Thursday 25th of April 2024
Home » Blogs » Gus Leonisky's blog

smirky sneaky bishop brings back the silly nuke option to blame labor...

 

nukie bishop

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop says nuclear energy remains an option for Australia, describing it as an "obvious direction" as it considers how to cut carbon dioxide emissions after 2020.

Ms Bishop called for a an open discussion about the feasibility of nuclear power, given Australia's abundance of uranium, but accused Labor of resorting to a scare campaign when the issue was raised during the Howard government years.

read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/julie-bishop-reopens-nuclear-debate-as-route-to-cut-carbon-dioxide-emissions-20141129-11w17k.html

 

--------------------

Nothing to do with Labor but common sense.

 

As one could read in many article on this site:

Nuclear energy has always been heavily subsidised, at a loss, by governments.

For a government hell-bent on making you suffer to bring its budget in the black (an illusion of trickery to enrich the rich and hammer the poor), it is a bit rich to bring this back on the table. All Nuclear Energy sectors around the world is subsidised by government, at the construction stage, at the operational stage and at the clean-up stage. 

 

Wind and Solar power are cheaper and profitable.

With technology having improved massively in this area, wind and solar energy supplies are very efficient and are now cheaper than coal which has to also be subsidised by governments in the building of infrastructure such as rail, and ports. Solar and wind energy is thus far more profitable than coal and nuke options. After the initial start up, Solar and wind energies are 100 free of CO2 emissions.

 

Nuclear power and nuclear weapons sleep in the same bed.

The only way, nuclear energy is "profitable" is for the governments to "buy" weapon grade plutonium and uranium. Even then, this sector is still subsidised to construct and clean-up.


 

nuking the planet...

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/28443

 

http://yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/11999

 

http://yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/21208

 

http://yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/948

so why nuke?

Nuclear power is not cheap and centralises supplies, even more than Coal power stations. There is oooodle of cash to be made by construction companies and operators (and let's not forget the spruikers for this stuff)— as they all get special treatment and funds (tax deductions, incentives, rebates, subsidies all at once) from governments — subsidised income usually assured for at least 30 to 50 years. 

Those annoying Liberals (CONservatives) hate the idea of "renewables" as in the short run renewables can oerate on more localised areas, including a town, a village, just a few homes or one single home. This could be the death knell of those big power companies that give cash to political parties — big companies that love centralisation and "privatisation" of government cash... 

Renewables are the way to go, including (regulated) geothermic energy and energy from the waves, etc.

the nuke illusion...

 

A prominent business group is urging the Federal Government to "get out of the way" of nuclear power becoming a reality in Australia.

The call comes after the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister reignited the debate about nuclear power in Australia.

The peak business group in South Australia, Business SA, is pushing for a debate to be held on the merits of building a nuclear power reactor in the state.

The organisation's chief executive, Nigel McBride, has welcomed the comments from senior figures within the Federal Government.

"I do welcome what is, to me, a very important sign from the Prime Minister that this Government is not closed to what could be a significant game-changer in our fight for affordable energy," he said.

At the moment legislation bans nuclear power from becoming a reality.

Mr McBride's view of the legislative ban is blunt.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-05/governments-urged-to-embrace-nuclear-power/5945072

 

 

Guess what the next move of these "business" people will be? They will BEG for the government to fund their "nukular" idea. Like in England where the UK government is forking out nearly 60 billion pounds to EDF to construct a few nuke power stations and is also forking out more than 65 billion pounds to clean up old nuke power stations... Don't believe a word these monkeys in pin-stripe suits are telling you. The price of "ordinary" electricity would go through the roof.

Invest in renewables and make the distribution of electricity on a localised scale with national switching.

 

But because the price of Nuke energy is quite expensive and nuke energy is centralised from the onset, these monkeys in suits would make a few bucks on the implementation of the "scheme"... where only a few dudes would cash in. The rest of you would pay through the nose.  Remember, NO NUCLEAR POWER HAS EVER MADE A PROFIT WITHOUT SUBSIDIES OR BEING FINANCED BY GOVERNMENTS. 

 

Renewable energy is paying for itself — after a modest outlay recoverable by governments. And you can where Bishop's new discovery of old stuff is coming from... Someone prod her to say what she said... It did not come out of the blue... 

it wants to focus on its renewable activities...

Germany’s biggest utility firm, E.ON, has announced plans to split in two and spin off most of its power generation, energy trading and upstream businesses, responding to a crisis that has crippled the European energy sector.

E.ON said it wanted to focus on its renewable activities, regulated distribution networks and tailor-made energy efficiency services, citing “dramatically altered global energy markets, technical innovation, and more diverse customer expectations”.

“E.ON’s existing broad business model can no longer properly address these new challenges,” the chief executive, Johannes Teyssen, said in a statement.

Germany’s power sector has been in turmoil, hit by a prolonged period of weak demand, low wholesale prices and a surge in renewable energy sources which continue to replace gas-fired and coal-fired power plants.

E.ON said it would prepare next year for the listing of the new company created by its breakup, with the spin-off taking place after its 2016 annual general meeting.

The split will not be accompanied by job cuts, E.ON said, adding that about 40,000 employees would remain with the parent group, while the remaining 20,000 would join the new company.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/01/eon-splits-energy-renewables?CMP=edi_2117

killing cornucopia...

 

The New South Wales Planning Assessment Commission has approved Chinese company Shenhua to mine coal on the Liverpool Plains.

The commission has determined the Shenhua Watermark Coal Mine can operate until 2046.

The mine backs on to one of the largest agriculture producing regions in NSW and will be just 25 kilometres from Gunnedah.

In making its assessment the Commission considered the agricultural production rate is 40 per cent higher on the plains than the national average.

The commission has approved the $1.2 billion open cut coal mine with conditions including that it will not extract more than 10 million tonnes of coal per year and it must have a water management plan.

NSW Farmers says mine a threat to agriculture

President of the NSW Farmers Association Fiona Simson says the decision is a broken promise from senior state Ministers.

She says it is a threat to agriculture in a highly productive region.

"I think its a huge blow for agriculture and a huge blow for the Liverpool Plains that this highly productive region had been mapped as being highly productive but now a new open cut mine is going to be placed right in the guts of it," she said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-29/shenhuas-watermark-coal-mine-gets-...