Global Nuclear Security Partners Australia Jasmin Diab says in lifting the current prohibitions on nuclear energy, Australia could have a decent “discussion, education and analysis” of it.
Ms Diab says she thinks the fact nuclear is being politicised is “going to force this issue to be a stumbling block”.
“If the government just lifted the current prohibition of nuclear energy, we can actually have an open discussion about the facts of nuclear and do the investigations and analysis of the benefits across Australia,” she said.
“I definitely think there will be an issue in politicising this as part of an energy policy.
“In lifting the current prohibitions we’d be able to actually have a decent discussion, education and analysis of nuclear energy in Australia.”
source
LOL 'decent discussion'… NOT WITH BOUen in "power"
bowen is the incarnation of Mr. Freeze
The irony is that many more people would buy an electric car if it was powered by nuclear generated power rather than coal or unreliable and expensive ‘renewables’.
Lifting the ban is just a distraction. No-one in the business or energy sector is pushing for nuclear power in this country.
Time all Labor States Lifted their individual Bans on Nuclear Energy Power Plants and Federal Labor put their money where there mouth is Lift the Ban on Nuclear .. Now why do they want to have it there .. it's Blocking Advancements of Nuclear in Australia something the Subsidized Renewables Fear .. their Taxpayer Funded Lifestyles . Private Jets etc
But nuclear submarines is ok?
Rolls Royce SMR, they are real. They have been commissioned to build 8 in the UK. China will lead the world with new Thorium salt reactors, this is the future, not uranium.
It requires intelligence and honesty not hyperbole and dishonesty. This is simple – Sweden the home of Greta Thunberg gets ~ 30% of its current electricity from nuclear and in November 2023 the government announced plans to construct two large-scale reactors by 2035 and the equivalent of 10 new reactors, including small modular reactors, by 2045. Why? What do they know that the ALP doesn't. More so, given Australia has the third largest Uranium reserves and has large areas that have been tectonically stable for billions of years.
South Australia has the largest uranium deposit in the southern hemisphere I'm not sure about the other states in Australia but I say let south Australia use it's natural resources
They will sell our uranium to China and India.. and we can sit in the dirt rubbing two sticks together bitching about Captain Cook..🥶
russian ice breakers have been for years smr powered , best in the world…
Coal fired power produces steam and plant food why do we need nuclear and who would want it in their backyard
Honestly, The only reason any Country uses Nuclear Energy.. Its because its good business for Nuclear Weapon Industry.. Its the only reason.. It is Inefficient wasteful and Dangerous.. But it is perfect for making secondary Weapons Grade Plutonium from the Spent Nuclear rods.. Uranium is not a renewable resource.. There are far better and cheaper and 1000 times safer sources of Energy.. None of the green Energy sources are renewable nof are they cheap.. Quantum Science has all the safe Energy needs you could ever want.. And it is infinite.. Not a temporay expensive propaganda resource that is not sustainable besides all the manipulated data is trying to convince you of things that are not actually true.. 👍
Coal and gas now
The current mob of left-handed spanners in charge will never allow it because their portfolios would crumble to dust in the face of something that would actually allow for Australia's re-industrialisation, which wind and solar will never be able to do.
At the moment we are only propping up solar & turbines from China and in the process destroying the environment here!😊
go do your research Sky. there are 2 Nuclear small reactors on line working April 2023,China 200-megawatt unit Shandong province. Russia has 2 – 1 working in the Bering Sea. DO YOUR RESEARCH YOU ignorant wretches!
Everyone has seen the catastrophic dramas with other nations who tried. Find out what country hasn't had any accidents. None.
Do we want a Chernobyl-style disaster in Australia? Why risk it?
There is no global ban and last year nuclear generation went down. Seems like most investors are not interested in nuclear
In the country of australia. There is no platonium on this island. Where is australia gonna get its platonium. From africa where it's full of it.. Same place, France in England and all of European countries get to their platonium.. By illegally confiscating it from these countries giving up pennies on a dollar.. What happens when the Africans attack all of the Mining companies?.
Push it push it – ok hands up all those in Media who've got shares in Uranium mines?
Reality hurts.
Here we go again.
The country is screaming out for nuclear and all you want is another talk fest.
What's left to talk about because it's been around for over 70 years.
