We have to 'move to nuclear' because we 'need a baseload power'
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 มิ.ย. 2022
- Entrepreneur Dick Smith says renewables are "too intermittent" to run a whole country on them.
"Look there's a claim at the moment which is made by the CSIRO here and AEMO, the Australian Energy Market Operator," Mr Smith told Sky News host Chris Kenny.
"They say that renewables, they say that wind and solar with storage, is cheaper than coal.
"Now, it's not true - and because of that lie, and it's a lie, we're going to delay moving to something that we have to move to which is nuclear because you need a baseload power."
Australia would be a superb balance of entrepreneurship and environmental pride if more people channelled Dick Smith's ideas.
please ? an environmentalist who loves flying his helicopter which burns fossil fuels like there is no tomorrow
@@iamasmurf1122 Brandon's Climate Czar John Kerry burns a hell of a lot more!
@@iamasmurf1122 There are very few people who don't contradict themselves and their principles one way or another.
Smith has at least highlighted the beauty and needs of the environment in his travels, rather than as far as I know partying on golf holidays and the like or grabbing public subsidies for solar and wind projects.
I live near the Dungeness Nuclear Power Station. They used to do free tours. Very interesting day out.
Any three eyed fish?
those were the best days, when there was no worries about "terrorist" b*mbing and sh*oting 😅😵🙃😓😔😌
*We Should Never have sacrificed people's livelihoods, peoples jobs, people's businesses and farms, our regions*
*We have to stay with coal.*
We could for a while, perhaps until compact aneutronic fusion reactors are commercially available, but there are so many unknowns with that so what government would commit to it?
HELE coal power stations are much cleaner but using coal to make blue hydrogen to fuel a power station would be the cleanest coal option.
and pump excess back in ground
You should. San Antonio,Texas used coal from Australia for decades for the power plant.
Said it was the cleanest coal to burn.
Keep our good quality coal for coking steal. Reinvigorated our manufacturing industry after the recession
As long as it's fuel source is thorium, rather than uranium, it may not be too objectionable.
Do my ears deceive me? Is the debate starting about nuclear power? Thank God.
Do u want the radioactive waste buried in your back yard.
It stays radioactive forever!
When we had this debate about 40 yrs ago and the aborigines don’t want it, the oceans don’t want it.. no one wants it... so exactly where are we going to dump it.??
Look at Chernobyl!
Look at Fukushima!
Put nuclear energy on the same referendum sheet as the voice.
Let Australia decide.
Nah they'd never do that
They never give us a choice about things that really matter to us, the referendum process is completely rigged and our democracy is a fraud.
It is leaking in florida.. so no.
Turkey Point in florida leaks... into coral reef... right now... so.. no.
Again kids.. incorrect.. turkey point is leaking in Miami. End of convo you lose.
These alternative energy sources include thorium, solar power, natural gas and hydrogen. Thorium can be used as a fuel in the nuclear cycle as an alternative to uranium and the technology to facilitate this has been around since the 1960s.
India has 63 molten salt thorium generators operating now. Australia has the second largest reserves of thorium
They haven’t got a bloody clue , and by “they” I mean all of the so called leaders and scientific gurus ,
Australia has destroyed the energy sysyem's economics, to the point where no investment in baseload, of any type, is viable. Power poverty is now certain, within this decade
That is the plan.
It will happen before the end of the decade it’s happening now
Well said Dick! I couldn't agree more
What about when your bills go up even more than under renewables? Nuclear is the most expensive option
Because you are dumb?
Uneducated.
Go research more kido.... turkey point leaks in miami... thats just one.. so, no.
@@dertythegrower yeh but who was the dumbass thinking a nuclear plant on the edge of a water system without proper contingencies and lockouts from it spill into a main body of water was a smart idea. I've checked it's proximity in the bay
Up river it makes sense, but in a bay that feeds directly into the ocean? Yikes.
Seems like they tried to subsidise their water costs and cooling but having access to water. If that's accurate then poor move and a lesson learned even though as someone who isn't an engineer understands collateral damage and risk assessment. If that's not the case andthen even dumber.
