Litespeed

Firstly, the UK, for example got there in a decade because incredible amounts were spent of public funds and it had the goal of making nuclear weapons materials as well. It had the massive military spending on bombs to back it. No country has developed a nuclear industry of a national scale in a decade, and no amount of public/private money and political will can afford to. Even in twenty years. The US never came close in 40 years of building them. And had a incredible need to build enough bombs to kill the planet a 1000 times. They had dreams of nuclear powered everything and were backing a massive % of gdp in the worlds biggest and powerful economy and military. All in a economy that was going gangbusters and a devil may care attitude and needing massive amounts of new power to grow for decades. Yes we have politically been all over the place but in this case, its a blessing. We did not go down the nuclear route. Even now it still does not stack up on dollars. That's tangential to leaving massive holes and waste heaps, polluted water etc of mining. If they did it and cleanly and then rehabilitated like they always promise, I would be amazed. Just because I use steel or power does not negate the needs of the environment and science in your argument. That depends on your idea of privately operated and profit. They are always, without exception globally a non private power system even if its a stand alone one. They are completely indemnified from any potential environmental liability beyond tiny amounts. Same for economic loss or death or ......in the community. They are in a guaranteed supply price that is rock solid for its life, it can only go up. They will always be given complete security from government and backup no matter what happens to the company running it. No costs of disposal and storage are fully paid by the operator, that ends up a government problem and still to be effectively solved and used properly. If it goes bang, the company is very limited in its ability to do anything but run to their jets. They are traditionally the cheapest possible finance against anything else- thats getting the money. Why? all completely gov covered, it is literally to big to fail in bankers terms, and will be milked for profit till the end. No matter what happens the bankers/ privateers get paid. Or the governments have just paid for it and get their state power to operate it. OR the massively subsidised version ala UK where you get to force a massive price and not only get the user to pay but the gov helps pay at every stage of building. A private run nuclear plant has never had to incorporate the actual expenses of finance, building, operation and disposal of waste, water use and decommissioning anywhere in the world. They also have always a captive market which every force of government protects them from competition. If they scream they cant make a buck and stay safe, they get given a higher price. The level of real subsidy they get is so great that a fully private one, with only private money and private risk and liability can not exist. No such unicorn has ever or likely will ever exist. It can by nature only exist in a special world of all the actual risk and cost goes to the public and any profit goes to the operator. It can not exist in a market economy on fair terms. In simple terms it always get to bring a machine gun to a knife fight. None of the above includes the non accounted for opportunity cost of alternative energy investment instead and its benefit in real terms to the end user and the environment. That is orders of magnitude different. The small and decreasing rapidly subsidy that renewables get is purely a financial incentive to get a industry going. It has had to have a small leg up to compete in a power sector that survives on inherent subsidy in its model economically for the fossil fuel sector. Why of all places Roxby Downs? It is far away from the type of power it generates is needed, huge amounts of power are the only type that make sense. It is a long way from its use, so that means a big power loss to get to market for most of it, plus huge powerline infrastructure at considerable expense. Desalination of seawater is a extremely wasteful energy system to gain water to cool a energy generation plant. The returns on energy expended for that gained as a system is very poor, then to have to pipe a huge distance to a far flung nuclear plant as well plus the cost of piping etc. It is generally only used to get water to drink not generate power. The costs are huge alone and all that piping costs the environment as well just to make. Desalination plants are damaging to the environment as well in the high concentrations of salt they produce as a huge plume that would make parts of the Spencer Gulf long term a low life zone certainly within the life of the nuclear plant. If the desal was for people dying of thirst sure but to make power never. Does not surprise me at all, a seed is full of goodness, some better than others. But it is a byproduct of low value compared to the crop of cotton it comes from. No one grows cotton for the seed. Cotton as a crop is a gross water user and produces very little in terms of nutrition per litre or megalitre of water irrigated for the food value. Not including its high use of chemicals and energy for harvesting, transport etc. If a mere fraction of the resources and water was spent on growing other types of food for humans or stock we would be way ahead. In a water restricted world on the driest continent to grow cotton does not make sense. This is just on economic terms forgetting the downstream effects. And what do we do with the cotton? send it overseas, process it into a shirt, wear it a few times and buy another. Every part consuming resources, energy and making greenhouse gases. A sensible government would see the cotton industry as a waste of precious resources for limited short term economic gain and long term pain on social, health, environmental and economic grounds. These are big picture themes and not considered criticism of a individual farmer but system wide issues. We only have so much capacity to use resources and must chose very wisely be it water, land, air, people or environmental resilience. Everything has resource limits, everything is connected and has a energy budget and environmental budget. I have always been a critical reader and don't swallow anyones political message as gospel. I am a Atheist. Be it religious or technology, I am not indoctrinated in anything, if you can make gold from lead show me. Nor do I believe a lot of the crap those with vested interest peddle. But I do declare my own vested interest that all sane lifeforms have- continued sustainable life on earth. Our ability to see beyond our next root also sees us with fundamental power over our environment and ability to destroy it. I think my research stands to speak for itself above, but many years of study and working as a researcher at uni and life long interest in this very topic area helps. These were obvious issues of critical importance back in 1990 when I first started. We did not just think up shite for research money and subsidy- that's the marketing or geology department. But hey the Daily Telegraph might know better? I am happy to be shown otherwise, be delighted in fact. Then I could just relax, drink cold fossil fueled chilled beer, throw the tinnies out the boats window and burn some diesel instead of using its sails with a clean conscience. Cheers I need a beer

