Forum

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

Poll 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 13th, 2024 at 4:44pm »

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print
Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables (Read 3838 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49062
At my desk.
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #30 - Dec 14th, 2024 at 9:35pm
 
Quote:
The Government mandating no gas stoves?


You are very confused Lee. How did you get from a carbon tax to this?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17652
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #31 - Dec 14th, 2024 at 10:18pm
 
freediver wrote on Dec 14th, 2024 at 9:35pm:
Quote:
The Government mandating no gas stoves?


You are very confused Lee. How did you get from a carbon tax to this?


Because the Government wants to outlaw fossil fuels. They even backtracked when they saw there was a need for gas. However, that decision may not last. The greens are very angry. Did you not know that?

"Secured $1.7 billion in total funding to help homes and businesses get off gas."

"Made it harder for new gas projects to proceed by adding billions in extra costs, helping derail the giant climate-bomb Beetaloo and Barossa gas projects."

"Secured changes to the law so that the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund cannot fund new coal and gas projects."

https://greens.org.au/climate
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 #32 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 9:47am
 
Quote:
Because the Government wants to outlaw fossil fuels.


So you were only pretending to discuss the merits of a carbon tax vs subsidising nuclear and renewables?
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46354
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #33 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 10:35am
 
freediver wrote on Dec 14th, 2024 at 9:25pm:
Quote:
How do homeowners use less electricity?


There are plenty of ways Lee. Do you actually want me to answer your stupid questions for you, or are they rhetorical?

Remember, you cannot eat electricity either. Or sleep on it. Even though it is the simplest and most direct link you can think of between what people want and GHG emissions, there are still several opaque layers between what people actually want and the emissions. For most of what people want, there are many more complex and opaque layers, all of which offer opportunities for individuals, but not governments, to make decisions that reduce GHG emissions. That is why a carbon tax is such a powerful and cheap way to reduce emissions, and why it is universally endorsed as such by economists.


100 years ago
Communism is Soviet power plus the electrification of the whole country - Lenin.

Now
Can't eat electricity, nor sleep on it.



Is the world becoming brighter or dimmer?



Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
tickleandrose
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4013
Gender: female
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #34 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 2:40pm
 
Look, lets just be honest.   In order to have nuclear energy, we need to change the federal law first.  In order for the coalition to do this, it needs to comprehensively win 2 elections in a row, over 8 years, in order to gain a majority in both the upper and the lower house.   

AND

At the same time, ALL the state government need to replicate the same. 

I do not think this had never happened in Australia before.

In addition.

We dont have the talents to run those nulcear power plants.   Running an experimental nuclear plant for medical use is vastly different when running one for power.  We would have to import talents - and thats not even just nuclear scientists, but also architects, engineers, and even specialized brick layers!   You dont really think your plumber neighbour next door can do the plumbing to drain dirty water do you? 

Case study:

The Hinkley C reactor, was projected to be 15 billion pounds in 2015, with expected completion in 2025 (just around 10 years).  And that is in a country already has laws for nulcear reactor,  and talents for building and running a nuclear reactor.  It is now scheduled to complete in 2025 (over 20 years), and expected to cost 47.9 billion pounds - which is around 90 billion Australian dollars.   

SO, in which fantasy / parallel universe, do you believe that Dutton can build 7 nuclear reactors for 300 billion dollars before 2040? 


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Belgarion
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5425
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #35 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 4:58pm
 
tickleandrose wrote on Dec 15th, 2024 at 2:40pm:
Look, lets just be honest.   In order to have nuclear energy, we need to change the federal law first.  In order for the coalition to do this, it needs to comprehensively win 2 elections in a row, over 8 years, in order to gain a majority in both the upper and the lower house.   

AND

At the same time, ALL the state government need to replicate the same. 

I do not think this had never happened in Australia before.

In addition.

We dont have the talents to run those nulcear power plants.   Running an experimental nuclear plant for medical use is vastly different when running one for power.  We would have to import talents - and thats not even just nuclear scientists, but also architects, engineers, and even specialized brick layers!   You dont really think your plumber neighbour next door can do the plumbing to drain dirty water do you? 

