Australia’s Nuclear Debate

[@jamiehayes6714]

This is an important conversation that most voters will never see. To cater to the electorate’s reduced attention span these points need to be put into a plain english video with lots of visuals. IMO

[@freethinker4991]

Your right most voters will be brainwashed by the propaganda on the commercial TV and there rich liberal party donors. People have become so stupid that believe the politicians and the the propaganda instead of the science and economic facts.

[@Hoop-pi6dp]

Slow motion trainwreck, nah, we call it a complete shit show! The uneconomical wind farm Aidan mentioned is also proposed to be constructed in very steep land prone to landslips and in the immediate water catchment area for a large regional city. The additional costs for specialised erosion and sediment control, specialised foundations and road network costs have been excluded from the costings of this project so even if they get their full 64 turbines this project will never be commercially viable. Likely to sit in a fund managers approved green projects folder, but never built, just upend the local community and tarnish the remaining "social licence" that the renewable industry claims they have. A complete shit show it is..

[@higgos72]

Uranium mining, nuclear energy, uranium conversion, spent fuel storage. We could be world leaders in this space instead of being just a quarry 🙏

[@40hup]

Or you could be the leader in renewables and green hydrogen production - lots of space and sunshine in Australia, also Wind on- and offshore. So why go with the most toxic solution when you can lead the most sustainable solution? BTW - to mine Uranium, you have to f*** over your indigenous people - again. They do not want Uranium mined in their territory.

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

wow, sounds great... no one else will or have taken the waste, wonder why?

[@zimmo0112]

Why would you want to be world leader in any of those? What does that even mean? World leader at storing so much waste? World leader at trading refined uranium?

[@notathome13]

Why uranium when thorium has no waste to dispose of and same what safer option. We seem to have a shite load of it too.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

​@@notathome13 Uranium-fired power is proven.

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

You all know that the protests would be massive and it would never ever get off the ground.

[@lynndonharnell422]

I would prefer not to have remnant vegetation along the Great Dividing Range destroyed by windmills, powerlines and pumped hydro.

[@freethinker4991]

So you like that people die from fossil fuels pollution. "New research from Harvard University, in collaboration with the University of Birmingham, the University of Leicester and University College London, found that more than 8 million people died in 2018 from fossil fuel pollution, significantly higher than previous research suggested-meaning that air pollution from burning fossil fuels like coal and diesel was responsible for about 1 in 5 deaths worldwide." If Nuclear was cheep to produce I am all for it, but it not cheep. The Nuclear teem need to go and get there cost down and still be safe. The nuclear power debate shouldn't be a debate it just need to be economic sense. We don't have to destroy any thing we have not already installing all homes with Solar and battery storage means the Great Dividing Range is not destroyed by windmills, powerlines and pumped hydro. Elon Musk has even stated that in the USA they only have to cover all the carparks with solar and they would have all the power they need.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

@@freethinker4991 "Elon Musk has even stated..." Then why isn't *_Gigafactory 1_* off-grid 100% solar-powered, as promised?

[@chrisruss9861]

Any genuine person who loves their country would agree.

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

Unlike the absolute clearfelling of 80% of the vegetation for farms, thats ok, but windmills on agricultural land is criminal wake up. Farmers keep clearing square kilometers per day. do your research

[@damienasmr922]

The first time I saw a wind farm I thought it looked pretty cool but once you see them plastered everywhere the novelty wears off very quickly. They're a blight on the environment.

[@Michael-lg4wz]

I thought Australia would have nuclear power twenty years ago but here we are. No one seems to talk about coal power toxins anymore

[@freethinker4991]

New research from Harvard University, in collaboration with the University of Birmingham, the University of Leicester and University College London, found that more than 8 million people died in 2018 from fossil fuel pollution, significantly higher than previous research suggested-meaning that air pollution from burning fossil fuels like coal and diesel was responsible for about 1 in 5 deaths worldwide.

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

Coal is a major generator of disease and has huge environment impact. do the research.

[@PeterMilanovski]

​@@freethinker4991 your still alive..... How?

[@PeterMilanovski]

You clearly are not an Australian..... Had you actually been an Australian you would and should already know that Australians don't want nuclear energy period! Anyone here claiming to be Australian and wanting nuclear energy is not actually Australian, they are employed by the nuclear energy lobby of America, here to convince someone that apparently there's one or a few dumb people in Australia who would want that poison in this beautiful country! And going by your response, you are definitely on the payroll....

[@freethinker4991]

@@PeterMilanovski My son is dead because of asthma complication caused from pollution as we us to live close to a main road. Peter I pray you never go through a lose like that .

[@whoguy4231]

$9 million per megawatt for nuclear power, $3 million per megawatt for coal, $1 million per megawatt for solar or wind. Nuclear is atleast three times more expensive, so are Australians ready to pay 300% more for power???

[@Chadceeka]

That's not how it works

[@davidkelly3779]

We are sooo going nuclear, there is no other rational choice. It maybe not in the next 5 years, but when people start to really feel the pain, we will go nuclear.

[@damienasmr922]

Voters are rarely rational in my experience. They don't have time.

[@adamwMLB]

Great discussion - please have Aidan on as a regular guest

[@chapter4travels]

The absolute smartest thing Australia could do is continue to burn coal, possible even build new coal stations if electricity demand warranted it. Then at the same time host every qualified Generation IV nuclear startup company to develop and build prototypes in the country. Provide a chunk of desert land, some infrastructure, and fuel, the rest of the funding is up to them. If any of them succeed at making a reactor that is cheaper to build and fuel than a coal station, slowly convert over to that technology and then export it all over the world along with the fuel.

[@yooper8778]

Australia is crazy not to be at least 80% nuclear powered.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

Australia is 91% fossil-fueled (IEA). A reasonable goal would be 20% uranium-fueled.

[@freethinker4991]

@@aliendroneservices6621 You really need to google your claims first. "In 2022, 32% of Australia's total electricity generation was from renewable energy sources, including solar (14%), wind (11%) and hydro (6%). The share of renewables in total electricity generation in 2022 was the highest on record, a share 1 percentage point higher than the earlier 2021-22 financial year."

[@freethinker4991]

Crazy that we want cheep power? If Nuclear was cheep to produce I am all for it but it not cheep. The Nuclear teem need to go and get there cost down and still be safe. The nuclear power debate shouldn't be a debate it just need to be economic sense.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

@@freethinker4991 IEA: *_Total energy supply, Australia, 2022:_* Coal: 33.7% Oil: 31.7% Natural gas: 25.7% That's 91% fossil-fueled.

[@freethinker4991]

@@aliendroneservices6621 So your information is 2 years old. "Key statistics from the Clean Energy Australia 2024 Report: Renewables account for 39.4 per cent of Australia's total electricity supply."

[@PhotoVideoTechOz]

Nuclear Debate, more like Nuclear Opinion piece by Aidan Morris from the Centre for Independent Studies which is part of the shadow Atlas Network. Who include organisations Advance Australia, Australian Institute for progress, and many others that are against action on climate change. Who started the CIS? Well it was donations from Santos, Shell, BHP, Rio.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

"...and many other that are against *_action on climate change."_* Can you show a positive *_return on investment?_*

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Integrated bs. Big words from a medical doctor and a coffee shop owner. Yes, I am getting angry. 😢😢😮 Let a grid construction engineer tell you how much a grid costs and let an investment advisor tell how much return on investment and let a grid owner/ operator tell you how much to maintain and run the grid and how much the retail operations cost. Australian grid is a $TRILLIONS asset that needs $100BILLIONs cashflow. Who pays Aidan ???? A grid with falling cashflow is dangerous?????????😮

[@damienasmr922]

Anyone that buys into the catastrophic CO2 clmate change narrative but dismisses nuclear is a hypocrite. Theyre almost certainly anti-human, degrowth communists at their core.