There has to be a formal unbiased process where parties are held accountable for the information government used to make policy upon! Have my vote as I read email from my power supplier that prices are going up!!!
They can't be going up,surely,unreliables are free?
I'm 100% for solar.
Please sign my petition to ban CLOUDS..!
Instead of paying 650mil for nothing to the French sign a new deal for the French to build a nuclear plant in Australia if the 640mil payment be used as a downpayment for it instead of wasting it!!
The french (Framatome) built one just outside Hongkong in China’s southern Guangdong province. Worked well until the Chinese discovered leaks. The Russians might be a safer bet as supply partners.
Don’t see the point, stick with what works..coal!
Solar and wind works a lot better.
@@carcusminsden1310 works until it doesn’t…its not a reliable source of power generation. No sun, no wind = no power
@Jay Dee ahhh such a simple mind
Just to correct something Dick said about Nuclear not being cheaper than coal and gas, etc , on Credlin they gave out the following costs published by an Australian Trade Union a couple of years back :- Cost per kilowatt (Australian dollars) = Nuclear $5596, Fossil Fuels $10,000 Wind $12,373 and Large scale Solar $14,882. So that makes Nuclear at less than 60% of Coal and Gas, and an awful lot cheaper than the wind and solar sources. Let's be honest, if there wasn't such a massive amount of money going to the "renewables" sector in subsidies and promises of "more to come", this would be no contest.
I would be interested in seeing the details of this argument. I have solar panels that I paid $20000 for, but does this count as zero cost as the initial outlay was from my money. Would the fields of solar panels built by government and energy companies be as cheap? Currently solar power has to be wasted when there is too much, and more expensive sources have to be brought online when there is a shortfall, South Australia is still reliant on power from coal in Victoria and the use of unreliables/renewables requires more money to be spent on distribution at a more granular level to balance out the voltage as clouds cause household solar panel output to fluctuate by up to 90 percent. We are currently importing solar panels from China, planning to move to electric vehicles from China, and the demand for lithium batteries is increasing as the first electric vehicles start to need batteries replaced. I don't think there is enough consideration of the future costs of household batteries, and the cost of the grid infrastructure. Solar panels will need to be replaced, disposed of, and the same with batteries. The growth in batteries for EV's may cause a massive increase in costs as shortages start to bite. It does seem funny to me that other countries find nuclear a clean and cheap alternative that can eliminate CO2 emmissions, while Australia seems to find it expensive, and prefer a slow roll-out of renewables at huge cost as a better approach to eliminating CO2 emmissions.
What's wrong with burning coal?
Emh like everything?
@@whiplash2891 name one
Nothing.
Ask Germany.
They're firing up Coal fired powered stations as we speak
@@markofmelbourne2328 it's not renewable, burning it releases in the air Soot, Sulphur Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides, Volatile organic compounds and Carbon monoxide. It's extremely inefficient and has like half the energy density compared to nuclear.
@@whiplash2891 if coal is not renewable, how did it get there in the first place? 😉
If we can somehow harness enough nuclear energy then vincey can mobilise his giant kangzilla weapon under the grear barrier.
Why don't you let them harness your gas?
Yes yes and a thoroughly thought out yes, that time is now.
SMR baseload with more numerous smaller grids are future for all Anglosphere nation's.
Sooner leadership figures this out the better we'll be
The problem with this whole debate around climate. Is the people who understand reality, know it wont take much to knock over the reliability of the Australian electrical power grid network.
It is teetering now. As State governments sold off their electricity networks, and then told the people buying those assets, that by the way we are going to legislate you out of business.
And that is essentially what the State Governments did, sold off their electricity assets, then outlawed coal and gas.
And you think to yourself, with the population rising, and no new power stations, just the sheer fact, of demand versus output becomes a major problem.
Throw the coal and gas power plant owners under the bus, and they refuse to maintain or expand those assets.
Green energy machines are not as reliable, and cost a lot more, given you need a lot more of them means more cost.
And little green ferals running around gluing themselves to road and blocking traffic don't get it. If the electricity grid becomes unstable, voters will not be interested in climate change.
