South Australia's premier, Peter Malinauskas, is in 'furious agreement' with PM that nuclear power would not work for Australia   :)
ABC News
Dec 7 2022

South Australia's premier has comprehensively rejected the future use of nuclear power generators in Australia, saying the "completely uneconomic" technology had already been thoroughly investigated and dismissed.

Key points:
Peter Malinauskas says he did not "seek to suggest that nuclear power should be part of the mix in our nation"
He says nuclear power is not a viable option because it would make energy more expensive
Mr Malinauskas says price caps on gas and coal are "worthy of consideration"
In an interview with ABC's 7.30, Peter Malinauskas recast comments he made earlier in the week in a News Corp interview, that were widely interpreted as pro-nuclear energy and were labelled a mistake by the Prime Minister.

"I didn't seek to suggest that nuclear power should be part of the mix in our nation," the South Australian premier told ABC's 7.30 host, Sarah Ferguson.

"I think we should acknowledge that nuclear power would make energy more expensive in our nation and [we should] put it to one side, rather than having a culture war debate around nuclear power."

In his earlier remarks, Mr Malinauskas reportedly said he "always thought the ideological opposition that exists in some quarters to nuclear power is ill-founded". He said people should be "open-minded" about the technology.



Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded by telling an Adelaide radio station he had a "great deal of respect for Mali, but everyone's entitled to get one or two things wrong".

However, in his ABC's 7.30 interview, the South Australian premier said his only intention had been to say the nuclear power debate should be contested solely on the evidence.

"I was simply saying: 'We've got people who are advocating that position without any reference to what the implications would be of the price on energy in our nation at the moment'. And that strikes me as being rather foolhardy," he explained.

He said he had spoken with the Prime Minister on Monday evening and said they were in "furious agreement" on nuclear energy.

Gas, coal price caps 'worthy of consideration'

State and territory leaders will meet with Mr Albanese at national cabinet on Friday.

The federal government is planning an intervention in the energy market and is understood to be considering price caps on gas and coal.

Mr Malinauskas said the idea was "worthy of consideration".

However, he said, the exact design of the policy would be "very important indeed" to strike a balance that brought prices down without sending "unnecessary signals" to investors.

Nuclear power would work in Australia we should embrace it.

As for cost our power bills going up show this renewable rubbish isn't as cheap as some claim.


Quote:

Big Wind's Bogus Subsidies Despite being famous for touting the idea that the rich don’t pay their fair share of taxes, investor Warren Buffet seems to be perfectly fine with receiving tax breaks for making investments in Big Wind. "I will do anything that is basically covered by the law to reduce Berkshire's tax rate," Buffet told an audience in Omaha, Nebraska recently. "For example, on wind energy, we get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms.That's the only reason to build them. They don't make sense without the tax credit."] https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nancy-pfotenhauer/2014/05/12/even-warren-buffet-admits-wind-energy-is-a-bad-investment

whiteknight wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 4:57pm:

South Australia's premier, Peter Malinauskas, is in 'furious agreement' with PM that nuclear power would not work for Australia   :) ABC News Dec 7 2022 South Australia's premier has comprehensively rejected the future use of nuclear power generators in Australia, saying the "completely uneconomic" technology had already been thoroughly investigated and dismissed. Key points: Peter Malinauskas says he did not "seek to suggest that nuclear power should be part of the mix in our nation" He says nuclear power is not a viable option because it would make energy more expensive Mr Malinauskas says price caps on gas and coal are "worthy of consideration" In an interview with ABC's 7.30, Peter Malinauskas recast comments he made earlier in the week in a News Corp interview, that were widely interpreted as pro-nuclear energy and were labelled a mistake by the Prime Minister. "I didn't seek to suggest that nuclear power should be part of the mix in our nation," the South Australian premier told ABC's 7.30 host, Sarah Ferguson. "I think we should acknowledge that nuclear power would make energy more expensive in our nation and [we should] put it to one side, rather than having a culture war debate around nuclear power." In his earlier remarks, Mr Malinauskas reportedly said he "always thought the ideological opposition that exists in some quarters to nuclear power is ill-founded". He said people should be "open-minded" about the technology. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese responded by telling an Adelaide radio station he had a "great deal of respect for Mali, but everyone's entitled to get one or two things wrong". However, in his ABC's 7.30 interview, the South Australian premier said his only intention had been to say the nuclear power debate should be contested solely on the evidence. "I was simply saying: 'We've got people who are advocating that position without any reference to what the implications would be of the price on energy in our nation at the moment'. And that strikes me as being rather foolhardy," he explained. He said he had spoken with the Prime Minister on Monday evening and said they were in "furious agreement" on nuclear energy. Gas, coal price caps 'worthy of consideration' State and territory leaders will meet with Mr Albanese at national cabinet on Friday. The federal government is planning an intervention in the energy market and is understood to be considering price caps on gas and coal. Mr Malinauskas said the idea was "worthy of consideration". However, he said, the exact design of the policy would be "very important indeed" to strike a balance that brought prices down without sending "unnecessary signals" to investors.