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-19/sa-big-battery-set-to-get-even-bigger/11716784

I will give Jim some time to think about his post and others can reply for now. But that is just plain drivel.

Glad to know your still doing the services to aviation that you are famous for. My son and brother were in Cairns looking at yachts this week. Son went for a parachute jump. Damn fool who jumps from operating aircraft and pays for the pleasure. I love him but he needs re-education. Next time when local will contact you in advance to join the drifter brigade. Keep up the smile patrols

Fortunate that generally such ego pilots rarely fly bigger stuff. Sad outcome but stupid trumps brains way too often. We need to be very proactive to keep our sport and reduce the idiots. Yet again someone reaches for a Darwin award. Glad no innocents were harmed.

Here is a new article about installed wind costs and subsidies in the UK. The subsidies are really just the level of payment for future contracts of supply. As the price installed drops so does the cost the UK will pay for power contracts. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/20/new-windfarms-taxpayers-subsidies-record-low "Most of the projects will receive as little as £39.65 for every megawatt hour of electricity they produce. The most expensive projects to win a subsidy contract will cost £41.61/MWh." "The sums were nearly half the £92.50/MWh awarded the year before to Britain’s first new nuclear power site in a generation, Hinkley Point C. The plummeting cost of offshore wind is attracting more interest from major energy companies." And that nuke power gets a many decade price fix at twice new power costs. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/11/huge-boost-renewable-power-offshore-windfarm-costs-fall-record-low https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/sep/25/hinkley-point-nuclear-plant-to-run-29m-over-budget But you claim wind is massively subsidised? the base expected cost is a standard of $40 mwh any less and not considered a susidy. So new round power subsidy of a max One pound and 61 pence per mwh. The long term subsidy for gold plated nuclear is a 52 pounds and 50 pence per Mwh. These are the UK governments figures on contracts signed- so no possible argument on the numbers In simple terms the wind gets 3 cents in the dollar for every $1 given to nuclear for the same power- which is baseload. The wind contracts have no public liability for profitability. The nuclear is a public backed profit machine for a private group. All real costs and risks the public pays including the outsize profits- all for at least 30 years. This Nuclear project is for latest available tech and in a country that has subsidised the nuke industry for 60 years. The model is considered flawed by the builders and governement and any future Nuke power will come at substantially greater cost to ensure viability for investors not the public. the extra cost will be a even greater public subsidy. So the most expensive power on the planet long and short term is admitted to only get more expensive. This in a country which has all the advantages of small space, high population and lots of fresh water. Maths is not hard. Science is not hard. Been ethical is not hard. Been good to the planet and its people is easy if you can use the first three. It can also be a lot cheaper to do the right thing and it only gets cheaper.

What you are afraid I might be right? Not just my science or logic. The legions of science and even pushers of nuclear industry all agree. All the major financial markets, government bodies, and even builders of nuclear power agree. But you can choose your own reality, but not the planets. Snide remarks just reveal bias and demonstrate a inability to see others views. If my logic or science or ethics are suspect, then demonstrate. I stand by my comments, how about more than just spitting the dummy?

Yes big holes in the ground can be used for pumped hydro. A good solution for certain areas. But the thousands of holes we have are far in excess of any practical use. A perfect example of mining never cleaning its mess and always shifting the cost to the public. Glad your onboard, pun intended. Funny we don't see the deniers condemn such waste of our money. But will scream murder about even a free shovel for renewables. Please be careful of mentioning the beneficial uses of holes in ground. Some could see that as justifying all the bomb craters in Vietnam, since some are now used for prawn farming. Perverse I know.

Before anyone complains about the idea of a "industry policy" , it is something responsible governments do. So I accept you may never have seen one. It is not a picking winners thing- it is ensuring the losers don't get placed on the podium and handed the prizes.

