True, Fester but our resident expert John D has already determined the cause of the blackouts in Span and Portugal while authorities there are still scratching their heads while the cause is pretty obvious with unreliable renewables that will only last 20 years before they will all need replacing again at great cost.
Meanwhile, a great editorial from Sharri Markson last night but we will soon know whether Australia is burdened with another three years of destructive Labor policies and more lies under Albanese.
https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/sharri-markson/sharri-markson-officially-endorses-peter-dutton-to-be-prime-minister/video/1e7c62ee1af26174728e51cb14f0a3db

Fester,

Once again, the Spanish blackout was triggered by a frequency drop - not a solar panel melting down - and their grid operator never blamed renewables. But sure, let’s skip that detail and turn it into a morality tale about Net Zero.

If ageing coal stations weren’t maintained, that’s not proof that renewables are unreliable - it’s proof that fossil generation can’t be treated like it’s timeless and maintenance-free. That’s not a zealot problem - that’s a planning problem.

If anything, it proves the need for a transition plan that doesn’t hinge on creaking legacy assets. Which is exactly what AEMO’s current work accounts for.

Hi Fester,

I remind you that Chernobyl, was a government built nuclear power plant, and what a disaster that was. Why is the LNP wanting to build 7 nuclear plants here? Why can't they get private investors? I really do believe such an undertaking will cost billions more than the Coalition claims, and it will take years longer than the forecast as well.

Try getting private investors to back something that is banned. What a ridiculous claim but it's one of many also made by Albanese. End the ban, cut the billions in subsidies poured into unreliable very temporary renewables and make it an even playing field before anyone can claim investors aren't prepared to back safe modern nuclear plants which are now embraced by every sensible G20 nation. Chernobyl is an old furphy along with three eyed fish memes and if Labor really thought nuclear plants including SMRs were dangerous they would not be planning to let our submariners serve onboard in close quarters with an SMR for weeks at a time, then allow them to be serviced and maintained in Australian ports!

Hi Mikko2,

"they (Labor) would not be planning to let our submariners serve onboard in close quarters with an SMR for weeks" The LNP doesn't have monopoly on stupidity.

Are you saying when elected the Coalition will "make nuk legal", then private capital will come flooding in from all those silent investors? Why doesn't Dutton say that, no he said the government will fund it all. I am also concerned about nuclear waste disposal, that's an unresolved issue, your thoughts.

BTW, I'm not a sycophantic Labor supporter, I'd be very happy with a hung parliament. But given Labor's 3 years, and what they have done, compared to the Coalitions 9 years, I don't think Labor deserves the sack, maybe a wrap on the knuckles, but not the sack.

Mikko2, given this fact; "Waste residues from reprocessing in France have been returned to Australia, where they are currently stored at ANSTO's Lucas Heights campus. There are ongoing concerns and problems related to nuclear waste storage at the Lucas Heights reactor site."

Presently Australia produces about 45 cubic metres of radioactive waste per year, mostly low level waste, but under the Coalition proposal there will be a significant increase in he production of high level nuclear waste.

Where would Australian produced waste, particularly high level waste, be processed and then stored?