Like the Russians, Labor responds to every situation with unpredictable stupidity.  As do the Liberals and Greens, I hasten to add.
The Libs had been in office - never in power - for 8 years, the UK 'Conservatives' for 12.  Neither did a single conservative or non-Labor/Labour thing. Four years of Trump - wasted. So now all three countries have an energy and cost of living crisis of THEIR making, here perpetuated by bozos like Bowen and Albo.
Sock puppet in the US, Macaron in France, Xi Who Must be Obeyed in China, Piggy Vlad the Kremlin, Rocket Boy in FingFang.


WTF??!!!!!

whiteknight wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 4:57pm:

Gas, coal price caps 'worthy of consideration'

Ah yes. Subsidise the losses selling into the Australian market.

Meanwhile Germany is talking about proposing a super profits tax on all energy suppliers. The ones screaming the loudest? Solar and wind. They think it unfair to be hit like that. ::)

lee wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 5:37pm:

whiteknight wrote on Dec 7th, 2022 at 4:57pm: Gas, coal price caps 'worthy of consideration' Ah yes. Subsidise the losses selling into the Australian market. Meanwhile Germany is talking about proposing a super profits tax on all energy suppliers. The ones screaming the loudest? Solar and wind. They think it unfair to be hit like that. ::)

You're right:    :o

https://www.rt.com/business/567168-germany-windfall-tax-renewable-energy/

26 Nov, 2022

The German authorities are set to introduce a windfall tax of 90%
for some clean power generators
in an effort to fund a previously approved consumer aid package,
according to a draft law seen by Bloomberg. 

Under the proposed legislation, which is scheduled to be voted on in the upper house of the country's parliament on December 16, the government will skim earnings above €130 per megawatt-hour for solar, wind and nuclear. 


The news hasn’t been welcomed by renewable energy producers and energy lobby groups, both of which expect the new levy to hinder investments in the sector, which is seen as vital to wean Germany off fossil fuels purchased abroad.
READ MORE: Germany plans to slap energy firms with more tax – Reuters

The legislation will inevitably “suffocate” companies in the renewables sector,
which have been pouring a lot of money into new technology, according Andreas Jung, a lawmaker from the Christian Democrats, as cited by Bloomberg. 

The legislation comes as profits generated by energy firms have been soaring due to record high power prices in Germany.

The SA premier had a moment of insight and honesty, but the Labor politburo slapped him down hard for daring to express an opinion not in accordance with the party mainfesto.  Unfortunately he has spinelessly acquiesced, his pathetic backpedal making himself look foolish. But that is the price he must pay for questioning the word of AnAl.   ::)   

It is prohibitively expensive but that may change. And what about fusion when that is commercially viable?

Cost of nuclear should be judged against the cost of AGW.

Jovial Monk wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 8:36pm:

It is prohibitively expensive but that may change. And what about fusion when that is commercially viable? Cost of nuclear should be judged against the cost of AGW.

I think fusion will never produce a viable commercial reactor.

However - we already know that Thorium will work
if more money is pumped into it:

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1519823686/0#0

Thorium is nothing special.

Jovial Monk wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 9:04pm:

Thorium is nothing special.

Read the thread - molten salt reactors have been proven to work.

Jovial Monk wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 8:36pm:

Cost of nuclear should be judged against the cost of AGW.

So seeing as AGW is actually costing nothing then nuclear is prohibitively expensive?

Bobby. wrote on Dec 7^th, 2022 at 9:11pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Dec 7th, 2022 at 9:04pm: Thorium is nothing special. Read the thread - molten salt reactors have been proven to work.

Thorium is nothing special.

Fusion is moving from a science problem to an engineering one.

Nuclear power stations are dangerous . . . and global warming is not? The bottomline in all anti-nuclear arguments is cost, while we piss away money on any number of projects. In the mean time, when will Australia reach total renewable energy and storage? 2050? Maybe, but too late anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7EAfUeSBSQ