It's not unions that are the trouble: it's the people running (ruining) them. A bit like governments, really.

98% SB agree that Labor luminaries are totally ignorant on nuclear energy and the abundance of uranium and thorium in Oz! And I add, by deliberate design as we hurtle toward bankrupting power prices exceeding 45 cents PKWH.

When with thorium and MSR technology it could be as low or lower than 1 cent PKWH. And all but free if we but allowed ourselves to become a repository for the nuclear waste of the world. As such earn annual millions for a product, we can use in MSR technology where it is just mostly unspent fuel! (90 to 95%) and the final waste product, just 5-10% with a half-life of just 300 years. A product that we can use in long life space batteries?

Their plan is to rollout battery backed renewables and dot the landscape with eyesore poles, wires and transmission lines. For which there will need to be massive land resumption! And all the above at taxpayer expense. And costing billions that would pay for many multiples of MSR thorium and or MSR waste burners and a massive energy surplus we could export to anywhere economically, using undersea, graphene cored cables. And earn much more than we ever did with coal (annual trillions?) and at prices that never ever go down but go up.

But a no can do as long as we have the dismally ignorant bird brains running the country into the ground and toward another Great Depression and a manufacturing sector limping to anywhere else with competitive energy prices and sane administrations!

Sitting on hands waiting for things to get well by themselves, not any part of a credible response, when what we need is really big ideas and polies not too timid to roll them out, Thorium reactors, surplus energy exports big time, rapid rail and the drought-proofing of OZ! TBC.
Alan B.

If it is true that "96% recommend immediate re-introduction of national service" then this suggests it is an unrepresentative sample and should not be taken seriously. Likewise with the 98% unaware that nuclear power is an expensive option: something they'd know if they really were paying close attention to the UK.

Uranium is as rare as expensive platinum, then needs enrichment to extract U235 from U238 and U239, given only U235 is fissile.

Thorium is four times more abundant and as common as lead. Costs about the same. The refined metal can be used as is without enrichment, but after spending around a fortnight in the blanket of a reactor. Where it absorbs neutrons to become fissile U233.

And suitable as a fuel in a molten salt (lithium/fluoride/thorium reactor) LFTR. And the fuel is continually reprocessed in the adjacent plant to continue to be useable in said MSR technology. Ditto nuclear waste and weapons grade plutonium.

The final waste product from MSR thorium is eminently suitable as long-life space batteries. One of the decay products is miracle cancer cure, the alpha particle, bismuth 213. And would seem to have produced remission in some very nasty death sentence cancers, including stage four ovarian cancers.

Have seen before and 66 minutes after, scans of a cancer riddled liver. After treatment with bismuth 213 a liver showing three tumor was completely clear in just 66 minutes with no apparent damage to surrounding healthy tissues.

If we rolled out thorium reactors along with microgrids we would all but eliminate the 75% transmission and distribution losses. Losses the mug consumer pays for.

My model for the rollout is reliant on government funded and facilitated tendering local regional and rural co-ops. Co-ops that would be allowed to compete for the consumer energy dollar and export contracts. This would ensure two things, low prices and employee owner returns that were vastly superior to wages/salaries and decided by them without needing to arbitrate or strike or the need of any union involvement!

Cling wrap thin underlay under roadways would replace all eyesore, poles, wires and transmission lines or the need to resume any private land. Unless it was for essential roadworks!

The upside of bismuth213 is a huge regional and rural, unending, massive medical tourism and overfull motels and hotels! there are simply no real downsides, albeit, many anti-nuclear bigrade, imaginary or deliberately invented one?
Alan B.

Cling wrap thin underlay Graphene should be substituted for, < cling wrap thin underlays. > I seem to be getting some unwanted editing from somewhere.

Graphene is a super conductor and is 200 times stronger than steel. This would also come with the added benefit of dramatically reduced road maintenance. TBC.
Alan B.

99% agreed the reintroduction of slavery was a good idea.
99% wanted a cut to the price of 'Premium' petrol, as the Roller doesn't run well on 'Standard'.

The rubbish put out by the likes of this bloke, that small business is somehow the philanthropic "Mother Teresa" of the Australian economy is not borne out by the facts on income, living standards and taxation. With a benign taxation system favouring business, the average small business owner in Australia nets in excess of $110,000 p.a. (2018). Stop the belly aching, and get on with it.

