Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    last farang standing
    Hugh Cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Online
    15-03-2024 @ 01:44 PM
    Location
    Qld/Bangkok
    Posts
    4,110

    Nuclear power generation increasing and it's poularity in Australia

    The latest survey has shown a slim majority of Australians now support nuclear power generation. There is an argument for small flexible generators for base load power with Australia having one of the biggest deposits of Uranium in the world. More Australians are wanting action on CO2 and this may account for a rise in acceptance despit Australia's overall contribution to CO2 being negligible in regard to the big emitters. Australians see the need to at least be in step with the big polluters which are China, USA E.U. India and Russia, the five big polluters contribute around 65% of all global Co2 emmissions.
    The initial cost of construction and decomissioning as well as waste storage need to be factored in to the overall cost of generation.

    As the US military leaves Afghanistan, two Americas are on show – and questions about power are swirling - ABC News

  2. #2
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    38,456
    I am hoping this will be a positive spin off from getting those nuclear subs- whatever they may end up being.

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    38,456
    Aha, Sky News (which doesn't have an original thought) has copied me!


    Nuclear power could be the ‘rabbit in the hat’ the PM pulls out for net zero



    Sky News host Paul Murray says nuclear power could be the “rabbit in the hat” which Prime Minister Scott Morrison pulls out when it comes to net zero emissions and technology.

    This comes after a poll in the Guardian revealed 50 per cent of Australians support nuclear energy being used for electricity domestically.


    Nuclear power could be the ‘rabbit in the hat’ the PM pulls out for net zero (msn.com)



    Seems a good idea to me- but the question remains how much nuclear technology will actually be shared with us by our fellow Aukus squawkers?

  4. #4
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,565
    The real question is when is Australia going to stop feeding the chinky coal-powered CO2 spitters?

  5. #5
    last farang standing
    Hugh Cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Online
    15-03-2024 @ 01:44 PM
    Location
    Qld/Bangkok
    Posts
    4,110
    They haven't sold coal to China for quite a while now. The Chinese are now using poorer quality coal from other parts of the world while Australia is selling less polluting thermal coal to other countries such as India.
    China has now a coal shortage and therefore a shortage of power for heating coming into their winter, while coal prices have increased substantially. This may also impact gas prices even more in the winter which will also impact power prices and heating costs in the northern hemisphere. The down side is China is buying less efficient coal which causes even more pollution.
    The upside of higher coal prices is it makes renewables even more competitive.
    Chinas ban on Australian coal has had little impact on Australia having found new markets at higher coal prices. China has shot itself in the foot yet again.

  6. #6
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    8,004
    Nuclear power has been a resource for decades. It still produces radioactive waste, despite efforts to recycle spent fuel rods, and a mass of accumulated waste, waiting for a long term solution to the problem of storage.

    Temporary holding tanks, often using dated technology, continue while users and producers try to tackle the growing dangerous waste, which often has thousands of dangerous years left in it.

  7. #7
    A Cockless Wonder
    Looper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Posts
    15,187
    Nuclear power is the cleanest greenest power available in huge quantities.

    Wind and solar have huge environmental impacts in terms consuming space and creating noise.

    This 24 lecture course from TGC is an epically good dive into the subject.

    The Great Courses

    Laurence Weinstein is another great presenter who loves his topic.

    He bounces up and down on the balls of his feet when he gets really excited explaining a point.

    He even (very topically) explains that being a nooclear submariner exposes you to far less radiation than the average line of work (because in a submarine you are protected from the radiation that rains down from the sky)

    Anyway it could make sense to get a nooclear industry going down under to give us some experiential background to support our embryonic submarine industry

    And while we are at it why not develop an aerial strategic nuclear weapons capability

    Partnering with the French is probably out for now so it is either the merkins or the russkies

    Here is a face off between the Mighty B-1 and its early cold war rival the Tupolev Tu-22 Backfire in one of its many and varied forms to get the design ideas flowing

    Nuclear power generation increasing and it's poularity in Australia-img_20210929_221715-jpg

  8. #8
    Thailand Expat
    malmomike77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    13,681
    RR has been investing in its SMRs for a while now.

    https://www.rolls-royce.com/innovation/small-modular-reactors.aspx#/

  9. #9
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    8,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Looper View Post
    Nuclear power is the cleanest greenest power available in huge quantities.
    I can agree with this statement, right up until you consider the ongoing problems with millions of tons of radioactive waste. The waste issue remains in baulk, awaiting scientific solutions to a problem that has been growing since the 1940’s.

  10. #10
    Thailand Expat
    Buckaroo Banzai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    03-08-2023 @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    My couch
    Posts
    4,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    I can agree with this statement, right up until you consider the ongoing problems with millions of tons of radioactive waste. The waste issue remains in baulk, awaiting scientific solutions to a problem that has been growing since the 1940’s.
    The waste is IMO a red herring argument. They say that it will last for thousands of years and that storage facilities are unstable for such a long time.
    Yes they will last for thousands of years if we had no further technological advancements for the next few thousands of years, they would. Storage facilities for the next 100 years should be easy to construct and maintain.
    IMO the opposition to Nuclear is an attempt to squeeze every last drop of profit from the hydrocarbon industry.
    Imagine the innovations in the technology if the Nuclear had been allowed to flourish in the past 60 years.
    All the problems we have with the technology is because we still are using 1069's technology, and regulation has quadrupled costs.
    Millions of lives have been lost from the alternative petrochemical solution from pollution and wars.And we might lose the planet do to global warming because of it..
    Thank you Green Peace.
    The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up.

