วีดีโอ

Nichola Tesla's Coil Technology = FREE/CLEAN ELECTRICITY !

Great approach to the dishonesty of bureaucrats. He is nailing the CSIRO's dodgy reports. [...and at 10:09 Senator Fawcett actually (almost) pronounces 'nuclear' correctly]

The one thing the proNuclear people is they did not add in the cost of safe storage of the Nuclear waste, It cost's the USA over 5 Billion a year to store the waste, and some Nuclear waste is safe after week and some has to be stored for over a thousand years , add that to the running cost, Even the UN have stated power from renewables & batteries cost less up to 6 times less than Nuclear

Nice idea but our government is all out of ideas

Did Chris Bowen manage to follow the logic here? 😂

Nice to see somome talking sense on the topic in Straya.

Test piot? Were the planes nuclear powered or something??

"All models are wrong, but some are useful". The Gencost report is wrong, but useful to those 'useful idiots' of the left.

Cheaper electricity means less GST for state criminals. Nuclear power means a reduction of the increase in the 40 BILLION dollars a year sent to overseas wind and solar plants.

i bet they wont put that on the ABC.

It won’t be cheaper, like the tunnels, desalination plant and everything else, politicians are so corrupt they will bleed us dry and then privatise it. We have cheap gas and we can’t get it. We have coal and China burns it for ffs we only have 25 million and we can’t even get energy or housing right without fat Gina getting rich.

The question should be "why is energy so expensive compared to other countries".

I would vote for you! Good job.

Covering for Bowen 's influence on data manipulation

This is why Albanese and Bowen need to dragged screaming to a real nuclear benefits debate. Burial of their heads in the sand is not a rational response to this critical long term power requirements of Australia. Being mono focal as Bowen and Albanese to renewables is not going to give us reliable power, it’s an important part but not the solution. So is the mandating of EV cars, the claim they will be more cost effective and energy efficient is also in question when you look at the whole of life cost and the energy cost to manufacture. Bringing nuclear up as an important policy at the next election is most likely going to win the day when all the facts are tabled. Well done to David Fawcett for presenting and debunking the CSIRO’s “report” that is being waved around as the governments argument against nuclear. Why are 30 countries using nuclear as their clean source of power generation? We are so far behind it is unbelievable.

Hydro is base load. Nuclear needs transmission lines just as renewables. The electric transition will require uprated power lines whether the energy comes from renewables or nuclear.

First lie, Canada gets 16% of its energy from nuclear not 60% as stated, it is so easy to check these facts David Fawcett is taling us for fools.

It is an old political trick to debunk an old 6 yrs report rather than an up to date study, because a 6 year old study criticism suits ones bias. Rooftop solar is the cheapest power for consumers. Nuclear power plans do not usually take account of decommisioning and nuclear waste storage. This guy is a decieving twister.

Where's the peace talks

As always, precise and informative. Thank you

Go ahead , but without my wallet !!!

I have listened to Senator Fawcett’s presentation to the Senate on the GenCost2024 Report and his SkyNews interview on the same subject, where he discussed his issues with some of the results presented in the report. I found some of the “facts” he presented misleading. Unfortunately when something becomes politial the cherry-picking of data becomes rampant. I will highlight a few instances: (1) He said the Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) for renewables did not include costs such as firming support and additional transmission lines required to make a high penetration renewable system work. This is incorrect. Page 65 of the GenCost2024 report gives a detailed discussion of how the LCOE is calculated for renewables for different penetration levels of renewables into the grid. (2) He said Canada's power is significantly cheaper than Australia's (true), and this was achieved with 60% of its power being generated by nuclear energy (false). The figure is that overall, 15% of Canada’s power is from nuclear energy, and 60% is from Hydropower. ​ * Ontario's lower power cost is due to lower transmission costs. The average wholesale power cost is approximately $110/MWh, which is higher than the wholesale cost in most of Australia. (3) In the SkyNews interview, there is a discussion about the lifetime of a nuclear power station. The figure assumed in the report is 30 years, which is the same for most technologies (except, for example, batteries, which have a shorter asset life). This figure is chosen because this is the number that most debt and equity providers require for a payback period before major refurbishment (which is usually less than the asset life). Issues around this choice of 30 years are discussed in Section D.4.1 on Page 107 of the report. The interview implies that a 30-year life for a nuclear power plant for the report’s calculations is ridiculous. The life of a nuclear plant corresponds to the life of the main pressure vessel and reactor core, but everything else must be refurbished or replaced over, say, a 60-to-80-year lifetime - turbines, steam systems, generators, control equipment, substations, etc. Therefore, it does not make sense to generate the LCOE over this extended period without including these extra capital costs. The upshot is that the price per kilowatt for nuclear with plant life extension will still be high compared to renewables. Note: even if you spend nothing on nuclear plant refurbishment, etc., over 90 years, its LCOE will only be about that of renewables. Of course this would not happen. I could go on, but the message here is if you want to have an informed view of this issue (and others), check the background facts.

The best form of safe cheap energy is thorium based energy. Not a single politician is talking about it. What a disgrace.

Great breakdown.. highly relevant for Norway as well.👍

Anthony Albanese is a loose expensive and not so responsible cannon. All so true and just look at the last 40 Years, industry running out of Australia at light speed.

The UK government is about to start the process of spending an estimated 1 Trillion pounds on carbon neutral energy production. My estimate is 3X higher because government projects always under estimate their expenditure. There has never been a project I can think of that came out on target. This is why I think getting Rolls Royce to build SMNR's (small modular nuclear reactors) if that is their determined course wouldn't even hit half the first intended costs. But then it is the WEF that's running this country not Labour.

Excellent

A politician who is educated in the field, and DOES NOT LIE!

To the Australian fairdinkum people Say s IAM that Iam Amen and amen 🙏

The federal government should invite Kirk Sorensen from FLIBE to give Parliament a talk on Thorium fueled, Liquid Salt cooled, Nuclear Reactors which are far cheaper to build and are far safer than uranium fueled reactors.

The federal government should invite Kirk Sorensen from FLIBE to give Parliament a talk on Thorium fueled, Liquid Salt cooled, Nuclear Reactors which are far cheaper to build and are far safer than uranium fueled reactors.

What we're doing now isn't working. We gotta start thinking of average everyday people trying to do more than just bloody survive in this country. Fuel is up, gas, power, groceries and on and on. Wages aren't keeping pace.

I was abused in 2020 by Laurie Watkins and no one cares because I have a disability