Paul is right, we need to focus on the things that matter to the overwhelming bulk of Australians. And that isn't giving big tax breaks to folks who by and large pay SFA tax?

Tax reform should lower the taxes of those who pay most of it and force the avoiders to at least pay some tax. And that is done by Jettisoning current tax practice and replacing that with an unavoidable flat tax of 15% above a generous tax-free threshold!

Then there is the cost of energy and climate change. Both of which are addressed with, MSR thorium, nuclear energy. which is safer than coal, vastly cheaper than coal and carbon free to boot! With far less toxic waste than coal polluting the environment! TBC
Alan B.

On the topic of nuclear energy, there are two types, uranium and thorium. Uranium powers solid fuel conventional nuclear. The rods are hollow, and the fuel is inserted inside as small ceramic bullets. The rods are then lowered or raised to control the reaction by electron magnets. Which need continuous guaranteed power to avoid a meltdown. They need constant monitoring by alert expert technicians and the fuel rods need to be relocated every 18 months or so and completely replaced every 4.5 years after on using around 5-10% of the available energy component of the uranium fuel with the rest becoming nuclear waste with a half-life of thousands of years. Now, the longer the half-life the less radioactive the substance. And nuclear waste decays with age to become in around thirty years mostly plutonium that can then be used again as nuclear fuel or burnt immediately in MSR technology where it is, mostly unspent fuel!

Molten salt Reactors, (MSR) burn thorium as their preferred fuel and Australia has around 40% of the world's known reserves in both thorium and uranium. Solid fuel reactors operate up to 300 atmospheres and require a reactor vessel 7 inches thick and a reinforced concrete containment building to contain a hydrogen/oxygen explosion, if a crack occurs in the reactor vessel or heat transfer pipes.

MSR thorium on the other hand, operates at ambient atmospheric pressure and fluoride salt does not boil below 14C! does not need all the expensive reactor vessel or containment building.

If for any reason there is loss of power, the molten salt self-drains into purpose-built tanks where no reaction is possible. Old mine workings/rail tunnels would be suitable for MSR thorium and could be secured fairly easily. TBC.
Alan B.

We could with the political will, convert all current Collins class subs to nuclear power. And done with MSR thorium replacing the diesels in the engine room. Then, replace the SMR MSR every four years or so and do the reprocessing of the fuel/reactor vessel etc., onshore.

The heat would heat seawater that would drive the alternators and a tried and proven steam venturi drive system that would make these things all but fly underwater.

Torpedoes could be replaced by underwater capable long-range rockets that are in use elsewhere today.

Effective shielding would ensure these reactors were less radioactive than a banana.

And the venturi drive would produce speeds that would ensure they would hardly ever be caught by pursuing destroyers.

Even then stern mounted rockets could ensure pursuit ended very abruptly!

Conventional metallurgical treatment of the reactor metal parts would protect them from corrosion. And replacing the heat transfer salt with something else now in use, would absorb the tritium.

When the new subs arrive, that should be designed as virtual aircraft carriers. The "aircraft" would be miniature steam venturi powered acrylic one-man subs carrying underwater capable rockets. Modern acrylics are far stronger than steel and could operate at depths no steel sub could match. And they would allow human eyeball visuals. A steam venturi drive system would enable these watercrafts to all but fly and be invisible to any metal detection systems. And sonar?

Superheated steam when passed over a known catalyst immediately decomposes to hydrogen and oxygen. A spark all that would be needed to ignite the fuel and produce massive thrust via an extremely robust venturi drive system.

Warning, do not try this at home!
Alan B.

In any conventional nuclear reactor, the loss of power for any reason is a massive disaster in the making.

As both electromagnets and water pumps need electrical power to operate. Without pumps pumping water around exchanging heat etc. The water boils to super-heated steam and adds to the possibly 300 atmospheres of almost unimaginable pressure.

And pressure that sure to crack something releasing superheated steam that immediately decomposes to hydrogen and oxygen still hot enough to combust as a virtual fuel air bomb.

Such a bomb released by humans from a plane could wipe out several city blocks and flatten them to the ground. This is why we will never have conventional nuclear energy as a choice for Australia, regardless of their admired safety record.

MSR thorium on the other hand, operates at normal ambient air pressure and therefore needs no huge thick seven-inch-thick reactor vessel. nor hugely expensive containment building.

