From Foxy,

"We'll have to wait and see what develops
as far as our energy sources go. In the meantime
lets learn about the pros and cons of both
renewables and nuclear in order to make a fair
assessment of each."

The pro's and cons are fully known.

We know the answers as they currently stand, and to wait further before action in the expectation that a whole new world of viable options will suddenly open up is unwise.

Essentially it all comes down to a dogmatic belief in the coming of some revolutionary, scalable, affordable energy storage solution allowing delivery of abundant energy 24/7/365, versus a dogmatic belief in what has been affordable and working already for over half a century in many countries of the world.

The only thing holding up the latter solution is the running interference of the dreamers supporting the former.

To the fence-sitters saying we need both renewables and nuclear working together, I ask why you would have them on the same grid?

In Ontario, the great plan is for renewables to eventually provide 100% while nuclear is wound down. This will never happen without some miraculous storage solution arising. The renewables are actually redundant while nuclear exists and are already creating affordability issues at the penetration level Greens have promoted.

SM's Myth 1 acknowledges renewables and gas back up can supply base load, albeit very expensively. While this is true, what also must be acknowledged is that it does nothing significant towards solving CAGW.

Dear Luciferase,

I agree with climate scientist Prof. Ian Lowe
when he states that our
political leaders need to confront public fears
regarding nuclear energy. He points out that the
concern people have is that when catastrophic
events happen the consequences of radio nuclear
material is involved are much more serious than if
its coal, gas, solar or wind. Also, the nuclear
waste problem is according to Prof. Lowe in
principle solveable given enough political commitment
and technical effort but as he points out - so far
it has not been solved 50 years into the nuclear
power experiment.

Therefore when all is said and done - before there can be a
sensible debate around nuclear energy in Australia, these
things need to be addressed.

The big problem with storage is cost.
You have to decide how many overcast windless days you can expect.
Then work out the generation & storage cost for one day.
Then multiply that cost by the number of windless overcast days you estimated.
Then add one more day's cost.
It has suddenly become a very costly exercise.

Oh, then after all that expense you get one more overcast day than you bet on !
The rule; don't live above the third floor.

For you, Foxy,

https://www.panterapress.com.au/shop/product/5/why-vs-why-nuclear-power

Nuclear waste is a long way down my list of concerns for the future, but you can make up your own mind, for a small outlay.

Best wishes.

Dear Luciferase,

That's all well and good for you.

However for the rest of us political leaders need to confront public fears.

Foxy
Tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick tick