And that is where the loony left will lose this debate as they have done in the U.S. Is enforce their ideas upon the country, when they don't work, it's never their fault it's the people who don't believe them.
And the left never get it, you can't force people to do something, it if does not work, or creates problems that were never there before they demanded change.
The problem has been the left had put the arguments on what they will accept as green energy.
It's just the cost of those machines in the form of solar panels - wind farms - solar batteries, cost a lot of money, and each one has a problem. With solar -they don't work at night - wind farms don't work when the wind does not blow. Solar batteries, can only do so many cycles before they are work out. Think of your car battery. You cannot drain even solar batteries down much more then 30% - 40% of their capacity. Anyone with a brain between their ears will understand this. A solar battery, might have a life of 20 if, and the if is a big one. You can store the battery not out in the sun or cold which also degrades them, at 25 degrees Celsius. Next, when you look up the battery specifications. Look at depth of discharge, versus how many cycles you will get from the batteries. It is there in the specifications. So the more depth of discharge, less battery life.
All these things in particular solar panels and batteries are good for an individual house. When you try to do this on scale the problems just blow out. How do you keep the batteries at 25 degrees Celsius, depth of discharge, means you need a lot more batteries to carry the load demand on them. If you use the batteries heavily, they wont last long.
Lithium batteries overheat, and can catch on fire even as solar batteries.
What the left failed to see was, they needed an answer for base load electricity. Or a new source of base load power generation. And pumping water uphill and releasing it overnight is small scale hydro stuff.
You wither go, nuclear, and here you really have to look at the latest technology, not the misleading 1950's photo of a nuclear power plant, that were first generation.
The latest designs like pebble reactors are cooled by by gas, and can't melt down, as the uranium is made into round spheres like a cricket ball size. Or the small reactors from nuclear powered ships or submarines, sit in a building about the size of three shipping containers high.
While ever the climate change debate remains locked on renewables, the loony left are going to get tarred and feathered.
They forgot to do their homework. And that was what do coal and gas fired power plants put out now megawatts in terms of power each day.
You can say what you like, about wind solar and batteries.
They don't work on scale. They work on individual houses and as the solar panel scheme was originally rolled out.
And people assume just put them together it must work. It works until the sun goes down, or you get repeated cloudy days blocking the sunlight reduces panel output.
The other problem is no-one is asking right now what is the amount of electricity does Sydney or Melbourne use in ONE DAY.
And the climate ferals don't think. Go and ask an electrical engineer what would it take to replace that capacity in solar panels, and the answer would more then likely be, you could not make enough of them to power a major capitol city in Australia.
That's the reality that's going to ruin these ideas of climate change this or that. You have to look at existing technologies, and what generates base power load for a reasonable cost.
If you go green energy, the costs will blow out, simply given the scale you have to replace once you take coal and gas fired power plants off line. And people will then realise politicians have been lying, and they can't play GOD with the climate.
To summarise, deliberate destruction of western countries from within.
What a great man.
Dick Smith has always made Sense and not Nonsense 👍
Yes that’s because there mates have invested interest. The joke needs to stop.
Uh, why can't we use
ALL FORMS OF ENERGY..?
Nuclear.power for electricity and desalinated water to water the deserts.
It's a win win.
Water the deserts why ?
Most the the deserts in Australia are remnants from inland seas. The soil isn’t viable because of the salinity in the water table.
Really, and where will this water hungry nuclear plant be situated?
I find it Amazing that the world still has one real news channel left for we the people so thanks sky news from America.
Can someone please share a link to Chris’ documentary?
No we don't want another Maralinga Christmas island in our backyard thank you very much.
Australia can utilise the Great Artesian basin to produce steam to run power turbines
Well said. Australia doesn't want another fukushima or Chernobyl. Media faked being inside a blown building (reactor 4) to trick the world that nuclear is safe
It’s politics not science.
Don't be ridiculous, tell people about cold fusion technology and Tesla free energy!!! Nothing can stop what is coming, nothing!
Lazard’s 7th Levelised Cost of Storage report puts the unsubsidised cost of wholesale PV and storage (50MW/200MWh) at between $US85-$US158. Nuclear costs between $131 and $204 $/MWh.
