this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Green Energy

2162 readers
9 users here now

everything about energy production

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The head of the Australian energy market operator AEMO, Daniel Westerman, has rejected nuclear power as a way to replace Australia's ageing coal-fired power stations, arguing that it is too slow and too expensive. In addition, baseload power sources are not competitive in a grid dominated by wind and solar energy anyway.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

The political context here is that the Australian conservatives (the liberal coalition I suppose), who have been vividly against climate policies and renewables, are now trying to propose nuke projects on coal power plant sites. Many of these coal power plants are soon to be phased out with renewables plus storage in the queue for the freed transmission capacity, so there isn't really any advantages these sites can offer for nuke projects decades from now.

Of course, any realistic realization of nukes in Australia would be no earlier than 2040 (some even suggest 2050), by then they could already get 100% renewable in energy system easily.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

The time for nuclear was decades ago.

Now it's being pushed by fossil fuel shills, who'd love nothing more than a gratuitously expensive 20 year boondoggle to let them have free reign over power generation for all that time, and to simultaneously nix any green plans with "but the nuclear is on its way!"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Who would have thought a political appointment is political.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

For a country with a huge amount of land and shore, that makes sense for them. But some form of nuclear (uranium fission, thorium fission, fusion?!) continues to be an important part of the world's weaning off of fossil fuels

load more comments
view more: next ›