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 > Robert Stone and Pandora's Promise > Comments

Robert Stone and Pandora's Promise : Comments

By Noel Wauchope, published 11/10/2013

I found myself disliking the film, for its sins of omission, and manipulative way of discrediting anti nuclear people.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All
I am prepared to bet the wind farm, if all subsidies were removed form nuclear, fossil, and renewable power sources, we would transition to a renewables quite quickly. Then if we were to include a penalty for all forms of harmful emissions and require all to take out full insurance, we would rapidly end up with adequate power, and minimal damage to the environment and climate.

Nuclear power would simply become too expensive and would not survive.
1 The insurance premiums for full cover would be just about kill it, even if there were no other problems.
2 The costs of high level waste disposal would further add to its problems.
3 The costs of decommission the plant at some point in the future would be the last nail in the coffin
4 They actually pay for all the fresh water they use.
5 The huge capitol cost means it takes too long to recover investment and introduces the risk of cheaper forms of power becoming available in the future.

Fossil fuels
Would all require a means of capturing and storing all co2 emissions which would be very expensive even if it is found to be practical.
Would also require more action on all the other emissions´s of pollutants.
More to be spent on cleaner production of fuels and rehabilitating the land after extraction.

Renewables
Geothermal, hydro, wind, solar thermal,solar photovoltaic, Tidal

Are currently close to competitive with fossil fuels and a long way ahead of nuclear when all the costs are taken into account. They do require suitable mix to achieve a reliable supply, for example when wind is at a peek solar is likely to low and vice versa, which means that with renewables it is entirely possible to produce power that is in the end cheaper and just as reliable as any other solution.
Posted by warmair, Saturday, 12 October 2013 11:00:43 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
The green position is nuclear-bad but renewables are not this century going to impact on AGW in to providing base-load needs. Nuclear is the only option. There's a visual making this quite obvious at 1.24 minutes on http://pandoraspromise.com/#trailer.

Let's the debate in Australia begin so we can get the inevitable (nuclear) started. Here's a taster http://www.npr.org/2012/05/04/152026805/is-thorium-a-magic-bullet-for-our-energy-problems
Posted by Luciferase, Saturday, 12 October 2013 11:01:04 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
Peter Lang:
From the link you provided,
"Today, wind turbines and solar panels combined deliver only around 3% of total electricity consumption in Australia, with coal providing 70%, and gas another 20% ."

And the reason for the high percentage of coal ?
Well Howard's subservience to big coal could be one reason. Lack of support for solar thermal for the same reason.
If solar thermal had the support of government , instead of the lip service it got, it could have been the main provider of power by now.
And once the infrastructure is in place it is basically fuelled for free, with no dangerous residue to dispose of.

It all comes back to politics and the donation (bribe) system.

Gas is of course controlled by the oil industry and they have been running the world for decades now as in invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
Posted by Robert LePage, Saturday, 12 October 2013 12:04:29 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
Robert LePage,

>"Well Howard's subservience to big coal could be one reason. Lack of support for solar thermal for the same reason.

If solar thermal had the support of government , instead of the lip service it got, it could have been the main provider of power by now."

Clearly you haven't a clue what you are talking about. The economy needs least cost power. Coal is least cost by a long margin. That is why we use coal. Least cost gives us a stronger economy which in turn means faster improvement in human wellbeing and the environment. This is all so basic it is impossible to have any sensible or productive discussion with people who understand so little.

"Humanity Unbound: How Fossil Fuels Saved Humanity from Nature and Nature from Humanity"
http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/humanity-unbound-how-fossil-fuels-saved-humanity-nature-nature-humanity

"Renewables or nuclear electricity for Australia - the cost"
http://oznucforum.customer.netspace.net.au/TP4PLang.pdf
Posted by Peter Lang, Saturday, 12 October 2013 12:23:59 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
Anyone who quotes from the Cato inst ( i.e. the Koch bros) cannot be taken seriously.
They are of course main drivers in the anti alt energy and pro extreme right movement in the US and no doubt through intermediaries, here also.
*Clearly you haven’t a clue what you are talking about. This is all so basic it is impossible to have any sensible or productive discussion with people who understand so little.*
And you believe in belittling my intelligence instead of refuting my argument with facts.

As for costs of coal;
Federal coal subsidies;
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Federal_coal_subsidies
Energy policy of Australia;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_policy_of_Australia
The truth about energy subsidies;
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/43376.html
The real cost of coal is quickly adding up;
http://sydney.edu.au/news/arts/2228.html?newsstoryid=9323
Origin wins as NSW coal subsidy scandal unwinds
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/origin-wins-as-nsw-coal-subsidy-scandal-unwinds-32814

Then to top it off you are vain enough to give a link to your own paper such as it is.
Posted by Robert LePage, Saturday, 12 October 2013 3:16:45 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
Robert, It would be a great world if renewables could meet our demands. I have no truck with Peter Lang's paper, it seems to have taken a balanced view. It quantifies the problem well and marries to the facts that renewables are far too limited in their ability to completely displace fossil fuels due to intermittency, scalability and the fact there is no way to store large-scale energy. All the sun and wind in the world won't mount these hurdles.

Only nuclear can succeed in displacing fossil fuels on a cost basis, at least, in a time-frame that can mitigate AGW. With renewables we are already hard up against their technical and cost limitations vs fossil-fuel generated power.

IMO, the aim for lifters is clear and achievable, with China, India, Russia and now the US leading the way. IMO, it is the time to jump onto the coat-tails of these endeavours. (Interesting link here about why the US did not take a thorium path earlier rather than the breeder path it did http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbyr7jZOllI )

Let's try to be pleasant in critiquing solutions in order to learn as much as we share of our own understanding. There is a lot we don't know yet.
Posted by Luciferase, Saturday, 12 October 2013 4:17:40 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. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All

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