Alan B.,
WTF are you on about? There is no nuclear power in Iceland!

Though molten salt reactors have great potential, there are still technical problems that need to be overcome before they're suitable for commercial use.

____________________________________________________________________________________

JBowyer,
>Aiden when we get Brown outs and Black outs who will you blame?
IF we ever get brownouts again, we should blame AEMO, as they'd be failing in their duty to prevent them.

As for blackouts, we should blame whoever's responsible, and do whatever we reasonably can to ensure they don't happen again.

One thing's for sure: we should base any blame on the actual cause, not your delusion that there's too little dispatchable generation capacity to ensure a reliable supply.

>We need GIANT brown coal plants
...like a hole in the head!

You complain about the cost of electricity then hypocritically call for something that would make it much more expensive (as well as far more polluting).

JB. My twin goals are carbon-free energy and the lowest energy prices in the world. Clearly, there are vested interests commenting here who have a renewables barrow to push, and if those renewables could produce power for as little as 2 cents or less per KwH. I'd be first to back them!

Whatever the "market" will bear is the woolly thinking of folk who've never done it tough, never stood in a dole queue, let alone queued for a meal in a soup kitchen. Never suffered from heat stroke because the cost of running the now obligatory air conditioner was beyond their budget.

As for Nuclear power, being built in just six months?

Go on Utube Thorium V greens) and listen to the evidence of the contractors who installed it in Iceland. And conventional enriched uranium Adian.

Adian seems to be some sort of green acolyte, here to obfuscate and misinform as he advocates for his renewables. Almost as if he ha some economic skin in this game with phrases like, whatever the market will bear?

And clearly doesn't give a tinker's dam if our manufacturing sector is completely offshored or thousands of cancer suffers die unnecessary deaths as Bismuth 213 is withheld or made ridiculously expensive.

He just doesn't get, we've had a safe working model of MSR technology for over fifty years and all while we endured Three-mile Island meltdown the Chernobyl disaster and the Fukushima incident. All of which would have been prevented if they were MSR! NO QUESTION!

If we de-privatised this industry, we could remove all the vested interests from this debate and just crack with what is proven as the cheapest cleanest safest option. And if that causes some green acolytes to go into nuclear meltdown? The rest of us can learn to live with the outcome.

Adian is not here to contribute to this debate but shut it down if any of us advocate for MSR thorium or nuclear energy.
Alan B.

Alan B.,
I couldn't find any video of that title there. But there are plenty of sources that say Iceland gets practically all (>99.9%) of its power from renewables. Could you have mistaken a small research reactor for a nuclear power station?

By the time thorium MSRs are able to produce power for 2c/kWh, it's likely renewables will be producing power for less.

Yes, it was a small conventional reactor. And built from a standard design, in six months Adian.

As to whether or not it produces power? Don't know. And they have geothermal and Hydro.

Just making the point. if there is a standard design with all the bugs worked out, i.e., the FUI 350 MW?

Then we should just crack on build one run it for around seven years as we make bismuth 213 and cheap power few can match. Then with our prototype fully functional, us it as a template to build dozens as factory built mass-produced models that can be trucked and assembled where they're needed.

And as walk away safe nuclear reactors making the worlds cheapest, cleanest safest energy. And 24/7. Whether the sun shines or the wind blows! And for less than 2 cents per KwH! If you don't believe that? Take it up with Economist, Professor Robert Hargreaves!

[I'd sooner believe Robert Hargreaves, Ivy league Professor and economist, than you and your alleged expertise on matters of economy/price per KwH.]

. Several of them could be tasked as waste burners. And even completely burn weapons-grade plutonium. Unless you'd rather we leave it in the weapons or watch the piles of nuclear waste grow and grow, more and more carbon is added to the atmosphere, even as climate change threatens the human race with extinction a well as all life on planet earth. You want?
Alan B.

The Death of Homo Economicus (Peter Fleming): And your power bill...

… Leaders of industry enjoy a state-funded socialism because they understand that pure capitalism is a mere impossible abstraction that is meant for the masses to toil with, out there beyond the perimeter.”

And how true is his reality. While the Industry socialists get on with making themselves wealthier, (and obscenely wealthy bankers “glee-clubs”, meet in comfortably air conditioned and centrally heated towers), the plebs are divided up into neat little groups of have and have-nots, to argue over a power bill.

Hillary Clinton ain't dead yet.

Alan B.,
Research reactors are much cheaper and simpler than nuclear power stations. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_reactor

Australia already has one in operation at Lucas Heights, and producing medical isotopes is one of its functions - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-pool_Australian_lightwater_reactor

There is NOT a standard design of MSR with all the bugs worked out. The embrittlement problem still hasn't been solved. I've no doubt it will be, but it will take time.

Please understand that I'm not here to shut down honest debate. What I'm here to shut down are lies. Endlessly repeating your claims about MSRs and thorium power won't make them true. There's a good reason why they're not used already: the technology has not been adequately developed yet. Yes, that's partly due to a conspiracy decades ago, but there's no remaining conspiracy.

And your appeal to authority is just another sign of intellectual dishonesty. Robert Hargreaves is not here; I'm arguing with you, not him. Lots of people involved with the development of a technology have optimistic projections of what it will eventually be capable of, and they're not always right. But more importantly, even if the 2c/kWh prediction is correct, it will take decades to get it down to that price. And UIVMM that figure is the baseload generation cost, not the overall generation cost let alone what consumers would actually pay.