Nuclear engineer slams Australia’s ‘dangerous’ renewables experiment

Radiant Energy Group’s Mark Nelson has criticised Australia’s “dangerous” renewables experiment as he pushes for the country to pursue nuclear energy.
Mr Nelson claims the nuclear industry is not paying attention to Australia while the country keeps its ban on nuclear power generation.
“You guys have to take yourself seriously,” he told Sky News host Chris Kenny.
“Get that ban gone, get ready to have a patient conversation about the length of time needed to get a proper nuclear energy program in place and stabilise your grid plants and admit that it's going to be a big sacrifice to even get that 10 or 15-year gap patched up with your retiring plants before the nuclear can come online.”
The Chicago-based nuclear engineer visited Sydney to participate in the RePlanet Australia conference.
The US state of Illinois generates more electricity from nuclear energy than any other state, accounting for one-eighth of the nation's total nuclear power generation.

[@batmanlives6456]

Bowen is just an Australian embarrassment…

[@Camptonweat]

Just Bowen? Angus Taylor did nothing to progress nuclear either.

[@peterlyall6789]

bowen got s face like rubber.....im sorry its the only thing i could think of typing in...i'll harder next time to be nice

[@batmanlives6456]

@@Camptonweat Angus is a waste of space as well

[@australiafirst520]

And what of The Lisping Loafer Camping in the Lodge?

[@batmanlives6456]

@@Camptonweatwe need Pauline at the helm!!!❤

[@AximandTheCursed]

Without government legislation and subsidies, no-one would have voluntarily built a single wind turbine or solar farm. Government interference in the free market always leads to shoddy decisions.

[@ironmaidens6663]

They run off taxpayer subsidies and their totally uneconomical without them.

[@random2829]

We - rudely - call subsidies BRIBES. 😀

[@ohsweetmystery]

If a technology is ready for consumers it does not need subsidies or incentives.

[@tassied12]

@@ohsweetmystery Nowhere in the world has nuclear been built without huge government subsidies. For a start they are unisurable by the private sector

[@greenlach7398]

Yeah and there are no coal subsidies in Australia, Yeah right.

[@blizzard5657]

We only need to lift the ban on nuclear power plants and industries with large power requirements will invest, rather than being penalized by carbon tax, and we could double productivity with affordable energy supply, 😊unfortunately the labor government think we are still in the 1960s ,

[@gismo130]

but they are happy to look the other way for "nuclear Submarines"

[@mariahewitt9787]

​@@gismo130 Indeed.

[@brucerobinson3715]

Labor are controlled by an ideology not facts, reality or commonsense

[@johnboyd6943]

This guy is making too much sense for our politicians to understand. Australia's politicians need to be awarded gold medals for calisthenics - the whole lot of them are bent over and have their heads up their backsides.

[@ilikevines]

“I appreciate your sacrifice in this dangerous experiment you’re running” 😂

[@jamesgreig5168]

Just to clarify, Mark was referring to renewables as the dangerous experiment.

[@Philip-hv2kc]

The windmills are pretty dangerous though. The government still seems to give money away for people to install solar. The damn inverters pollute the airwaves with interference and mess up AM reception.

[@Prognosis__]

The government will first have to remove the ban on new nuclear reactors and allow market forces to decide.

[@kerravon4159]

Absolutely, that's the very first thing they should do.

[@AximandTheCursed]

The sooner, the better, the ban was akin to cutting off a leg, then expect to keep running competitively.

[@rodsloane706]

Ànd get rid of Barking Batsh*t Bonkers Bowen

[@eoin1959]

The hypocrisy is that we are selling off our uranium to other countries so they can produce nuclear power. *Australian Uranium, Powering the World*... except, of course, Australia, where nuclear power is officially banned 🤪

[@freethinker4991]

Watch this on nuclear kzbin.info/www/bejne/kKOUlpagjquMitE

[@marc7214]

We're going through all this financial pain for what 1% of the world's pollution. While China exponentially increases their pollution. It's pure insanity not to consider nuclear.

[@Brian-bg2cb]

Nuclear works. It has been badmouthed for decades and made people afraid. But most don't investigate.

[@JoeZorzin]

and it's not even pollution- that is CO2 isn't a pollutant

[@susannahvarietyvideos5660]

@@JoeZorzin Exactly and without Co2 the plants would not grow.All this hype about cutting most of Co2 will probably affect sustainability of foods.

