A real Labor leader, Bob Hawke, was talking about nuclear power back in the 1980s. He believed that nuclear power was the way to the future for Australia.

A little before his death, he was still talking about nuclear power as a “win for the global environment and a win for Australia”.

Newspoll has 55% of all Australians supporting nuclear, with 18-34 year olds being the keenest at 65%.

John

Don't forget that renewables need a larger grid. The current grid accounts for 40% of power costs, and it is commonly contended that a grid to handle wind and solar would double the cost. The implication of this is that in using wind and solar alone, the cost of your generation, storage and associated infrastructure would need to deliver power at a third the cost of nuclear to be on a par with it.

Then there is the environmental impact. Nuclear power has a small footprint and would use existing generation sites, whereas renewables have a comparatively huge footprint and will impact significantly.

It is no wonder that the real world evidence is one of nuclear being cheaper than wind and solar. Nor is it strange that nations like France have long since dropped plans to phase out nuclear for renewables, instead choosing to build more reactors.

https://www.euronews.com/business/2024/05/16/economics-of-nuclear-power-the-france-germany-divide-explained

Finally, the carbon emissions from nuclear are up to a quarter that of solar and similar to wind turbines. Until storage is built (if ever), wind and solar are reliant on gas generation, which emits over 40 times as much carbon as nuclear, but even with storage the carbon emissions from wind and solar will be up to tenfold that of nuclear.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-electricity

Countries as different as Turkey, Japan, Egypt and Bangladesh are currently building nuclear reactors. China has 2 more on the way to add to its 55 already in use.

In the past two years the U.S, UAE, India, Pakistan, Slovakia, Belarus, Finland and South Korea have brought reactors onstream.

China has had reactors up and running in less than 6 years.

France gets 70% of its electricity from nuclear power.

Overall, there are 440 reactors running safely, efficiently and cheaply globally.

Australia? Bloody idiots!

Hi Bezza,

I read an article in The Sydney Morning Herald that
claimed :

"Experts have cast doubt on the central pillar of Peter
Dutton's nuclear pitch to voters saying it would take
decades to fill in coal mine voids and make contaminated
power station sites safe, during which time fragile
valuable transmission lines would be left to deteriorate."

"Also - operators at several of the seven sites identified
by the Coalition for nuclear already have well advanced plans
to transform their sites into renewable energy hubs with
grid-scale batteries, hydrogen and solar once the coal runs
out."

Surely we can't ignore expert opinion?

In the meantime, Chris Bowen is still jumping in at the last minute, achieving victories - for the other side - and reminding all and sundry of his advice before Morrison had a surprise win: “If you don’t like Labor’s policies, don’t vote for us”. And we didn't. And we shouldn't next year either.

The latest move by this boofhead is to threaten the horizons of Labor electorates with hideous offshore windmills, creating huge no-go areas where these people take their ordinary, normal pleasures on the water.

Commentators are already starting to equate the Voice drubbing Labor received with the possible outcome of the next election, now that Dutton has started his pitch - not quite directly opposing the climate/renewables nonsense, but intending to do it better for the sake of the economy, the environment and, wonder of wonders, the Australian people. None of which Labor has any interest in.