-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
Just saying, hey?
Yeah right, just saying because you want to keep obfuscating the issue by giving detail of the weather when climate is the issue.
Melbourne is on the East side of Australia, we have a La Nina, you would expect it to be a bit cooler than an average year and January was a little cooler than the long term average, the average maximum was 25.2, the long term average (taken at the old weather station which they moved because it was too prone to the urban heat island effect, because, you know, they don't distort the figures like the conspiracy nuts make out and they do relocate weather stations to make sure the long term records are comparable) is 26.
Meanwhile, over on the Indian Ocean side of the country, in Perth, where La Nina would have far less impact, the January average was 32.9, whereas the long term average is 31.2.
Just saying.
Meanwhile, the polar vortex has made Texas very cold. Is this linked to climate change? Given the jet stream is weakening, and the jet stream contributes to holding the polar vortex in the polar regions, this is a possibility. However, the science is not in on this, the answer they are giving is maybe, we need more evidence. You see, scientists don't make a call until they have enough evidence. What we do know is that the energy supply in Texas, very reliant on fossil fuels, failed in the cold weather. Despite the Republicans and Fox lying about this, the reality is that the Texas power supply lost around 4-5GW from wind turbines freezing (preventable with de-icing equipment) and at the same time lost about 35GW from failing gas and coal power stations (also preventable, they just haven't bothered putting the required equipment in despite being told to do so after similar issues when the polar vortex made Texas very cold in 1983, 1989, 2003, 2006, 2008 and 2011) Seems their free market fossil fuel reliant power system doesn't deliver.
DS
Yeah right, just saying because you want to keep obfuscating the issue by giving detail of the weather when climate is the issue.
Melbourne is on the East side of Australia, we have a La Nina, you would expect it to be a bit cooler than an average year and January was a little cooler than the long term average, the average maximum was 25.2, the long term average (taken at the old weather station which they moved because it was too prone to the urban heat island effect, because, you know, they don't distort the figures like the conspiracy nuts make out and they do relocate weather stations to make sure the long term records are comparable) is 26.
Meanwhile, over on the Indian Ocean side of the country, in Perth, where La Nina would have far less impact, the January average was 32.9, whereas the long term average is 31.2.
Just saying.
Meanwhile, the polar vortex has made Texas very cold. Is this linked to climate change? Given the jet stream is weakening, and the jet stream contributes to holding the polar vortex in the polar regions, this is a possibility. However, the science is not in on this, the answer they are giving is maybe, we need more evidence. You see, scientists don't make a call until they have enough evidence. What we do know is that the energy supply in Texas, very reliant on fossil fuels, failed in the cold weather. Despite the Republicans and Fox lying about this, the reality is that the Texas power supply lost around 4-5GW from wind turbines freezing (preventable with de-icing equipment) and at the same time lost about 35GW from failing gas and coal power stations (also preventable, they just haven't bothered putting the required equipment in despite being told to do so after similar issues when the polar vortex made Texas very cold in 1983, 1989, 2003, 2006, 2008 and 2011) Seems their free market fossil fuel reliant power system doesn't deliver.
DS
Nuclear's on the table.
Coalition MPs in drive for nuclear energy (paywalled)
Nationals senators have drafted legislation allowing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in nuclear power as two-thirds of Coalition MPs backed lifting the ban on the controversial fuel source to help shift the nation to a carbon-neutral future.
The block of five Nationals senators, led by Bridget McKenzie and Matt Canavan, will move an amendment to legislation establishing a $1bn arm at the green bank to allow it to invest in nuclear generators, high-energy, low-emissions (HELE), coal-fired power stations and carbon capture and storage technology.
The Nationals’ move comes as a survey of 71 Coalition backbenchers conducted by The Australian revealed that 48 were in favour of lifting the longstanding prohibition on nuclear power in the EPBC act.
Liberal MPs Andrew Laming, John Alexander and Gerard Rennick are among backbenchers who want Scott Morrison to take a repeal of the nuclear ban to the upcoming election — a move that would open a new divide with Labor as the nation sets a course for a low-emissions future.
