Reply to JohnBennetts. Well I fell into the "New Nuclear" trap there, didn't I? The New "Nuclear argument - new nuclear is different from conventional nuclear reactors - therefore it must be safer? Can't have an accident, etc?

Well, anyway there are all sorts of disaster possibilities - especially in the transport and storage of nuclear wastes, and particularly in the recycling and breeder reactor systems.

Sodium cooled nuclear reactors safer? Not necessarily so. http://allthingsnuclear.org/dlochbaum/nuclear-plant-accidents-fermi-unit-1

So ChristinaMac1, what is your solution to producing sufficient base load power to maintain a stable grid, particularly when the renewables are not generating sufficient power to do the job? Remember that both oil and gas produce CO2.

David

I did hear a report on the BBC that a fusion reactor in Europe was
able to maintain the plasma for some minutes.
Now that is a significant step forward.
It is said they can get output 10 times the input power.
That is an ERoEI of 10, or is it ?
Actually by the time you take all the energy used in ancillary equipment
and the maintenance and construction of the system the ERoEI could be a lot lower.

So promising but not soon enough.
So what do we use if not oil, gas & coal ?

ChristinaMac1 posted:

"Well, anyway there are all sorts of disaster possibilities - especially in the transport and storage of nuclear wastes..."

Did ChristinaMac1 link to a list that might support her rhetoric? No, of course not.

They're only "possibilities", after all, ie imagined.

I don't know why I bother to respond.

ChristinaMac1. Back in the dark ages the boilers in steam engine were blowing up, but they overcame those problems. They didn't stop using them. Same goes for nuclear.

David

Mia Pepper has followed a long tradition of anti nuke activists in printing half truths and outright falsehoods.

The RC's finding was "The Commission has found that commercial electricity generation from nuclear fuels is not viable in South Australia under current market rules." given that the market rules effectively ban nuclear, not that "it would not be commercially viable to develop a nuclear power plant in South Australia…" as Ms Pepper lied.

The RC also found that "However, it has found that nuclear energy has the potential to contribute to national emissions abatement after 2030"