Lets just do the coal again. Its cheap and already available. Yeah right tassie with their $1000 bills each quater for a family, using minimum shower time, no heater and short showers, get a grip on the situation with ordinary poor people.
Cheap? Have you been paying attention?
@@carcusminsden1310 chwaper than any of this green rubbish ... 70% of part made in Ch8na, needing tobe replaced every 10-15 years. What a disaster! We have coal, we have plants, lets do what Ch8na has been do8ng and building more coal plants instead if covid modelling ...
That's what happens when you have unelected,genocidal oligarchs telling us what to do,the lunatics running the show!
Carcass,circus,we had a perfectly good electricity grid,there is no climate emergency,just unprecedented scaremongering,profiteering and political lunacy!
@@sherriestapleton8054 yeah no it isn't. You really need to keep up.
Men with common sense like him are so badly needed in politics, certainly here in America.
Not really kid
Its leaking at turkey point in miami
get an education.
explain Turkey Point leaking into my water then, little kid...
Turkey Point water leak proves you incorrect.. we have smarter people
*Net-zero emissions will mean net zero jobs. And posibly alter your soon to be net-zero credit spending if the WEF gets its way.*
Mr. Smith may have done a lot of walking but he seems to have both feet firmly on the ground!
i vote we put all our politicians on bigger versions of those wheels that rats and mice use.
Chernobyl, Fukushima. What could possibly go wrong.
Nuclear is still the safest option by far....
@@smdnsnnd7254 so far......
@@frankcoates4609 name something else that could potentially be safer?
@@smdnsnnd7254 hundreds have died from nuclear power stations.
Those are 50s-60s old water cooled reactors, modern fast reactors use liquid salt can't be driven into a melt down.
Fukushima reactors biggest problem was the tsunami and being water cooled. Very high temperatures of a melt down can make water so hot it splits back into Hydrogen and Oxygen, a very explosive mixture which is what happened at Fukushima.
Liquid salt no such issues, the reactor just stops with wimper if there is an issue.
We are more informed about Nuclear.
What is your plan for the waist, deadly to all life for 200,000yrs
Molten Salt reactors or Thorium-based nuclear power produce the same output with less fuel and no danger and also can be switched of with a flick of a switch.
The only thing you can't do is make purified uranium for bombs, but that's a good thing right.
Yes the Molten Salt Fast Reactor (MSFR) can use Thorium as fuel and can also consume nuclear waste. The fuel reprocessing is far simpler and can be done on site using the Pyroprocess. These technologies are extremely safe and proliferation resistant in that they do not produce usable weapons grade material in any stage of the process. If we started now and shared knowledge with all of the other nations working on similar technology we may have a proven design and the industrial capability to roll it out across the entire nation before 2050. Nuclear power plants are like trees, the best time to get one started is 20 years before you need it. But what hope have we got when our politicians are pinheads and our top boffins, or the corporate creatures controlling them, are corrupt?
You can bury it in my backyard.
Australia’s been disposing of nuclear waste for years.
Plus a fair chunk of the by product can be used in nuclear medicine as well as military applications.
Get Musk to shoot it off into space for orbital storage
Rockets run liquid oxygen / hydrogen so it's totally green too
It's too sensible.
Yeah let's have another fukushima or Chernobyl disaster but this time in Australia 👍. Its safe! And have media pretend to be inside fukushima reactor 4 building. A building that blew! To trick the world that everything is okay 😃
go find a company to build one that won't need public money.
they covered a lot in a couple of minutes
Habahahaha. How's that ac and electric car doing during the summer
Dick Smith you’re a commonsense thinker and maybe Dick Smith should look into industrial hemp as a rural energy resources and manufacturing industries.
why is CSIRO and the energy operator lying?
The CSIRO is biased and political, full of left-wing activists. It lies all the time eg. climate change.
Just thought I'd check in with Sky News to see if they were saying anything stupid and I wasn't disappointed.
You were stupid enough to give them your click 🤷♂️
A lot smarter than you carcass!
So now you can go back to the biased taxpayer funded ABC and be happy
Their ABC will be hounding Dick Smith to come on their channel with his facts.
Not really
He is uneducated ontl many leaking plants.. kid. prime example is turkey point
Matt.. bot or uneducated? I think latter.. also you have no content as usual.. bot?
Bot
Again.. turkey point miami plant... leaking
No we don’t think again
Nuclear Power ? No thanks !
Because of China?
Why solar farms , how about install solar panels to individuals' homes and businesses
*Wake up to this fraud.*
Dick said nuclear power plants 🪴 hummed and churned out energy carbon free, could someone ppl lease explain carbon. Is that the same carbon growers pump into their greenhouses to aide in the plant's growth? I'm very confused about the carbon footprint that we leave behind us .
Do you want a green base load look at the Sydney Harbor the TIDE comes in the Tide goes out . What great way to generate power
We need nuclear because it the best option at this point in time unless we’re living in the planet of rainbows and unicorns expecting windmills to produce iphones
Why though, I'm yet to understand why? It is the most expensive one, jt doesn't solve the crisis at all, it will take like 6-10 years to commission here and will be super expensive!
Here’s an example of the kind of ignorant freak you described 🤷♂️
how convenient in times of fuel prices going high .. ,,convenient ''
happy days well wes got a clean green labor govenment at last?? they know how to keep us safe worm and dry well fed and happyaaaa??? im so happy now?? whens the new vaxin comming i think i might be getting sick ?? but still happy
Dick Smith demonstrates again that one successful businessman is more intelligent than 1,000 career politicians. Exhibit 2: Trump.
Yet Turkey Point leaking into my water in florida... facts
He is not.. get a clue please
Turkey Point is leaking.. i win all debate right there
The main world resources of thorium are associated with monazite placer deposits in India, Brazil, Australia, the USA, Egypt, and Venezuela.
When the technology is ready, watch Australia export it for peanuts and import the finished product for billions.
Thorium reactors are to my knowledge still under development. There is no shortage of thorium (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_thorium_resources) and it is 3 times more abundant than uranium. Australia has reserves of an estimated 500,000 tonnes (second only to India), in addition to lots of uranium.
@@stevolegato there online in India
That’s all very well and fine, but what are you planning on doing with all the nuclear waste? Ship it off to 3rd world countries to be buried?
We have been stung in the short term because too many existing plants were off-line for maintenance. 1/3 of our capacity was offline! Clearly maintenance schedules need to be coordinated/approved by AEMO.
Forgetting in the first instance about all forms of subsidy and penalty in using one form of power or another and for which location. If Albo can come back from his global gallivanting to his constituents and tell us that he has engaged 2 separate Aussie engineering consultants to analyze the options for additional power, that would be a grand first step. One report is to examine the short term (1-3 years) and the other would look at long term options. This would provide hopefully some unbiased information to enable decisions to be made. This power must be financed, planned, designed, constructed, operated and owned by the federal government for at least the next 10 years. No option should be ruled out. The reports should be made available to all people.
Energy POWERS every other industry.ALEX EPSTEIN 's "Fossil Future" on sale now June,2022
Nuclear is the way to go. It’s extremely safe these days, not like it used to be.
Actually nuclear power has always been relatively safe. The two most noted incidents were completely avoidable and were due solely to government corruption and incompetence, not the process itself.
Fukushima? Chernobyl? Its fucking run if something happens. Everyone gets sick! Even media faked being inside reactor 4 fukushima to brainwash the world that everything is all fine. Disgusting!
@@johnwoodrow8769 Its never been safe! Is Dumping nuclear waste in the oceans safe? You don't abandon communities and leave everything behind cause its safe. And have media pretend to be inside reactor 4 fukushima a building that blew up to trick the world its all fine. Its disgusting!
@@kylekylie7204 If you want to use Fukushima and Chernobyl as representative of the safety of a properly designed, monitored, and operated nuclear power facility ..... then on that same logic you'd NEVER get in an airplane and all dams would need to be immediately taken down. Poorly designed and maintained planes crash, and have killed thousands. The highest number of deaths from a man made disaster was a dam collapse killing hundreds of thousands of people.
