Leaderboard

Can't work my wife out. First she says "Sure! Get yourself a tattoo." Now she's whining about the bagpipers in the garden.

Just pointing out something many may not have known.

I think this might be a little optimistic. Global stockpiles of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel exceed 320,000 tonnes currently in storage, with another 120,000+ tonnes having been reprocessed. The vast majority of this material sits in temporary wet pools or dry casks near power plants, awaiting permanent deep geological disposal. [1, 2] he International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) tracks the global spent nuclear fuel inventory across power reactors worldwide. When including all classifications (Low-Level and Intermediate-Level Waste), the global inventory totals tens of millions of cubic meters, although the highest-level, most radioactive materials make up a very small percentage of that total volume. [1, 2, 3] Here is a video about how waste disposal works. This is not hysterical scare mongering, but I believe an accurate description of the process. The thing that strikes me is it is quite complex and thus far not much has been actually permanently disposed of.

Siso...You don't mention quick response considerations or storage. That's the game changer. You can easily research the real cost of these things IF you want to . Australia has a relatively small Population over a large area. A grid for any system here will be costly and damage Prone. Long distance equals transmission losses and higher power costs. Tidal and battery could be stand alone for some areas like Broome.. Really, what's Planting trees got to do with nuclear?? Some Countries are almost standing room only, and there's plenty of places where a big tree is a big problem. Nuclear Needs cooling and LOTS of water. Australia is one of the driest continents in the world but we have Wind and sunlight in abundance. Horses for Courses they say. Look at the condition of some test sites like the Marshal Islands. Nev

Very true, and this applies to all forms of power generation. I am not philosophically opposed to nuclear; however, I have not seen convincing economic modelling. If we were to go down the nuclear road, we would be looking at significant costs. Recent projects in Europe, the UK and the US have experienced substantial cost overruns and delays A question I would have is: Who would build them? Australia has world-class engineering and construction capability, but it currently lacks experience in several areas unique to commercial nuclear power, including: nuclear-qualified pressure vessel manufacturing reactor vessel forging steam generator manufacturing nuclear fuel fabrication a nuclear regulatory workforce for commercial power reactors Those capabilities would need to be developed over time or sourced internationally. Whilst transmission upgrades required may be less than for renewables, they are still substantial. Nuclear does have an enormous upfront cost and is only viable over many decades. In the meantime, storage technology gets cheaper and better. Storage technology continues to improve and fall in cost, whether lithium-ion, sodium-ion or other emerging technologies. Given the long lead time between deciding to build a nuclear power station and generating the first power, storage technology will continue to advance. I think some time ago you mentioned that you have a historically fantasic feed in tariff from your retailer, so I imagine you are doing alright. My power bills have gone up; however, the solar keeps it cheap compared to other bills I have. For my household, investing further in rooftop solar and storage is likely to reduce my electricity costs far sooner than waiting for a fleet of nuclear stations to be built. Ultimately, I'm less interested in whether a technology is labelled "renewable" or "nuclear" than whether it can deliver reliable, affordable and environmentally responsible electricity for Australians. At this stage, I haven't seen convincing evidence that a nuclear pathway would provide a better overall outcome, particularly given the costs and construction timeframes involved.