“I’m very keen to see the prohibition lifted,” Mr Laming said. “It is something that has to be taken to an election so Australians realise there is a significant change in energy policy.”
Mr Alexander said it was like “trying to fight Muhammad Ali with one arm tied behind your back if you are going to ignore nuclear energy”.
“This is a new era; let’s be right at the cutting edge,” Mr Alexander said.
On Wednesday, the government was forced to delay a vote on a key piece of legislation to establish the Grid Reliability Fund after Barnaby Joyce pushed an amendment for the fund to be allowed to invest in HELE plants.
The fund would sit within the CEFC’s remit and support low-emissions dispatchable power projects, as well as transmission and distribution infrastructure. It is aimed at stabilising the energy system and balancing the growth of intermittent renewables.
The new amendment proposed by the Nationals would go further than Mr Joyce’s push by ensuring the CEFC — established by the Gillard government in 2012 to invest in green energy initiatives — could help kick-start nuclear projects as well as new clean coal plants.
Senator McKenzie said: “We compete against the world with one hand behind our back while other nations avail themselves of cutting-edge, low-emissions technologies. For too long, Australia has blocked energy innovations such as nuclear and carbon capture technologies in addition to allowing (HELE) projects.”
Out of the 71 Coalition backbenchers surveyed by The Australian, only Queensland senator Paul Scarr was opposed to changing the nuclear prohibition enshrined in the EPBC Act, citing a lack of community support “at this stage”. A further 22 backbenchers were undecided or did not respond to questions.
Other supporters of lifting the ban on nuclear generation, including Trent Zimmerman, Ted O’Brien and Rowan Ramsey, believe the government should not move ahead with legalising the energy source while the proposal is bitterly opposed by Labor.
In-principle support for lifting the nuclear prohibition is prevalent by members in every faction of the Coalition, which has been divided over climate change action since Tony Abbott became prime minister in 2013.
City-based Liberal MPs who back strong action on climate change — including Jason Falinski, Tim Wilson, Katie Allen, Andrew Bragg and Dave Sharma — argue that nuclear should be an option in a technology-agnostic approach to Australia finding a pathway to zero-net emissions. Conservative MPs who are cautious about green-energy policies — including Mr Joyce, Senator Canavan, Eric Abetz, Craig Kelly, Kevin Andrews and Tony Pasin — say nuclear energy could provide an option for a zero-emissions dispatchable power source to balance out the growth of intermittent renewables.
The Prime Minister has signalled he will not move ahead with legalising nuclear energy unless there is bipartisan support with Labor. MPs told The Australian Mr Morrison was unlikely to pursue a policy change on the issue in this term of parliament. However, small modular nuclear reactors were included as a potential technology in the federal government’s technology investment roadmap discussion paper.
Nuclear energy, which does not produce direct carbon emissions, is used in nations that have set zero-net emissions by 2050 targets, including Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan and South Korea. The Biden administration is also supportive of nuclear power.
West Australian Liberal Vince Connelly said Australia was being “held back by an outdated ideology that seeks to paint nuclear technology as inherently evil”.
Ms Allen said, it was “hugely significant” the US was progressing with prototypes for small modular reactors.
South Australian senator Alex Antic said nuclear was “effective, reliable, safe and virtually emission-free”. “The radical left cannot have their ideological cake and eat it too when it comes to energy generation,” he said.
Mr Wilson attacked Labor and the Greens as nuclear science deniers. “You aren’t serious about climate change if you oppose nuclear outright,” he said. “Only nuclear plus baseload renewables can deliver Australia a sustainable net zero future with cheap, reliable electricity.”
Many government MPs acknowledge the power source is not currently competitive on price, but say investment decisions should be a matter for private companies and lifting the nuclear ban would encourage technological advancement.