Only a hand full of people perished in the Fukushima and Chernobyl accidents. But I appreciate you aren't interested in facts as they don't align with your irrational hysteria.
@@kylekylie7204 The nuclear power industry has an excellent safety record. Around 500 nuclear power plants have been operating since the 1950's in over 30 countries. Hydro has by far the worst safety record for power generation.
You really should stop commenting on subjects you clearly know nothing about. ANYONE who references Chernobyl in a discussion on modern well designed nuclear power plants clearly knows nothing about the subject. Chernobyl was no more than a reflection of the failing Russian state, nothing else. You know, the country who has no way to rescue its submariners if they get into a problem.
Fukushima the same. What sort of government would allow a reactor to be built close to the sea in the most tsunami prone country on earth. A CORRUPT Japanese government.
Over the past 50 years, we should have had a multiple reactors at Radium Hill feeding the national grid and Australians with cheap, clean and unlimited energy.
Australians have been ripped off
Neither cheap, clean or unlimited.
clean it is not, kid
@@carcusminsden1310 clean.. this kid said its clean..meanwhile there is dozen of leaks in America alone as i type this
mark is another bot
notice all bots have no content and basic name... meanwhile im not, pointing it out
all power is evil shut all power down leave oil in the ground?? its for the gods to use??
Steam machines.
Yes we all need nuclear!!
I say go nuclear. If that's the path we have to take.
Nuclear is not safe! Fukushima? Chernobyl? Media faking being inside reactor 4 fukushima to convince the world everything is safe! Do not be fooled
Fear usually paralyzers reason
The latest parliamentary enquiry into nuclear energy in Australia found that it would be a poor fit for Australia's energy market. The chief engineer at AEMO said it was the last thing we needed in a 21st century market. Australia is a sunny country with the highest market penetration of rooftop solar in the world. From spring to autumn we now regularly have negative wholesale prices where solar is eating into baseload demand. In such a market, a nuclear plant would quickly go broke.
And without baseload power from one source or another (nuclear being the most environmentally friendly), the whole country will quickly go broke.
And you can't run a city or a smelter on unreliables,total bullshit,coal fired power stations are still the best solution,virtue signalling and carbon taxes and unreliables will have no quantifiable effect on the climate.,money is better spent on filters for emissions of any pollutants from coal fired power stations,there is no climate emergency,now there is an energy crisis and people can't afford their electricity bills,so countries are already going back to coal fired power stations,you can't make this shit up!
@@SamsungSamsung-md9xq It's interesting how the media has shut down the question of if there is a 'climate emergency' and/or even if switching to renewables will make one scrap of difference if there is. The spin merchants have just moved forward as if these are now indisputable established facts, rather than highly questionable claims.
*There is the net-zero policy which I vehemently disagree with on the basis that it is only going to cost jobs.*
Just checking what Dick and Chris are saying here is that the government needs to pay for Nuclear Generation either via direct ownership or subsidies to providers ?
There is no way it is economic without the taxpayer being slugged one way or another. At end of life watch the owner go bankrupt and leave the taxpayer with the remediation costs.
wakey wakey wakey Australia...safe nuclear reactors have been built in Central Europe in 1960's...Czech republic has 6 running nuclear reactors...only 10 million people....you have everything to build and run nuclear reactors in OZ but something else very important is missing...(it's not the money)!!!
Nuclear is not safe! Fukushima? Chernobyl? You don't abandon communities if something happens cause its safe. Or have media pretend to be inside reactor 4 fukushima a building that blew to trick everyone worldwide thats its all fine!
Said the LNP in power… not
We didn't have electricity problems before but now we do. I'm guessing we have an incompetent Labor gov running the show now
@@Wide_Awake708 you’re a deep thinker, mate
@@C.J.M.. What's the matter mate, having trouble refuting facts?
@Christo
You’re pathetic 😎
@@Wide_Awake708 facts and you mate😂😂
Well said!!!
