Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
Abbott's Path For Human Extinction (Read 4915 times)
Rider
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male
Re: Abbott's Path For Human Extinction
Reply #30 - Mar 31st, 2014 at 3:23pm
 
google says 'cooling towers' - simple solution, the fish are happy and that is all that matters.

enough air time to a subject that only 1 in 150 MP's give a toss about.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
____
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Abbott's Path For Human Extinction
Reply #31 - Mar 31st, 2014 at 3:46pm
 
Rider wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 1:53pm:
____ wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 1:31pm:
Rider wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 1:02pm:
____ wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 11:41am:
Rider wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 11:23am:
____ wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 11:17am:
Swagman wrote on Mar 31st, 2014 at 10:19am:
Time to invite some private consortiums to establish a network of nuclear power stations on the Australian mainland.

We could utilise our abundant uranium and thorium reserves to generate an over supply of energy with little or no CO2 emissions thus bringing our arbitrary emission target down.  We could then export the over supply of energy to Asia and make cash to cover the cost of the compounding bill for hand outs and get browny points for reducing Asia's CO2 emissions as well.

Wink  Smiley



A. Is your plan for nuclear to completely replace fossil electricity and if so, by when.

B. Nuclear is not suitable for a hot climate and we are on trajectory for an extreme heat climate. How do you suggest we circumvent this situation or will we be without electricity during heatwaves?

C. Water to run the nukes when water in in shortage during drought.


A. Plenty of coal for decades and decades/who said we should replace all coal and why on earth would we? Its clean, reliable, proven and sustainable.
B. Nonsense. Complete. And. Utter.
C. Dams/sited on coastline.



If coal is clean why are the cons wanting "clean coal"

Quote:
The Coalition will redirect $158.3 million from the Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships programme towards clean coal technologies, including carbon geo-sequestration projects associated with coal-fired electricity generation.



http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2010/08/14/real-action-mining-and-resource...


Heat and Drought Pose Risks for Nuclear Power Plants

Like coal-fired power plants, nuclear facilities use large amounts of water for cooling purposes. After water has cycled through the plant, it is discharged back into a nearby waterway, usually a lake or a river, at a higher temperature. State regulations prohibit nuclear plants from operating once water temperatures go above a certain threshold, in part because it could compromise the safe operation of the facility, and also because discharging very warm water can kill fish and other marine life.


http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/heat-and-drought-pose-risks-for-nuclear-powe...


1. lib policy from 2010 is so......meh...2010. Guess what, moving on....
2. no risk to life, no risk of meltdown, leak or plant failure, risk of not meeting environmental guidelines and facing a fine....HUGE...sound the alarms the greenies are gonna fine industry again!!!!




Cons realised coal was dirty in 2010, so what has changed to coal since for you to now claim coal is clean?

No risk to life, then why do insurance companies refuse to insure households to the risk of nuclear accidents. Surely if it is as safe as you say, insurances companies would see insuring homes and lives on parr to taking candy from babies.




1. the Greens and Labor don't have the mortgage on bad policies, this is an example of one the Libs have got wrong. Its dumb. Its almost as dumb as last weeks irrelevancies re Dames and Sirs.

2. The "no risk to life" sentence was lifted out of the article you posted..you should check the totality of your source documents. BTW Insurance companies are not the litmus test of what is right or wrong. They are lecherous conniving profit driven organisations who feed on humanities weaknesses and stupidity. Clearly on this basis alone you should despise them and never quote their wisdom ever again. 



We are all aware the libs have bad policies yet still you claimed coal is clean and it appears you are alone in this opinion.

What is your opinion based on.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Rider
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male
Re: Abbott's Path For Human Extinction
Reply #32 - Mar 31st, 2014 at 4:15pm
 
Stop burning coal tomorrow and you'll work it out.
1. resume whale slaughtering for blubber oil for lamps - should be popular and will increase employment in the ailing fishing industry
2. resume forest clearing wholesale for heat,cooking and light sources - again, another hugely popular move in the green movements, adding significant employment prospects for women and children and the ailing Axe manufacturing industry.
3. return to real smog and poverty


Clean is clearly a subjective description. Burning coal in a modern power plant is significantly cleaner than burning coal, wood or cow dung in every household oven, open fire and heater.

And its a lot easier to find than fairy dust, you know, the sh1te you lot think will run wind turbines and solar wankfests.

How's that our (the tax payers) $90million investment into Tim Flannerys Geodynamics going? Just as easy as drilling a hole and pumping a bit of water down it he reckoned...... Grin Grin Grin Grin 

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
____
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 33410
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Abbott's Path For Human Extinction
Reply #33 - Mar 31st, 2014 at 5:15pm
 
That's your supply of evidence for your coal is clean opinion.
o.k


Now since no one is forwarding burning wood and whale blubber. How is coal clean compared with what has already been forwarded. Like solar thermal?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grendel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male
Re: Abbott's Path For Human Extinction
Reply #34 - Mar 31st, 2014 at 5:42pm
 
I've heard and seen Abbott blamed for a lot of things...
but Human Extinction?


Had to be a Green  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print