Yep, way pro...
Plus - Lease our uranium to those with nuclear power.
Dig it up and lease it for power generation then take it back and build secure deep geological disposal sites in the middle of the country. Charge a fortune for the privilege, create a massive new national industry...
Nuclear waste is not a huge headache to deal with (Expensive yes but not hard) and is considerably less toxic and deadly on a global scale than fossil fuels - by an order of magnitude.
The only challenge is to find a politician with some balls and that includes the Greens.
^^^ +1.
Last time the idea of burying nuclear waste in Australia was touted, the pathetic greens mounted an emotive campaign against it.
Forgetting that over 1km down in rock, in the most geologically stable place going, 2000km from civilisation, is so damn remote and that any problem is 1 in a million. Then even if that 1 in a million happens, even a major spill would not affect us.
We need to mine it and take the waste back and charge a fortune.
Yes I'm pro, until alternatives are developed it's the best strategy to reduce CO2 emissions right now. Nuclear is a safer way to generate power than coal, even now coal miners are suffering.
www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-03/up-to-1000-coal-workers-could-have-black-lung-union-claims/7216910
And we should also be generating income storing nuclear waste. What is the problem with burying it in a safe location? Even Plutonium 239 with a half life of 24,000 years. That's not even a blip in geological time, barely a blip in evolutionary time.
sounds good ..... but not in my back yard !! has to be near the sea for cooling . Who wants one at their favorite beach ?
Much like the crew above, pro nuke, and bury the leftovers someplace Maralinga-ish.
But - really would prefer the safer version of nuke power - Thorium instead of Uranium.
So, thorium nuke for baseload, with solar / wind etc for as much as they can supply.
stephen
Interesting topic.
I watch footage from some of the "horizontal falls" in WA's north, and wonder what could be achievable with tidal power generation.
Consistent as your watch, pedictable results, zero waste/byproducts/emmisions.
Anyone that has seen the mechanical pumping known as "ram pumping", will probably suspect that there are better options out there, yet to be discovered.
Nuclear seems to me like we learned too much too quickly, and too many jumped on the ship before thinking it through.
Incidentally, Wiki suggests that a significant proportion of waste comes from the weapons industry.
Go back to bows and arrows already.
How do you propose getting the waste to "Maralinga-ish" sites sn? Road? Rail? Hmnn, just a bit risky...
I know it's gone off the mainstream radar, but ****ushima is still alive and pumping crap into the Pacific. Then there's the stories you're not hearing about the problems in the US. Shame the fracking is causing so many earthquakes, not such a stable environment for the aging nuclear reactors.
so how about a mega nuc plant up near ord river !! plenty water for cooling and bury the waste right next door !!! win win !!
then a spider web of mega cables fanning out all over aus ..... how much votage drop would there be with nuc power ? not an issue ??
How do you propose getting the waste to "Maralinga-ish" sites sn? Road? Rail? Hmnn, just a bit risky...
Thorium generated power is supposed to be "a lot safer" than uranium, partly because thorium waste has a much shorter half life [or something like that]
Not needing to be stored for umpteen gazillion years like uranium based waste.
IIRC, thorium waste is ok after 150ish years - which we have the technology to handle.
The main reason the nuclear energy industry went for uranium, was that assisted in supplying materials for making A bombs.
As for transporting the stuff - bung it on either rail or truck in the containers designed for carrying nuke waste.
These things were tested by chucking out the back of aircraft, ramming with locomotives, and being blown up.
They passed all the tests.
If you follow the rules and procedures - carrying D.G. is no great deal.
stephen
^ Why have the DG to begin with? (Appreciating your field of expertise, and my lack)
What are the downsides to tidal power generation?
Thorium is the new nuke pipe dream, not really been done successfully, and the figures don't really stack up for it to be viable.
eg
independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/dont-believe-thorium-nuclear-reactor-hype,4919
Speaking of figures not stacking up, same goes for nuclear power in general. Too expensive to bother with.
Not to mention the nimby factor- might have stood a chance of joe public forgetting Chernobyl but ****ushima's just killed that chance.
The future is most likely small scale photovoltaic (solar) generation, battery storage, network smart micro-grids with neighbors selling excess to each other during peaks. Backed up by solar thermal which yes works at night and therefore ticks the magic 'baseload' box. https://www.solarpowerservices.com.au/news/670-solar-thermal-energy
^ Why have the DG to begin with? (Appreciating your field of expertise, and my lack)
What are the downsides to tidal power generation?
seaweed and corrosion
Has anyone done the sums of power loss if the conductor material were solid silver?
It's seen as a valuable commodity, and today, with all the CT's out there, there's probably tons of the stuff in people's cellars etc
Bigger picture to my mind is, turn off the AC and put a jumper on, or turn off the AC and take your jumper off.