Decommissioning and waste disposal is still a Problem, Siso. Nev

A feed-in tariff reduces an individual household's bill, but it is not evidence that the overall electricity system is cheaper. In a personal sense for those with solar a feed-in tariff has a great deal to do with a "reduction in power bills" In terms of the cartoon that reawakened this conversation. India is building NP but it is also aggressively building renewables: India aims for 500 GW of non-fossil fuel energy capacity by 2030, a central part of its goal to reach net-zero emissions by 2070. This is divided into aggressive renewable energy (solar, wind, and hydro) and nuclear power targets, coupled with specific green hydrogen and emissions goals. [1, 2, 3] Renewable Energy Targets 500 GW Non-Fossil Capacity by 2030: This is India's primary stated goal to shift its power generation mix. [1] Green Hydrogen: Under the National Green Hydrogen Mission, India aims to produce 5 million metric tonnes (MT) of green hydrogen annually by 2030, which will require an additional 125 GW of associated renewable energy capacity. [1] Emissions Intensity: India aims to reduce the emissions intensity of its GDP by 33% to 35% from 2005 levels by 2030 and increase non-fossil capacity to 50% of the total installed base. [1, 2, 3] Nuclear Energy Targets 100 GW by 2047: To support the path to net-zero, India has set a long-term target to scale nuclear capacity from roughly 8.8 GW up to 100 GW by 2047. [1] Regulatory Expansion: Recent legislative milestones, including the SHANTI Act and amendments to the Atomic Energy Act, allow greater private-sector participation and foreign investment to accelerate these builds. [1, 2] If we go nuclear or not, optimistically, we need at the very least 10 to 15 years of other means of power generation. If Australia stopped building renewables today and waited for nuclear, it would still need replacement capacity because coal plants are retiring. Option 1: Extend coal Possible, but: old plants become less reliable, maintenance costs rise, unplanned outages increase, emissions remain high. Option 2: Build more gas Gas turbines are excellent for firming, but: gas prices are volatile, fuel supply is limited, emissions are significant. Option 3: Build renewables and storage now This is essentially the current pathway: replace retiring coal with wind and solar, add batteries, pumped hydro and transmission, potentially add firm generation later. The advantage is that these assets can be built relatively quickly and reduce exposure to fossil fuel prices.

Sams parents were NZers & his father was in the military & stayed on in the UK after WW2. They eventually decided to return to NZ.

Great actor. He was great in Jurassic Park, and Hunt for the Wilderpeople. Apparently a Sir too, and his real first name is Nigel.

I was on my way to work this morning and thought stuff it, I'm getting a coffee and going to have it at the beach before I start. My daughter told me on the phone it was -4c in tamworth, and here I get to wake up to 9c and this view. It was 14c by the time I got to the beach. I'm starting to catch on life is too short to let this stuff pass us by and work is not everything.

My Dad had one also, it was his first rangefinder camera after trying to use an old clapped out bakelite camera that someone must have given him. He took lots of family photos with the Neoca during the 1950s. In his latter years he gave me all the negatives which I still have, stored safely. He developed them himself and they look pretty good. Unfortunately Dad's Neoca was stolen, so, for nostalgia, I bought one as part of my collection, and also as a bit of family memorabilia.

In a post near the beginning of this thread I mentioned that I became interested in photography when a workmate of my father gave me a 35mm camera. Neoca 35mm - my first camera I later purchased a twin lens reflex camera which took a 2+1//4" film negative. I never got into film processing, taking my negatives and transparency films to a chemist or camera shop for processing. Twin lens reflex Then I went digital so I could do post processing on the computer. I bought a Panasonic Lumix FZ20 camera which had a 12x zoom lens, great for airport photos. Unfortunately I lost it at an Avalon Air Show. It was a particularly hot day, and at the end of the show I was heading to the exit, suffering from a bit of heat exhaustion. A staff person on a golf buggy offered me a lift to the first aid room. I placed all my goods, chair, esky, camera, etc. on the back seat. When we got to the first aid room the camera was missing. I was pretty devistated. I assumed it had fallen off when we bumped over a gutter. My wife found a secondhand Lumix FZ40 which had a 24x zoom lens in the Trading Post for much less than I paid for the FZ20. It had belonged to the late father of the advertiser. That is the camera I use today in addition to my phone cameras. Lumix FZ40 I have an old iPhone 6 whichhas been decommossioned as a phone, it has no sim card. However it takes good photos, is small and light and fits in a tee shirt pocket, and is very easy to transfer images to the computer. My actual phone, a Samsung Galaxy, takes probably slightly better photos than the iPhone, but is large, heavy, like a brick to carry, and is a nightmare to transfer photos.

The other thing that is becoming a pain is having to do everything on your phone. So many aps drain the battery quickly, and if you are stuck with a flat battery, or the network fails as has haapened with Telstra and Optus, you are stuffed.

How much BLOOD does Trump Have on his Hands, NOW? Nev

Nuclear puts out a lot of heat and needs water, cost heaps to build reflected in the Price Private enterprise wants to do it. Nuclear test site will remain dangerous forever, effectively.Can't be used for quick response either, like Batteries or Hydro. Todays demand fluctuates wildly. Nev

There's just two things I hate.... 1. The way things are 2. Change