Case study:

The Hinkley C reactor, was projected to be 15 billion pounds in 2015, with expected completion in 2025 (just around 10 years).  And that is in a country already has laws for nulcear reactor,  and talents for building and running a nuclear reactor.  It is now scheduled to complete in 2025 (over 20 years), and expected to cost 47.9 billion pounds - which is around 90 billion Australian dollars.   

SO, in which fantasy / parallel universe, do you believe that Dutton can build 7 nuclear reactors for 300 billion dollars before 2040? 




Utterly ridiculous argument. Countries like Armenia, Mexico, Pakistan, South Africa, even Bangladesh, have nuclear power  either operating or in development.  If they can do it we certainly can.  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
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17652
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #36 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 6:19pm
 
freediver wrote on Dec 15th, 2024 at 9:47am:
So you were only pretending to discuss the merits of a carbon tax vs subsidising nuclear and renewables?


You were the one commenting on a carbon tax. And have failed to prove it cheaper for the poor. You were the one suggesting the poor may have better access to cheap electricity. How is that without subsidies which can only increase prices? Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Armchair_Politician
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25964
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #37 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 9:14pm
 
tickleandrose wrote on Dec 15th, 2024 at 2:40pm:
Look, lets just be honest.   In order to have nuclear energy, we need to change the federal law first.  In order for the coalition to do this, it needs to comprehensively win 2 elections in a row, over 8 years, in order to gain a majority in both the upper and the lower house.   

AND

At the same time, ALL the state government need to replicate the same. 

I do not think this had never happened in Australia before.

In addition.

We dont have the talents to run those nulcear power plants.   Running an experimental nuclear plant for medical use is vastly different when running one for power.  We would have to import talents - and thats not even just nuclear scientists, but also architects, engineers, and even specialized brick layers!   You dont really think your plumber neighbour next door can do the plumbing to drain dirty water do you? 

Case study:

The Hinkley C reactor, was projected to be 15 billion pounds in 2015, with expected completion in 2025 (just around 10 years).  And that is in a country already has laws for nulcear reactor,  and talents for building and running a nuclear reactor.  It is now scheduled to complete in 2025 (over 20 years), and expected to cost 47.9 billion pounds - which is around 90 billion Australian dollars.   

SO, in which fantasy / parallel universe, do you believe that Dutton can build 7 nuclear reactors for 300 billion dollars before 2040? 




This is a ridiculous argument. Australia has never operated nuclear submarines, yet we now have sailors and officers operating onboard US nuclear submarines after attending US Navy nuclear submarine schools. By your logic, Australia is incapable of operating such submarines, but I think the officers and sailors from the RAN training onboard US Virginia class submarines would disagree. What we don't know, we can learn from the US and UK. To say that we can't do it because we never have is an absurdly ridiculous argument bordering on the nonsensical.
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 #38 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 9:41pm
 
lee wrote on Dec 15th, 2024 at 6:19pm:
freediver wrote on Dec 15th, 2024 at 9:47am:
So you were only pretending to discuss the merits of a carbon tax vs subsidising nuclear and renewables?


You were the one commenting on a carbon tax.


We were discussing it. Both of us. This is what you posted:

lee wrote on Dec 14th, 2024 at 9:32pm:
freediver wrote on Dec 14th, 2024 at 9:25pm:
lee wrote on Dec 14th, 2024 at 8:22pm:
freediver wrote on Dec 13th, 2024 at 10:07pm:
lee wrote on Dec 13th, 2024 at 7:33pm:
How does a carbon tax, of itself, reduce emissions? Roll Eyes

Because money talks, and BS walks. If you put a price on something was was previously free, people will use it less.

How do homeowners use less electricity?

There are plenty of ways Lee.



Not using air conditioning in what is said to be a climate existential threat? The Government mandating no gas stoves? No wood stoves?


Now I am never quite sure whether your questions are rhetorical or merely incredibly stupid. I even ask you, though I never get a clear answer. Is the problem that you are always talking about something else, but you never think to tell anyone else?