[@falcodarkzz]

The only way China etc dacarbonises is with western tech we build and scale. They now have the biggest solar plant, thanks to us, so no, our investment in these technologies is vital.

[@JoeZorzin]

@@susannahvarietyvideos5660 Like they're doing in Holland- where the government is trying to beat down its highly successfully and advanced farming industry in the name of pollution.

[@SubvertTheState]

Never thought I'd see Mark Nelson on Sky News. He knows a lot about nuclear power, and he has an excellent mustache.

[@Camptonweat]

Correct re: the mustache.

[@TheSpankingMonkeys]

I was thinking the exact same thing 😂

[@rikeralpha100]

With a moustache like that he must know what he's talking about.

[@fourgedmushrooms5958]

We are being screwed. Intentionally

[@Mike-ud6kc]

I can't remember when we voted for this ludicrous solar utopia ! Please explain !

[@selwyn500]

Who is making money off the solar and wind energy push? We can have nuke subs but no nuke power stations😂

[@jaybee9269]

Truly absurd, isn’t it.

[@berti-y4f]

The Elite (like Mike Cannon-Brookes/Atlassian who controls the board of AGL) because they all have large share portfolios in renewables and make a shitload of money.

[@MrOlgrumpy]

Who are we buying wind turbines and the attached infrastructure from ? the greatest unrelated polluter in the world !

[@chrisg8321]

😂😂😂 So other countries see us as a nutcase 😂😂😂

[@typetersen8809]

Blindly charging toward "Net Zero" whilst most others have either Nuclear and/or Coal? You bet they think we're nuts.😂

[@VenturiLife]

As opposed to a use-case.

[@chrisg8321]

@@typetersen8809 And then when it backfires Labor and Green voters will blame conservatives, its their modus operandi.

[@Prognosis__]

Blackout Bowen is one

[@robot336]

CLIMATE ALARMIST'S - THE ONE'S WHO ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR - ARE NARCISSISTIC RACIST'S PUSHING FOR MORE BLACK AFRICAN CHILD AND CHINESE CONCENTRATION CAMP MUSLIM SLAVE LABOUR TO DIG UP AND BUILD THEIR GREEN NIGHTMARE WHILE HANDING OVER OUR ENERGY / NATIONAL SECURITY TO COMMUNIST CHINA 😈😈👿👿😈😈

[@redplanet7163]

Wind and Solar are environmental nightmares. Australia needs to stop this madness now!

[@pandemicoftheunvaccinated5367]

Almost a third of Australian households have rooftop solar systems - the highest rate in the world. Yep, it's madness... consumerism.

[@redplanet7163]

@@pandemicoftheunvaccinated5367 Let the rooftop solar continue. If every household can generate its own electricity then the main problem is solved. But destroying millions of acres of farmland, natural habitats, coastlines and off shore habitats to save the world from roughly one millionth of its anthropogenic carbon emissions is pure insanity. All the while destroying our essential industries like steel production and manufacturing. How did you become so brainwashed?

[@davegoldspink5354]

@@pandemicoftheunvaccinated5367my place is one of them and it’s all bullshit. We often get blackouts and even on sunny days our power goes off just like everybody else. The batteries aren’t much help either you power $15000 to $18000 for a 15KWh and get very little stored energy. There’s a big uptake of solar in this country because you’re paid for energy you send back into the grid but that is getting less and less all the time.

[@pandemicoftheunvaccinated5367]

@davegoldspink5354 one third of aussies think otherwise.

[@davegoldspink5354]

@@pandemicoftheunvaccinated5367 like the unvaccinated they’re deluded and uneducated

[@johnfischer3142]

He is spot on

[@benburton3496]

This guy is not right on any of his statements

[@robot336]

CLIMATE ALARMIST'S - THE ONE'S WHO ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR - ARE NARCISSISTIC RACIST'S PUSHING FOR MORE BLACK AFRICAN CHILD AND CHINESE CONCENTRATION CAMP MUSLIM SLAVE LABOUR TO DIG UP AND BUILD THEIR GREEN NIGHTMARE WHILE HANDING OVER OUR ENERGY / NATIONAL SECURITY TO COMMUNIST CHINA 😈😈👿👿😈😈

[@martinwinlow]

And I suppose Germany was wrong to ban nuclear, too? And Japan...?