Sky news is ling to you all again! After watching this show I would
suggest getting familiar Dave Borlace. BSc in Technology youtube shows
on Nuclear which further suggest the Nuclear is not the answer link to
shows. th-cam.com/users/JustHaveaThinksearch?query=Nuclear
What are two things Australia has szhitloads of??
Wind.
Sun.
Fk nukes
Pffft it’s that simple, is it?
Do you hold your printer up to your computer screen when it says it can’t find it?
Heaps of uranium too and then we won't be held hostage by Chinese solar, wind and batteries
😉
We have some of the largets uranium deposits in the world. We would be self sufficient if we used Nuclear, Solar and wind.
@@5RndsFFE solar and wind are garbage, it's a ploy to sell us out to China. They have monopoly on rare earths used to manufacture these products.
Coal comes to mind,but that's too sensible,now we will have an energy crisis the minority left and greens will rue the day they ever started this bullshit!
Nuclear is a good medium term solution as apart from SMRs, they take quite a while to build. In the short term, High Efficiency, Low Emissions (HELE) coal fired power stations are a pretty good interim solution.
The annoying thing is we've had the interim already, safer nuclear technology is like 30 years old now, we missed the boat in transitioning to nuclear into renewables, we need tonjust go renewables. Nuclear is just too expensive
Amazing...everything you said is wrong.
@@binmcbin1890 Renewables by themselves just don't work. They are also highly energy intensive to make, usually from coal fired power stations providing that energy for their manufacture. That's not mentioning the toxic cocktail of chemicals used to produce them and their difficult and often uneconomic disposal. Renewables (or part time energy sources) are only part of the solution. When the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow, enormous batteries are not cost efficient or anywhere near totally effective. And why buy all these renewables from China? They just laugh when everybody including Australia just shoots themselves in the foot. If you have the resources for other solutions in your own country, why not use them?
The only solution!
@@carcusminsden1310 So you could build a nuclear power station quickly?
Modular reactors is the way to go!
Yes and will be delivered by unicorns that sh*t rainbows!
@@carcusminsden1310 Don’t know much about nuclear reactors do you? Go do some research before writing fairy stories
Norman Mazlin,
Stop "Fantasizing" and Start Supporting Australia's Amazing Solar Opportunity.
wont help us now... it would 10 years to make..... coal plant from scratch 1 year....
And a big battery 3 months.
@@carcusminsden1310 we can get the kids in Congo to work a bit harder... & who cares about tailing dams?
@@donavonlarney ahhh more lies...cobalt not needed any more
@@carcusminsden1310 i know nothing .. please tell me more?
@@donavonlarney alternative chemistry my friend
No.
Use less power.. its unsafe, kid.. undeniable, kid..
CONG
I can't seem to remember sky news Australia being so for nuclear power during the last 9yrs 🤔
Maybe you were drunk
@@DominicPelle God youre such a sad sack. Always changing your profile lmao, taking this way too seriously!
It's just a fact sky/news corp have only started pushing nuclear as an option since coal was got ridiculously expensive. Murdoch with his stake in uranium mines lol fancy that! And here's you perpetuating a lie for them just cos hahaha. Pure sad sack behaviour
Speaking of drunks, here’s Guy Incognito.
I have to wonder what it would take for you people to grow up and change 😎
@@DominicPelle no doubt, but I just looked. Nope, no push for nuclear power. Lots of China will attack Australia, still waiting on that 🤔
Absolutely
It's Sky; It's Dangerous Lies.
Stikibits sure does dribble irrational garbage
It may have been okay for Skyhooks to live in the '70s but you don't have to. Do some homework before you put the thumbs down on everything.
You Sky-nutters sure gibber irrational crap.
How long before nuclear power stations can take over ?
30 years. By then we will 100% renewables anyway so no point.
On tonight's episode of sky's groundhog Day..
Same bat time
Same bat channel
Same sky puppets
Same complaints
Same result
Australians voted in support of clean renewable energy sources. 🌏
😆😆😆😆
Marked for spam
Dicki ✔️✔️ top man!!!this man is the man for information. He speaks the TRUTH LIKE ALWAYS. NUCLEAR POWER ✔️✔️
No.. it still leaks in america and we are smarter
turkey point leak in miami.. just one of many, kid... so, no.
explain turkey point leaks in miami water 🤐
Nuclear is the worst idea. They had to fake being inside reactor 4 at fukushima to trick the world that everything was fine. Disgusting!