[@vincentcleaver1925]

Small, fourth generation nuclear needs to be part of every country's energy portfolio. You need nuclear derived radioisotopes for medicine, you need nuclear power plants for your navy, and by all means relie on China for wind turbines and pv

[@aliendroneservices6621]

No country needs wind or solar, and relying on China for anything is foolish.

[@gregorymalchuk272]

Third generation is better, cheaper, and we alrady have designs with western regulatory approvals.

[@chapter4travels]

@@gregorymalchuk272 Third generation is inherently more expensive and far less versatile because of its low-temperature output.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

​@@chapter4travels High capacity-factor, high fuel-burnup, and low cost-of-construction (50 cents-per-watt target-price), make scaled 3G cheaper than 4G. Process heat isn't needed. Electric heating is superior, as it is more-precise, and doesn't involve complex plumbing.

[@chapter4travels]

@@aliendroneservices6621 It's not possible for high-pressure/low-temperature nuclear to be superior in any way than low-pressure/high-temperature nuclear. It's just physics.

[@iamdrone]

30:30 Small nuclear reactors are promoted to gain favor with specific voter groups, rather than due to technical constraints. The push for these reactors is more about political strategy than addressing technological limitations.

[@chapter4travels]

Smaller is less scary, but arbitrarily dumb.

[@decem_unosquattro9538]

Low cost nuclear? 😂 There is no such thing as low cost nuclear. If you're going to build nuclear reactors they're full size reactors. Small modular reactors? No. The problem with full sized nuclear reactors is the staggering cost of nuclear. We are in a serious financial trouble in Australia now. Our federal government is essentially bankrupt yet despite this there is this talk of building what 7 nuclear reactors? Does Dutton have any idea of the cost of these reactors? What would a reactor cost over the next 12 years or longer? 50 billion each? Look at Olkiluoto 3 for example which has only just come online after what 12 years construction time. Not only did it take much longer to build, the costs associated with it blew out by a factor of just under 3X. Siemens and Areva sued and counter sued each other. The Bulgarian mafia was allegedly involved in blackmailing welders and their families. Sizewell C is also behind shedule and again way over budget. Hinkley Point reactor again over budget and behind shedule. Estimated cost 2016 18 billion UK Pounds now 47 billion... Its estimated reactors take 15 to 20 years to build. I hate to think what a reactor would cost now into the future. As fuel prices increase so does the cost of reactors. Already we've signed up for nuclear subs yet we are broke. Now they trying to push to build nukes. Lets just build coal powered stations. Faster and cheaper.

[@freethinker4991]

If Nuclear was cheep to produce I am all for it but it not cheep. The Nuclear teem need to go and get there cost down and still be safe. The nuclear power debate shouldn't be a debate it just need to be economic sense.

[@chapter4travels]

Agreed. Old-school pressurized water reactors are inherently expensive, there is no way around it. But low-pressure/high-temperature reactors have "the potential" to be cheaper than both coal and natural gas power stations and provide industrial process heat. If Australia was really smart, they could host those "Potential" technologies for very little money and "potentially" lead the world in reliable, versatile clean energy. (and the fuel)

[@freethinker4991]

@@chapter4travels I would like to reed the report can you link to it? are you talking about Geothermal and the laser rock drilling tec form Canada

[@davidwilkie9551]

The real issue is absolutely "Foreign Ownership", in the guises of divine/derived power +/-, and the human fight/flight defensive Homeostasis that is absolutely integrated in the functional thermodynamical phenomenon of self-defining QM-TIME Completeness. Outback in cattle country where the original inhabitants are most aware of bulldust and feral animals gone wild against the best interests of self sufficient survival, subsidies for fraudulent controlling practices are clearly distinguished.., ie "islanding" is the inverted-reverse concept of democracy, in that the "divide and rule" strategy dominates over providing for yourself and family.