That in itself would reduce demand hugely.
^ Why have the DG to begin with? (Appreciating your field of expertise, and my lack)
What are the downsides to tidal power generation?
seaweed and corrosion
Good points.
How do we quantify them without research?
Hopefully it is happening right now.
To me they're just thoughts borrowed from smart people both local and abroad, I haven't the training to offer anything more.
The footage is compelling in itself, to the raw power, potentially on tap.
We could learn a thing or two from our nearest neighbours. At least they are giving it a damn good go, and have been since, oh before the turn of the century. The last century...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_New_Zealand
^ Why have the DG to begin with? (Appreciating your field of expertise, and my lack)?
Dangerous Goods - and the necessary transport of them - are a part of modern civilised life.
Admittedly, some things are more dangerous than others,so greater respect is due.
You name it, I've carried it - radioactives included [but not in huge quantities]
The only thing that bothered me was the paperwork involved.
Must admit though - I was a lot happier carrying bulk acid, explosives, radioactives etc, than petrol.
The results of an accident while carrying motion lotion worried me quite a bit.
stephen
I'm on the no camp.
Nuclear waste is not easy to deal with...Not a single permant storage facility worldwide in operation.
Australia is not as geologically stable as people believe. We frequently have earthquakes across the country. A leak could destroy groundwater supplies for hundreds of thousands of years.
We are talking about a by-product that stays dangerous for a period of time we have no experience with. We don't know if we can build something to last that test of time.
That's just the burrying it part.
It needs to actually get out bush first.
The second a solution is found, I'd be very pro.
There's a reason no other country has committed to burying it. Even America after spending billions cancelled their storage facility b
Interesting topic.
I watch footage from some of the "horizontal falls" in WA's north, and wonder what could be achievable with tidal power generation.
Consistent as your watch, pedictable results, zero waste/byproducts/emmisions.
Anyone that has seen the mechanical pumping known as "ram pumping", will probably suspect that there are better options out there, yet to be discovered.
Nuclear seems to me like we learned too much too quickly, and too many jumped on the ship before thinking it through.
Incidentally, Wiki suggests that a significant proportion of waste comes from the weapons industry.
Go back to bows and arrows already.
There was a company in Scotland that had, IIRC, a 5MW station providing power to distilleries, utilizing the rise and fall of waves. Some green eco show in the UK had a pair of inventors that made a smaller version on the same principles out of a PVC pipe for a pair of hobo surfers in a caravan. Totally doable, less ugly and intrusive than windmills but I don't know how much loss there'd be transmitting power from the coast inland . . . not a big issue considering the proportion of people who live near the ocean.
Company (wavegen) sold the technology and plants and then died off. Shame.
Google "horizontal falls", and it will become apparent that there is a consistent, reliable, predictable source of energy available.
Both ways by the way, both incoming and outgoing tides.
Greenies aside, "utilising" a naturally occurring fissure to produce energy is going to be unpopular if there is no coin to be made.
In this respect, I understand the bulk of the CT'ers, but for the good of the earth, and humanity, it seems the way to go.
Again, no emissions, no waste, plenty of jobs, ad infinitum.
Much like the crew above, pro nuke, and bury the leftovers someplace Maralinga-ish.
But - really would prefer the safer version of nuke power - Thorium instead of Uranium.
So, thorium nuke for baseload, with solar / wind etc for as much as they can supply.
stephen
Exactly.
Easy to set up, and no where as volatile should something go amiss
Best bit is, Australia has considerable amounts of the stuff.
Biggest issue still here in WA, ol Charlie Court earmarked a spot in a very pristine and frequented kite and windsurf location just North of Perth. Government still has it locked down for 'future development'
Who wants that crap in your own back yard?.
a spot in a very pristine and frequented kite and windsurf location just North of Perth. Government still has it locked down for 'future development'
Probably the same spot that was being considered as the replacement location for the Baldivis explosives reserve.
Govt. were initially looking for a coastal spot where they could have thier own pier for unloading bulk explosives and dangerous goods loaded shipping,
Not sure what the location will be now - sadly, no more messing about with or transporting bulk kaboomy stuff.
stephen
There is a helium shortage apparently. It looks to be a major problem
www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/a4046/why-is-there-a-helium-shortage-10031229/
You can get helium from decaying isotopes. Apparently.
www.helium-corp.com/facts/heliumfound.html
Someone else gives us stuff. They pay us to take it. We then use it to get rich. Sounds reasonable to me.
The video at the top shows nuclear reactors world wide in the 1980s. There appear to be two in the eastern states of Australia. At 3:40 Apparently
The video at the top shows nuclear reactors world wide in the 1980s. There appear to be two in the eastern states of Australia. At 3:40 Apparently
No electricity producing reactors though. Think they're for research and medicine??