  11. #11
    I'm in Jail

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Online
    29-04-2023 @ 08:08 AM
    Location
    Not in jail
    Posts
    7,255
    I'm hearing that there ban on the rock lobster isn't going to well either with west aussie lobster still finding its way there via hongkong.

  12. #12
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    8,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai View Post
    The waste is IMO a red herring argument. They say that it will last for thousands of years and that storage facilities are unstable for such a long time.
    Yes they will last for thousands of years if we had no further technological advancements for the next few thousands of years, they would. Storage facilities for the next 100 years should be easy to construct and maintain.
    IMO the opposition to Nuclear is an attempt to squeeze every last drop of profit from the hydrocarbon industry.
    Imagine the innovations in the technology if the Nuclear had been allowed to flourish in the past 60 years.
    All the problems we have with the technology is because we still are using 1069's technology, and regulation has quadrupled costs.
    Millions of lives have been lost from the alternative petrochemical solution from pollution and wars.And we might lose the planet do to global warming because of it..
    Thank you Green Peace.
    Denying the existence of a serious and growing problem, will not make it go away.

    Current storage methods have been in use for many years, but all are now showing evidence of leaks. The proble exists in solid and liquid forms, and so far science has no suitable response.
    The issue is not as simple as you seem to think. Science has only had 60 to 80 years to find a safe so,ution. So far, no resolution has proved satisfactory, despite recycling to extract more energy, and temporary solutions that are now failing.
    Google : Why nuclear waste is a problem

  13. #13
    Thailand Expat
    Buckaroo Banzai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Online
    03-08-2023 @ 01:50 PM
    Location
    My couch
    Posts
    4,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Switch View Post
    Denying the existence of a serious and growing problem, will not make it go away.

    Current storage methods have been in use for many years, but all are now showing evidence of leaks. The proble exists in solid and liquid forms, and so far science has no suitable response.
    The issue is not as simple as you seem to think. Science has only had 60 to 80 years to find a safe so,ution. So far, no resolution has proved satisfactory, despite recycling to extract more energy, and temporary solutions that are now failing.
    Google : Why nuclear waste is a problem
    That's because the technology has been vilified to such degree , who would want to do research in the field? and where would the funds come from?
    As to the storage problem , I am sure we can device leakproof containers.

  14. #14
    Thailand Expat

    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Location
    Sanur
    Posts
    8,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai View Post
    That's because the technology has been vilified to such degree , who would want to do research in the field? and where would the funds come from?
    As to the storage problem , I am sure we can device leakproof containers.
    A number of research projects have sprung up because leakproof containers cannot be devised. The USA, having been at it for such a long time, are leading most research, based at respected US universities. The finest minds in the world have still failed to find an answer.
    Meanwhile, stockpiles of radioactive waste continue to grow.

    Try reading the google suggestion I gave you. My view is supported by what they have found over the years. It’s toxic waste and remains dangerous for thousands of years. Your view is simplistic and defeatist, but it still doesn’t help the storage or production of radioactive waste, even if was a credible solution.

  15. #15
    Thailand Expat OhOh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Location
    Where troubles melt like lemon drops
    Posts
    25,226
    China is gearing up to activate the world's first 'clean' commercial nuclear reactor

    By Ben Turner July 23, 2021

    Plans include building up to 30 reactors in partnered nations.

    Snip:

    "Instead of using fuel rods, molten-salt reactors work by dissolving thorium into liquid fluoride salt before sending it into the reactor chamber at temperatures above 1,112 Fahrenheit (600 degrees Celsius). When bombarded with high energy neutrons, thorium atoms transform into uranium-233, an isotope of uranium which can then split, releasing energy and even more neutrons through a process called nuclear fission. This starts a chain reaction, releasing heat into the thorium-salt mixture, which is then sent through a second chamber where the excess energy is extracted and transformed into electricity.

    Thorium reactors have long held an elusive appeal for nuclear scientists. Sitting just two positions to the left of uranium on the periodic table of chemical elements, nearly all mined thorium is thorium-232, the isotope used in nuclear reactions. In contrast, only 0.72% of total mined uranium is the fissile uranium-235 used in traditional nuclear reactors. This makes thorium a much more abundant source of energy.

    Thorium’s advantages don’t stop there. The waste products of uranium-235 nuclear reactions remain highly radioactive for up to 10,000 years and include plutonium-239, the key ingredient in nuclear weapons. Traditional nuclear waste has to be housed in lead containers, isolated in secure facilities, and subject to rigorous checks to ensure that it doesn’t fall into the wrong hands. In contrast, the main byproducts of a thorium nuclear reaction are uranium-233, which can be recycled in other reactions, and a number of other byproducts with an average “half-life” (the time it takes for half of a substance’s radioactive atoms to decay to a non-radioactive state) of just 500 years."

    Full article here:

    China to activate world's first 'clean' nuclear reactor in September | Live Science
    A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.

  16. #16
    Thailand Expat harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    96,565
    Now *that* could be a game changer.

    No chance of a Chernobyl.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •