The largest nuclear power station is our own sun.Either we murder half the world's population and go back to the horse and buggy days or we have the courage to face a brave new world of nuclear energy.
Fossil fuels may well cook us alive as nuclear may also snuff out our consciousness.I don't think we have much choice.

They are working on a way of recycling nuclear waste,when it does eventuate nuclear will be more palitable.

Just the other day I was looking for a lucid definition of oxymoron.It suddenly dawned on me in the shower,IT HAS TO BE A LEFT WING THINK TANK,or on the other hand could it have a more surepticious and deeper meaning,ie GIVING OXYGEN TO MORONS.

You have to admit it,the left have an uncanny way of perverting logic and lack the courage to face life's challenges.

It seems that this debate conflates two separate issues; global warming and declining production of fossil fuels. Nuclear is relevant in Australia only in relation to global warming as 80% of our electricity comes from coal, of which we have abundant reserves. As I have posted above, I believe that some modest subsidies to existing technologies could reduce our dependence on coal-fired power, without the need for expensive nuclear stations with their attendant waste problems. We're having trouble finding storage for low-level waste. Imagine the damage to your property values if a reactor or waste storage site was located in your suburb. Not in my backyard thanks.

Arjay, I'd suggest you spell and grammar check your posts before calling other people morons.

Thanks, Barry, the Long View seems to be a little alien to post-boomers, but it does explain Abenese's strange limp. (Rob88's right, he's getting the sap hugged out of him.) This is a good thing. Before coal there were horses, after Nuclear . . .

"Either we murder half the world's population and go back to the horse and buggy days"

Onya rjay, You've seen through Preznit Shrub's little plan.

Now Johnj,is was not the moron on the missing "r" in my surrepetitious musings,but more on dismissing the logic that points to our survival.No individual people were the intended in my pun,but rather the flawed logic of our less courageous consciousness.In this respect,we are all guilty to some degree.The left whingers have been proven wrong too often and have held the lectern for far too long.

It is too easy to appeal to our weaker side in order to garner support and the left have made made this attribute their forte to the detriment of Australian society.The PC brigade have been wrong about serious afflictions in our society including immigration,economics and their perverted social engineering,yet still continue to push their insidious agendas on us all.They sing the praises of alternate energies that will never maintain the present world population and at the same time berate the West in not giving enough to the poor to imrove their living standards,yet ignore the necessity for birth control and good governance.

The world is in the over populated mess it in today because the West developed better food and medical technologies without insisting on responsible birth control measures such as China has implemented.That is the reality.As a result ,we will continue to fight over diminishing food,resources and energy.

There is hope that with the interdependance of globalisation that we won't be able to destroy each other,however the mix of superstitious religious ideolgy,poverty and the left ignoring reality does not auger well for our survival.

U RAN I AM - Downer

Fresh from the AWB scandal, fresh from the fallout from Jakarta, Indonesia, to the Fresh debate regarding Nuclear energy and waste, Downer tossed another poison laced bone to add to some morose agenda our leadership has for the Australian citizen.

According to his coalition partner and deputy leader of the Liberal Party, Mark Vaile, told media that it was inevitable that Australia should take responsibility of the spent nuclear fuel that Australian Uranium was made from to supply countries with cleaner ozone emissions.

The media attention was continued by Mundine from the Labor party, running with the foxes, to say that their policy is, "No new mines", to their Federal counterparts, chasing with the hounds, considering this could be the future of our technological efforts to create a cheaper source of energy.

This debate will now be discussed by Labor in the forth coming, Labor National Conference.

I guess they need a few freebies to get the motor running on ideas regarding the nuclear debate, we have obvious not paid them enough as opposition to have policy on a the subject of nuclear energy?

The Labor party should already have solid policy on Nuclear energy and up to date statistics and information for the people of Australia to make an informed opinion on the opposition of the nuclear energy debate.

The right reasons are that Australia cannot sustain the impact nor the environmental factors on an Industry where there has not been enough information gathered about the long term effects.

We have certainly seen the disaster and the controversy over those who wish to use this method to supply energy.

Mr Downer suggested that it was up for debate whether we just dug it up and processed it as well.

Where is the Greens Party and their ability to get their point of policy through relating to the mining and processing of Uranium? Slurp.

The World needs some better ideas than nuclear material that can be use to make weapons against us.

As federal shadow minister for the environment (1977-80) Barry Cohen would be aware that the Whitlam Government had rubbved a judge, a chemist, and an engineer together to generate the three commissioners for the Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry; that it produced a first report in 1976, and a second in 1977.
The reports hardly presented a lilly-white cover for the uranium scene. Rather they gave a bundle of ifs-ors, and suggestions for caution-if-she-goes. If Barry had delved deeper, he might have found some of the expert witness' offerings of interest. While one of them stated that a nuclear bomb could never be made from power-reactor grade material, he clarified that under questioning. Apparently, no-one in their right mind would use it to make a bomb: it is insufficiently stable; and there is no certainty that any resulting explosion would yield "just" 2,000 tones TNT equivalent - or 20,000.
Just great that such fuel is hardly the stuff for regular armies - pity it is hunky-dory for terrorists having suicidal tendencies. Now, is it just coincidence that we have been seeing more terrorists, as human beings struggle ever harder for a fair share of diminishing prospects in an ever-crowded world - increasing from 4.7 to 6.5 billion from 1977 to 2006, and now chugging on at 1.3% per year?
Barry is also in a position to know that it was the zealotry of Bob Hawke which brought on the "three mine" uranium policy: his last act as ACTU leader, at the Adelaide congress, before entering parliament. Bob white-anted the no-mines policy already put in place by ordinary members. Persuasive power and zealotry won the day.
Uranium is today's Magdala fortress for nuclear zealots who won't face up to ecological limits; or the deficiencies of what they propose.