-
Today:
Australia will no longer contribute to United Nations Green Climate Fund
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
-
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
They weren't subject to an engineering health check. It was naked ignorant politics.
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
You said you thought it was a good precaution. Precaution against what seems like a reasonable question.
Because during the shut down they also lost valuable staff, and I would have thought that would be a bad idea when running a nuclear power plant. Not to mention shutting and starting are some riskiest times for a reactor. -
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
Regardless, they now intend to shut down the lot. Is that a bad call?
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
Regardless, they now intend to shut down the lot. Is that a bad call?
I don't know enough to make a call on it.
I just often think we point at Govts not having done nothing prior to a catastrophe and then when they do do something to hopefully limit potential catastrophe we are equally scathing.
I do understand the Govt would know next to nothing about Nuclear Engineering and limits but that would be for most things too and sometimes a big call is made even if way over the top
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
Regardless, they now intend to shut down the lot. Is that a bad call?
I don't know enough to make a call on it.
I just often think we point at Govts not having done nothing prior to a catastrophe and then when they do do something to hopefully limit potential catastrophe we are equally scathing.
I do understand the Govt would know next to nothing about Nuclear Engineering and limits but that would be for most things too and sometimes a big call is made even if way over the top
Forget the immediate response. Again, I'm talking about the ultimate response which has been to completely shut down all nuclear power in Germany. What is your view on that?
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
Regardless, they now intend to shut down the lot. Is that a bad call?
I don't know enough to make a call on it.
I just often think we point at Govts not having done nothing prior to a catastrophe and then when they do do something to hopefully limit potential catastrophe we are equally scathing.
I do understand the Govt would know next to nothing about Nuclear Engineering and limits but that would be for most things too and sometimes a big call is made even if way over the top
Forget the immediate response. Again, I'm talking about the ultimate response which has been to completely shut down all nuclear power in Germany. What is your view on that?
I don't have an educated view on that.
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@antipodean said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Rancid-Schnitzel said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
This is a really interesting article from a guy that has been right at the heart of pushing for investment into renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which lead to the Obama government investing $150 billion into the technology. Basically says it's not going to happen, and the only way we can effectively cut CO2 emissions is through nuclear power
Makes a very strong case for it, to be honest I'm sold.
Further to that, this announcement which sounds very promising:
Interested in the Ferns thoughts?
I'm one of those hypocritical numpties who thinks nuclear is awesome... just nowhere near me. And it's that kind of irrational fear that means nuclear will probably never gain popular appeal. The environmental lobby have also been screaming about the evils of nuclear for generations. I doubt they'll swallow their pride on this one.
They must be pretty damn safe though. The one in Japan that was hit by a tsunami was built in the 70s and it seems to have survived ok. Still didn't stop that dummkoph Merkel from closing all the plants in Germany, a country known for typhoons and tsunamis.....
She temporarily closed 7 of 17 as a precaution due to them being the oldest. Not really a bad call I wouldn't have thought.... as a precaution
Precaution against a tsunami?
I would assume a precaution of their potential vulnerability due to their age against any consequence? I don't really know as I wasn't there.
Regardless, they now intend to shut down the lot. Is that a bad call?
I don't know enough to make a call on it.
I just often think we point at Govts not having done nothing prior to a catastrophe and then when they do do something to hopefully limit potential catastrophe we are equally scathing.
I do understand the Govt would know next to nothing about Nuclear Engineering and limits but that would be for most things too and sometimes a big call is made even if way over the top
Forget the immediate response. Again, I'm talking about the ultimate response which has been to completely shut down all nuclear power in Germany. What is your view on that?
I don't have an educated view on that.
What's your view on nuclear power in general?
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
-
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
I read that too on this thread but still don't know jack about it.
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
I read that too on this thread but still don't know jack about it.
Did you read the article I linked to? The guy does a pretty good job of explaining the shortcomings of renewable energy sources and the benefits of nuclear. I agree that I am generally happy to defer to experts on this. My main vested interests are cheaper power, and it would be good if we stopped pumping pollution into the environment as we don't really understand the long-term consequences of that, so am trying to understand it at least in layman's terms
-
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
He's just polishing the Power Wall.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel it sparks joy.
Anyway, nuclear. I'm actually a fan. I think it ticks pretty much every box in terms of reliability, emissions, and safety - IF it is done right and the required steps aren't skipped.
The problem? It costs a fuckton to set up.
Over its lifespan - which could be as long as 80 years - a nuclear power plant is actually one of the cheapest options going around. That wasn't a problem when government owned the infrastructure from the generation through transmission, distribution, and right down to the switchboard on your house/business.
They generally don't do that any more in Australia, because privatisation of networks and the retail market not getting the level of competition promised. Long story.
The only way someone would consider a nuclear plant in Oz* is if a government body underwrote their losses for (say) 30-50 years. That is a big ask for any modern financier, after all. The government would run screaming to renewables before sinking taxpayer money into that.
The waste can be an issue, though we have heaps of wide brown nothing to store it in. If you want to avoid waste, you get yourself a Gen IV reactor which burns almost all the fissile material.
Gen IV reactors are yet to enter commercial use outside Russia - which therefore makes it highly likely their Gen IV is complete bullshit and not doing what it says. The reason? Gen IV is waaaaaaaaaaay more expensive than your garden variety reactor.
Nobody is going to pay overs to save the planet, after all.
The other thing we really need to look into is SMR - Small Modular Reactor - tech. Higher cost / MWh than a standard "big" reactor, these little chaps are going to be very important for extraplanetary journeys where the ships are likely to be nuke-powered, and colonies established using nuclear. Long running, minimal maintenance, less issues with cracks and water use.
It may be that we rapidly build nuclear if the naysaying about renewables (hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, storage, etc) don't end up getting close to what we need. But most models have renewables - in Australia at least - comfortably serving above 70%. And the advancement in tech probably pushes it closer to 95% in the next 5 years.
*presuming they've overcome the hurdle of getting Federal Government approval to even contemplate it as we have legislation around preventing that
Climate Change