The coalition should take a leaf from Labor's renewables book because they had no discussion just mandates.
Where should reactors be built and the waste stored?
Where ever we're told they will be is the answer.
I'm personally in favour of depositing the waste back where it came from at Roxby Downs in South Australia.
They built 35 kms of drives underground before they began mining any ore.
There's no need to dig anything out because it's already there.
A rarity for any mine is you can also drive heavy vehicles underground.
Australia's repository for nuclear waste has already been built and is sitting there waiting to be moved into.
Why not there because they mine the ore and produce yellow cake there already.
Roxy Downs is known as a uranium mine but in reality it's a copper mine that processes other ores like uranium and gold almost as an afterthought.
We need nuclear yesterday and not a discussion or debate.
It's time to lock up the talkers and give the doers a chance.
Let Canada help you with safest low grade uranium reactor in the world – CANDU
Wake up Australia you are turning 3rd world
Provided that "decent discussion" doesn't include the cost nuclear energy, right Jas?
:I
Umm…having prohibitions against nuclear energy doesn't prevent open discussion about nuclear power.
It only prevents nuclear power plants.
How do I know?
Well your watching a discussion about nuclear energy, yes?
Yes.
So how is it that the claim that a ban on nuclear energy power plants prevents discussion around the issue of nuclear power?
Well it doesn't.
And this video is actually proof that a ban on nuclear energy power plants DOES NOT prevent a discussion about nuclear power.
So.
Why on earth the headline of this video?
Disinformation.
Trying to get the listeners/watchers to believe something that simply is not true.
And the lie they want you to believe?
Debate about nuclear power is being stifled.
It isn't.
And this video is the proof it isn't.
And then the video wants you to believe…
What profits the makers of this video to believe.
Check with independent sources.
NO ONE is banning debate on this issue.
And this video is in itself proof of this.
Are SMR's the future?
Are renewables a better option, economically, environmentally and in the allowable timeframe?
My vote is for renewables.
Nuclear, wether SMR, which is actually an unproven technology, or the older types of nuclear reactors, take a huge amount of time to get up and running.
Typically more than a decade.
Do we really have a decade to sparevin the fight against climate change?
The science says that we don't.
Nuke power is attractive but we have to be mindful of any potential accident.
Earthquakes can ruin a nuke reactor.
Look at Fukushima where the repair cost is at least $100 billion .
Australia have no earthquake so that risk is removed.
Australia is a huge country so there are plenty of suitable locations for a nuke reactor site.
Just watched a post by the ABC, 'should Australia shift to nuclear power' and point out that it is counterproductive to continually bring up images of the british and Menzies government nuclear past in Australia. It was wrong to do so but likely unavoidable at the time as Australia did not have a good accountable democracy at that time and still has not today. It is just that we are better informed today through social media. It is also gutless of the ABC to have the comment section turned off and as such I consider the ABC to be a tool of Labor. No good at all, not balanced and as I said gutless and undemocratic.
The rear occasion a decent discussion breaks out in our parliament they all get up and walk out.
I am an unusual sort of person. I am well qualified as a scientist and have worked in several hazardous situations. I have already refused to apply for a job in a nuclear establishment when requested. I have been in too many places and have seen too much – I am not stupid. If you talk to engineers they might tell you Australia can go nuclear with safety. But it would not be them carrying the can when incidents happen. All engineering is based on science.
Referendum, not advertising, propaganda and rhetoric
It's hard to debate anything when you get blocked. Why would Youtube block pro-nuclear comment? Theres no warning to the article above.
they talk about competition will bring price down this is what we need nuklear vs wind and solar
Much is said about Ontario's very successful and low(er) cost electricity generation from nuclear however another very good, real example right now is Northern Illinois where In March 2024, over 100% of electricity consumption in Chicago and northern Illinois was covered by nuclear energy. Ratepayers paid $0.17 per kilowatt on average (that is 0.26c AUD) for this electricity. Bowen, over to you.
Anyone ever get the feeling that most environmentalists are more inclined to punish the population for enjoying the benefits of modern life than finding working solutions to environmental issues.
Utter bs. Conflating so many things…
Yes we need to investigate nuclear power as an option for our future electricity supply this wind and solar is not a viable solution to our energy crisis.