Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> Federal Politics >> Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1716599019

Message started by whiteknight on May 25th, 2024 at 11:03am

Title: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by whiteknight on May 25th, 2024 at 11:03am
Anthony Albanese lashes Peter Dutton’s ‘risky’ nuclear plan amid broader energy debate
May 24 2034
News.com.au
Anthony Albanese has called on Peter Dutton to come clean about his nuclear plan, discrediting the idea as a “risky proposition”, amid a broader debate on Australia’s energy future.   :(

The Opposition plans to build up to seven nuclear reactors across the country in places where coal and gas-fired stations already exist, but despite reports of where those locations might be, has remained tight lipped – promising voters the details will be released “in due course”.

The Coalition has also batted away suggestions it will cost up to $17bn and take up to two decades to build the first nuclear reactor, as outlined in a CSIRO report this week.

Mr Dutton doubled down on his plan to go nuclear on Friday, despite the report also stating the electricity produced by nuclear energy would cost twice as much as that of renewables.   :(

“We’ve got to get serious about a new energy system as we decarbonise and modernise, and nuclear is a key part of that,” Mr Dutton told Channel 9.


Mr Albanese said Mr Dutton needed to tell Australians what his plan was, because it was a “risky proposition” that “didn’t stack up”.

“He told people he would tell them in March, and then it was going to be before the budget, then the budget reply, and now we’re still waiting, now it’s June,” Mr Albanese told 4BC.

“He needs to say where they’re going to be, who’s going to pay for them, and how much they’ll cost.”

Mr Albanese, who will mark his second anniversary as Prime Minister on Friday by delivering a speech spruiking the need for “much more clean energy” to get Australia to net zero emissions by 2050, said the goal of his government was to shore up energy security.


Labor on Thursday launched its national battery strategy, aimed at improving Australia’s manufacturing output and reducing reliance on China.

Mr Dutton says the energy policy will be released ‘in due course’.

Mr Dutton said he wanted to believe battery power could provide the baseload power needed for the country but “it just can’t”, and poked holes in the reliability of wind and solar power.

“So you need to firm it up. And we know at the moment, Labor governments in Victoria and NSW are extending the life of coal-fired power stations because they’re worried about the lights going out,” he said.

The NSW government made a deal to extend the life of the Eraring power station, drawing the ire of the Greens and the teals.

Education Minister Jason Clare, appearing on Sunrise, said it was a “common sense step” to extend its life.

“But we have got to make the step from the old coal-fired power stations to renewable energy, and you can extend the life of these … for two years,” he said.

“What you can’t do is extend them for 16 years, which is what you would need to do if you went down Peter Dutton’s half-baked yellow cake idea of nuclear power that would cost a bomb, that would take too long to replace one of these old coal-fired power stations, and frankly, is about as popular as a poo in a pool.”

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by Grappler Truth Teller Feller on May 25th, 2024 at 8:16pm
Well - he would, wouldn't he?

If we keep the pressure up in an election year we might be given batteries for free.... it's a chernobyl ambition... glowing so to speak... no need for a meltdown over it.... just consider it openly and fairly - put the power stations on some of that brand new sacred land and any problems won't affect more than ten people...

If every part is 'sacred' or 'culturally significant' there'll be none left anywhere else anyway.... but I doubt you lot care much... you can't even raise the flag for kids' minds being twisted by social media....  every time the MSN puts out a thing about great sites to visit in Oz - the general gist is - 'get to it now before it is all locked up as sacred or something equally silly'....

I know I am in the majority..... even though they put this poo into kids' heads from age three or so... 

"What did you learn in school today, son?"

"I learned that all Abo land claims are sacred, that all whites like you are racist, that women must always be believed over a man, and that gender can be anything I want it to be, and that the government never tells lies even when they do ..... so don't call me son or White again...

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by Belgarion on May 26th, 2024 at 7:15pm
AnAl really should listen to the experts here instead of the hopelessly corrupted CSIRO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=y_J1gSeWomA

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 26th, 2024 at 7:22pm
That's right baronvontwit, he should listen to random tube wannabes instead of the country's leading scientific organisation.

I'll bet you've never been accused of being a genius.  :D

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by Bobby. on May 26th, 2024 at 7:31pm

Belgarion wrote on May 26th, 2024 at 7:15pm:
AnAl really should listen to the experts here instead of the hopelessly corrupted CSIRO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=y_J1gSeWomA



Thanks - so the politicians lied.   :o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_J1gSeWomA

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by stunspore on May 26th, 2024 at 9:08pm
For some reason, I can't fathom, how the cost issue isn't clear?  I mean sure, it's an estimate, but if there's alternative mathematics how come they aren't out for scrutiny?  Because there actually isn't?

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by Belgarion on May 27th, 2024 at 10:19am

John Smith wrote on May 26th, 2024 at 7:22pm:
That's right baronvontwit, he should listen to random tube wannabes instead of the country's leading scientific organisation.

I'll bet you've never been accused of being a genius.  :D



The countrys 'leading scientific organistion' is run by professional board sitters who do what their political masters tell them to. It is a poor shadow of its former self. The bloke in the video on the other hand is an honorary professor of nuclear physics at ANU  and has worked in the nuclear power  field for over 30 years.

Who do you think is better qualified?  ::)

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 27th, 2024 at 7:52pm

Belgarion wrote on May 27th, 2024 at 10:19am:

John Smith wrote on May 26th, 2024 at 7:22pm:
That's right baronvontwit, he should listen to random tube wannabes instead of the country's leading scientific organisation.

I'll bet you've never been accused of being a genius.  :D



The countrys 'leading scientific organistion' is run by professional board sitters who do what their political masters tell them to. It is a poor shadow of its former self. The bloke in the video on the other hand is an honorary professor of nuclear physics at ANU  and has worked in the nuclear power  field for over 30 years.

Who do you think is better qualified?  ::)



Csiro.  Any day of the week. 

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by lee on May 27th, 2024 at 7:57pm

John Smith wrote on May 27th, 2024 at 7:52pm:
Csiro.



You mean the CSIRO that uses Lazard's calculations for LCOE of storage? The one that uses four hours only of battery power? That one? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 27th, 2024 at 9:01pm

Quote:
You mean


The one with more credibility than either you or baronvontwit?  yes, that's the one I mean.

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by lee on May 27th, 2024 at 9:51pm
Poor JS, never lets the truth get in the way of his preferred story.

https://www.lazard.com.au/media/g3jjbcgs/lazards-levelized-cost-of-storage-version-60-vf2.pdf

Page 23. If you can understand it. ;)

"In the column headed “Storage Duration (Hours),” we find a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 4. Four hours of duration just happens to be the norm for the capability of today’s most cost-effective battery storage technology, lithium ion batteries. Unfortunately, the studies that I feature in my energy storage Report calculate that the number of hours duration of storage needed to fully “firm” a system using only wind and solar generation would be at least one month (720 hours), and potentially two to three months (1440 to 2160 hours). Lazard would seem to be off by a factor of somewhere between 180 and 540 of what would be needed."

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2023-12-17-climate-advocacy-incompetence-versus-intentional-fraud-lazard-edition

That may be easier for you to understand.

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 27th, 2024 at 10:16pm
Not sure why you think batteries are relevant to the topic Lee.  :D :D

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by lee on May 28th, 2024 at 11:47am

John Smith wrote on May 27th, 2024 at 10:16pm:
Not sure why you think batteries are relevant to the topic Lee.



Because Guido, if you don't get nuclear you are going to be stuck with renewables. ::)

Unless you think renewables don't need backup; something with which the CSIRO disagrees. ;)

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 28th, 2024 at 2:22pm

lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 11:47am:
Because Guido, if you don't get nuclear you are going to be stuck with renewables. ::)

Unless you think renewables don't need backup; something with which the CSIRO disagrees. ;)


so we should ignore australias leading scientific body because batteries make you cry?

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by lee on May 28th, 2024 at 2:44pm

John Smith wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 2:22pm:
so we should ignore australias leading scientific body because batteries make you cry?


So you can't follow a logical argument. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 28th, 2024 at 4:19pm

lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 2:44pm:

John Smith wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 2:22pm:
so we should ignore australias leading scientific body because batteries make you cry?


So you can't follow a logical argument. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


My argument is that the CSIRO is more reliable than random wannabes on utube. That you pretend that has anything to do with batteries is your issue. Had your vibrator run flat again? Is that why batteries were fresh on your mind?

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by lee on May 28th, 2024 at 4:30pm

John Smith wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 4:19pm:
My argument is that the CSIRO is more reliable than random wannabes on utube.


No matter their qualifications. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

So tell me what the CSIRO does on nuclear. They have no design or any other nuclear expertise. ;)


John Smith wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 4:19pm:
That you pretend that has anything to do with batteries is your issue.


Renewables pet. Rely on backup. With no fossil fuel or nuclear that is batteries. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 28th, 2024 at 5:26pm

lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 4:30pm:
No matter their qualifications.


absolutely


lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 4:30pm:
So tell me what the CSIRO does on nuclear.



lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 4:30pm:
So tell me what the CSIRO does on nuclear.


costings


lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 4:30pm:
Renewables pet


renewables have nothing to do with the reliability of the CSIRO dumbarse. Only dumbarses think one has anything to do with the other

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by lee on May 28th, 2024 at 5:50pm

John Smith wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 5:26pm:
costings


And as explained they rely on Lazard's costings, with their deficiencies. ::)
John Smith wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 5:26pm:
renewables have nothing to do with the reliability of the CSIRO dumbarse.



They have set themselves up as the experts, but they shouldn't be questioned as to their methodologies? If the methodologies are bogus, and they are, that goes to the very core of their supposed "reliability". ::)

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by Gnads on May 29th, 2024 at 12:07pm

John Smith wrote on May 27th, 2024 at 7:52pm:

Belgarion wrote on May 27th, 2024 at 10:19am:

John Smith wrote on May 26th, 2024 at 7:22pm:
That's right baronvontwit, he should listen to random tube wannabes instead of the country's leading scientific organisation.

I'll bet you've never been accused of being a genius.  :D



The countrys 'leading scientific organistion' is run by professional board sitters who do what their political masters tell them to. It is a poor shadow of its former self. The bloke in the video on the other hand is an honorary professor of nuclear physics at ANU  and has worked in the nuclear power  field for over 30 years.

Who do you think is better qualified?  ::)



Csiro.  Any day of the week. 


The CSIRO HAS become a organisation of "bought" research. Their computer generated model "Gencost" does not know more than the 50 plus countries around the world that successfully run nuclear power generation programs.

Chris Bowen & the CSIRO have said Nuclear is too expensive with an estimate cost of $387 billion dollars.

Estimates for Net Zero by renewables by 2030 are at $1.5 trillion dollars ...

with Bloomberg stating the cost at $1.9 trillion dollars.

No other country has signed up to Net Zero with 100 % renewables. It's an impossibility to maintain a reliable supply.

So who is telling porkies???

Even 17 year old Will Shackel has more common sense and knowledge about the use of nuclear in the mix with renewables than the idiot fearmongers in charge at state and federal level.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVu8oxkblsQ&ab_channel=SkyNewsAustralia
Picture0081.jpg (100 KB | 0 )

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 29th, 2024 at 12:10pm

lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 5:50pm:
And as explained they rely on Lazard's costings, with their deficiencies


whereas you rely on make believe and fairy tales


lee wrote on May 28th, 2024 at 5:50pm:
They have set themselves up as the experts, but they shouldn't be questioned as to their methodologies?


question away. Just don't pretend you or some random youtuber know better.

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by John Smith on May 29th, 2024 at 12:11pm

Gnads wrote on May 29th, 2024 at 12:07pm:
The CSIRO HAS become a organisation of "bought" research.



you cretins claim anyone who disagrees with Mr Potatoe head is bought ::)

Title: Re: Albanese Lashes Dutton's Risky Nuclear Plan
Post by Gnads on May 29th, 2024 at 12:14pm

John Smith wrote on May 29th, 2024 at 12:11pm:

Gnads wrote on May 29th, 2024 at 12:07pm:
The CSIRO HAS become a organisation of "bought" research.



you cretins claim anyone who disagrees with Mr Potatoe head is bought ::)


The only potatoes with their heads in the dirt over nuclear are Bowen & Albanese .....
 
and idiots like you. No "e" in potato Guido.

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.