[@oystla]

Nuclear power is Extremely expensive. The power price of New Hinkley Point C in UK has increased to 120 £/MWh. And Will still rise further in the CFD agreement the next 30 years. Small SMR is Even more expensive. While Wind and solar costs are still going down.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

My insights from my construction career. Aidan says the grid exists so, lets use it, and fill it with nuclear electricity. Adian says save on extremely expensive new grid costs and build at existing generation stations locations. Aidan assumes only nuclear electricity technology has evolved, Aidan lives in his own bubble of denial. EVs, BVs (battery vehicles) are expanding production. Battery technologies are evolving and going into production. No metal batteries have been in test production in the USA for months. Auto manufacturers are busting to get their own BVs into production. Elon Musk is developing 24/7 /365 robotic gigafactories and vehicles factories in sunny Texas. Most vehicles drive building to building car park space. Most vehicles are parked 23hrs every day and all night long. All BVs oversized battery is FREE to be UTILISED when parked all day 🌞 and all night long 🌙 . Selfplug-in V2G like a home robotic vacuum cleaner to a $60 wall outlet ezi pezi. Trickle currents all day long. Nuclear grid electricity will be a DEAD DUCK cashflow, basket case. Built on government money, tax payer's money. Tell him he is dreaming, tell him to f.........f. He is insulting to common sense and thinks people will believe his confusing bs.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

My electricity feed-in 5cents kWh, my supply 50cents kWh. Generation is dirt cheap, but grid electricity is expensive. 😮 😢😢😢 In Sydney Australia.

[@Discoworx]

Wind and solar going down?? Did you add on grid level storage??????? The extra transmission????????? The answer is: no you didn't and neither did Gencost or the ISP.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@Discoworx Yes, distant renewables are still grid electricity. Rooftop PV and BV with OVERSIZED battery parked 23hrs every day has no grid costs, millions of customers can shut off grid electricity every day the sun shines. That f.......ks the grid cashflow. That f........ks the nuclear generation cashflow. And f.......ks the peaker plants cashflow. Just my thoughts.

[@carneeki]

I'm in favour of nuclear power, I'm just not confident an Australian govt can make it happen by the time we've colonised other planets. Getting it done with a minimum of deadlines having rushed past would be nice.

[@alexnosek1066]

Good to have an episode on Australia, Chris. Have been hoping you'd feature it. Having said that, your guest's description of The Voice referendum was a stretch. Peter Dutton's messaging was full of the sorts of cynical hyperbole and fear-mongering that he accuses anti-nuclear campaigners of.

[@aliendroneservices6621]

18:59 19:09

[@chrisruss9861]

The no case was clear and logical with many smart Aborigines who don't want a divided country agreeing with it.

[@Discoworx]

I'm no fan of Dutton but I don't think he was necessarily hyperbolic about the voice. It was a mechanism for treaty and without knowing what that involved how could we back it?

[@alexnosek1066]

@@Discoworx I don't want to re-litigate the campaign, but Dutton absolutely had his moments of the disingenuous and cynical rhetoric that has defined his political career. The "divisive" claims themselves were totally laughable and transparently intended to sow division. Fear-driven and racialised messaging is at the top of his playbook. He can not help himself. Anyhoo, I don't expect Morrison to take a public shit on the politician advocating for the same thing that he wants. Just thought his sugar coating of Dutton as some kind of misrepresented pragmatist was worth a comment.

[@Discoworx]

@@alexnosek1066 yeah but the fact remains that the voice was actually based on race and therefore divisive and I don't see how you can hand wave that away.

[@GBiv78]

Will Australia "privatize" this power source so we end up not getting cheap electricity? What will probably happen is the government use public money to get this going and then palm the asset off to one of their mates to take profit instead of providing cheap electricity to the public

[@PhotoVideoTechOz]

They always do PPP agreements with all the risk on the public and guaranteed returns the the private. Just take a look at the new AUKUS deal we give the US UK hundreds of Billions of cash to sustain their shipyards and no guarantee of boats.

