4 May 2025 Friends Of The Earth Australia
Coalition's nuclear policy must be nuked   
The Don’t Nuke the Climate initiative has today welcomed the clear rejection of nuclear power by Australian voters. Seven News political editor Mark Riley summed up the Coalition’s problem:


“The party that chose nuclear energy as its policy has exploded in a nuclear bomb set on them by voters tonight.”   


The idea of domestic nuclear power is over. The Coalition now must ditch any lingering nuclear ambitions and all political parties need to move swiftly to advance a renewable energy future for our nation.

Dave Sweeney, nuclear free campaigner with the Australian Conservation Foundation, said:
“Australians have rejected nuclear power and that door is now not just closed, it is welded shut. Nuclear power is too slow, too risky and too costly – in every way.


“The economic, environmental and community advantages of renewables have been embraced by Australians. Today we are nearly half way there with around 45% of Australia’s electricity coming from renewables. Our job – and the governments mandate ‒ is to speedily, sensibly and sustainably advance the renewable energy future.


“It’s time to stop playing politics with nuclear distractions and delays. It’s time to get on with the clean energy transition, effective climate action and building an energy future that is renewable, not radioactive.”


Dr. Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth, said:


“There is overwhelming evidence that the Coalition lost votes and seats because of its nuclear power policy.


“Polling by the Liberals Against Nuclear group demonstrated the nuclear policy’s drag on the Coalition’s vote in marginal seats and across the nation.


“Forty-six percent of voters in Peter Dutton’s electorate of Dickson said they were less likely to vote for Mr. Dutton because of the nuclear power policy.

“In 2007, the Coalition took a pro-nuclear power policy to the election but suffered a large swing against it and lost the election with leader John Howard losing his seat. Yesterday, the Coalition suffered a large swing against it and lost the election with leader Peter Dutton losing his seat.


“The lesson should be clear. The Coalition’s nuclear power policy must be buried once and for all.”   

After last nights ass kicking, I doubt nuclear will remain policy for the libs. They'll go back to bringing in lumps of coal as their new energy policy

I thought Dutton got it wrong to want to build so many nuclear power stations -

it would have been nice if we had even one of them -
just so we could say we were up to date – we were a modern country -
as a status symbol not appearing as Luddites.

At the moment – we have:
solar panels,
batteries,
hydro,
pumped hydro for storage,

and we also have coal and gas but unlike most modern countries
we don't have even one nuclear power station.

Maybe we could have built a whole nuclear industry ? -
enriching Uranium to make fuel rods and selling them overseas.

I think there has been a lack of vision towards nuclear energy here in Australia.
France gets 70% of their energy from nuclear.

Brian Ross wrote on May 4^th, 2025 at 6:51pm:



What history  - Lucas Heights?  - British nuke tests?

Its sad that the media have brainwashed people about nuclear power, Australia will always be the bridesmaid when it comes to manufacturing industry. No large manufacturing company will ever want to build factories in Australia due to the unstable and costly energy sector.

Bobby. wrote on May 4^th, 2025 at 7:45pm:


That is a very small load.

Leroy wrote on May 4^th, 2025 at 7:50pm:



It's still experimental.
There are many technical problems to iron out before they make a large reactor.
Imagine safe reactors that can't melt down?   

Brian Ross wrote on May 4^th, 2025 at 10:20pm:



Google AI

Australia does not currently enrich uranium. While Australia possesses significant uranium reserves, it exports the mined uranium as concentrate for enrichment and fuel production in other countries. There have been past considerations and research into enrichment capabilities in Australia, but it has not materialized due to factors like cost, skills, and non-proliferation agreements.



https://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/industry/minerals-and-mining/mining/former-mi...

Port Pirie treatment plant

yes Brian,
they made yellowcake and they also contaminated land.

They did not enrich Uranium.

Belgarion wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 9:12am:


Australia is not a third world country and is not sliding into third world status....Nuclear energy for Australia was always a gamble and was only proposed to avoid urgent action on climate change....Australia has rejected Dutton's Nuclear fantasy and claiming Australian's are ignorant to defend the failed LNP campaign is denialism 101....Ignorance and denial delivered the worst election defeat in Australia since the second world war....What a pathetic attempt to blame everyone accept the Coalition for their self inflicted defeat!!!

philperth2010 wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 10:30am:


I agree that the coalition ran an abysmal campaign, however that does not alter the facts about nuclear power. If it was a fantasy as you claim there would not be 32 counties using it now with around 30 others in the process of developing it.  The real fantasy is believing in the 'renewables' myth, as has been proven recently in Spain and Portugal. The pity is that we in Australia are being left behind because of the very effective scare campaign run by Labor and the anti-nuclear lobby.

On a related note, I was having a beer or three over the weekend with some ex navy friends, one of whom had been a nuclear power plant operator. His opinion on the irrational fear of nuclear power was interesting to say the least. Also I did a quick check and he did not have three eyes or glow in the dark, so I will take his opinion on nuclear power over that of any politician or scaremonger.

Bobby. wrote on May 4^th, 2025 at 11:25pm:


What do you think Yellow Cake is, Bobby?  It is the first stage in enrichment.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...

Brian Ross wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 11:33am:


If you say so, but I was training at a power station in the mid 80's to run a nuclear power station.

Brian Ross wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 11:28am:


No it is concentrated not enriched.

"Enriched uranium is a type of uranium in which the percent composition of uranium-235 (written 235U) has been increased through the process of isotope separation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium

If you want to talk first steps then it is the mining.

I think it will come up again once the true reality of 'degeneratives' ... sorry ... 'renewables' .........  (they degenerate from Day One and do so rapidly - besides built in China they have a chip installed so when The Fleet is off the Heads and the Disappearing Gun at La Perouse isn't in action any more - we're done once they shut off all the power) ..........  comes into play, the People will realise they need a more solid and affordable alternative.... NOT capable of being remote controlled from Beijing...

Plenty of thousands of feet deep mines out there to 'store' nuclear waste in ... besides - just drop it at Maralinga - what pharken difference would it make anyway?

I'm almost certain I saw that Mustang recovered from there in full flight mode again - and it can never not be radioactive.

Meantime China and India are building HUNDREDS of coal-fired stations and nukes as well... while we dither here about a remotely possible few irradiated walkabouters out there... and pat ourselves on the backs for being climate heroes worthy of St Greta ...... while the world fills up with smog up north....

Read 'On The Beach' ..... you might imagine that means the Northern Hemisphere will go under in a cloud of smoke - cancers and lung disease and heart disease etc.... while the Southern Hemisphere is exempt....

https://earth.nullschool.net/

lee wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 1:32pm:



Brian doesn't know.   

Uranium has only 0.7% if the isotope U235 in it. (the rest is U238)

It has to be enriched to at least 4% U235 to be usable for fuel rods.

Leroy wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 2:57pm:




https://corporate.dw.com/en/fact-check-was-the-iberian-blackout-caused-by-too-mu...


Claim: "Renewables, in this case solar, have just caused the first major #power outage in Spain,
specifically due to an oversupply of solar," an alleged physicist with a German account, posted on X, formerly Twitter, garnering almost 100,000 views (as of 30.04.2025, 16:40).

The user refered to Fritz Vahrenholt, a German chemistry professor and manager, who is critical of energy transition efforts and had explained in another post on X, which attracted more than 400,000 views, that before the grid failure in Spain, the production of renewable energies, especially solar, had increased more than demand.

DW fact check: Unproven

The cause of the power outage has not been conclusively clarified. It is correct that at the time of the blackout, solar energy provided around 60% (19.3 GW) of the power available in the Spanish grid. Moreover, it appears that solar power plants dominated electricity production in the southwest of Spain.

philperth2010 wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 2:54pm:


Since they are still investigating?