And given MSR thorium is designed to operate in complete safety, in a molten state. A meltdown is not part of foreseeable risk factors. Should the power fail for any reason, they Automatically self-drain into purpose-built tanks where no reaction is possible and cool till solid salt.

There were a couple of unresolved issues with MSR thorium that have since been sorted. And given the all the foregoing we could build as many as fifty walk-away-safe, MSR thorium power plants for the same cost as one conventional uranium reactor.

Micro grids and graphene under road cling wrap thin, underlays would replace poles, wires and all transmission lines eventually. And graphene cored undersea cables would allow almost resistant free electrical transmission to anywhere, to produce ever increasing income (multiple trillions PA) unmatched by coal, food and iron ore exports!

Only idiotic ideology and ideologues prevent that potential outcome! Antinuclear simpletons and jibber, jabber greenies with IQs that more or less match the ambient temperature? Also fit the above description. And if the cap fits?
Alan B.

I can't find anything on a think tank named "MTG" apart from a Facebook appearance and a savage anti-Muslim rant, nor any reference to a Jobs Summit on the Gold Coast in September so I wonder who these representatives were and how many were casting those votes.

Facebook says "the MTG was formed in 2010 as an advisory group for small to medium businesses, and to use the collective knowledge of the initial 72 companies, to convey opinions in a humorous and positive way".

It all seems rather odd to me.

Hi rache,

Anyone can set up a "group" and claim it represents anything they like it to "represent". From there they can churn out all the facts they like. The bloke who wrote this article is just a far right nutjob and can't be taken seriously.

Hi Alan, you got the rant a bit wrong mate.

Despite assumptions that the rich pay little tax, the data actually tells us a different story. According to the ATO's Taxation Statistics 2019-20 , 31.6 per cent of all tax collected comes from those earning $180,001 or more.

An even larger percentage that do pay no tax at all after government subsidies are the low earners.

Basic maths, analysis and demographic awareness are not the strong points of many....

The people who support: "96% recommend immediate re-introduction of national service" need to do national service themselves, why?

If it's such a good idea (not) why wouldn't they do it? However, they ignore demographic decline i.e. the working age cohort passed the 'demographic sweet spot' pre Covid, followed by lower fertility but preceded by the baby boomer 'bubble' now transitioning to retirement.

However, that does not preclude mass (re)training, but would need to include authoritarian rule and Soviet like planning.....

Hasbeen
There's a bit more to the taxation issue.

While it's true the rich pay more income tax overall, the indirect tax burden falls proportionally more heavily on the poor. The rich have more ways of minimising income tax and unlike the poor, don't generally spend all their income.

The entire income of the poor is therefore more heavily subjected to paying GST and the various fuel, tobacco, alcohol and other levies regardless of how that income is obtained.

Agree rache, the GST & fuel taxes are obscene, we did rather stupidly vote for the GST, & fuel tax is a hang over from when fuel was so cheap that a percentage of it was almost nothing.

I see nothing wrong with taxing the hell out of tobacco, alcohol & gambling should be included, as they are voluntary taxes, easily avoided.

However as it is the low income earners who most heavily use government services such as health & transport it is reasonable that they contribute towards the cost of such services.

Hasbeen

Fair enough, but the wealthy and Corporations also rely on many Government services - as well as the Police and Armed Forces to protect their property and Hospitals as well as roads to transport their goods plus essential infrastructure to keep them in business but somehow many seem to avoid contributing. Some are even paid subsidies by the taxpayer and the average wage earner can't get paid via off-shore tax havens or via Family Trust structures.

Also GST is entirely paid by the consumer and not those further up the chain, who can claim refunds for any GST charges incurred providing goods and services.

The tax system overall is disproportionate but it's not likely to change.

The Jobs Summit was never about cooperation between the business and the unions but a fig leaf to cover up a predetermined union biased change to labour legislation

Alan,

The spot price of Uranium is about US$100 per kg whereas platinum is about $30 000 /kg

Enriched uranium is obviously far more expensive, but the cost of fuel in a typical reactor is about 0.02c per kWhr including the cost of disposal. i.e. about 0.2% of the cost of power production.

While thorium is far cheaper, the cost of the reactor is far higher, with many of the corrosion issues still unresolved.