Wow, Australia's power strategy is fucked with everything put into solar and wind

She's my aunt❤

Very interesting! Looking forward to bring this to Indonesia

What about recycling?

All those techniques were well developed for the petroleum geology over 30 years ago, solid mining geology is just catching up and copying....

Thanks for a well-researched video by an expert

It’s clear that the normal scientific processes regarding climatology have been taken over and politicised. Consequently all real scientific debate and research has been suspended unless you are publishing research papers that agree and support the predetermined answers about CO2 and the “Climate Emergency” Try publishing research that casts any doubt on this and you will be pilloried professionally and on social media to the extent that it becomes a career ending move. Michaux doesn’t disagree with the basic premise that we are in a “Climate Emergency”, he simply points out in the same way that Mark Mills does that the current solutions that politicians are mandating are unachievable, some might say insane. He doesn’t take it the necessary step further and question whether there has been a sufficiently rigorous scientific process to establish whether an energy transition with this velocity and on this scale is necessary at all.

While it is true current high pressure water reactors cannot be scaled to acheive changeover smr reactors built in shipyards can be scaled for this to proceed. That is something not running at this time but will be much safer than pressurised water reactors. Fusion is Not the answer because one must needs tritium which will pollute the entire area while thorium breeder smrs will easily be able to follow through on numbers and total generation. The greatest threat at this time is tellurium cracking and other metals produced during high neutron bombardment.

Limits to Growh did not predict that "we would run out of important metals by about the year 2000". There was no "undergraduate blunder". This is a myth that was created in 1989 by Ronald Bailey, science editor of the Forbes magazine. "Of course, Bailey’s accusations are just plain wrong. What he had done was to extract a fragment of the text of the book and criticizing it out of context. In table 4 of the second chapter of the book, he had found a row of data (column 2) for the duration, expressed in years, of some mineral resources. He had presented these data as the only “predictions” that the study had made and he had based his criticism on that, totally ignoring the rest of the book." "The fact is that none of the numbers he had selected was a prediction and nowhere in the book it was stated that these numbers were supposed to be read as such. Table 4 was there only to illustrate the effect of a hypothetical continued exponential growth on the exploitation of mineral resources. Even without bothering to read the whole book, the text of chapter 2 clearly stated that continued exponential growth was not to be expected. The rest of the book, then, showed various scenarios of economic collapse that in no case took place before the first decades of 21st century." www.resilience.org/stories/2011-09-15/cassandras-curse-how-limits-growth-was-demonized/ In fact, it's still too early to judge whether Limits to Growth got the timing right or not! www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/gaya-herrington-mit-study-the-limits-to-growth

If Quinkinland is a typical example of what the rest of the world is like, anyone who recognized the threats to civilization posed by the Schemes of exploitation, particularly anyone who fears the threats, self identifies as a soft target for exploitation, who can be added to the list of extractable resources and subsidies for status quo schema. Lies have no upfront cost for the liar, but what goes around comes around and decays the supporting structure. Going direct to what, how and why inside-outside holographic positioning presence structures operate, the emulation, effectively and efficiently fit for purpose management of thermodynamical systems should be easily understood to require immediate revision, reiteration and re education regarding holographic time-timing nucleation.

I’m proud of you darling ❤❤❤

❤❤❤

Love dry Aussie humour... allows listening to approaching catastrophe with a smile!

Doesn't even take into account politics, border disputes, war, trade barriers, corruption and so on which make any significant changes impossible.The world is a set of complex, interlocking, dissipative structures that can't be transitioned from one phase to another without drastic shocks to the system.

H2 is stored at 800 bar, sharpen up Michael

:45 mins. Please rephrase ‘the final solution’ !! I know, out of context, but there will still be strife.

quick question. How will we able to handle all this planning and not loose efficiency or massive bureaucracies?

Chris Bowen hasn't seen this. He's is allowed to willy nilly and systematically tear down the social structure of Australian society.

12 week buffer

In the spirit of all solutions being on the table including UFO propulsion, there is one tried and true system which has optimised energy requirements and resources for millenia, which still exists, and which i fear will eventually make a comeback more broadly. Slavery.

Thank you for what you do!

I would never worry about an asteroid hitting us causing an extinction level event,,,, if all this goes ahead we are in the making of a new kind of ELE, a man made one. This is going to end badly.

So basically the so called elites dont have a clue what to do so they are piling the problem on to the 99%😮

HYL is Mexican company which has been taken over.by Tenova. The HYL process was developed in Mexico.

Can we use reflectors to increase the effective area of light hitting solar panels during winter?

don't lie to yourself .... crapitalist propaganda ... the crapitalist 'transition' didn't and doesn't work ....

Police say "Ignorance of the Law is NO excuse", but positioning nothing different in No-thing definable, (everything observable is a relative-timing differentiate), is a genuine reason why QM-TIME nucleation of holographic prime-cofactor frequency density-intensity alignment amplitudes is a cause of ignorance to be overcome. Ie policies worth policing have to be confirmed by appropriate Math-Physics thermodynamical reasoning, and we have teaching-learning techniques to fix this. ***** The suggestion that methods of mining, metal extraction and materials forming might have vastly superior techniques it's possible to use, if we begin with first principles holographic nucleation Singularity-point positioning in "all is vibration" QM-TIME resonance Actuality.., one can assume the knowledge is available but not taught appropriately, because Euler's e-Pi-i Superposition-point Entanglement dimensionality coordination shaping the aspect-versions of local time-timing sync-duration reciprocation-recirculation is very simple as a first step in identifying coherence-cohesion objectives permanence, babies can see it pretty quickly, so the teaching-learning task thereafter is a matter of assembly sequences of abstractions.

Accepting that this assessment of the actual source of the problem is the fossil fuels, and the cause is the diabolical attitudes of those enforcing their exclusive use, against the million times more effective use of nucleation relative-timing resonance decay, controlled energy release, the solution is an educated Democracy and choice of appropriate Thermodynamically realistic values in general tune with the global ecosystem. It's like an old episode of Get Smart, mostly farce. The outstanding significance of Newtonian Fluxion-Integral Temporal superposition Calculus was encapsulated in the placement of twinned-symmetrical Prisims divergence-convergence nucleation @ Singularity-point positioning of parallel coexistence frequency superposition AM-FM time-timing alignments. This is why Nuclear Power Generation is absolutely understandable in terms of Euler's Fusion<->Fission Functional Resonance, Logarithmic Time = Superspin Singularity-point Modulation Mechanism, ..obviously not the natural thermodynamical principle to fear, but predators in power are destroying the world and continue to promote justifiable fear of deliberate ignorance.

Brilliant! Very impressive presentation. Well Done to Simon Michaux and to all scientists with the same 'attitude'!

Question as a point of comparison. If Nuclear were to represent >80% of hypothetical generation, what would that do to the required metals? We know from this analysis that there's not enough metal for 4 weeks backup. What if we could reduce that to under a day because of the nature of baseload power?

The old economic saying, "It's the grid costs stupid." 3 things. Generation Grid transmission Dispersed customers The grid is incredibly expensive and a little expensive electric energy, plus the rest of our energy as cheap fossil energy, then we are ok. The grid transmits to millions and millions of dispersed customers from the central generator No fossil fueled future means 5 times bigger national grid to deliver 5 times more electricity. The national grid is incredibly expensive. The first national grid has been built over 100years and costs as much as the national GDP. Now central electricity generation needs a 5 times bigger grid capacity to transmit all the extra energy to the dispersed customers. A little electricity energy over the expensive national grid, a fragile lightweight grid that was limited in capacity because of its $/klm construction costs, then became expensive energy in the electricity bills. But because it is fragile it can be broken like when the AC is turned up in the middle of the day. Forest fires started when the transmission lines heat and sag too low and close to the ground vegetation. Transmission lines blown over in stormy weather. Now 5 times bigger grid, a robust grid, is economically horrendous financially. Also horrendous in CO2 from the resources to finished giant grid, and raw materials. All centralised electricity generation has this major problem and nobody is talking about it. EV talk, all day long. Nuclear electricity talk, all day long. Distant renewables talk, all day long. Time frames, we don't have 100years.

You do not mention the grid capacity increase, 5 times bigger. That is a huge resource need and financing and CO2 emissions.

I was still there Simon 😉Fantastic work ! 🙏🏻 Greetings from Belgium 🙋‍♀️

Professor Happer says we can make synthetic fuel from limestone, so when we run out of oil, coal and natural gas, there is still lots of limestone.

Simon is clever, but distracted by this. He would be better suited to apply his considerable expertise to the matter of the survival of humanity, specifically the calamity that will befall Earth not in 26 years time, but in the next fifteen to twenty two years. No point in looking to construct a new paradigm or shift in direction for 2050, events before then will assuredly render that as naught.

