Hi Joe,

None of my comments are directed at you, or anyone on this forum, you take them as if they are personally directed at you and others when they are nothing more than general observations.
I have no time for your derogatory personal insults, like Nimby and hair-shirt brigade.
Perhaps you think of yourself as one of the movers and shakers of this world, one of the real decision makes, when you are clearly nothing of the sort. As I said don't take it all so personally, relax!

Hi Paul.

Right back at you: where did I make any derogatory comments about you ? I'm simply saying that the poorest people in the world are entitled to what you and I enjoy. And until they do, and if it takes massive development in their countries using whatever energy resources they have access to, we can't criticise.

Actually, given that renewables - good and holy as they may be - are much more expensive in generating energy, until the technology improves sufficiently, it would be entirely understandable if poorer countries used cheap alternatives such as coal and gas.

That was all I was trying to say.

Cheers,

Joe

There is need for a complete rethink on energy.
First remove any consideration of global warming from the discussion.
Reason, it does not matter whether it is true or not.

Second, consider stopping coal export from Australia.
Use our coal to build the new energy system.

Third, stop export of natural gas.
Use NG to build the new energy system.

Fourth, assuming finance available build many nuclear power stations.

The big problem however is to get the general public to understand
that what the greenies have been telling them for years was a load of
rubbish. Sometime around 2025 the lack of investment in search and
development by the major oil companies will start biting.
Then they may understand.
The politicians ARE the general public so there will be no help there.

Unfortunately there is another catch 22. The financial situation is
so dire that we may experience either a financial crash much worse
than 2008, or worse a Trainter "Collapse of Complex Society".

Many financial experts are predicting the crash and warn that there
is nothing that can be done about it.

The real problem is that will rule out any major reconstruction of
our energy system and the above points will be irrelevant.

Sorry Joe, I appositive profusely I mixed your tag up with that of Luciferase and his comment about "Perhaps you're one of the hair-shirt brigade". I will be more careful. Sorry again.

I actually think we are on the same song sheet on this. Fossil fuels are not going to be phased out overnight, but they will decline over time, and the cost will increase, that is inevitable as the supply diminishes. Nuclear will play an increasing roll in future energy supply. The problem with nuclear is twofold, with very high start up costs and the safety aspect as well.

" Actually, given that renewables - good and holy as they may be - are much more expensive in generating energy, until the technology improves sufficiently, it would be entirely understandable if poorer countries used cheap alternatives such as coal and gas."

That is reasonable, I do think we need to do more addressing the efficient use of energy, in western societies we will need to use less energy per capita than what we are now, and allow for a more equitable distribution world wide.

Hi Paul,

No worries :)

I assume that much of the improvements in nuclear energy generation since disastrous early models like the Chernobyl reactor, have focussed very much on safety, even if it has meant higher start-up costs. Fair enough.

We don't hear anything about safety problems with the nuclear reactors in France or Sweden or Finland, perhaps because there are few of them. As I understand it, with my rudimentary knowledge, modern reactors may have high start-up costs, but very long productive lives: sixty years or so. And presumably, even with those, improvements can mostly be retro-fitted as technology improves which pull down production costs.

Of course, as an adopted South Australian ,I've got selfish interests, given the vast potential of Olympic Dam, if it's ever allowed to get into full production. If that happens, up goes the price of housing in Adelaide, so I could sell, down-size and make a packet. Maybe many 'objective' analyses are based on those motives, a sort of RNS (reverse-NIMBY-syndrome) :)

Cheers,

Joe

The nuclear industry in France appears in crisis
20 reactors shut down:

http://www.ecowatch.com/france-nuclear-power-shut-down-2086414462.html

Reuters also reports that French nuclear problems shake
European power market, boost prices. Google it.