The LNP don't actually believe in human-caused climate change, so how can they have a plan to address it? Plus, nuclear wouldn't be switched on for 20 years!
There are a lot of watermelons in the comments section decrying a practical solution like nuclear power. Renewables are currently not up to providing base load power and are just a rort for tax payer money & a burden on society in general.
good you folks are so woke - they dont even mention its only going to take 5-6 years to build whereas 28.000kms of transmission lines by 2030 - yeah right that target wont happen either.
Of course no one is having the debate, because, don't you know? Wahleed speaks and thinks for everyone in the country. Apparently no one else does any research into molten salt reactors/thorium, or any other advancement in the technology in recent years. Wahleed is omniscient.
Nuclear energy is not cheap. It is very costly to build. The immediate running cost maybe cheaper but waste management is very expensive and I wouldn't call it zero emissions (i.e. radiation). However there are better nuclear options like Thorium but they are long way away from commercial practicality. While I'm not totally opposed to Nuclear, I would be very skeptical to any political party proposal without clear evidence from scientific community and actual costing of the total cost being taken into account, i.e. waste management, and that includes environmental & social impacts.
@@awc900 Because removing it would require to go through the senate. You have the Greens and environmentally conscious independents who would certainly block it. Why would Labor bothering dealing with all of that if it isn't part of their own policy?
@@awc900 But why would Labor put themselves through that? If they don't plan to have any nuclear polices themselves? The Liberals had over 10 years to remove it, why did they wait until they were in opposition?
If the LNP tries to get us to pay 4 to 10 times more for Nuclear power, then we need to make them pay for it. If it costs more than solar, then the LNP, their donors, and backers must be made pay for it.
I can't see any company/energy provider in their right mind building SMR'S, when the AER and ACCC set electricity prices each year you'll have energy providers making 4 times the profit with renewables compared to the ones who have SMR'S. Big nuclear power reactors different story not as expensive but still costly and decades to build but where do u put it? and oh no those dam transmission lines they will also need.
@@darkhorseman8263 data from 9/10/2023 State Distribution Network Average Electricity Usage Rate (per kWh) NSW Ausgrid 35.7c/kWh NSW Endeavour Energy 37.2c/kWh NSW Essential Energy 38.9c/kWh VIC AusNet Services 35.8c/kWh VIC Citipower 26.7c/kWh VIC Jemena 30.7c/kWh VIC Powercor 30.4c/kWh VIC United Energy 29.3c/kWh QLD Energex 31.4c/kWh SA SA Power Networks 45.3c/kWh
Even if it was fully safe ... the reality is, it'll cost literally HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS, and it would take 20 years to build and switch on. It's not happening.
Finally, someone with a real plan to address climate change.
The LNP don't actually believe in human-caused climate change, so how can they have a plan to address it? Plus, nuclear wouldn't be switched on for 20 years!
You off your tablets?
@@benwilson6145 They are sock puppet / lobbying bots trying to engineer narrative.
Whitestone strategics, probably.
There are a lot of watermelons in the comments section decrying a practical solution like nuclear power. Renewables are currently not up to providing base load power and are just a rort for tax payer money & a burden on society in general.
good you folks are so woke - they dont even mention its only going to take 5-6 years to build whereas 28.000kms of transmission lines by 2030 - yeah right that target wont happen either.
I support unbanning of nuclear power, but let companies pay for their own not taxpayers.
Should taxdollars go to wind and solar?.
Of course no one is having the debate, because, don't you know? Wahleed speaks and thinks for everyone in the country. Apparently no one else does any research into molten salt reactors/thorium, or any other advancement in the technology in recent years. Wahleed is omniscient.
Nuclear energy is not cheap. It is very costly to build. The immediate running cost maybe cheaper but waste management is very expensive and I wouldn't call it zero emissions (i.e. radiation). However there are better nuclear options like Thorium but they are long way away from commercial practicality. While I'm not totally opposed to Nuclear, I would be very skeptical to any political party proposal without clear evidence from scientific community and actual costing of the total cost being taken into account, i.e. waste management, and that includes environmental & social impacts.
Nuclear is more reliable than wind and solar.
The moratorium needs to go before a serious discussion can commence so let's get rid of it.
There is no need for a discussion, no company will ever build a Nuclear plan. The costs are insane
@@benwilson6145 So remove the moratorium and there's nothing to be afraid of.
@@awc900 Because removing it would require to go through the senate. You have the Greens and environmentally conscious independents who would certainly block it. Why would Labor bothering dealing with all of that if it isn't part of their own policy?
@@JaneTee-dc6si I doubt if they could block it if Labor and the LNP reached a consensus on removing the moratorium.
@@awc900 But why would Labor put themselves through that? If they don't plan to have any nuclear polices themselves?
The Liberals had over 10 years to remove it, why did they wait until they were in opposition?
Beats relying on wind and sun 24hr a day...
If the LNP tries to get us to pay 4 to 10 times more for Nuclear power, then we need to make them pay for it.
If it costs more than solar, then the LNP, their donors, and backers must be made pay for it.
We will pay for it with higher electricity prices
@@genebrowne3138 They will pay for it. Not us, and not our businesses.
They won't even build it until 2070 even though might aim for 2050 and it will be Billons over budget.
I can't see any company/energy provider in their right mind building SMR'S, when the AER and ACCC set electricity prices each year you'll have energy providers making 4 times the profit with renewables compared to the ones who have SMR'S.
Big nuclear power reactors different story not as expensive but still costly and decades to build but where do u put it? and oh no those dam transmission lines they will also need.
@@darkhorseman8263
data from 9/10/2023
State Distribution Network Average Electricity Usage Rate (per kWh)
NSW Ausgrid 35.7c/kWh
NSW Endeavour Energy 37.2c/kWh
NSW Essential Energy 38.9c/kWh
VIC AusNet Services 35.8c/kWh
VIC Citipower 26.7c/kWh
VIC Jemena 30.7c/kWh
VIC Powercor 30.4c/kWh
VIC United Energy 29.3c/kWh
QLD Energex 31.4c/kWh
SA SA Power Networks 45.3c/kWh
It has little chance of landing a blow as Labor will claim it's insafe
Even if it was fully safe ... the reality is, it'll cost literally HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS, and it would take 20 years to build and switch on. It's not happening.
@@pronumeral1446 No company will ever build one
Goodbye liberal party.
Nope Nope Nope. Besides the exorbitant costs and ridiculous time it would take to come online, in whose backyard does the LNP want to bury the waste?
Where do you think the expired solar panels end up? Along with the toxic substances that leech the ground and that do not decompose.
@@pirahnalasagne They are recycled.
@@pirahnalasagneExpired solar panels are recycled.
I have a property they can store it at.
About a thousand kilometres from the closest house hold, as Australia is absolutely huge if you've forgotton.
Funny, how many sock puppets show up to cheer this. Look at these fake accounts.
Dont push , DO IT ! @#$% the UN !
You have a nice conspiracy theory to spread, does it beat Jewish Space Lasers!
agreed, theyre little more than CCP puppets anyway.