pmccarthy

Taking it a step at a time, I assume no one disputes the safety angle. If we can agree on that we can move on to cost and timing.

The "facts" quoted here by the Albanese sycophants are 75% nonsense. I can post "facts" which are soundly based but get howled down each time. This has been going on for several years here. The bottom line is that I am seen to be a "denier" so everything I post is fair game. I sometimes forget that and post something, only to get beaten up again. I am a slow learner. My colleague the late Ian Hore-Lacy spent 40 years advocating for nuclear power in Australia. He ran the Uranium Information Centre in Melbourne and wrote several books. He had two science degrees. But people here would ignore his work I'm sure because he had worked for the Rio Tinto group. I wish he had lived long enough to hear Dutton today, he dreamed of nuclear getting a hearing. So, if I quote "facts" from Ian's work. how will you respond? It's like the bloke in Salem who said there are no witches. He was shouted down. "Of course there are witches, we burned a dozen last year! That is proof!"

This seems to be the labor party kumbaya thread. An ugly and dangerous place to visit.

Are

I hope OK recovers and comes back. I don't know what his views were, but I can certainly understand the impact of negative attacks. It is quite depressing to be attacked personally for genuinely held and soundly based beliefs.

I don't know about anyone else, but I think Keith Richards was there.

It would be an anus horribuls.

I don’t even know the names of the teams after 46 years in Victoria.

That sort of nonsense is going to tip the balance in favour.

He played an IRA guy once. A really moving part. I have forgotten the name of the movie. ( not the Eagle has Landed)

You need a Lab test. They are a great dog

This month was $240 for me. Plus $145 for gas.

I nearly hijacked OME's blog to respond to a highjacked theme, but I will continue here. This is the difference between prediction and actual events. Is the number of global natural disasters increasing? Gianluca Alimonti &Luigi Mariani ABSTRACT We analyze temporal trends in the number of natural disasters reported since 1900 in the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) from the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). Visual inspection suggests three distinct phases: first, a linear upward trend to around mid-century followed by rapid growth to the turn of the new century, and thereafter a decreasing trend to 2022. These observations are supported by piecewise regression analyses that identify three breakpoints (1922, 1975, 2002), with the most recent subperiod 2002–2022 characterized by a significant decline in number of events. A similar pattern over time is exhibited by contemporaneous number of geophysical disasters – volcanoes, earthquakes, dry landslides – which, by their nature, are not significantly influenced by climate or anthropogenic factors. We conclude that the patterns observed are largely attributable to progressively better reporting of natural disaster events, with the EM-DAT dataset now regarded as relatively complete since ∼2000. The above result sits in marked contradiction to earlier analyses by two UN bodies (FAO and UNDRR), which predicts an increasing number of natural disasters and impacts in concert with global warming. Our analyses strongly refute this assertion as well as extrapolations published by UNDRR based on this claim. See Is the number of global natural disasters increasing?: Environmental Hazards: Vol 23 , No 2 - Get Access (tandfonline.com)

Bill Gates and Dick Smith are both greenies at heart. No vested interest in nuclear, it just makes sense.

One thing I would add is that the world does not have enough available mineral resources to deliver the "electrification" being forced upon us by left wing politicians. That is not just cars, but grid, generation and storage. So, it cannot physically happen. Once that is accepted, we can make more realistic plans for the next 25 years.

Helm

The objection to nuclear because it needs lots of water must be a furphy. It is a steam generator, so would use the same amount of water as a coal or oil fired generator. Edit,,, just found this: Coal, on average, consumes roughly the same amount of water per kilowatt-hour as nuclear, while it does very more heavily depending on the type and age of the individual power plant.

Or the upright bikes.

In Australia it would be called a Froot.

My only experience of electric was not that they were quieter. Apparently the tyres are hard and high pressured, with low profiles, to reduce rolling resistance, which makes road noise. My ICE car can have a softer, quieter tyre. But that is a very small sample of experience.

Injury

I think I made a kissing gesture. Still have the photo.

B seems too easy.

My mum said of my father that he had kissed the Blarney Stone. He hadn't, but I have.

Funny, I have no trust in the ABC or the Age!