[@rsinclair6560]

Illinois Energy Professor..The Economics of the Nuclear Reactor.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Is that the video with gas turbine plant vs Nuclear plant construction costs and paying off debt ?? It is an excellent video. Future uncertainty is the biggest factor. In Australia the opposition is saying they will build it because the idea is poison to businesses from previous nuclear bans. This is a distraction, the past poison is not the problem, it is the future economics. Now the business government want to socialise the project with taxpayers money and have the government build them. WTF. My concern is that a bigger grid capacity must be constructed if nuclear electricity is to replace fossil fueled energy. This is ×10 times bigger costs to millions and millions of customers and taxpayers. But grid cashflow will crash every day the sun shines 😮😮😮 in sunny sunny Australia. WTF.

[@chapter4travels]

@@stephenbrickwood1602 Why does nuclear need 10x grid capacity?It would use the exact same infrastructure as the coal plant it replaces.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@chapter4travels exactly, good comment. Nuclear cannot stop any more CO2 emissions than the small part in the old coal fired plant.

[@chapter4travels]

@@stephenbrickwood1602 Relace coal with nuclear and use the same infrastructure it did. Any new demand pays for the grid to distribute it just like it has since the beginning of all electrical grids. With nuclear you don't need as long of transmission corridors as renewables need, so there is some savings there.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@chapter4travels distant renewables need a grid aswell. This excellent point was made by Aidan Morrison a year or more ago to Chris. But 'no grid' rooftop PV and a big fat oversized battery parked 23hrs every day and happy to be UTILISED is incredibly cheaper. Petroleum savings Gas heating and cooking and water heating savings And no grid electricity savings All no taxed money in the bank. Just pay the dollar a day fee to remain connected to the grid. Actually only 86cents. For emergencies.

[@davieb8216]

20:09, please remember that the Australian media is controlled Rupert Murdoch, and it's pretty easy to guess what his thoughts on the "voice vote" were.

[@davieb8216]

Peter Dutton did kill the vote, if he supported it, it would have gone through.

[@PaulAustralianborn]

Interesting video Aidan what you say definitely makes sense and I like the idea of having 4 reactors on each site because each build will be cheaper and run smoother I have voted ALP all my life but the last 2 years and especially Chris Bowen and the announcement of nuclear power is going to make me vote nuclear Enjoyed watching this Australia definitely needs nuclear power 🇦🇺⚛️🇦🇺⚛️🇦🇺

[@aliendroneservices6621]

36:14 36:49 Answer the question: what does your term *_"integrated-renewables"_* mean?

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

70gW or gWh? Battery Vehicles. 20million BV parked 23hrs all day long and all night long will be 2,000gWh (or 1,400gWh) of storage capacity freely available from most of the parked vehicles. My cars are often parked 24hrs for a few days at a time. Smart nuclear talk utilization factor of nuclear but think the little customers are not going to plug their BV oversized battery into their all electric home or businesses. Tell him he is dreaming. Grid electricity demand will crash every day the sun shines. 🌞 😮😢😢😢. Home utilization will be maxed out for years. The government built nuclear generation plants, and the grid cash flow will die, but only on the days the sun shines. 🌞 😊😊😊

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Integrated bs. Big words from a medical doctor and a coffee shop owner. Yes, I am getting angry. 😢😢😮 Let a grid construction engineer tell you how much a grid costs and let an investment advisor tell how much return on investment and let a grid owner/ operator tell you how much to maintain and run the grid and how much the retail operations cost.

[@detectiveofmoneypolitics]

Detective of money politics following this content cheers VK3GFS 73s Frank

[@suchdevelopments]

Elon Musk supports nuclear power. We must think of the future, or at least 50 years. Australia has renewable energy, which includes nuclear power.

[@freethinker4991]

Elon Musk supports nuclear power because he will need it to colonize mars. Australians want cheep power! If Nuclear was cheep to produce I am all for it but its not cheep. The Nuclear teem need to go and get there cost down and still be safe. The nuclear power debate shouldn't be a debate it just need to be economic sense. Dutton if a fool for pushing nuclear power as it just telling us all he is in the pocket of big donors that don't have Tax payers interest in mind.

