I have never heard of Leo Smith but, boy, did he write the truth back in 2012!

“Sanity and rationalism have been cast aside …”. You need only to think of Bedlam Bowen to know that is true.

Since 2012, things have got worse; the politicians have got madder and more controlling; electricity is getting dearer and dearer; nobody is listening; few people care.

Australia is rooted

Speaking as a former power authority science assistant. I mostly agree with the author.

Renewables/green anti-development ideology, may be carbon free, but certainly not the best, cleanest and safest carbon free option, nor is it dispatchable without massive investment in pumped hydro or humongous battery backup.

That said, the best, safest, cleanest and cheapest carbon free power that is also dispatchable is nuclear. Not the huge edifices that date back to the fifties, but as either SMRs or better yet, MSR thorium.

The Chinese invested millions or trillions ironing out the bugs in MSR thorium and cheaper for us than trying to refurbish old coal-fired power stations. And the smaller ones can fit inside a standard shipping container as ready to generate options.

They come with several upsides, one being power for less than 3 cents PKWH. And also, the production of a large range of medical isotopes, the most notable the miracle cancer cure, the alpha particle, bismuth 213!

MSR carbon free technology can also burn nuclear waste, where in CARBON FREE MSRs it is mostly unspent fuel that could power this nation for thousands of years with "unspent fuel" we are paid annual millions to take.

Nuclear waste is mostly low rad uranium! [Bananas, Brazil nuts and milk are also mildly radioactive.]

MSRs burn in a safer environment than any coal/gas-fired/renewable option. Because they don't need water as a coolant can be placed almost anywhere, negating the need for continent crossing, eyesore transmission lines.

But serve microgrids that can be placed underground also, where they would be far less vulnerable. And less costly to maintain long term.

Some of our services need to be placed underground, it therefore makes perfect sense that all should be delivered thus.
Alan B.

On top of UN open borders, UN "net zero" has stormed Australian "thinking", inside ten years. It aligns Green and Labor.

"Net zero" is an article of faith for state premiers, the public service, bishops and billionaires, industry, unions and universities, media and “think” tanks, myriad lobbyists. Dissent is rare, and potentially very costly.

After constant lecturing from the try-hard Matt Kean, not to mention the European Union, Morrison eventually caved, and "committed" to net zero. Sadly, today's Liberal Opposition wouldn't dare seriously oppose "net zero". The local and international pressure is just too much.

Such a clear, simple well written article Charles, but too much so to get through to the product of our dumbed down education system today.

It is just as well nature has given us so many natural advantages such as our coal, gas, uranium & iron ore as we throw away, or conned out of most of this gift.

I must take issue with Charles on a number of points: 1)CO2 is not a "pollutant", nor is it catalytic (i.e. runaway). 2)We need more CO2, not less. 3)I'm partial to the proposition that the "greenhouse effect" occurs only in an actual greenhouse, not in the Earth's turbulent atmosphere. 4)I don't have a problem with nuclear, but Australia's top priority should be the construction of new coal-fired base load capacity. 5)To ensure grid stability, the name-plate rating of connected intermittent sources should not exceed say 20% of the installed base load power.

Deleted for abuse.