solar and wind energy means the replacement PVs etc can be manufactured as required, using renewable energy.

Answered above. Reading between the headlines doesn't cut it. Wink

thegreatdivide wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 11:59am:

Nuclear may be required in some countries, but not in Oz......which is not to deny the last unit of elecricity to be added to the Oz grid might be cheaper via an always on nuclear plant than by adding more excess renewables storage (batteries/ puped hydro).

So why do renewables in the first place?

10 Suncables at $30 billion a pop? Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Captain Nemo Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 10340 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables Reply #122 - Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 12:45pm If renewables are so "cheap" ... WHY has the default price of electricity has gone up by 25% in NSW, SA and South East Queensland between 2019 and 2024 and 27% in Victoria? * * https://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/five-common-items-adding-hundreds-to-your-...
Back to top	The 2025 election could be a shocker. IP Logged

Leroy

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 682
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #123 - Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 12:55pm

Captain Nemo wrote on Dec 22^nd, 2024 at 12:45pm:

If renewables are so "cheap" ...

WHY has the default price of electricity has gone up by 25% in NSW, SA and South East Queensland between 2019 and 2024 and 27% in Victoria? *

* https://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/five-common-items-adding-hundreds-to-your-...

Its only gone up 25% because of subsidies, if you were to take the real cost into consideration the rise would have been much more.

Back to top

Every day you wake up is a good day, make the most of it.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49062 At my desk.	Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables Reply #124 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:30pm Renewables and nuclear are very expensive. Reducing GHG emissions is cheap.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46392
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #125 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:34pm

Madness:

Australia’s energy ministers are developing a plan to kickstart the first deliveries of huge liquefied gas shipments into Victoria and NSW, fearing they are out of time and other viable options to avert a domestic gas crisis.

Despite Australia’s position as a top global gas exporter, homes and businesses in the south-east are facing a shortage of the fuel by 2028 unless urgent measures are taken to offset rapidly depleting gas fields in the Bass Strait that have supplied the local market for decades.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/time-is-running-out-victoria-ns...

Back to top

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

IP Logged

Leroy

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 682
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #126 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:38pm

Australia needs to cut the bullshit about coal.

How the eff are we going to cut back on emissions when we export 54% of the worlds exported coal.
We are not burning the coal but we are selling it so others can burn it.

Companies make billions selling our coal, government make millions in royalties and us poor taxpayers have to pay for expensive and unreliable solar and wind power.

Shafted I tell ya, we are all being shafted.

Back to top

Every day you wake up is a good day, make the most of it.

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49062 At my desk.	Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables Reply #127 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:44pm Quote: How the eff are we going to cut back on emissions when we export 54% of the worlds exported coal. That is not generally counted as our emissions.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17669 Gender:	Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables Reply #128 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:45pm freediver wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:30pm: Reducing GHG emissions is cheap. And bad for manufacturing, jobs and many other things.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 49062 At my desk.	Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables Reply #129 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:53pm lee wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:45pm: freediver wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:30pm: Reducing GHG emissions is cheap. And bad for manufacturing, jobs and many other things. No it isn't.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Leroy

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 682
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #130 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:53pm

freediver wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:44pm:

Quote:

How the eff are we going to cut back on emissions when we export 54% of the worlds exported coal.

That is not generally counted as our emissions.

I know, stupid isn't it. If we want to be real about cutting emissions we would not sell 350million tonnes of coal for burning every year would we.

Back to top

Every day you wake up is a good day, make the most of it.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49062
At my desk.

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #131 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 4:16pm

Quote:

I know, stupid isn't it. If we want to be real about cutting emissions we would not sell 350million tonnes of coal for burning every year would we.

We could be really tricky with this. We could put a GHG emissions tax on coal exports, and agree to waive that tax for any country that implements a carbon tax that is at least 50% of what ours is. We could do the same with jet fuel for international flights - charge a GHG emissions tax for the incoming and the outgoing flights, and agree to waive the tax for incoming flights from any country that does the same.

But in terms of emissions accounting, it makes more sense to attribute it to wherever the coal is burned.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17669
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #132 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 5:10pm

freediver wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 3:53pm:

No it isn't.

Logic not your strong suit?

A carbon tax? Increases business costs, which go onto the bottom line, forcing up prices. Even if that carbon tax is somehow distributed to the taxpayers generally, it is a subsidy on their costs. It doesn't make the product cheaper, it merely masks the cost.

And then there is the cost of collection and distribution. Even the GST does not wholly get back to the states.

Or perhaps you have some unexplained reason for thinking that? Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49062
At my desk.

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #133 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 7:24pm

Quote:

Even if that carbon tax is somehow distributed to the taxpayers generally, it is a subsidy on their costs.

Can you explain your logic here? If we substitute a tax on something we don't want taxed, like income, for a tax on something we do want taxed, like GHG emissions, why does it suddenly become a "subsidy on their costs"?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17669
Gender: male

Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #134 - Dec 24^th, 2024 at 7:29pm

freediver wrote on Dec 24^th, 2024 at 7:24pm:

If we substitute a tax on something we don't want taxed, like income, for a tax on something we do want taxed, like GHG emissions, why does it suddenly become a "subsidy on their costs"?

Because the taxpayers are paid so it artificially lowers their cost of electricity. If it artificially lowers a cost it is a subsidy.

But who said anything about WE do want a tax on GHG emissions? For whom exactly are you speaking? Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Who has the better energy plan?
Coalition 9 (56.2%) Labor 5 (31.2%) Don't know 2 (12.5%) Total votes: 16 « Created by: Armchair_Politician on: Dec 13^th, 2024 at 4:44pm »