Luciferase. That is all very good, but those of us who are pro-nuclear will have to fight tooth and nail to get any Australian government on board. Meantime, I will be putting some of my money into the new IPO of 1414 and their molten silicon energy storage technology.

David

Luciferase, that is good news about the modular system. However it
will be a long time before they supply the US demand and we have to
make some decisions well before that time.
One thing that gets ignored regarding storage systems is that they
have to be recharged. Where do you get the electricity or whatever to
recharge them while at the same time supplying the normal load.
So far the only figure I have seen to overcome that problem requires
the wind & solar capacity to be 12 times the size of the load.
Additionally it has to be spread all over the country with a massive
an increase in the interconnector grid.

That of course becomes an impossible financial barrier.
So we have a massive long term problem but also a difficult short term
problem of keeping the lights on over the next five to ten years.
It is only difficult because the politicians and their pride are involved.

VK3AUU, I'm afraid your IPO is just another pig with its snout in the subsidy trough, another pointless false dawn along the road to nowhere.

That's not to say don't invest, heck, the public purse will ensure you reap a reward like everyone else into renewables. I can't blame you for not looking a gift-horse in the mouth, I myself installed 6 kW paid for largely by the taxpayer.

It's just whether you really want to make a difference, or not. I am one voice. I actually lose friends over my position, voice opinion in media avenues, and financially support organizations that are out there trying to do something constructive about nuclear. To me, it's the greatest issue of our time, and we owe our descendants an honest and realistic attempt try to achieve a solution.

Bazz, I'm not averse to staying with current coal, or HELE, until SMR's dawns over the next decade. Public expenditure on renewables is a complete waste of money on a non-solution to AGW.

Perhaps the political the tide is starting to turn on nuclear?

https://tinyurl.com/y9ob9hvu

Someone above parroted the Amory Lovins line about cost. But the reality is that expensive nuclear power is a particularly American problem, due to their unique regulatory framework that cripples American nuclear. There are countries building nuclear far cheaper than America. Check South Korea!

>“We find that trends in costs have varied significantly in magnitude and in structure by era, country, and experience. In contrast to the rapid cost escalation that characterized nuclear construction in the United States, we find evidence of much milder cost escalation in many countries, including absolute cost declines in some countries and specific eras. Our new findings suggest that there is no inherent cost escalation trend associated with nuclear technology.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421516300106

Dr James Hansen says climate change is too important to bother with unreliable non-baseload wind and solar power, and says that believing in renewables is like believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy. https://bravenewclimate.com/2011/08/05/hansen-energy-kool-aid/ Instead he says the world should build 115 GW of nuclear reactors each year. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/nuclear-power-paves-the-only-viable-path-forward-on-climate-change
He recommends breeder reactors that eat nuclear waste, and promotes this free book by friends at the Science Council for Global Initiatives. http://www.thesciencecouncil.com/prescription-for-the-planet.html

Hooray, someone's singing my song:

https://tinyurl.com/y7jh75xc

Not only is nuclear a necessity on the (non-hydro) main-grids of the world, it is the "only" necessity. A dollar spent on more renewables or fossil-fueled electricity is a dollar wasted that should have been spent on nuclear.

When will pollies begin to grasp this and talk about it, and how can the public be educated? The green dream of renewables is all pervasive with the public believing the storage issue is licked. Finkel is surely culpable for advocating that storage be added to the grid to accommodate renewables when it is ridiculously expensive option that could ever possibly be contemplated and would dash our economy to the rocks. To accept the Australian prohibition of nuclear without utterance or challenge makes him unfit for purpose.