Other Liberal MPs in favour of lifting the prohibition are: Warren Entsch, Russell Broadbent, James Stevens, Ian Goodenough, Rick Wilson, David Fawcett, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, Sarah Henderson, Hollie Hughes, James McGrath, Jim Molan, Julian Simmonds, Bert van Manen, Ben Small, Dean Smith, David Van, Terry Young and James Paterson.
Nationals MPs who want the energy source legalised include Anne Webster, Damian Drum, Perin Davey, Llew O’Brien, Sam McMahon, Susan McDonald and Ken O’Dowd.
Boothby MP Nicolle Flint has previously publicly backed nuclear power.
Coalition MPs in drive for nuclear energy (paywalled)
Nationals senators have drafted legislation allowing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in nuclear power as two-thirds of Coalition MPs backed lifting the ban on the controversial fuel source to help shift the nation to a carbon-neutral future.
The block of five Nationals senators, led by Bridget McKenzie and Matt Canavan, will move an amendment to legislation establishing a $1bn arm at the green bank to allow it to invest in nuclear generators, high-energy, low-emissions (HELE), coal-fired power stations and carbon capture and storage technology.
The Nationals’ move comes as a survey of 71 Coalition backbenchers conducted by The Australian revealed that 48 were in favour of lifting the longstanding prohibition on nuclear power in the EPBC act.
Liberal MPs Andrew Laming, John Alexander and Gerard Rennick are among backbenchers who want Scott Morrison to take a repeal of the nuclear ban to the upcoming election — a move that would open a new divide with Labor as the nation sets a course for a low-emissions future.
“I’m very keen to see the prohibition lifted,” Mr Laming said. “It is something that has to be taken to an election so Australians realise there is a significant change in energy policy.”
Mr Alexander said it was like “trying to fight Muhammad Ali with one arm tied behind your back if you are going to ignore nuclear energy”.
“This is a new era; let’s be right at the cutting edge,” Mr Alexander said.
On Wednesday, the government was forced to delay a vote on a key piece of legislation to establish the Grid Reliability Fund after Barnaby Joyce pushed an amendment for the fund to be allowed to invest in HELE plants.
The fund would sit within the CEFC’s remit and support low-emissions dispatchable power projects, as well as transmission and distribution infrastructure. It is aimed at stabilising the energy system and balancing the growth of intermittent renewables.
The new amendment proposed by the Nationals would go further than Mr Joyce’s push by ensuring the CEFC — established by the Gillard government in 2012 to invest in green energy initiatives — could help kick-start nuclear projects as well as new clean coal plants.
Senator McKenzie said: “We compete against the world with one hand behind our back while other nations avail themselves of cutting-edge, low-emissions technologies. For too long, Australia has blocked energy innovations such as nuclear and carbon capture technologies in addition to allowing (HELE) projects.”
Out of the 71 Coalition backbenchers surveyed by The Australian, only Queensland senator Paul Scarr was opposed to changing the nuclear prohibition enshrined in the EPBC Act, citing a lack of community support “at this stage”. A further 22 backbenchers were undecided or did not respond to questions.
Other supporters of lifting the ban on nuclear generation, including Trent Zimmerman, Ted O’Brien and Rowan Ramsey, believe the government should not move ahead with legalising the energy source while the proposal is bitterly opposed by Labor.
In-principle support for lifting the nuclear prohibition is prevalent by members in every faction of the Coalition, which has been divided over climate change action since Tony Abbott became prime minister in 2013.
