Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "Peter Dutton admits to significant upfront cost of nuclear reactors" video.

We know exactly how much a nuclear reactor costs. We have been building them for 70 years.
3
Nuclear is most certainly clean and safe if properly regulated. It has never proven to be cheap. Where did you get this idea from?
1
@josh4270 Same question to you. Where did you get the idea nuclear power is cheaper than renewables. LAZARDs LCOE study completely contradicts your claims. Please reference some data source as evidence of your claims. Thanks.
1
@josh4270 I’m not sure what you mean by cost as there are numerous LCOE studies in the public domain that all universally clearly show renewables are cheaper at producing electricity than nuclear, coal, and gas. You are correct in that LCOE studies do not include decommissioning costs, but you seem only concerned with the environmental costs of recycling PV cells and wind turbines, but not the pollution caused by burning fossil fuels which has contributed to the warming of our atmosphere and oceans. C02 lasts in the atmosphere for over a thousand years and the effect it has on warming the atmosphere has been known since the mid 19th century. You can legislate to eliminate PV cell waste and wind turbines are already being recycled in construction cement. There is always a solution.
1
@josh4270 Yes, both LAZARDs and the CSIRO have produced LCOE studies in the last 12 months that conclusively show renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels and nuclear energy at producing electricity in the Australian market. The AEMO has also produced a report that provides all the costs related to renewables infrastructure which again shows renewable infrastructure cheaper than nuclear infrastructure. All this information is publicly available online.
1
Yes you can. It is legislatively possible.
1
AEMO have published all costs associated with renewables. You can read these reports online from its website. Nothing is hidden. Or remain ignorant, no skin off my nose.
1
@ProudAussie23 Yes and the AEMO have published those costs. You can read them online from its website.
1
If that was true and it might be, then why has the total overall output of nuclear energy been decreasing since the late 90s and the total overall output of renewable energies been significantly increasing? Considering nuclear and fossil fuels receive significant government subsidies as well.
1
@VK6AB- These are all government initiatives where cost is irrelevant. You understand the Chinese economy is different to the Australian economy. All you have done is cherry pick data. Instead look at overall worldwide PWR construction and decommissioning of PWR. Tell me how much in the last 12 months in TWh has been added to the grid in renewables compared to nuclear in net terms.
1
@VK6AB- So all you did was avoid the question, and enter a strawman, But let’s take China which currently has renewable energy production outstripping nuclear by 300%. Renewables now provide 30% of Chinas energy needs. China has commissioned more solar last year than the rest of the world combined. Please find a better example for nuclear energy expansion than China, or is that the best you have.
1
@VK6AB- Never mentioned anything about coal as neither did you. I never claimed or suggested coal powered energy production had not increased. Again that is just another strawman from you. Once again this argument has nothing to do with the safety or reliability of PWR, but the introduction of them into a market already dominated by 30% renewables ie Australia. Even the IAEA admits that nuclear is extremely problematic financially in this situation. And please “gaslighting” that is so yesterday, let’s just stick to factual information.
1
@VK6AB- Yes I always amuse myself, particularly when your final reply lacks any substance whatsoever.
1
The AEMO has published numerous reports on the costings. You can read these online from its website. All costs are revealed.
1
@stevemcallister8649 So you obviously haven’t read the report yourself as it specifically addresses the infrastructure costs as did the AEMO reports. Many economists criticised the costing of nuclear as too conservative and cost would be significantly higher. All you have displayed is a clear bias against independent scientific data. The exact same report would have been delivered to a LNP government. You cite no data or documentation that even remotely refutes any of the AEMO or CSIROs Gencost LCOE study.
1
@ThatGuy-ze5kk No factually incorrect. In actual fact numerous economists and engineers have commented that the CSIRO were overly conservative in their estimation of nuclear costings and they erred on the side of caution. Nuclear costs in Australia would be significantly higher. So the average planned lifespan of current PWRs is 30 to 40 years. There are significant costs associated with extending their lifespan. There CSIRO Gencost LCOE report was accurate and its methodology was fully explained. All you have done is denigrate the independent scientists, economists, and engineers who produced the report with unsubstantiated claims of bias. You clearly have the bias issues.
1
@ThatGuy-ze5kk No you are wrong again. I quoted the factual data from an independent report. This is not my opinion it is a CSIRO report. I have repeatedly asked you to provide some evidence to the contrary and all you have provided is your personal opinion. It is not my personal opinion that renewables are cheaper than nuclear at producing electricity it is the CSIRO opinion. Once again provide some data, a report, a document that supports your view, because all you have provided is your personal opinion, which is worthless unless of course you have some expertise in the field of which again you would have to provide evidence of.
1
@ThatGuy-ze5kk Again I have read numerous LCOE studies and they all concluded the same. I am happy to accept a contrary position if you could actually quote some verifiable data.
1