[@TECO1234]

​@@martinwinlowthey were wromg

[@TECO1234]

@martinwinlow Yes considering g without it they have no power or heat and live in a northern climate. People were burning the trees from their yards to stay warm last winter. Factories are closing because energy costs are soaring. They lost their oil pipeline from Russia and Nuckear would be clean.

[@alwaysright3718]

But the Australian people want expensive renewables that destroy the environment, they keep voting for it...

[@RiverWhiskey07]

Not everyone voted for it

[@1knightinbangkok946]

You got what you wished for..

[@eoin1959]

We also have 30% of the world's known uranium reserves, and we are the 4th biggest uranium producer, but we send it all to other countries so they can have nuclear power 🤔

[@jamesdanton9033]

I have a massive solar array on my roof. Given the increase of the cost of energy and the fact that green energy is such a load of BS that I'm not even being paid for back to grid anymore, it's made that investment redundant. Why doesn't this translate to people to the larger scale?

[@Nathan-ry3yu]

You want to hope your Tesla batteries don't catch fire. A cold storage business in Queensland has already gone up in flames. It ain't working that great for people in California either

[@jamesdanton9033]

@@Nathan-ry3yu I've given it thought. If it did it would take the whole place with it.

[@Nathan-ry3yu]

@@jamesdanton9033Batteries are not stable. Overcharging is a major issue. Also in extram heat the panels wiring gets brittle over time. The maintenance is a headache. If you don't keep the solar panels clean it affects it also. It don't take much for them to crack either.. when the batteries catch fire you can't put it out. You have to let it burn out. Theirs a house not far from where I live and they had their home burnt down because of solar energy.

[@jamesdanton9033]

@@Nathan-ry3yu Yeah, they tell you none of that when they're shoving that green crap down your throat.

[@rof8200]

Microsoft wants to use small nuclear reactors for their data centres. I'm sure they can do maths to compare between renewable energy and nuclear.

[@Trevor7727]

This would have been well advanced by now, but the US sanctions sidelined this for several years. Bill Gates was livid about it….Obviously BG had Microsoft on side…..

[@caroliner2029]

Let's do it! 🇦🇺 Then how do we get rid of the wind turbines, those expensive wasteful monstrosities that are a blight on our landscape?

[@polarbear7255]

We need to establish nuclear baseload to replace coal first. Only then can intermittent renewables be scaled by to 20% of the grid or less. In the meantime we will have little choice but to continue to rely of very expensive intermittent renewables and ageing coal plants to keep the lights on and bridge the capability gap until nuclear can bring power to the grid. SMR can be brought online relatively quickly but the video is correct, we would ideally build several large scale GW class reactors to replace our coal stations, but that would take up to a decade. At least at the end we have 70 years of reliable dispatchable baseload delivering cheap electricity to consumers.

[@mariahewitt9787]

We already have a wind Turbines grave yard in Queensland. We probably have a Solar panel grave yard somewhere too. Solar panels and wind Turbines have a 10 -15 year lifespan!! And Michael Shellenberger, Environmental Expert has proof of Wind Turbines serious adverse effects on Marine life.

[@vernonwhite4660]

The CSIRO used to have credibility . Not any more

[@gwendatrafford5794]

Definitely...,... Nuclear power

[@aftonline]

All I can say is that the decade of nuclear transition won't begin until we have a change of government so that's another delay while we wait for the next election. Personally I think we can do a lot more with rooftop solar plus storage which doesn't require any new transmission lines, but using nuclear as baseload generation is fine by me too.

[@zacs8654]

The Gencost report by the CSIRO has huge errors.

[@RiverWhiskey07]

Yes, a 17yr old student has more noise than Bowen and it seems like more than the CSIRO panel that had a discussion/workshop (with no nuclear experts invited)

[@RiverWhiskey07]

Nouse

[@jamesgreig5168]

It was one huge mistake. The CSIRO have caught the Chris Bowen disease.

[@ThatJay283]

yes! this! the most important thing we need is the ban lifted. until then, we cannot accurately even talk about the costs of nuclear. in fact, the australian government doesn't even need to necessarily even fund nuclear, because just legalizing it will create investment opportunities for long-term investors. they might even choose to invest in small modular reactors, and those will be great experiments here for whether or not they will actually work for us to work towards creating a clean, sustainable future. this also applies to future gen 4 reactors. the ban we have is ridiculous.