@@kylekylie7204 you have no idea what constant power supply is coal /nuclear. And more economical than wind and solar.
It would take at least 20 years to move to nuclear. We don't have the expertise in building nuclear power stations let alone manning them. It would have been a fantastic idea if we adopted it decades ago.
apparently we can use the existing plants and infastructure. they convert the existing ones…..
Useless... We could do it in under 10 if we really tried.
@@fbryce1ify yeah for the most part, they only need to swap generator and maybe some transmission stuff
20years! Don't have expertise! Operate them!
Good grief! ... you are well and truly out of date!
I once asked the head of operations at Lucas Heights is it difficult to recruit the necessary skills to operate a nuclear power industry in Australia. His reply was no, it is actually incredibly easy. You don't train people from scratch, you take already highly skilled people from a closely related field e.g. electricians, aircraft technicians etc, and just 'up skill' them.
It takes decades to build Nuclear power stations plus the thousands of years to store the waste, but Deep Geothermal can produce energy for base load anywhere in the world, using new hybrid drilling using conventional and Gyroton techniques.
"decades to build"!?
Best do some homework before commiting to print...
That was decades ago. We past that Joe. We can build 3D printing.
@@KIA-MIA-POW Yes decades to build...common knowledge my friend.
@@carcusminsden1310 ...there are several USA nuclear personnel having a good laugh at the decades old information you now seek to exploit!
Nuclear reactors connected to the grid in 2020 had a median construction time of 84 months(7 years).
Dick, We Will do it.
Australia Will Run on Renewables.
Stop Doubting Our Capabilities.
Yes the Fact that there is No Genuine Large Scale Solar Power Station makes Our Renewable Capabilities look Poor.
So We Must Fix this.
Dick I Challenge You to Admit Nuclear Needs Storage, Multiple Types, Very Expensive, Very Long Term.
What is a news channel doing promoting nuclear every week ?
Doing what the rest of the clueless media should be doing,but haven't the smarts or the guts to do!
Better than the climate hysteria stuff
@@SamsungSamsung-md9xq Sure... remember Fukushima ?
@@fred4687 Are you under the illusion that nuclear does not contribute to global warming ?
@@asmaben1114 Less than the manufacturing and transportation of windmills and solar panels
Yes the super rich and powerful want to build a billion dollar plant charge you for the cost, plus for whatever power you use. Win win for them. Lose lose for you.
Not in the southern hemisphere.
You already ruined stuff with the Maralinga testing.
Geez sky is really scraping the bottom of the barrel for nuclear guests.
Dick Smith is held in the highest esteem by millions of Australians.
GOD BLESS DICK SMITH A TRUE HUMANITARIAN AUSTRALIAN
Actually, with new advances in battery technology, we could well be on the brink of a storage revolution... and similar advances in solar panels make them more efficient, too.
@Music Music Current batteries have a ten-year warranty, true... but they may last longer (I hope!) Future batteries could last a LOT longer. And they're likely to be cheaper too... (again, I hope!)
I doubt they'll ever be a complete replacement, but they could still help take a some of the strain off an over-stressed grid. It would be a shame to throw the baby out with the bathwater!
Bullshit!
@@SamsungSamsung-md9xq Believe what you like... No skin off my nose... but there are definite improvements in both battery and photo-voltaic technology. Here are links to a few articles which prove that, unlike you, I'm NOT just 'bullshitting'!
th-cam.com/video/5hjPm6QZVbU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/kyiw05SiG2s/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/qeVOFydscAo/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/oYT9lZJFNiU/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/FnlGmkZRd1o/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/wLlL46pYcg4/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/H1BvXUity0s/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/tHRoefpqMaM/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/DOBBwx3Cbbk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/xtV9dyceQmc/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/M0fnEsz4Ks0/w-d-xo.html