Finally....

Like humans, the older the plants get, the more things go wrong. A steam generator replacement, like grandma's hip replacement, only buys so much time. The reactor's steel, like human bones, gets more brittle with age. For a price, plant owners can give their nuclear facilities the equivalent of bone replacements, organ transplants, face lifts and tummy tucks, but what they will still have in the end is an old nuclear plant.

There's health problems. There's safety problems. Then, there's money.

These days, most of us have a personal choice in our economic behaviour. We can spend a few more cents on recycled toilet paper or organic food, knowing that, in the long run, we are doing something to help prolong our environment. That’s all we can do, whereas getting rid of nuclear power cannot be accomplished on a personal, everyday consumption level. It costs. A lot. In terms of money, disposal and storage of waste. At least with wind power it doesn’t take much to remove the towers and at least they can be recycled unlike nuke plants.

Howard's 'debate' is just a big charade while the focus remains solely on nukes - we need to consider and support sustainable energy until this happens we are just going in circles.

I was heartened to hear that the Fox recommendations has resurfaced in this so called "Full Blooded Debate". What Australians demand is a "Full Bloody Debate" not the half backed yellowcake inquiry palmed off to Australians by the Government.

I cross examined most of the hundreds of witnesses to the gruelling almost 2 year long Fox Inquiry from 1975 to 1977.

However, last minute significant evidence leaked rom the files of Mary Kathleen Uranium Mining P/L was not accepted by the Inquiry Counsel Assisting. It revealed an extensive global price fixing cartel "The Uranium Club" that inflated the price of uranium from $7/pound to $45/pound from 1972 to 1974. We see similar inflation of the uranium price now from 1996 to 2006. See article http://www.321energy.com/editorials/roffey/roffey080806.html

This evidence while not accepted by the Australian inquiry was accepted by the US Justice Department and it resulted in out of court settlements close to $1billion from many Australian uranium producers.

Most significantly, the evidence revealed advice given by senior Australian Government officials , Scully and Larkin, that Rio Tinto Zinc and other Oz Uranium producers could avoid the safeguard problems of exporting Australian uranium to Taiwan (not a signatory to the NPT) by sending it to the US where it would be "toll processed" and then forwarded to Taiwan. So despite Australia's safeguards , Australia's officials were already plotting to thwart these in advance.

The missing and unaccounted for Australian uranium needs to be a major focus of any inquiry into nuclear. Another major focus is the real long term contribution to abating climate change with renewable energy systems such as solar, wind and many other clean energy systems. So lets have a full bloody debate and not the half baked yellowcake debate.

Then perhaps Australia can rival the Californian Governor's million solar rooftops policy and program in the Asian Pacific region.

Good on you Richard for detailing and highlighting some very important aspects to this issue.