Most protagonists of nuclear power like to say it is clean, meaning no CO2 is released, as though this desirable. Certainly it is a selling point for people who think that carbon dioxide is the driver of potentially lethal global warming.
In fact carbon dioxide it is the foundation of life on earth, “the breath of life,” and despite the rising level in recent times, now above 400 parts per million (0.04%) it is still dangerously close to the minimum required to sustain life on earth,
There has to be a way to use the emission-free character of nuclear power to hasten the legalization without at the same time supporting the demonisation of CO2 which is the foundational lie that underpins both irrational climate alarmism and the suicidal net zero ponzi scheme.
So lets hear no more talk about nuclear power as clean energy because this implicitly supports the foundational lie!
Nuclear power should never have been made illegal and resistance to nuclear power in the community is largely the result of a worldwide communist campaign that morphed out of the Ban the Bomb protests in the 1950s. The Australian John Grover described this campaign in some detail, and the consequences are still with us in the form of bitter resistance from the ALP and The Greens. http://www.the-rathouse.com/2011/Grover-Power.html
Nuclear power should be legalised as soon as possible but we can’t expect to have a significant amount of nuclear power in the grid inside two decades. The Coalition nuclear policy (which we have yet to see) is irrelevant to the looming power crisis and distracts attention from the fact that the Coalition has signed the same net-zero suicide note as the Government.
WE will have to burn coal for many years or the lights will go out and everything else that depends on a continuous supply of electricity. Even if people have an irrational fear of CO2, the need to keep burning fossil fuels is simply a matter of fact based on the ABC of intermittent energy production.
- The grid must have a continuous input of power.
- The continuity of wind and solar input is interrupted by nights with little wind.
- There is no feasible or affordable storage available to fill in the gaps.
That is why the so-called transition to wind and solar power has hit the wall and we are one coal station closure away from blackouts every night when the wind is low. Eventually nuclear power may replace coal and in that event we will have power without CO2 emissions. Speaking on behalf of the green plants, that will be disappointing.
People who want to use the “no emissions” line to make people more receptive to nuclear power, can say that there are no emissions and in the same breath they need to explain that we will have to burn coal for a decade or three. That is just a matter of fact. TINA There is No Alternative.
It is time for Coalition politicians to tell the simple truth and explain the facts of the matter to the public. They showed some ticker and a hint of leadership in The Racist Voice debate and that helped to converted a losing cause into a win for NO. Maybe they can do it again.
I don’t think we can expect much from Dutton. He’s not a leader’s shoelace.
The Nationals led the way on the Voice, thanks to Jacinta Price, who later toured the country with Warren Mundine taking the no argument to the people.
Dutton was late to the party.
Welcome back, Rafe, and thank you for the work you and your allies have been quietly doing on this issue.
Unfortunately, there is a hurdle to be overcome before your efforts can be effectively utilised: It’s an image problem.
Let me express it this way: You are presented with two papers on this issue, but you only have time to read one. You are not provided a precis of each, merely the sole authors: Dr. Judith Sloan, and Adam Bandt. Which one would you choose?
I would be willing to bet that most Cats would choose option A: Judith Sloan. Those of us who are familiar with her reputation and output would choose her over Adam Bandt – whose reputation and output we are also familiar with – because she aligns with our values (the scientific method, a rejection of consensus science and appeal to authority). We would reject Bandt because he exhibits the opposite characteristics. We do not regard him as ‘credible’ in a rigorous scientific research sense, and are more likely to view what he says or writes with a less-than-open-mind. We may even question the personal motives behind his behaviour, and transfer that suspicion to the individual himself.
Here’s my point: After decades of very successful and almost wholly unopposed labeling and personal attacks by the well-resourced ‘Our Sista Gaia is being violated’ lobby, it is realists and conservatives who have been branded – in the eyes of the majority of the public who are unaware of another perspective – as the credibility-lacking, motivated-by-malice, enemies-of-nature who are neither to be trusted, nor even listened to. WE are the Adam Bandts in the eyes of regressives.
For as long as that Green = Good, Conservative = Evil Monsta theme exists, we will be headbutting a brick wall, because we need individuals, organisations, and political parties to listen to us – to yourself and your committed friends – with an open mind.
Let’s say you have been invited to make a presentation to a politician. Do you present yourself in stubbies, thongs, and unwashed singlet, dragging a supermarket bag of loose, crumpled-up notes written in crayon?
Like it or not, it’s about image first. To both the general public, and politicians. Being associated with Klimate Killas or Gaia Molesterers, or *GASP* right-wing conservatives is not likely to get you an invite to property developer cocktail parties.
Why must we constantly DEFEND ourselves though? Why can we not ATTACK? Smartly and in a targeted manner, seize the initiative and turn to insults around to suggest to the public that despite their best intentions, they are being duped. They are being duped in some instances, by organisations which are foreign funded. Why would such organisations be concerned with little Australia? What motivates them?