[@higgos72]

Australian Governments energy investment, traffic light ratings system, gas red 😂 this is a hooge buy signal! Loading up even more on coal and gas! Blackout Bowen has no idea!

[@basil8940]

I thought Dutton was the perfect Machiavellian Henchman.

[@JohnSmith-nz4bn]

I would have gone with cluster f**k lol

[@suchdevelopments]

😃Good day from GOONELLABAH, NSW! I am an engineer promoting the Copenhagen Atomics reactor. Thorium encourages me, and it will be a Game-Changer in Energy. I'll embark on a six-month journey to circumnavigate Australia in two CYBERTRUCKs and a Tesla Semi, covering 22,000 kilometres at the beginning of February 2025.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Do you mean it will not need a grid to the millions of customers ???😮

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Aidan says the grid exists so, lets use it, and fill it with nuclear electricity. Adian says save on extremely expensive new grid costs and so, build at existing generation stations locations. Aidan assumes only nuclear electricity technology has evolved, Aidan lives in his own bubble of denial. EVs, BVs (battery vehicles) are expanding production. Battery technologies are evolving and going into production. No metal batteries have been in test production in the USA for months. Auto manufacturers are busting to get their own BVs into production. Elon Musk is developing 24/7 /365 robotic gigafactories and vehicles factories in sunny Texas. Most vehicles drive building to building car park space. Most vehicles are parked 23hrs every day and all night long. All BVs oversized battery is FREE to be UTILISED when parked all day 🌞 and all night long 🌙 . Selfplug-in V2G like a home robotic vacuum cleaner to a $60 wall outlet ezi pezi. Trickle currents all day long. Nuclear grid electricity will be a DEAD DUCK cashflow, basket case. Built on government money, tax payer's money. Tell him he is dreaming, tell him to f.........f. He is insulting to common sense and thinks people will believe his confusing bs. 😢😮

[@Discoworx]

Towing a generator or not towing anything at all?

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@Discoworx ????????

[@suchdevelopments]

@@Discoworx 1. Neuralink will help those who are worse off than me. 2. I take two Tesla Optimus robots. 3. Promote of Tesla - Cybertruck, Starlink, Optimus 4. Promote the CYBERTRUCK to the State Government and Police forces of States. 5. Promote the Tesla Semi. We will use it for concerts and accommodation while circumnavigating Australia. The trailer of the Tesla Semi will covered in PV that will charge the batteries of Cybertrucks and Tesla Semi in places with no chargers.

[@aevans2564]

Why are you interviewing a lobbyist? This guy is as credible as a Campbell’s soup tin on the topic of Nuclear power generation in Australia. He’s also paid to disinform, and has a clear agenda?

[@AndrewLambert-wi8et]

NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY ISNT GOOD FOR AUSTRALIA BECAUSE OF THE HIGH TECHNOLOGY INVOLVED.

[@stanleytolle416]

Nuclear is needed to climate the need for fossil fuel back up and certain industrial uses. The use of fourth generation high temperature reactors make sense in this case. These type of reactors can provide the high tempatures for industrial use and storage of power for interment power output.

[@davefoord1259]

No relation to scotty

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

1:00:47 engineering reality 😅😅😅😅 said the paid nuclear promoter to the medical doctor. 😊😊😊😊

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

33:00 Nuclear utilization will crash as Battery Vehicles utilization will expand. Renewables and Battery Vehicles will destroy nuclear cashflow.

[@Kenneynrg]

EVs will never fill more than 15% of the market… what then??

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@Kenneynrg 74% of electricity goes to buildings, so rooftop and BVs can supply that 74%.

[@redfern_mike]

Why is it so bad to subsidize renewables but OK to subsidize nuclear? BTW we will store the nuclear waste in your back yard

[@aliendroneservices6621]

Wind and solar are infinitely-expensive, on a sustained basis. There is no point in subsidizing them. And they are never merely "subsidized". They are forced onto the grid, at negative prices, resulting ultimately in a state of permanent-blackout.