| In favour (48) | Opposed (1) | Undecided / won't say (22) |
| Alex Antic (Senate, SA) | Paul Scarr (Senate, QLD) | Andrew McLachlan (Senate, SA) |
| Andrew Bragg (Senate, NSW) | Andrew Wallace (Fisher, QLD) | |
| Andrew Laming (Bowman, QLD) | Angie Bell (Moncrieff) | |
| Anne Webster (Mallee, VIC) | Bridget Archer (Bass, TAS) | |
| Barnaby Joyce (New England, NSW) | Celia Hammond (Curtin, WA) | |
| Ben Small (Senate, WA) | Claire Chandler (Senate, TAS) | |
| Bert van Manen (Forde, QLD) | Fiona Martin (Reid, NSW) | |
| Bridget McKenzie (Senate, VIC) | Garth Hamilton (Groom, Queensland) | |
| Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (Senate, NSW) | Gavin Pearce (Braddon, TAS) | |
| Craig Kelly (Hughes, NSW) | George Christensen (Dawson, QLD) | |
| Damian Drum (Nicholls, VIC) | Gladys Liu (Chisholm, VIC) | |
| Dave Sharma (Wentworth, SA) | Lucy Wicks (Robertson, NSW) | |
| David Fawcett (Senate, SA) | Matt O’Sullivan (Senate, WA) | |
| David Gillespie (Lyne, NSW) | Melissa McIntosh (Lindsay, NSW) | |
| David Van (Senate, VIC) | Pat Conaghan (Cowper, NSW) | |
| Dean Smith (Senate, WA) | Phillip Thompson (Herbert, QLD) | |
| Eric Abetz (Senate, TAS) | Ross Vasta (Bonner, QLD) | |
| Gerard Rennick (Senate, QLD) | Scott Ryan (Senate, VIC) | |
| Hollie Hughes (Senate, NSW) | Slade Brockman (Senate, WA) | |
| Ian Goodenough (Moore, WA) | Steve Irons (Swan, WA) | |
| James McGrath (Senate, Queensland) | Tony Smith (Casey, VIC) | |
| James Paterson (Senate, VIC) | Wendy Askew (Senate, TAS) | |
| James Stevens (Sturt, SA) | ||
| Jason Falinski (McKellar, NSW) | ||
| Jim Molan (Senate, NSW) | ||
| John Alexander (Bennelong, NSW) | ||
| Julian Leeser (Berowra, NSW) | ||
| Julian Simmonds (Ryan, QLD) | ||
| Katie Allen (Higgins, VIC) | ||
| Ken O’Dowd (Flynn, QLD) | ||
| Kevin Andrews (Menzies, VIC) | ||
| Llew O’Brien (Wide Bay, QLD) | ||
| Matt Canavan (Senate, Queensland) | ||
| Nicolle Flint (Boothby, SA) | ||
| Perin Davey (Senate, NSW) | ||
| Rick Wilson (O'Connor, WA) | ||
| Rowan Ramsey (Grey, SA) | ||
| Russell Broadbent (Monash, VIC) | ||
| Sam McMahon (Senate, NT) | ||
| Sarah Henderson (Senate, VIC) | ||
| Susan McDonald (Senate, QLD | ||
| Ted O’Brien (Fairfax, QLD) | ||
| Terry Young (Longman, QLD) | ||
| Tim Wilson (Goldstein, VIC) | ||
| Tony Pasin (Barker, SA) | ||
| Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, NSW) | ||
| Vince Connelly (Stirling, WA) | ||
| Warren Entsch (Leichhardt, QLD) |
City-based Liberal MPs who back strong action on climate change — including Jason Falinski, Tim Wilson, Katie Allen, Andrew Bragg and Dave Sharma — argue that nuclear should be an option in a technology-agnostic approach to Australia finding a pathway to zero-net emissions. Conservative MPs who are cautious about green-energy policies — including Mr Joyce, Senator Canavan, Eric Abetz, Craig Kelly, Kevin Andrews and Tony Pasin — say nuclear energy could provide an option for a zero-emissions dispatchable power source to balance out the growth of intermittent renewables.
The Prime Minister has signalled he will not move ahead with legalising nuclear energy unless there is bipartisan support with Labor. MPs told The Australian Mr Morrison was unlikely to pursue a policy change on the issue in this term of parliament. However, small modular nuclear reactors were included as a potential technology in the federal government’s technology investment roadmap discussion paper.
Nuclear energy, which does not produce direct carbon emissions, is used in nations that have set zero-net emissions by 2050 targets, including Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan and South Korea. The Biden administration is also supportive of nuclear power.
West Australian Liberal Vince Connelly said Australia was being “held back by an outdated ideology that seeks to paint nuclear technology as inherently evil”.