Now, do you actually need me to explain to you how people might use less electricity, or or more importantly, create fewer GHG emissions? Or do you think you can figure that out for yourself?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 15th, 2024 at 9:48pm by freediver »  

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 18490
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #39 - Dec 15th, 2024 at 11:43pm
 
Quote:
Sweden Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Energy Ebba Busch stated today that "she's furious with Germany" for dismantling its nuclear power plants, causing a spike in energy prices in Sweden.

Southern Sweden has record-high energy prices today due to having send electricity to Germany via undersea power cables today.

Cold weather coupled with no wind has driven up the demand in Germany from other sources than wind. EU regulations force Sweden to send that electricity to Germany, driving up prices in southern Sweden today to be nearly 200 times higher than they are in northern Sweden.

A 10-minute shower in southern Sweden costs around USD 5 during today's price spike.


Ebba Busch added that Germany's decision to dismantle its nuclear power plants has also other detrimental effects for Europe:

"I'm furious with the Germans. They have made a decision for their country, which they have the right to make; it's their right to decide. But it has had very serious consequences, also for the EU's competitiveness because we see that German competitiveness has dropped significantly."

She said that Germany's actions have also reduced its ability to help Ukraine.

- “After Russia's invasion of Ukraine, they still chose to dismantle their nuclear power plants... I respect that people can have different opinions about nuclear power plants, but we could have kept it. They are important because they are baseload power plants.

Having access to such baseload power plants would have increased the transmission capacity from Germany to other electricity price areas in Europe, driving down prices for all of us"

https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1867190438941061429

No wind how are those solar panels going in winter with fewer hours of sunlight?





Back to top
 

german_solar.jpg (155 KB | 2 )
german_solar.jpg

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
Armchair_Politician
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25964
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #40 - Dec 16th, 2024 at 5:10am
 
I heard Bowen saying on TV the other day that Dutton's nuclear plan would cause grid overload during peak solar generation times (especially during summer) and force home owners to have their solar panels turned off to stop the grid overloading with nuclear power also providing power. He was shown by an expert just how stupid he really is when the expert point blank shot Bowen down by saying that nuclear power generation can be reduced at such times in order to ensure there is no grid overload (conversely, it can be increased to take up the slack when "renewables" aren't producing enough power). The same cannot be said for solar, as panels need to be turned off to avoid grid overload. Nuclear provides the grid with great flexibility, whereas solar does not as the sun does not always shine! In short, Bowen is a moron who I wouldn't trust to run a piss up in a bar.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20396
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #41 - Dec 16th, 2024 at 8:34am
 
Armchair_Politician wrote on Dec 16th, 2024 at 5:10am:
I heard Bowen saying on TV the other day that Dutton's nuclear plan would cause grid overload during peak solar generation times (especially during summer) and force home owners to have their solar panels turned off to stop the grid overloading with nuclear power also providing power. He was shown by an expert just how stupid he really is when the expert point blank shot Bowen down by saying that nuclear power generation can be reduced at such times in order to ensure there is no grid overload (conversely, it can be increased to take up the slack when "renewables" aren't producing enough power). The same cannot be said for solar, as panels need to be turned off to avoid grid overload. Nuclear provides the grid with great flexibility, whereas solar does not as the sun does not always shine! In short, Bowen is a moron who I wouldn't trust to run a piss up in a bar.


Well you aint no expert are you....Why not post the actual comments from this so called expert mate....Your opinion is not worth crap???

Huh Huh Huh

Quote:
Coalition’s nuclear plan to switch off solar for up to 3 million homes


https://smartenergy.org.au/coalitions-nuclear-plan-to-switch-off-solar-for-up-to...

Quote:
Yes, nuclear power plants can be ramped up and down, but they are generally considered inflexible because of the potential safety issues and thermal stresses that can arise:

Nuclear plants are often operated in baseload mode, which means they run at their maximum capacity whenever they are online. This is done to help meet base-load demand in a grid system and to recoup the large costs of construction.