I don't know about Oakridge power having been anywhere near as successful as he indicates... My research indicated that it had multiple down-time and never produced more that 5mw at best, often only 3-4. When the liquid salt plumbing components were examined after decommissioning, much corrosion and some cracking was found after that short time in use.... I understand much effort has been devoted to solving this problem, and only time will tell if it has been successful after real usage.

Nature has a solution and that one is most likely to play out. Forced total degrowth. No worries.

Uranium 233 is a fast fissile material, so unfortunately as great as LMS reactors are, there use is controlled and restricted by the Nuclear Proliferation Treaties. Basically you'd be handing every state in the world the ability to make nuclear bombs... given the potential resource wars coming, this is not a good idea.

Ugh. If you believe the land was taken from "traditional owners" why don't you give it back to them instead of lip service kissing their ass. Woke to the core. I hate self-loathing, gratuitously apologizing white people. Show some balls and accept that in life there are winners and losers. You won, they lost. Move on.

Honest question…do these quantities take into account any potential recycling of some of these materials? Now or hypothetically in the future?

If you base your research on IEA predictions, you might as well throw it away. Ten years ago IEA predicted BEV sales for 2040 at 10%. That number was surpassed in 2022.

Thank you for your great work. What is the solution? Only nuclear can replace coal over time. Forget about solar and wind, especially wind is complete non-sense, except for very few niche application in the private sector. For the industry, especially regarding baseload power, simply forget wind and solar. Assume they dont work here, assume they dont exist. Beside a massive build up of nuclear energy on a worldwide scale (min. 14.000 GW), we should make existing industry and power plants (!) emissionsfree. If CO2 and water vapor is created, we should turn that with some hydrogen into methanol. Methanol is the best seasonal storage, methanol is the high density battery, which we are missing. (5400 Wh per kg or 4300 Wh per liter compared to lithium-battery about 160 Wh/kg) Electric cars are not feasible, let alone electric trucks. Just forget about that, does not work, and wont ever work for sure. Heatpumps to be used for heating are the dumpest idea ever considered. Heatpumps are fine only for cooling if powered by solar or nuclear, basically near CO2 free.

End futile expensive subsidies, embrace free markets and increase fossil fuel production. The threat across the planet is poverty not warming. Poverty kills millions, while warming hasn't killed anything. It is wealth creation and the modern world that mitigates and neutralizes threats from warming. Threats from everything.

One of the many tool's to come out of the studies by Simon that concisely informs, In my opinion, is the input calculating data that can render out puts as to how effective outcomes are by spread sheet analysis. This could mean the existing can be added or extracted to hypothetically imposed projections. Speeding up the missing pieces to the puzzle. Comprehensive mapping of the intricate maze to decern a more efficient path foward I engineering blue prints rather than build expenses not germane to cause. Inventors can and therefore investors can taylor specific redress. Knowing the limitations constricts in order to concentrate resource. Consulting apps on energy 10x from now incorporated spans out the level to overcompensate, a well measured approach to any good engineering in practice. A scaling mindset for big challenges ahead. Personally decentralization is self sufficiency and sustainable. Bar some exceptions.

So why not nuclear power?

If you REALLY wanted to cause catastrophic man-made climate change, then you would install millions of 3MW windmills offshore and onshore. The prevailing wind patterns would change dramatically and make any CO2 impacts look like chump change. Dr Robert Ian Holmes

So what you are saying is we can just build a crap ton of next generation nuclear plants and solve all the issues you mentioned above? To be formal, I have some questions 1. Does the calculations about solar deficiency include improvements in solar efficiency? If so, how much? 2. The battery scenario excludes sodium battery which are in production right now. What happens if we add sodium to the equation? 3. Like in the Q&A, nuclear seems to be the best solution. But nuclear is very bad at handling fluctuating loads. The batteries won't absolve it too given the numbers you shared. Any solutions?

The only problem with green transition it is if we will have enough materials to do the transition , specially rare earths and recycling them .

This makes it sound like the astronomical amount of materials needed is largely just to make up for the long term energy storage in places with cold dark winters and little sun and wind. What would be the material requirements if there were still a 10-20% buffer of fossil fuel electricity production to make up for this instead of long term storage? Along with some nuclear still being in the mix of course. 100% might not be feasible for all areas, but can we still solve the majority of the problem and then hope carbon capture advances enough to take care of the rest?

This is rather sobering. The elephant in the room: we need to think differently about our way of living and the economy that’s come with that. Dramatically less meat and dairy, less consumer products, much less travel. That hurts, but it doesn’t have to be a life that’s not worth living. The positive side: we start now, immediately. If you don’t want to: think of your children and start nevertheless.