Keep it going , was always good for a giggle

Reads to me that the GRID - a huge and upcoming issue HERE - was the basic cause.

Now then - whether it's 'renewables' of nuclear - the stories are that the grid is not able to hold the loads... it needs a lot more than a puff of hot air from Cambra to fix it.... and wow - I thought it was a private concern these days..... so why should WE - the taxpayer be paying for it?

I guess the government may have to resume it and do it properly - that'll create some jobs for a while!!

Pity about that Chain Home of nukes along the Murray - we can't just blow Victoria off of Australia now... crack it off and let it slip away into the Antarctic Ocean... cool story, bro ...

Nationals MPs '100 per cent' back nuclear being kept as Coalition dissects loss

John Smith wrote on May 5^th, 2025 at 3:22pm:


You did not actually read the references then. .

Here is an uncomfortable truth - in glaring headlines!

Tiny Australia contributes 4.5% to
world pollution/climate change!!!

Harsh truth:-

"

Australia has a global carbon footprint that far exceeds its economic size and population - and is responsible for around 4.5% of global fossil carbon dioxide emissions

, with 80% of those emissions coming from its fossil fuel exports, according to a new analysis released by Climate Analytics Australia today."

Simple - to cut down on its comparatively (there's that word for dividie again) over-heavy carbon 'footprint' - the only way forward for Australia is not 'renewables' and 'electric cars' - but to stop exporting fossil fuels!!

Kinda makes you wish you'd signed up for the three-headed Murray Cod, don' it?

I'm looking for shares in nuclear power startup companies right now..........................

Nuclear policy must be fully reviewed and considered.... this is not a party comment - it is a real world comment...

Australia is ruined - we - the people - need to start somewhere in taking back the billabong to drain it.... and it will not happen overnight - it took fifty years of mismanagement to wreck the joint - we can't just bulldoze the ruins and build over them - I can promise you nothing but sweat, blood, tears, and cash costs - with many of you overweight young folk losing some weight for a change - before Australia sees the light of day again...

How do YOU propose we go about finding the money to rebuild Australia once we put a stop to the insane mass immigration?  Raise taxes as you central governists always demand?  Do a Victoria and borrow borrow borrow (not Brian Boru, either) for the same result?? 

Oh - I get it - you WANT it all - but like an Abo - you want someone else to pay for it all!!  Sorry I interrupted you.....

All you young pricks and conts wallowing in self-pity and luxury should be out there with a pick and shovel..... instead of whining about how your Elders worked like dogs instead of 'having a career sitting on their arse' like you and imagining you are hard done by because you don't instantly have the best paying jobs- as the sheilas are doing and have done for years now...... your heroic forebears of The Second Greatest Generation - who built on the work and sacrifice of TGG - worked like dogs to have hopefully a home of their own and thus be 'rich' - while you bustards - like Abos - just want it all handed to you for nothing.

YOU want to sit on your arse and whine about it all day like a whinging Abo and have it all handed to you for no work - just like some sheila.

Hey - kanga!!  Aren't Mummy and Daddy and Granny and Grampa, who worked in Stygian conditions in many cases, and who had fewer children during The Enlightenment that 'freed' women (to go into servitude alongside men) etc (Christ - you lot are stupid - you demand everything all ways at once - no wonder you can't work out if you're a man or a woman) - going to leave you enough in their wills? 

You poor little bastard... you must be an orphan....

https://www.ansto.gov.au/our-science/nuclear-technologies/reactor-systems/advanc...

Which do you want StupidKanga?  Women to stay home and have more children and make a good job of it and a return of the Good Old Days?  Or your 'freedom' to sit around all day and rant about Boomers and blame everyone but yourself for your own lack of action and ability to DO anything?

Brian Ross wrote on May 4^th, 2025 at 10:20pm:

We are not talking about nuclear BOMBS, cockwomble.

Wake up.