Nuclear plants can help manage variability in demand or renewable energy output, and can respond to market prices or system operator dispatch. However, ramping up and down the power output of a nuclear plant on a daily or weekly basis can compromise its efficiency


https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-r...
Back to top
 

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46354
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #42 - Dec 16th, 2024 at 8:53am
 
Armchair_Politician wrote on Dec 16th, 2024 at 5:10am:
I heard Bowen saying on TV the other day that Dutton's nuclear plan would cause grid overload during peak solar generation times (especially during summer) and force home owners to have their solar panels turned off to stop the grid overloading with nuclear power also providing power. He was shown by an expert just how stupid he really is when the expert point blank shot Bowen down by saying that nuclear power generation can be reduced at such times in order to ensure there is no grid overload (conversely, it can be increased to take up the slack when "renewables" aren't producing enough power). The same cannot be said for solar, as panels need to be turned off to avoid grid overload. Nuclear provides the grid with great flexibility, whereas solar does not as the sun does not always shine! In short, Bowen is a moron who I wouldn't trust to run a piss up in a bar.



Bowels is blinkered by ideology and will not let his judgement be clouded by common sense.

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: 46354
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #43 - Dec 16th, 2024 at 9:20am
 
Now even the Australian Energy Market Operator has admitted our electricity transition will have to rely on gas for decades. On November 12, Uhlmann quoted Australian Energy Market Operator CEO Daniel Westerman saying “gas would be essential to ensure the reliability of the eastern grid to 2050 and beyond”.

Given likely gas shortages in Australia without a domestic gas reservation policy, Westerman admitted there may be times when there is too little gas during periods of low solar and wind output to keep gas-fired power stations running.

The politics of this have not yet hit home in Canberra: because of engineering difficulties, Australia may never reach a time when it does not need fossil fuel back-up of renewables.

Adi Paterson, former CEO of ANSTO (the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation), says there is too much politics in power system discussions and not enough engineering expertise.

“The Australian east coast power grid is the single biggest machine in the southern hemisphere. The grid is the precision timing signal for hundreds of industries across the country. This links not just to manufacturing but to things like landing aircraft safely and even to pumping sewage,” Dr Paterson says.

“People who use the grid to do precision manufacturing are starting to get the rattles. In fact, South Australia has lost 4000 precision manufacturing engineering jobs but no one will talk about it. Those jobs have gone to the west coast of the US.

“Data centres also depend on precision timing systems in the grid. All sorts of things are wobbling as the grid becomes less stable.”

This is an inevitable function of using inverters to introduce power from wind and solar into the synchronous grid stabilised by spinning turbines.

Dr Paterson believes neither AEMO nor the CSIRO understand the engineering challenges and are yet to consider weather events such as east coast blocking lows that could affect wind and sun for up to 10 days at a time.

He points to the latest GenCost report’s admission that the CSIRO had underestimated the life span of nuclear plants and their average operating capacity, but against all logic had found correcting both had no positive effect on the economics of nuclear.

Dr Paterson points out Gencost “does not actually measure the cost of power at the meter but the cost of generation to the fence. One of its fatal flaws is not measuring the cost of the big new grid needed to make renewables work.”

Interestingly, in considering the wider economic effects of renewables, France – 70 per cent-dependent on nuclear power – is not facing the same industrial downturn as Germany.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17652
Gender: male
Re: Nuclear power to cost almost half ALP renewables
Reply #44 - Dec 16th, 2024 at 11:52am
 
philperth2010 wrote on Dec 16th, 2024 at 8:34am:
Quote:
Coalition’s nuclear plan to switch off solar for up to 3 million homes


https://smartenergy.org.au/coalitions-nuclear-plan-to-switch-off-solar-for-up-to
...



And?

philperth2010 wrote on Dec 16th, 2024 at 8:34am:
Quote:
Yes, nuclear power plants can be ramped up and down, but they are generally considered inflexible because of the potential safety issues and thermal stresses that can arise:

Nuclear plants are often operated in baseload mode, which means they run at their maximum capacity whenever they are online. This is done to help meet base-load demand in a grid system and to recoup the large costs of construction.

Nuclear plants can help manage variability in demand or renewable energy output, and can respond to market prices or system operator dispatch. However, ramping up and down the power output of a nuclear plant on a daily or weekly basis can compromise its efficiency


https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-power-r
...
Posted by: Armchair_Politician  Mark & Quote Quote      



Whereas ramping up and down renewables have no effect? How do you ramp down on undersupply? Oh, that's right renewables don't have efficiency at all. Grin Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Send Topic Print