The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Nuclear power down for the count > Comments

Nuclear power down for the count : Comments

By Jim Green, published 31/1/2019

Renewables accounted for 26.5 percent of global electricity generation in 2017 compared to nuclear power's 10.3 percent.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All
We have around 700 years of coal. And can, if so directed, cook it to release the methane content, which could and should be transmitted as the gas. To #1, eliminate current transmission and distribution losses, around 75% in total. Losses we the consumer pays for! #2, reduce power bills by the same 75%

At some point, we will have no other choice than build a national gas grid pipeline, and use compressed methane as transport fuel, as we can in all current internal combustion engines. And pay for all of it, the gas grid and refill stations etc with the annual 26 billion plus we now fork over to foreign price gouging, tax avoiding, profit repatriating multinationals, for fully imported fuel.

Moreover, with every decade of delay, the construction costs double!

[The Dutch have proved we can grow ready to use Jet fuel from algae. Some oil-rich algae are up to 60% oil and under optimised conditions will double their bodyweight and oil content every 24hours Using just 2% of the water of traditional irrigation.]

Methane will happily power up ceramic fuel cells to produce on demand 24/7 power and free hot water. Moreover, all the costs are upfront, so comparatively speaking, power costs can progressively get cheaper, but particularly with the automation of open pit mining.

Used a transition transport fuel and on farms, reduce transport/farm originated CO2 by much as 40%! And give diesel bills the flick!

That said, for mine, we should be building shipping container sized MSR's and using them as waste burners other nations would pay s annual billions to dispose of their's, and when completely burnt, reduce the half-life to just 300 years while producing a (waste) product eminently suitable as long life space batteries.

A win-win all round, for the environment, the economy and even ameliorate against manmade climate change.

The degassed carbon from cooked coal, possibly a source of highly profitable manmade graphene?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Thursday, 31 January 2019 6:58:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well I don't know what you're so happy about, Jim. Until we figure out much better solutions for storage than are currently available, we'll still need constantly generated baseload power. And that means thermal or hydro, and if hydro was viable it would probably be already implemented, so that just leaves thermal.

So which is better, Jim? Coal or nuclear? I reckon you're so welded to your anti-nuclear position that you'd side with coal. But those of us who have actually studied the physics know that nuclear not only produces less CO2.... it's less radioactive. No, seriously, look it up. It's also a damn sight safer. In fact, it's pretty much a no-brainer unless your personal income or your local region's economy is based on coal-mining...

... Are you getting kick-backs from coal miners, Jim? It would explain a lot.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Thursday, 31 January 2019 7:36:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jim, just a quick question. If renewables are giving cheaper and cheaper electricity why are my bills always increasing?
Another problem is the start of the black outs?
People like you tell me that is the fault of foreigners and coal but frankly I think it is crooks like you mate!
Posted by JBowyer, Thursday, 31 January 2019 7:44:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jim Green thinks that by repeating bollocks often enough that people will believe you.

That there have been 59 connections and 50 disconnections in the past 10 years would tend to indicate that nuclear power is static. However, what the figures hide is that the new reactors being connected are typically twice the size of the older ones, and on top of that have longer life expectancies.

Secondly, while renewables have increased, the wind biomass and solar power is only about 9% the rest comes from hydro which is a limited resource that is unlikely to increase much.

The article that declares that Germany is going to phase out coal is a joke especially considering that Germany is now building new HELE coal power stations to compensate for the Nukes that they have closed.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Friday, 1 February 2019 9:44:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Granted Jim Green speaks truth on the slow slide of nuclear power generation as we know it.

But I feel confident Green, as an Officer and Gentleman, would support the construction of Plutonium Production Reactors for a true Australian Nuclear Weapon Capability.

Australia can easily produce two essentials of nuclear weapons, ie:

- a gun-type nuclear warhead [1] and

- Tomahawk missile delivery system bought from the US, already cleared for use in Collins class submarine torpedo tubes, and Hobart class destroyer vertical launch systems [2]

But bomb grade Plutonium needs a longer lead time (10 years) to develop. It requires a specialised reactor (or 2) and a French built, Israeli Negev-Dimona type reprocessing facility. [3]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_design#Gun-type_assembly_weapon

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobart-class_destroyer#Armament

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel#Negotiation

So I'm confident that Jim Green, as a Patriot stout and true, would support bomb grade nuclear weapon reactors for Australia!

Isn't that right Jim?
Posted by plantagenet, Friday, 1 February 2019 3:47:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think 'friends of humans' rather than 'friends of the earth' is likely to give us a more honest and better outcome.
Posted by runner, Friday, 1 February 2019 4:11:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy