The Climate, Environment and Energy Thread

[DJC]

The whole renewables push loses credibility when it rejects low carbon or no carbon alternatives to their preferred option, we should be making use of all available technologies because we won't ever make the cut with just one or two. Demand for suitable solutions exceeds supply tenfold and the situation isn't changing.

The arbitrary rejection of competing or complimentary carbon reduction options is just a tell that for some it's partially or fully about money not the environment.

Missing the point again LP.

Apart from the economics that means that private sector won’t go near nuclear and taxpayers will foot the bill, it’s the timeframe that is critical.  It’s simply not possible for us to build nuclear reactors in time to reach emissions targets.  The long planning and construction time will mean ongoing use of fossil fuel and that’s the real agenda behind Dutton’s scheme.

Let’s look at Loy Yang as one of Dutton’s proposed nuclear power plants.  AGL has made it clear that the site is not available for a nuclear power plant, Victorian legislation prohibits nuclear power, it’s in an earthquake prone area and it’s close to population centres like Traralgon.  If the Victorian parliament could be persuaded to repeal its nuclear ban, the environmental effects and planning processes would take many years to complete and with no guarantee of a favourable outcome.  That’s if the site meets the technical requirements, particularly water supply.

AGL invested heavily in reducing the Loy Yang plants’ water consumption because of competing demands and lower rainfall.  The Yallourn Weir would struggle to meet demand and that’s why few nuclear plants are inland.  Trawsfynydd was an exception.

The high flux reactor at Lucas Heights began operating in 1958 and the OPAL reactor took over in 2007.  What do we do with the relatively modest nuclear waste?  The Coalition’s plan for the nuclear waste produced by its seven plants is to store it onsite for the life of the reactor.  Presumably, it will become someone else’s problem then.

Putting environmental issues to one side, timeframes and costs for nuclear power generation are prohibitive.  Look at the delays and cost blowouts for the US Vogtle nuclear power plant expansion and the UK’s Hinkley Point C plant.  The latter is now not expected to come online until 2031 at a cost of $63bn.

We’ve missed the nuclear bus and the way forward is renewables supplemented by lower emissions fossil fuel.