Ms Allen said, it was “hugely significant” the US was progressing with prototypes for small modular reactors.
South Australian senator Alex Antic said nuclear was “effective, reliable, safe and virtually emission-free”. “The radical left cannot have their ideological cake and eat it too when it comes to energy generation,” he said.
Mr Wilson attacked Labor and the Greens as nuclear science deniers. “You aren’t serious about climate change if you oppose nuclear outright,” he said. “Only nuclear plus baseload renewables can deliver Australia a sustainable net zero future with cheap, reliable electricity.”
Many government MPs acknowledge the power source is not currently competitive on price, but say investment decisions should be a matter for private companies and lifting the nuclear ban would encourage technological advancement.
Other Liberal MPs in favour of lifting the prohibition are: Warren Entsch, Russell Broadbent, James Stevens, Ian Goodenough, Rick Wilson, David Fawcett, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, Sarah Henderson, Hollie Hughes, James McGrath, Jim Molan, Julian Simmonds, Bert van Manen, Ben Small, Dean Smith, David Van, Terry Young and James Paterson.
Nationals MPs who want the energy source legalised include Anne Webster, Damian Drum, Perin Davey, Llew O’Brien, Sam McMahon, Susan McDonald and Ken O’Dowd.
Boothby MP Nicolle Flint has previously publicly backed nuclear power.
Nice puff piece by the Oz, I assume to try to take a bit of focus of other issues the government is having.Nuclear's on the table.
Coalition MPs in drive for nuclear energy (paywalled)
Nationals senators have drafted legislation allowing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in nuclear power as two-thirds of Coalition MPs backed lifting the ban on the controversial fuel source to help shift the nation to a carbon-neutral future.
The block of five Nationals senators, led by Bridget McKenzie and Matt Canavan, will move an amendment to legislation establishing a $1bn arm at the green bank to allow it to invest in nuclear generators, high-energy, low-emissions (HELE), coal-fired power stations and carbon capture and storage technology.
The Nationals’ move comes as a survey of 71 Coalition backbenchers conducted by The Australian revealed that 48 were in favour of lifting the longstanding prohibition on nuclear power in the EPBC act.
Liberal MPs Andrew Laming, John Alexander and Gerard Rennick are among backbenchers who want Scott Morrison to take a repeal of the nuclear ban to the upcoming election — a move that would open a new divide with Labor as the nation sets a course for a low-emissions future.
“I’m very keen to see the prohibition lifted,” Mr Laming said. “It is something that has to be taken to an election so Australians realise there is a significant change in energy policy.”
Mr Alexander said it was like “trying to fight Muhammad Ali with one arm tied behind your back if you are going to ignore nuclear energy”.
“This is a new era; let’s be right at the cutting edge,” Mr Alexander said.
On Wednesday, the government was forced to delay a vote on a key piece of legislation to establish the Grid Reliability Fund after Barnaby Joyce pushed an amendment for the fund to be allowed to invest in HELE plants.
The fund would sit within the CEFC’s remit and support low-emissions dispatchable power projects, as well as transmission and distribution infrastructure. It is aimed at stabilising the energy system and balancing the growth of intermittent renewables.
The new amendment proposed by the Nationals would go further than Mr Joyce’s push by ensuring the CEFC — established by the Gillard government in 2012 to invest in green energy initiatives — could help kick-start nuclear projects as well as new clean coal plants.
Senator McKenzie said: “We compete against the world with one hand behind our back while other nations avail themselves of cutting-edge, low-emissions technologies. For too long, Australia has blocked energy innovations such as nuclear and carbon capture technologies in addition to allowing (HELE) projects.”
Out of the 71 Coalition backbenchers surveyed by The Australian, only Queensland senator Paul Scarr was opposed to changing the nuclear prohibition enshrined in the EPBC Act, citing a lack of community support “at this stage”. A further 22 backbenchers were undecided or did not respond to questions.
