The French aren't very happy with us

On a side note, I hope I didn't jinx us. No sooner have I posted about us being a safe place for nuke power, we get earthquakes on the Eastern states! 😂😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldfishMan

Besides, everything adds up. Energy cost affects every aspect of life. This is a simplistic view, but on an individual level, lower power bills = lower cost of living = lower wages required. Or, lower power bills = lower cost to run the country = (hopefully) lower taxes = again lower wages required. Hell even the cost of petrol will be affected because instead of using the fuel to generate electricity, there's more to go into cars. And now with EVs, the effect would be even more profound.

It's defo more complicated than the above, but the point is, energy cost is a major input to all these calculations.

---

In France 70% of their energy are from nuclear so they don't depends on oil that much with EV coming using oil will be so less. That's why Europe,UK can move to EV by 2030. I wouldn't say we have to have 70% nuclear power but at least some nuclear power, some solar,some hydro,some wind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Climax598

If Scandinavian countries can do it I don't see why we can't. We just to have some back bone and the well to achieve.

---

First we need to be weaned off the mining industry pulling our politicians strings to keep pushing all federal sponsorship towards them, i.e. Federal sponsored coal and gas power plants, Federal sponsored diesel discounts and the list goes on... So not sure about the backbone part, but they definitely have strings up their arses

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldfishMan

On a side note, I hope I didn't jinx us. No sooner have I posted about us being a safe place for nuke power, we get earthquakes on the Eastern states! ����

---

Definitely you mate :shout:

Our 1st site for Nuclear Plant should be on Ayers Rock... solid foundation there in the middle of nowhere... and we can divert our submarine contract to a Nuclear power plant contract with the French too

But heck, we have so much desert in the middle of Aus, we can easily build 10 Nuclear power plants each producing GigaWatts of power to power all of Aus. Worst case if they blow up... we'll become the 5 Islands of Aus + Tassie

Nuclear Power station would need to be within reasonable range of a constant water supply, so that would rule out maralinga (it was was contaminated by the brits in the 50s, and "supposedly" cleaned up in the 90s).
WA near the ord river would be a good site.

The French subs contract was already running over budget without a sub built, I think the compensation we'll have to pay the French will be cheaper than completing the contract.

With the US bases we currently have and the ones that will eventually come (you wouldn't think they'd gives us nuclear attack subs and leave us to our own devices) I think we'll work out some sort of a nice lease agreement.

We've become strategically important to both the US and China.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou

Nuclear Power station would need to be within reasonable range of a constant water supply, so that would rule out maralinga (it was was contaminated by the brits in the 50s, and "supposedly" cleaned up in the 90s).
WA near the ord river would be a good site.

---

I was thinking about the latest Thorium-fuelled Molten Salt based Nuclear Power Plant that doesn't allow nuclear warhead yields and doesn't require massive amount of water to cool or that we have to keep radiated water supplies for hundreds of years. These type of power plants can be build in the desert away from the water and population.

So no "crazy green peace" hippies can go try and sabotage it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dotcumdotinyou

The French subs contract was already running over budget without a sub built, I think the compensation we'll have to pay the French will be cheaper than completing the contract.

With the US bases we currently have and the ones that will eventually come (you wouldn't think they'd gives us nuclear attack subs and leave us to our own devices) I think we'll work out some sort of a nice lease agreement.

We've become strategically important to both the US and China.

---

Countries that host US Troops has to sign-up to a co-payment scheme. Like Korea pays $900M to 1B per year, Japan pays $1.7B-2B per year, Germany pays $2.5B, etc. How much will Aus pay for US Troops and Submarine and missiles.... No wonder everyone says America makes money when there is war or even the word of war

The prototype of the thorium fueled power plant is soon to be tested in China...I wonder if Ji Jing Ping will sell it to us at the moment?

While a nuclear powered submarine has a number of advantages and the way to go, I dont think Nuclear power for electricity is cost efficient. I was reading somewhere that Solar energy is the most cost efficient to produce followed by Wind energy. Maybe it made sense 15 years ago, but Australia should go down the path of clean energy. We had such a massive head start with Solar energy over the rest of the world, but muddled thinking and petty politics pandering to the Coal vote bank has seen us fall behind almost every major country. Australia is way behind other developed countries in adapting electric cars. The recent development of Electricity companies being approved to CHARGE homeowners for supplying electricity is another classic example. Surely the solution is to invest in a more modern grid that caters to a more energy efficient world rather than enabling electricity companies to make more profit!! I think that is why China has certain advantages in planning and implementing these things as they dont have to worry about the next election 3 years down the road.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SinSeeker

While a nuclear powered submarine has a number of advantages and the way to go, I dont think Nuclear power for electricity is cost efficient. I was reading somewhere that Solar energy is the most cost efficient to produce followed by Wind energy. Maybe it made sense 15 years ago, but Australia should go down the path of clean energy. We had such a massive head start with Solar energy over the rest of the world, but muddled thinking and petty politics pandering to the Coal vote bank has seen us fall behind almost every major country. Australia is way behind other developed countries in adapting electric cars. The recent development of Electricity companies being approved to CHARGE homeowners for supplying electricity is another classic example. Surely the solution is to invest in a more modern grid that caters to a more energy efficient world rather than enabling electricity companies to make more profit!! I think that is why China has certain advantages in planning and implementing these things as they dont have to worry about the next election 3 years down the road.