[@TheDanEdwards]

​@@aliendroneservices6621 "Wind and solar are infinitely-expensive, on a sustained basis."

[@factnotfiction5915]

> Why is it so bad to subsidize renewables but OK to subsidize nuclear? it isn't I believe the broader point is that the subsidy costs for VRE are hidden (in these CSIRO & AEMO reports), whereas the subsidy costs for nuclear are at least semi-transparent.

[@freethinker4991]

@@aliendroneservices6621 Wrong but I am willing to let you convince me were is your pear reviewed paper that supports your claim that "Wind and solar are infinitely-expensive, on a sustained basis"? I suspect you have be brainwashed by the propaganda on the commercial TV and there rich liberal party donors. People have become so stupid that they believe the politicians and the the propaganda instead of the science and economic facts.

[@freethinker4991]

@@factnotfiction5915 Were or which lier has told you the subsidy costs for VRE are hidden in these CSIRO & AEMO reports. Another one brainwashed by the propaganda on the commercial TV and there rich liberal party donors.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

53:13 battery vehicles oversized battery and vehicles being parked 23hrs every day means offgrid in the suburbs is very real option. Save on all home energy. Save on gas supply. Save on petroleum use. All un taxed money in the bank. And the roof is shaded in a warming world. 15% of all energy used in Australia is electricity. 100% electric energy is x7 more GRID CAPACITY. This is an incredible amount of money and time. So add savings from not building a bigger national grid AND not building nuclear power stations and just UTILIZATING the oversized BV battery parked 23hrs every day is just icing on the cake. Happy days, Hahaha Hahaha Hahaha 😅😅😅😊😊😊 But WTF would i know after decades in hard dollar construction and a decade in the electricity construction.

[@chapter4travels]

So you get in your EV to go somewhere and your battery is drained when you thought it would be full. Cool, just stay home. But you're right, charging and discharging people's EVs remotely to balance the grid seems really simple. How does that work for a week of cloudy weather? Nobody can drive anywhere for 2 weeks. One week for the cloudy weather and another week to recharge everyone's batteries. This sounds great!

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@chapter4travels no no no. Just do your little hours drive in the day and recharge in all the other hours. Have your selfplug-in vehicle plugged in all night. It's oversized 100kWh battery will be much bigger than any home battery. A little cheap home battery if necessary. The rest of the grid can do whatever they want. In midwinter a little fossil fuel use is nothing in a warmer climate.

[@chapter4travels]

@@stephenbrickwood1602 The ulitiimate Rube Goldberg energy scheme.

[@Discoworx]

​@@stephenbrickwood1602 you've assumed 100% uptime on the grid supply for that night time charging. You need an expanded grid to harness all that overbuilt RE to cope with the fluctuations. That's big $ and why electricity won't come down in price.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@Discoworx your crazy. Just top up when the sun shines. Do you live in cold latitudes ????? If so, summertime and shoulder seasons will mess with nuclear grid electricity.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

14:00 Can you "see" grid construction costs are ×10 times generation construction costs.??? Fossil fuel energy is ×10 times electricity energy. So how is nuclear going to stop CO2 emissions ???? How is nuclear going to stop worldwide CO2 emissions ????

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

31:00 no grid construction engineers in any room. $ 5million per km to Mt Isa and $6million per km to connect SA to NSW. $1million per km is cheap, but Australian grid is 1million km. $TRILLION grid infrastructure asset needs electricity and $100sBILLIONS cashflow. Aidan think they have "sucked you in" with their cashflow to you. 😮

[@chapter4travels]

Replace coal plants with nuclear in the same location. No new grid is needed.

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@chapter4travels but nuclear was going to stop all CO2 emissions.

[@chapter4travels]

@@stephenbrickwood1602 Who said that. Citation needed

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

@@chapter4travels they nuclear promoters say the only way to get clean electricity to run the world and charge the electric vehicles.