Other supporters of lifting the ban on nuclear generation, including Trent Zimmerman, Ted O’Brien and Rowan Ramsey, believe the government should not move ahead with legalising the energy source while the proposal is bitterly opposed by Labor.
In-principle support for lifting the nuclear prohibition is prevalent by members in every faction of the Coalition, which has been divided over climate change action since Tony Abbott became prime minister in 2013.
In favour (48) Opposed (1) Undecided / won't say (22) Alex Antic (Senate, SA) Paul Scarr (Senate, QLD) Andrew McLachlan (Senate, SA) Andrew Bragg (Senate, NSW) Andrew Wallace (Fisher, QLD) Andrew Laming (Bowman, QLD) Angie Bell (Moncrieff) Anne Webster (Mallee, VIC) Bridget Archer (Bass, TAS) Barnaby Joyce (New England, NSW) Celia Hammond (Curtin, WA) Ben Small (Senate, WA) Claire Chandler (Senate, TAS) Bert van Manen (Forde, QLD) Fiona Martin (Reid, NSW) Bridget McKenzie (Senate, VIC) Garth Hamilton (Groom, Queensland) Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (Senate, NSW) Gavin Pearce (Braddon, TAS) Craig Kelly (Hughes, NSW) George Christensen (Dawson, QLD) Damian Drum (Nicholls, VIC) Gladys Liu (Chisholm, VIC) Dave Sharma (Wentworth, SA) Lucy Wicks (Robertson, NSW) David Fawcett (Senate, SA) Matt O’Sullivan (Senate, WA) David Gillespie (Lyne, NSW) Melissa McIntosh (Lindsay, NSW) David Van (Senate, VIC) Pat Conaghan (Cowper, NSW) Dean Smith (Senate, WA) Phillip Thompson (Herbert, QLD) Eric Abetz (Senate, TAS) Ross Vasta (Bonner, QLD) Gerard Rennick (Senate, QLD) Scott Ryan (Senate, VIC) Hollie Hughes (Senate, NSW) Slade Brockman (Senate, WA) Ian Goodenough (Moore, WA) Steve Irons (Swan, WA) James McGrath (Senate, Queensland) Tony Smith (Casey, VIC) James Paterson (Senate, VIC) Wendy Askew (Senate, TAS) James Stevens (Sturt, SA) Jason Falinski (McKellar, NSW) Jim Molan (Senate, NSW) John Alexander (Bennelong, NSW) Julian Leeser (Berowra, NSW) Julian Simmonds (Ryan, QLD) Katie Allen (Higgins, VIC) Ken O’Dowd (Flynn, QLD) Kevin Andrews (Menzies, VIC) Llew O’Brien (Wide Bay, QLD) Matt Canavan (Senate, Queensland) Nicolle Flint (Boothby, SA) Perin Davey (Senate, NSW) Rick Wilson (O'Connor, WA) Rowan Ramsey (Grey, SA) Russell Broadbent (Monash, VIC) Sam McMahon (Senate, NT) Sarah Henderson (Senate, VIC) Susan McDonald (Senate, QLD Ted O’Brien (Fairfax, QLD) Terry Young (Longman, QLD) Tim Wilson (Goldstein, VIC) Tony Pasin (Barker, SA) Trent Zimmerman (North Sydney, NSW) Vince Connelly (Stirling, WA) Warren Entsch (Leichhardt, QLD)
City-based Liberal MPs who back strong action on climate change — including Jason Falinski, Tim Wilson, Katie Allen, Andrew Bragg and Dave Sharma — argue that nuclear should be an option in a technology-agnostic approach to Australia finding a pathway to zero-net emissions. Conservative MPs who are cautious about green-energy policies — including Mr Joyce, Senator Canavan, Eric Abetz, Craig Kelly, Kevin Andrews and Tony Pasin — say nuclear energy could provide an option for a zero-emissions dispatchable power source to balance out the growth of intermittent renewables.