Building a nationalised nuclear grid would take at least 30 years minimum and that assumes we could get the money. Nuclear has a role if you have already built and own it. We have not. Even UK are finding they can't build one economically. They have ample experience. Assuming we could build it- we do not have the water to either cool them nor for the steam to power conversion. Steam turbines use huge amounts of water that must be fresh. Or should we build nuclear to run the desal plants needed to provide water to run nuclear. A losers game for a dry country. How is helping sheep farmers going to solve it? I will help them as its my heritage since 1832. But a fibre industry that uses mass water and chemical for low jobs and inedible produce like cotton should be discouraged. As a matter of industry policy. Wind farms do conduct like others, they pay big income to farmers who still get their land to use. Or did you mean the most subsidised industry like mining and coal power, who get govt money, trash the joint, suck up all the water and leave a big hole in the ground and economy?

I am happy to take any challenge you make but will be very busy solving the problems created by others. Help is appreciated. I am more than happy to defend my ethics. Take a shot.

It is obvious that, no matter what some people think, they must get on the same planet as the rest of us organisms. Or should get off, the dead rock they so earnestly strive for is called the moon. Gaia said its OK,they can all go and do as they wish. Just leave it how you found it. Anyway ........ As demonstrated by a chief sceptic, who eloquently demonstrated with his wonderful prose, and high praise it was indeed. The only solution is to accept the most gravest task...... I accept to be your benevolent dictator. I will rule with science, compassion, ethics and a love of all creatures. Even the those that by their actions have shown their greed over survival of others. Even those that are full of shite. At least we can grow food from them.

I think it might be like gravity. You have to drop them from height head first. We might have to do multiple repeated drops.

Amazing how some will use anything to shoot the messenger. Their blindness to reality is amazing at times. Or He doth protest too much. You know they are jumping Sharks when they claim it is offensive to do the right thing.

Amazing how some will use anything to shoot the messenger. Their blindness to reality is amazing at times. Or He doth protest too much. Maybe some need to get a job with a crane company. The ability to cherry pick and hoist straw men is amazing.

Or the most expensive restaurants ripping of millions in wages and then claiming the laws are unfair, too hard to read and understand. So justify stealing from wage earners. But it is not theft. Just good business practice. Steal $50 go to jail. Steal $5 million, blame the greedy staff you steal from and the unfairness of system, get away with it.

The ex fire commissioners report states Australia has actually risen on long term average by 1.9 degrees. That's a huge change for the driest continent. No one has more to loose country wise- bar flooded islands. But we are doing the absolute opposite of what we need to do. What a pathetic lucky country we are.

But fellas there is a massive skill shortage. Just ask any business, they try and get staff but Aussies want to be paid and have those commie things like work rights. So we fill up on often low skilled, underpaid visa staff or do one better like Jetstar and claim the flight is a international sector flight. So use massively underpaid cabin staff from Asia on Asian rates but working on local routes. Australia, the lucky country one day, and a morally bankrupt tax avoider the next.

Careful there Methulsa, Next you will expect us to think critically. You know knowledge and science is scary? Best just to shove heads in the sand and wait for Schmo the Munster to inform us from the rear.

Scomo the schmo, our prime Munster. Not just a religious fairy worshiper but a Pentecostal but. Religions right wing happy clappers who believe not only is greed good but godly for them. So believe they have a right to exploit the globe and everyone else. Who did he want to take to the states on his trip, when he went to a Pratt box factory Instead of the U N? Brian Houston of the millionaire Hillsong church as his spiritual advisor. Who is also still to be charged for covering his dad abuse of children, as per the royal commission. Even the Whitehouse said No farkin way. Looks pretty clear Scomo does not care if the future and children get farked over. Its all OK, folks shutup and pray. The Munster loves quiet obedient Australians.

I think your been a bit rough on the women and Judge. It is obvious the mechanic gave the women very bad advice and should have known the likely outcome of his advice. He only had to say, it can be damaged if you drive without cooling. Simply. Legally the same if the car had one wheel but but, she asked for help, mechanic looks at wheel missing all but one nut and only says, no nuts here go across town. Wheel falls off on trip, accident etc. Would he be liable then? Mechanics are a legally regulated trade and considered experts by law and the public. They have some responsibility even if it only not to provide negligent advice. The women did everything a reasonable person would expect, the mechanic did not. Getting paid or not is irrelevant. He is not a mate helping but a professional. It may be a case of a dodgy mechanic finally getting some payback. Been in bussiness is not a licence to do anything without care.

Four doors down from my place. Now just a mechanics of slow cars. Dainty was the quintisential Aussie creative engineer.

Don't forget the others as well. A goodie was the beer..... Two dogs firetrucking.

It just amazes me that some can use any excuse or creation of facts to suit their argument. All to excuse massive rippoffs of market failure. But always the first to scream for a government handout or rules to suit themselves. Economic sociopaths is a apt term. If you think I am pointing a finger in your direction? You would be correct

I am all for proper testing and accreditation with compliance of the rules been the norm. It is the ability to be dodgy by bending rules or plain ignoring them, that have Boeing in this situation. The effectual regulation gap in the USA is so big Airbus could fly a A380 through it.