Coalition Policy still Pro Nuclear ?

[pietillidie]

^Nice post, Bruno.

Then there are various economic arguments. Three which come to mind are: (a) the argument that nuclear is actually extremely expensive when the accounting is done correctly (my tip is Tannin will know the details of that); (b) nuclear is a minimally-competitive technology prone to control by megalithic multinationals, while green energy is highly-competitive and decentralised, with all of the downward inflationary forces and social good such high competition entails; and (c) the move to nuclear will simply delay the scale needed for the inevitable move to green technology.

[Tannin]

Thanks for the compliment, PTID. Details? No, but at least a rough overview.

According to pro-nuclear people, nuclear power costs about twice as much as much as fossil fuel thermal power. According to anti-nuclear people, nuclear power costs about three times as much as much as fossil fuel thermal power. There are also people who attempt to claim that it is in fact cost-competitive, but they can only do that by ignoring the capital costs (which are, of course, incredibly high).

So, twice the cost or three times the cost, take your pick.

[Culprit]

GE loves nuclear power.

[Culprit]

All the Liberals need to do is name where they want to put the Power Stations. They won't as the ramifications at the polling booth would be massive. They will push it through when they obtain control of both houses of parliament and dump them in Labour electorates.

[London Dave]

[Culprit]

Hi LD, actually I am suggesting "if" the Liberals obtain control of both houses Australia will have Nuclear Power Stations.

[watt price tully]

[annewilo]

There goes my Palidan -$3.74

There seems to be a knee jerk reaction to anything nuclear now that we have an old power station hit by level 9 earthquake and after shock tsunami.

When all the dust settles I think Japan could lead the way in renewable energy sources. Maybe this is the wake up call we have needed for something to be done with the highest radiation source we have, being the sun, to produce the fuel and energy we need to sustain a heavily reliant society on coal and nuclear solutions.

Throughout Europe they have also turned to nuclear power as there is and will be a huge demand on coal resources that are sure to run out in 75 years.

And those against nuclear, what is your alternative? You poo hoo a carbon tax, you say desal is too expensive but where are the suggestions and advances. We sit here and wait for future generations to resolve a problem that we in the main have caused.

And don't go the Gillard or Abbott route here. This has to be bi-partisan if we are to fix it and make it non political. It's a global issue that starts at home for me.

[Tannin]

Agree, Anne. It's quite stupid, really - the relevance of this event to, say, a nuclear power station in St Albans is pretty small. It does, however, provide a graphic reminder that, with nuclear, any accident has the potential to be a truly massive one with anything up to millions of deaths. There is nothing new in that - we have all known exactly that for decades. The only difference is that we have been reminded of it.

[Tannin]

[Culprit]

Ah Tannin I did Clarify "If", you only read what you want too.

[Culprit]

[annewilo]

[Culprit]

We can't have an alternative fuel sources whilst we have private companies running and owning essential services. A Nuke Power Station owned by another Private company is not about supplying a cost effective service it's about making money.

Nuclear is a global issue? Yes, just like Soccer is the world game.

I am with Mrs Right; I just never knew her middle name was Always.

[annewilo]