The Prime Minister has signalled he will not move ahead with legalising nuclear energy unless there is bipartisan support with Labor. MPs told The Australian Mr Morrison was unlikely to pursue a policy change on the issue in this term of parliament. However, small modular nuclear reactors were included as a potential technology in the federal government’s technology investment roadmap discussion paper.
Nuclear energy, which does not produce direct carbon emissions, is used in nations that have set zero-net emissions by 2050 targets, including Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Japan and South Korea. The Biden administration is also supportive of nuclear power.
West Australian Liberal Vince Connelly said Australia was being “held back by an outdated ideology that seeks to paint nuclear technology as inherently evil”.
Ms Allen said, it was “hugely significant” the US was progressing with prototypes for small modular reactors.
South Australian senator Alex Antic said nuclear was “effective, reliable, safe and virtually emission-free”. “The radical left cannot have their ideological cake and eat it too when it comes to energy generation,” he said.
Mr Wilson attacked Labor and the Greens as nuclear science deniers. “You aren’t serious about climate change if you oppose nuclear outright,” he said. “Only nuclear plus baseload renewables can deliver Australia a sustainable net zero future with cheap, reliable electricity.”
Many government MPs acknowledge the power source is not currently competitive on price, but say investment decisions should be a matter for private companies and lifting the nuclear ban would encourage technological advancement.
Other Liberal MPs in favour of lifting the prohibition are: Warren Entsch, Russell Broadbent, James Stevens, Ian Goodenough, Rick Wilson, David Fawcett, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, Sarah Henderson, Hollie Hughes, James McGrath, Jim Molan, Julian Simmonds, Bert van Manen, Ben Small, Dean Smith, David Van, Terry Young and James Paterson.
Nationals MPs who want the energy source legalised include Anne Webster, Damian Drum, Perin Davey, Llew O’Brien, Sam McMahon, Susan McDonald and Ken O’Dowd.
Boothby MP Nicolle Flint has previously publicly backed nuclear power.
Shouldnt all those bush MPs be worried that nuclear power will take jobs away from coal regions? This is nothing but an attempt at distraction from the ethical short comings of the current government, and an attempt to divert focus from renewables.
You know someone is trying to distract everyone when nuclear power is brought up.
Nuclear power plants take at least a decade to build and are very expensive.
Uranium is not a renewable resource, if we started to generate a lot of electricity from nuclear power it would run out in a matter of decades.
While the uranium would run out in decades, the nuclear waste would be toxic for thousands of years, there is no safe way to dispose of nuclear waste.
Nuclear is not carbon neutral through the full cycle of nuclear power as they need to mine the uranium and as time goes on the high grade uranium deposits are mined out and lower grade deposits are more energy intensive to extract.
Nuclear accidents are an issue, as is nuclear proliferation.
There is a reason why very few nuclear reactors have been built over recent decades, it is no solution.
Why go nuclear when there is ample, renewable, energy available from solar, wind, tidal, hydro etc?
There is an old saying: If nuclear power is the answer, someone got the question wrong.
I have never understood the obsession with nuclear power by a fair chunk of the Nats and Libs (and some of Labor), it actually makes no sense on so many levels it just isn't funny. Makes for a good distraction I suppose, means they don't need to talk about their inaction on climate change and avoid any ongoing crisis they are trying to bury.
DS
Nuclear power plants take at least a decade to build and are very expensive.
Uranium is not a renewable resource, if we started to generate a lot of electricity from nuclear power it would run out in a matter of decades.
While the uranium would run out in decades, the nuclear waste would be toxic for thousands of years, there is no safe way to dispose of nuclear waste.
Nuclear is not carbon neutral through the full cycle of nuclear power as they need to mine the uranium and as time goes on the high grade uranium deposits are mined out and lower grade deposits are more energy intensive to extract.
Nuclear accidents are an issue, as is nuclear proliferation.
There is a reason why very few nuclear reactors have been built over recent decades, it is no solution.
Why go nuclear when there is ample, renewable, energy available from solar, wind, tidal, hydro etc?
There is an old saying: If nuclear power is the answer, someone got the question wrong.