---

Agree 100% that charging home owners that send electricity into the Grid should be listed as a Crime. I mean seriously, all the excess power from home solar panels should be sent to a community battery or recycled to other users.

Just cos the Govt rather spend Billions on missiles and nuclear subs. How about spending those Billions on upgrading our Ausgrid so it catches up to the 21st century.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by studsg

Agree 100% that charging home owners that send electricity into the Grid should be listed as a Crime. I mean seriously, all the excess power from home solar panels should be sent to a community battery or recycled to other users.

Just cos the Govt rather spend Billions on missiles and nuclear subs. How about spending those Billions on upgrading our Ausgrid so it catches up to the 21st century.

---

As scomo say national security is more important. So he can win the coming election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Climax598

As scomo say national security is more important. So he can win the coming election.

---

What national security threat are we facing ??

The only threat now is China surpassing USA as the biggest economy. Are we paying to fight other country's war again ? Like Vietnam, Afghanistan. US claims their objectives in Afghan was to remove the growth of terrorist there, in 20 years the number of members for the terrorist groups has grown by 3 times. Our veterans came back living with their injuries for the rest of their lives. Have they won ?

If there are people who will vote for him base on this. Good luck to us all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SinSeeker

While a nuclear powered submarine has a number of advantages and the way to go, I dont think Nuclear power for electricity is cost efficient. I was reading somewhere that Solar energy is the most cost efficient to produce followed by Wind energy. Maybe it made sense 15 years ago, but Australia should go down the path of clean energy. We had such a massive head start with Solar energy over the rest of the world, but muddled thinking and petty politics pandering to the Coal vote bank has seen us fall behind almost every major country. Australia is way behind other developed countries in adapting electric cars. The recent development of Electricity companies being approved to CHARGE homeowners for supplying electricity is another classic example. Surely the solution is to invest in a more modern grid that caters to a more energy efficient world rather than enabling electricity companies to make more profit!! I think that is why China has certain advantages in planning and implementing these things as they dont have to worry about the next election 3 years down the road.

---

Yes, very good points you made there bro. Solar power is indeed very cheap to setup, cost effective and clean. It only has one drawback which is the capacity problem because it relies on the Sun. Nuclear on the other hand gives that always on, always reliable source of energy once it is up and running.
That's why smart governments implement both sources of energy. You really want to get at that cheap clean goodness of solar energy, and cover for the lack of capacity with some nuclear power. China, Russia, India are all going with this mixed approach.
Meanwhile, the countries that have US-style democracy... lobbyists and vested interests galore... Are politicizing the issue. One party says nuclear power, the other side goes for solar and wind.

Why take sides when you can have both?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoldfishMan

Yes, very good points you made there bro. Solar power is indeed very cheap to setup, cost effective and clean. It only has one drawback which is the capacity problem because it relies on the Sun. Nuclear on the other hand gives that always on, always reliable source of energy once it is up and running.
That's why smart governments implement both sources of energy. You really want to get at that cheap clean goodness of solar energy, and cover for the lack of capacity with some nuclear power. China, Russia, India are all going with this mixed approach.
Meanwhile, the countries that have US-style democracy... lobbyists and vested interests galore... Are politicizing the issue. One party says nuclear power, the other side goes for solar and wind.

Why take sides when you can have both?

---

Fair point about reliability bro. But I think all the other countries that have nuclear energy for electricity generation had a few decades head start. Given the amount of time the submarine contract has taken to go nowhere, the nuclear reactor may take decades and we may end up pissing off USA and UK like we pissed of Japan first and then France.

The combination of solar and batteries is working well in states like SA, so that may be the medium term solution. But again the batteries rely heavily on rare minerals. So hopefully battery technology evolves to be less reliant on these minerals (Toyota fuel cell technology is one example)

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Does this mean we won't be offered "French service" in shops any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aussiegaigin

Does this mean we won't be offered "French service" in shops any more.

---

Reminds me of This, particularly the "French maid - Aussie maid in yellow bogcatchers".

https://youtu.be/kzwr8kQtCbI

Can we stop DFK our girls from now on. I bet no.

(CNN) - A US nuclear powered submarine struck an object underwater in the South China Sea on Saturday, according to two defense officials.

A number of sailors on board the USS Connecticut were injured in the accident, the officials said. None of the injuries were life-threatening, according to a statement from US Pacific Fleet. It's unclear what the Seawolf-class submarine may have hit while it was submerged.



Fast forward 10 years from now, when we finally get a nuclear Sub from the AUKUS and forced into doing some dirty works for Uncle Sam or His Majesty in the South China Sea. This could be an episode of Diggers in deep sea. Good luck to our boys.