Nuclear energy is more expensive than renewables, CSIRO report finds

Clean hands? Strawman fallacy? Have I been bragging about American “clean hands”? No. I’m simply pointing out the fact your country doesn’t care about the environment as much as you’ve been led to believe. You done been snookered.

If you were serious you would stop strip mining coal and selling it to the least pollution conscious countries on the planet. If America was serious we would have built nuclear power decades ago.

What “infrastructure” do you need to stop deforestation in Australia?

SMH.

 

We are but first we have to build the replacement infrastructure and that is what we are doing. In fact there is a plan to lay a cable from the Northern Territory to Singapore to sell power but not sure that is going to work when you have a lovely source of geothermal just down the road from them

https://time.com/6311538/australia-singapore-suncable-clean-energy/

 

I took a deeper look into the situation. The light water reactor was built 5 miles from the caldera of a volcano that last erupted 18000 years ago.

How do you know the stupidity wasn't failing to fuel the reactor?

 

I'll bet, you're not driving your house, filled with about 140 people around the world... Under water...

 

You are being forced to mine coal for China and Europe and destroy your forests because of a lack of some “infrastructure”?

What infrastructure do you need to stop profiteering from coal exports and to stop killing trees? Be specific.

Is this a crisis or not? Actions speak louder than words. Even ones set to music. Nobody is acting like there’s a crisis. Why?

 

Solar and onshore wind are about as useful as monkey farts.

Nuclear is better than coal. Isn't Australia mining coal to sell to China at an alarming rate?

You do understand China is in the same atmosphere as Australia right?

An Aussie sitting upon a 5000' tall pile of coal they mine lecturing others about green energy is like a man murdering his children and lecturing me on child care.

Your country supplies the biggest polluter the world has ever seen.

 

"Told" =/= "Demonstrated"

 

It wasn’t the volcano but the fault lines running to it. Bottom line is that reactor has sat there doing nothing for a lot of years due to “safety concerns”

 

How much damage has the facility sustained since it's construction?

 

Permit applicants must establish a fund for the decommissioning of their own plant.


Direct your attention to this section of the regulation: § 50.75

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part050/part050-0075.html

(1) For an applicant for or holder of an operating license under part 50, the report must contain a certification that financial assurance for decommissioning will be (for a license applicant), or has been (for a license holder), provided in an amount which may be more, but not less, than the amount stated in the table in paragraph (c)(1) of this section adjusted using a rate at least equal to that stated in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. For an applicant for a combined license under subpart C of 10 CFR part 52, the report must contain a certification that financial assurance for decommissioning will be provided no later than 30 days after the Commission publishes notice in the Federal Register under § 52.103(a) in an amount which may be more, but not less, than the amount stated in the table in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, adjusted using a rate at least equal to that stated in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

 

So, the funding is guaranteed by the operator, not the government. Is that right?

 

Looks like that's true in the US anyway. I can't imagine other regulations would overlook that eventuality.

 

I wouldn't mind nuclear power. It has a good safety record and I trust our standards....more then Russia...

I will tell you that in kansas...the wind farms are creating a lot of conflict. The property owners want to lease their land. But many kansans hate how they look. Personally...they look majestic to me.

 

Looking a little deeper I find that many licensees have sued the federal government for failing to hold up its end of the deal to build its own centralized waste storage facility for military nuclear waste. There have been federal payouts awarded in these lawsuits, but I wouldn't exactly call them a subsidy.

During permitting, the government asserted an interest in collecting privately generated waste into their own centralized storage facility to secure the waste, and the operators included that policy in their planning. Absent that facility, the plant owners were on the hook to secure the waste on their own at much greater expense than if everything was stored in one place. Hence the legal awards...

 

when they become safe enough and small enough that everyone wants one, only the rich will probably be able to buy them

 

Can you think of another technology where that is the case?

 

nuclear seems to have more restrictions, but we will see

 

No, I was going to say this is the case for just about every technology.

Isn't this the basis for every argument for the government funding of research & development of new technology?

 

I do not mind the government investing in research in this field

 

Well I don't see that. It's a technology that requires processes, expertise and most definitely established government regulations. So I don't see "mini nuclear" power plants for individual homes in the near future.

But we don't know...go back 1 generation and who could have imagined back then a 2024 world?

 

technology like this

https://www.popularmechanics.com/sc...ive-diamond-battery-will-run-for-28000-years/

will we get that, can we use those in cell phones, laptops, etc...

 

They produce about 1.9v and can supply .0000005A of current. This is about 1 micro watt of power. To run a single LED bulb continuously you'd need about 132,000 of them wired in series and parallel.

It's worse than the idea that you could power your home by connecting a turbine to a dripping faucet.

Not to mention the fact that you'd have to wait 28000 years to get back a fraction of the energy you used to produce them.

 

new technology, could get better and better

 

I'm not investing my money into it until I see a path for return.

RE may be "cheaper" than nuclear power, but remember how much money you saved on a calm night when you are shivering in the dark.

 

No not really. Electrical power requires the production of current. The entire reason the cell lasts so long is that the cell can only supply a tiny amount of current.

It has no potential to be the power of the sun in the palm of your hands. It's more like the power of the lume on the hands of your watch.