Apologies for the lengthy screed, but I’ve always admired your efforts but been frustrated by the perceived results. The more damage is done to our economy and standard of living, the greater effort it will take for future generations to dig themselves out of a neo-medieval pit.
If you really want to put the Coal back into Coalition they should be pushing HELE plants on our reserves of coal and especially where the infrastructure(poles and wires) is already in place! We have reserves in the hundreds of years supply ready to go and still the cheapest form of electricity there is!
We have been betrayed by politicians and the left media, which is most of it.
The climate scam is about knobbling the west, while “developing nations” continue to emit CO2 regardless, nothing more.
The combination of privatisation of power and the climate scam is the poison that needs an antidote. Matt Canavan knows it. We need coal power and plenty of it.
Their reaction to COVID was the same sort of ignorant panic based on lack of information – we read about the dangers of mRNA vaccines well before they became mandatory, so why didn’t pollies inform themselves, ditto the “Health Authorities” and the mainly leftist media.
Episode 3 of Landman and Billy Bob’s wind rant, is a start to getting the word out.
Just noting that ALL of the Carbon Dioxide sequestered in plants and such, was once in the atmosphere
It was those nice plants that started using the stuff as FOOD, helped along by a dash of sunlight
I also note that the “other” greenhouse gas” is WATER VAPOUR.
When the usual sociopaths start demonizing water, things are getting desperate.
BTW, a basic nuclear reactor is quite a simple bit of construction. Before and during WW2, the Nazis built dozens of “research” reactors. Some were installed in the basements of schools and even Breweries. Several of these structures survive today and interestingly, seem to show little or NO residual radioactivity.
There were at least TWO tests of “going critical” as well. often described as a “fizzle”, the “device was basically arranged to start to go critical, but then “melt” from its own heat. Tough luck for the concentration-Camp inmates who were strategically placed at various distances, to “test” the action of the radiation “pulse” the was emitted as the device was going critical.
The two US bombs used on japan were “air-burst” at several thousand feet altitude.. When the initiators fired, the FIRST thing that occurred was this radiation impulse; making people and structures “go away” from HEAT alone. Then the big BANG occurred, blasting the surrounding areas almost featureless.
There was a VERY good reason for the choice of targets, apart from them being industrial and / or transport hubs.BOTH cities (and the other contenders) are situated in “bowls, thus “containing the physical blast wave to some extent.
If yo ever get to Nagasaki, visit the “Glover House”, which overlooks the harbour and is the original timber construction. It suffered no significant damage in the strike..The original “pile” for the Manhattan Project used a LOT of timber in its construction.
See also “Thorium” as a fissile material..
Only Canavan and Antic are, I understand, those in the Coalition telling the truth.
I really can’t see the Lieborals and NP, who signed us up to the Net Zero fallacy, changing their policy and recinding that traitorous error. They may promote nuclear but still allow/encourage the wind and solar alternatives. They cannot be trusted.
WATER.
You can have unlimited coal and the latest furnaces, but you need a prodigious amount of WATER to make the steam to drive the turbines AND for general local cooling.
There is a large coal-fired power station not far north of Toowoomba, here in Qld. It was purpose-built in that location because of that local coal deposit AND a source of fresh water.
HOWEVER, this water source actually proved unreliable, so a serious pipeline was built from the Wivenhoe Dam, away to the east and nearly two thousand feet lower in altitude.
So now they use “electricity” to pump water across country and up the range to stabilize ware delivery to the power plant.
Is there an actual, serious electrical or mechanical engineer in ANY parliament ANYWHERE in Oz?
Bear in mind,the old joke:
Mechanical engineers build weapons,
Electrical engineers build guidance systems.
Civil engineers build targets.
That was built as part of the so called water grid to “drought proof” Poowoomba, which nearly ran out of water during the millenium drought. There was a massive outcry when Di Thorley was talking about building a water recycling plant (hence the Poowoomba moniker).
“You can have unlimited coal and the latest furnaces, but you need a prodigious amount of WATER to make the steam to drive the turbines AND for general local cooling.”
For cooling, yes. For steam, no.
The steam loop is closed – it has to be because the water inside needs to be surgical purity or better. Any dust, or bilogical contamination will “sand bast” the turbine blades to destruction in short order.
As you might expect when you realise the steam is driving an 800,000+ HP engine (the generator).
For cooling, you can also use a “cooling tower” – these are the big steam belching towers you typically see on TV coverage. They recover 90% of the water, BTW – it condenses on the inside and runs/drips down (that is the design).
If you have water nearby (like Eraring on NSW central coast), there are limits on how hot the cooling water can be when it is returned, so these pump huge amounts of cooling water, much more than is required for the actual cooling process. IIRC, 80-90% of the pumped cooling water does NOT go through the heat exchangers, it just “dilutes” the actual cooloing water to a lower temperature.