The Voice is all that Albanese is interested in. The rest of his gang aren't interested in anything; they just follow the dictator. And, Albanese's energy policy has already had a huge impact on productivity - killed it.

I get the nuclear argument now that coal and gas have been trashed. But we wouldn't need to be arguing about it if we had stuck with coal and gas. With human-generated carbon dioxide merely 3% of the total, and Australia's contribution to that amount infinitesimal, we have idiotically, right royally, rooted Australia and enabled the big emitters to take over our industries.

If we ever do go nuclear, it will be too late to repair the damage that our political class has done. It is too late now.

What we needed, when all this climate-carbon dioxide bullsh.t started, was not a new source of energy, but a new political class. That we didn't get it is the fault of 17 million voters.

Michaelia Cash, who should be training Peter Dutton on how to speak up, has pointed out that the closest members of the Labor party have come to business is to close it down.

In all of its manipulations of, and interference with industrial relations, the government has not once mentioned 'productivity'.

After Trudeau Canada, Albanese Australia is the second most woke country in the OECD. And their United Nations Net Zero is a demanding mistress at the best of times. One thing that really unsheathes her claws is the mere mention of the n-word. No, not that one, the other one.

The green tinged and ideologically committed seem to have a flexible attitude to the truth. We can't unsee the 60% approval rating for nuclear up there on the telly. The generation cost study by CSIRO and AEMO a few years back had small nuclear costing $A340 per MWh while General Electric was saying $US60. Better not fly in GE powered planes.

Just now Nemwatch shows about 20 GW out of 30 GW demand being generated by coal and gas. Somehow by 2030 that fraction will have dwindled away then again they said power prices would drop. Perhaps they forgot to mention gas backup, frequency correction, hopefully nonflammable big batteries, new powerlines and subsidies. I predict some heavy industries will have to pack up when power is unreliable and expensive.

Agree, Graham. And the only game in town that addresses economic growth, climate change, energy reliability and affordability, plus inflation in one foul swoop!

However, SMRs are not the best solution but MSR thorium would be. And the latter can use nuclear waste as fuel, where it is, mostly unspent fuel. fuel the world will pay us annual millions to take from them!
Alan B.

Sorry..you miss the point with your pro nuclear argument.

Never under any circumstances should nuclear power generation be implemented.

The whole of the creepy Democracy thing needs to be run off the cliff for a new start.
Saving the bacon of those responsible for the ever growing catastrophe it is to too many, is an undeserving lifeline.

Coincidentally, I'd written elsewhere here about Sweden admitting that renewables can't do what's claimed for them and that, therefore, they were embracing nuclear.

It is very clear that Australia is in a similar position ie buying into the renewable cult which can't met Australia's power needs. While other options abound, nuclear is one that would met the power needs while mollifying the the CO2 fetishes of the climate cultists.

Equally it is clear that, given the option, a majority, or at least a plurality, of Australians support the nation going nuclear.

But what is also very clear is that a large majority of those who support nuclear, support it being located somewhere else. Nuclear is or would be the ultimate NIMBY issue. Lawfare launched by alliances between the NIMBY crowd and the anti-nuclear left would make building a plant, if not impossible, at least so traumatic that no sane corporation would attempt it.

So it would require massive government involvement both financially and in terms of amending legislation to combat the lawfare. With the best will in the world, I can't see that happening. Perhaps it'll stand a chance after a winter or two of mid-freeze blackouts.

"The whole of the creepy Democracy thing needs to be run off the cliff for a new start."

To be replaced by?? ??

Mhaze.

Well, I’d start with a few fundamental rule changes. The first of which would be the handing over of non-performing and criminal Politicians to the lynching mob, supported by the tax payer to reside at the back door of Parliament House and on demand.

The confiscation of any personal accumulations of wealth derived from insider manipulation of the political system towards these personal ends, followed by the gift to the lynching mob of such, to amuse themselves with.

Remove all flags on Government buildings not appropriate to the State, along with the public burning of rainbow flags in town squares, along with their proponents.

Daily prayers at midday daily, all with a strictly Christian focus.

The burning of all polling booths, and the elimination of any need whatever to vote on any issue.

Reconciliation between Islamists and Christians on a National level to be mandated, and the oversight of morality issues devolved towards Muslims, with the eventual aim of State involvement of censorship issues in turn devolved to Islamist perfectionism.

Joint Christian and Islamist delegations to be regularly flown to Iran for briefings with Joe Biden, in order to coordinate foreign policy issues to key with the new world order emerging from the new ME policy of containment of Israel.

There is more, but I don’t wish to give you indigestion by over feeding you with an excess of original ideas.

Cheers.

Diver Dan,

Hilarity ensues.

Now let's get this straight. You want to have a nation with "a strictly Christian focus" that meanwhile lynches "non-performing and criminal Politicians"? And you think that makes sense or is in the slightest bit sane.

But you've ducked the most important question....who are the people leading this brave new world of yours and how do they get selected?

Or haven't you thought that far ahead?

Mhaze.

Here’s me thinking you above many others on this site, had a brain.

Christianity like all things in nature, divides itself into two distinct camps; one camp well represented by our favourite OLO preacher, Pete S: Highly academic and profoundly self assured.

Then there are the rest of us Christians, unsuited to the confines of Academia, and more suited to the extended charismatic views of Hillsong for example.

On the last occasional visit to Hillsong, I was very impressed by a local member and his detailed knowledge of the breweries in my local area I was unaware of myself.

I pay no heed to rumour mongering nit pickers in the Main Street media, constantly turning over Christian stones looking for the stray pedo.,.

I’m sure the Hillsong movement have their fair share, as do the RC’s, but I’ll make a very safe bet, not as many pedo’s as the gay Mardi Grass hide under their naked romping through main thoroughfares of our once decent cities and towns.

The above touches on my view of Christian morality, our wayward brothers in Islam and the fundamental melding of the two forces aligned under the banner of God and his righteousness, opposed by the forces of evil congregated under the debauchery of gay rights and their rainbow symbolism.

But you've ducked the most important question....who are the people leading this brave new world of yours and how do they get selected?

Or haven't you thought that far ahead?

"Here’s me thinking you above many others on this site, had a brain."

it is truly said, ""When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser."

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser."

So…you allude to it, and shoot you self in the foot.

Not smart!

But you've ducked the most important question....who are the people leading this brave new world of yours and how do they get selected?

Or haven't you thought that far ahead?

“ But you've ducked the most important question”

I dispute the priority you put on your “ own” question. In my world that question doesn’t rate a mention.

Why not concentrate on the suggestions for change, and stop wasting my time.

Try putting your own views forward for change, or maybe your too comfortably ensconced in the fantasy of Democracy as its currently dished up!

That's what I thought DD. You haven't thought that far ahead.

So you think that deriding the act of voting and voting itself shows you to be oh-so much smarter than the rest, it merely shows your lack of consideration.

If you want a society where christians can lynch those you despise, you should have some idea how that society's leadership is going to be determined.

That you don't have the slightest inkling shows that you are just throwing a tantrum about a society you dislike and a people who won't do what you want.

It takes a special type of nihilism to want to tear something down without having even the vaguest idea what to replace it with.

Me? Well I'm pretty happy with democracy and agree that it is the best, most just system of government ever devised by humans. Tinkering at the edges is always required, but childish demands to toss it out without a viable alternative is just.....well childish.