Australia has stayed on the "no nuclear path" despite the times: Tony Irwin with Ross Greenwood
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 มิ.ย. 2024
- ✍️ SIGN OUR PETITION TO LIFT THE NUCLEAR BANS IN AUSTRALIA:
www.nuclearforaustralia.com/p...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ABOUT NUCLEAR FOR AUSTRALIA:
Nuclear for Australia is Australia's largest campaign for nuclear energy. Our aim is to disseminate information about nuclear energy to help advance and inform the debate.
Nuclear for Australia is a registered charity. The organisation is proudly non partisan and is currently chaired by the former CEO of ANSTO and nuclear science advocate, Dr Adi Paterson.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOLLOW OUR SOCIALS:
• Instagram: / nuclearforaustr. .
• Facebook: profile.php?...
• Twitter: / nuclearforaus
• TH-cam: / @nuclearforaustralia
• TikTok: / nuclearforaus. . - บันเทิง
I love listening to Tony Irwin....so measured, fact based and hands on experience with Nuclear....these are the people we should be listening too!!
Just like the "experts on the COVID scamdemic. 🤣🤣🤣
"Mr Littleproud, you and Dutton reminded me of the speech JFK gave on reaching the moon, not that you are both JFK but you both made me proud. I can hear you saying "We choose to go Nuclear in the next ten years and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard". Come on Australia get behind this far seeing Mr Dutton / Littleproud and vote for LNP both in the Senate and The House of Representatives or the ALP, Greens and loopy Teals will forever stop us moving forward and bankrupt Australia with the cost of renewables, which have to be replaced and disposed of in 15yrs".
Yes , I think so too .
I'm an engineer and I worked on Lucas Heights isotope extractor for nuclear medicine nuclear is safe
With half a life of billions of years. They will evaporate by the sun immediately.
@@Yourbrightspot What is the halflife of cadmium-114? Does that infinite halflife make it infinitely dangerous?
@@aliendroneservices6621I believe this comment may mislead the concept of danger between toxicity and radiotoxicity. Cd-114 is a stable isotope that is highly toxic (like many other stable isotopes), but is useful as a research tool. This means that regardless of nuclear reactors (the subject of the video) it will still be used for medical isotope production whose industry has a very good reputation and has more benefits to health through its application. For an infinite halflife you could say that Fe-54 is toxic with enough quantities.
@@aliendroneservices6621 Not if stored and handled properly in view of the length of time that those scientists have been dealing with it and other isotopes.
Great interview Ross. Good to hear from someone that knows what they’re talking about…
Bring on nuclear asap…
Given how much gas, coal, sunshine, wind, uranium we have here in Australia. Power prices have to be a huge failure of government.
Not a huge failure, but a criminal sell-out. The people of Australia have been betrayed into a high cost of living.(sucked dry )
Interesting that the US Senate has just passed 88:2 - huge bipartisan support - legislation aimed at cutting regulatory costs and overheads. Plus a new program to support the development of next Gen 4 advanced designs. The big commercial driver is going to be the demand for rock-solid base generation to support massive growth in AI data center energy requirements.
_Interesting that the US Senate has just passed 88:2 - huge bipartisan support - legislation aimed at cutting regulatory costs and overheads._ At last, they're waking up. The USA was a leader in nuclear power generation, but not any more. They have a long way to go to 'make America great, again.' Rosatom and the French are now miles ahead of them.
Economic investigator Frank G Melbourne Australia is following this informative content cheers Frank
What I can't understand about this, is why do we need to keep renewables in the mix (unless its for remote communities etc). Why have two completely different energy sources with being unreliable that requires constant replacement. If we go nuclear just ditch the expensive and unreliable renewables that generally can't be recycled.
Oh and the Gencost report was written by an economist..
7 reactors will power 4% of the grid by 2050. That's why. Nuclear will be a drop in the bucket.
You are absolutely and totally correct 👍
1:10 why will 'renewables' be needed?
Their only use is to placate the muppet brigade …
Renewables are useless
Most of my concern is in regards to the costs and the timeline. The problem with nuclear is there has been a number of recent nuclear reactor builds that have gone hugely over cost and over budget.
In Finland they completed a nuclear reactor in 2023 that was meant to cost 3 billion Euros and by completed in 2009, instead it cost 11 billion Euros and was 14 years late. Finland already has a nuclear industry.
In the UK the Hinkley Point C is the same situation.
In regards to both the coalition and labor plans in Australia, neither appear to be specifying the total costs and probable timeframes so that the merits of each can be judged.
_The problem with nuclear is there has been a number of recent nuclear reactor builds that have gone hugely over cost and over budget._ That's the European Pressurised Reactor. They may be superior once built, but they're tricky to get right. So, until they've ironed out the kinks, avoid them.
Bipartisan support would help avoid poor decision making
@@danielmaher964 Then the problem is that one of the parties *_wishes to create a state of permanent-blackout,_* and that wish is incompatible with uranium-fired power.
@@aliendroneservices6621 if so they deserve 0 seats
You omitted the fact Finland's power bills dropped to one-third of what they were prior to nuclear.
Too much talk of small modular reactors. 1.1 GW capacity units and get on with it. UAE is in the middle of its construction and unit startups, and each unit gained construction and start time efficiencies with each unit, 7yrs to 5yrs and next is no scheduled on line in 3.5yrs from construction to startup. And cost dropped with each unit. Proven South Korean nuclear construction companies and unit manufacturers. Could have built capacity of 20GW in the last 20yrs with the renewables handouts already.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
One of the barriers to nuclear, is that people don't understand it's benefits. The opposition really needs to focus on educating the public about issues like the scale of nuclear waste compared to other forms of power.
PFAS
DUTTON GREAT MOVE
You guys need to rustle up a few more experts to support this if you’re so keen on it. So far you’ve really rolled out this guy repeatedly and that high school kid. You might need to do better if you want it to be taken seriously.
You gonna roll out Greta on renewables 🤔
Sky can be as dull as they like. If you want to know just Google it.
"This guy" is Tony Irwin. "That high school kid" is William Shackel. Learn, please.
@@troywallace322To be fair, she has no less credibility than the high school kid!
But no, I was wondering if you’d be able to get an expert from AEMO, CFC, IEA, CSIRO, Origin, AGL or anyone really from the energy sector or any investment banks or anyone really who thinks this is a good idea.
@@froggy0162 Your so called experts are not always experts. It depends on the pay outs. Graft. Why do you think Labor are staying with renewables and the rest of the world is moving past them. The CSIRO are extreme lefties. Scientists, credible ones, are the way to go.