SR

"You already said that."

Well sometimes (often) I have to repeat stuff for the slow of reading.

"So why do you imagine it detracts from a single point I made? None of which I hastened to say you have in anyway addressed."

I didn't address it because it was just your attempt to alter the point. SOP for SR.
The point being, (repeating it again!!) that they decided they couldn't both get to net-zero and met future needs using renewables but instead had to massively ramp up nuclear to met their future power needs.

"Keep in mind this change came after the hard right party gain the largest number of seats in 2022 and a huge say in the subsequent coalition."

Yep. Very true and very important. Only those not beholden to the renewable fetishists are clear-sighted enough and concerned for the nation's and their people's welfare enough to make the necessary decisions. Agreed that doesn't really describe the current Libs, but as things unravel such a group will inevitably arise.

Dear mhaze,

You really can't help yourself can you. Off gilding the lily with your usual gay abandon.

"but instead had to massively ramp up nuclear to met their future power needs"

They aren't massively ramping up anything but rather adopting a policy of SMRs in place of its aging large nuclear power plants.

This required a change in the policy limiting the number of plants to 10.

"The agreement said necessary regulations should be developed to create the conditions for the construction and operation of small modular reactors (SMRs) in Sweden."

Perhaps just stop over egging things. It makes you look silly and utterly unreliable.

"Changing the target to “100% fossil-free” electricity, from “100% renewable” is key to the government’s plan to meet an expected doubling of electricity demand to around 300 TwH by 2040 and reach net zero emissions by 2045.

“This creates the conditions for nuclear power,” Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson said in parliament. “We need more electricity production, we need clean electricity and we need a stable energy system.”"

http://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/sweden-adopts-100-fossil-free-energy-target-easing-way-for-nuclear/

"meet[ing] an expected doubling of electricity demand" via nuclear isn't a massive ramping up? Do tell.

It seems you still don't get this. The Swedes recognise that they need more electricity, clean electricity and stable energy production and have determined that renewables aren't going to provide that. So...nuclear.

Meanwhile Australia needs more electricity, clean electricity and stable energy production and our renewables-centric elite are just hoping the wind keeps blowing. See the difference?

You know, I'm starting to wonder, does our SR just quote the lefty hymn book, or is he actually the author of the damn thing? He & it are both nutty enough.

Hassy,

We know how pro nuclear you are, having at one time suggested on this very forum, that we should "nuk Pakistan" and obliterate 200 million innocent men, women and children, remember that cal, how sweet. What was your pretext, yes; "Get them before they get us." Would you like that to be official government policy? Since you are so pro nuclear!

Kudos Mhaze, Hasbeen.