I have never understood the obsession with nuclear power by a fair chunk of the Nats and Libs (and some of Labor), it actually makes no sense on so many levels it just isn't funny. Makes for a good distraction I suppose, means they don't need to talk about their inaction on climate change and avoid any ongoing crisis they are trying to bury.
DS
You know you're talking to a rabid greenie when they dismiss nuclear out of hand.
It's a far more mature technology than renewables and would give the latter time to develop such that it reaches acceptable levels of reliability, scalability and affordability.
China and India are constructing 18 nuclear power plants between them. The US, UK, Japan, France, Russia and South Korea are also building them. It's time we got over the 1970's fear of the nuclear boogeyman.
yeah except a nuclear plant takes a decade or more to build, so they don't give anything time to develop. Renewables are modular, scalable and deliver a return on investment immediately. They can be installed in parallel with network modifications.
This nuclear stuff is conservative anti-renewable virtue-signalling, nothing more. Get back to me when an Australian plant has been built and goes live in about 15-20 years. If ever.
An interesting take on large scale solar, particularly in desert locations. I'll admit I hadn't really thought of these impacts. I'm a big believer in rooftop solar which wouldn't have the same issues as large scale solar (as many roofs are already made of dark colours).
theconversation.com
Solar panels in Sahara could boost renewable energy but damage the global climate – here's why
In a bid to ditch fossil fuels, some countries are considering carpeting deserts with solar panels.
theconversation.com
Do you just make these facts up? Or read a headline without the detail and take it as gospel? Or deliberately engage in manipulating and misrepresenting facts to get a soundbite you want?
Japan had 30% of it's power generated by Nuclear when Fukushima happened. They subsequently shutdown all their nuclear plants. Only 3 nuclear plants have been brought back online out of the 50 odd they had. While the federal government wants to bring more back online, they keep being hit by court injunctions by the local governments where these plants are.
Most of the unused plants are in the process of being decommissioned.
Fukushima happened in 2011, not the 70's. The people who lived nearby are still *smile*, as is the land. The biggest surprise has been how much news of what happened is/has been supressed.
Or even decommisioning one at the end of life that hasn't gone bad. That's a very big undertaking, but that's OK, we don't factor those costs into the comparisons between nuclear/fossil/renewable and the taxpayer will probably pick up the tab anyway.
In the US they are still trying to get that plant in Georgia built, and that was the first new nuclear power plant to be licenced and begin construction for over 3 decades.
Cost overruns, they were meant to be turned on in 2016 and 2017 but are still not complete, Westinghouse Electric went bankrupt due to losses incurred by their nuclear power business - the problems mount up and that's well before you consider the toxic waste which lasts thousands of years that the plant will produce and the cost of decommissioning a toxic power station.
It is a distraction from inaction on climate change, not a very good distraction either since nuclear just does not add up.
DS
Cost overruns, they were meant to be turned on in 2016 and 2017 but are still not complete, Westinghouse Electric went bankrupt due to losses incurred by their nuclear power business - the problems mount up and that's well before you consider the toxic waste which lasts thousands of years that the plant will produce and the cost of decommissioning a toxic power station.
It is a distraction from inaction on climate change, not a very good distraction either since nuclear just does not add up.
DS
No I don't *smile* make things up. You should at least *smile* know that much you smarmy little *smile* *smile*.
Nuclear reactors under construction worldwide 2023 | Statista
There were 57 new nuclear reactors under construction in the world in 2023, of which the majority were located in China.
www.statista.com
You know what you lot are? *smile* zealots.
More nuclear reactors are closing than being constructed and the construction figures tend to include those which are "planned", most of which will never be built.
If they build them all then the uranium will last an even shorter amount of time - unlike the toxic waste which lasts thousands of years and has no safe disposal.
DS
If they build them all then the uranium will last an even shorter amount of time - unlike the toxic waste which lasts thousands of years and has no safe disposal.
DS
They've been around for 70 years. Other countries have managed to store the waste safely, and we have plenty of space.