[@MrJasperspool]

ESG is made for you to look the other way while those in the know invest in coal fired power and steel mills. We had nuclear it was taken away because of the interests from overseas for our coal using coal fired as the backstop in production.

[@seanworkman431]

One could look at it this way. If Australia is encouraged to get grossly into debt for an experiment, then we lose our sovereignty and our natural resources are up for grabs. Australia has lots of gas, coal and uranium.

[@dsinghr]

i like this kind of reporting.. very amusing to watch haha

[@gerardcrabb4556]

Replace Coal sites with Gas and Nuclear to hold up Renewables...

[@chapter4travels]

Germany has already done the experiment and it failed miserably. If you go that route it would be a path of much higher energy costs, low reliability, industry leaves the country and you play blackout bingo anytime there is bad weather.

[@ponzitizen]

Scientists can't agree then we taxpayers will keep on paying to the highest bidder... There has been very broad research into SMR's as a viable solution so to dismiss as a buzzword shows the extent of the problem... But he did say one thing and this could be about the environmental credits attached to renewables and no doubt will be another money making scheme or attached to personal social credits sometime in the near future...

[@Joeblow-k2n]

There is actually people in Australia that are trained I should’ve listen to the story further

[@davegoldspink5354]

We’re already running a reactor at Lucas Heights which has been in place since the 50s and has been updated since then. It is one of 70 reactors worldwide that produces isotopes for medicine and industry as well as having an ongoing nuclear research program.

[@swedishbob_7315]

Mark Nelson and Chris Kiefer... great communicators, Mark plays piano really well😄

[@kimyoung4554]

GO GREEN GO NUCLEAR. WAKE UP OZZIE'S

[@kaybee5150]

This guy talks a lot of sense.

[@Youser57]

Australia should have had several nuclear power plants by now, it's about balance, renewables storage, current resources, AND nuclear

[@alanb9337]

The US engineer might be alright in Illinois with 11 reactors at 6 nuclear plants. The US are doing their own 'experiment' in renewables as well. 2022 -USA - approximately 60 percent of their power was from carbon fuels, 18 percent from nuclear and 22 percent from renewables. Large offshore wind farm generation is in the process of being constructed in the North-East coastal areas of the US. California is still building solar farms , the AES/ Avantus solar project for 2GW is to come on line 2025/2026. Big Battery Storage (BESS) capacity for California now exceeds 5GW . How much is water cooling of solar panels discussed in Australia, especially with the newer large solar projects?

[@missano3856]

The renewables are mostly hydro.

[@decem_unosquattro9538]

My guesstimate is one 1600 MW nuclear reactor would cost 20-25 billion to build. Olkiluoto 3 cost 18 billion to build but that was after 2005. Fuel was much cheaper back then. Now. I hate to think what the cost would be. Just remember Olk3 was a disaster. Bulgaria mafia blackmailed the welders to get it done cheaply as possible. To weld something like this you need special very highly skilled welders. The cost would probably rise above 25 billion because fuel is very expensive in this country and it's only going to get higher.

[@polarbear7255]

No. You clearly don’t understand energy systems or how nuclear reactions generate energy. Fuel costs for nuclear are negligible. Both because of the tiny amount required and the enormous amount of energy that tiny amount can produce. Remembering that uranium has a specific energy of 330,00,000 MJ per kg, 1 ton of Uranium fuel could power all of Melbourne 24/7 for a year. The infrastructure to build a nuclear power station, like any infrastructure, is expensive to build. Using specialist welding as some sort of excuse is also nonsense. In the end Nuclear reactors can produce energy reliably at 1/3 the cost of electricity produced by a system of intermittent renewables. So, you missed the point because you a. Don’t understand the physics and b. Don’t understand the energy system.

[@decem_unosquattro9538]

@@polarbear7255 That's an arrogant and ignorant statement to say considering you know little or nothing about what I know or don't know. I know neutrons collide with uranium atoms ⚛️ U-235 which is enriched to 3.5%. Fissioning: Neutrons are subatomic particles that collide with atoms of enriched uranium (3.5%) which splits the atom and creates 3 neutrons. 1. 3 neutrons 2. 3x3 =9 neutrons 3. 3×3×3=27 neutrons 4. 3×3×3×3=81 neutrons 5. ... Time interval between each generation is 30 millionth of a second. 3 neutrons : 1 collides with another uranium atom 1 collides with a non fissioning atom 1 leaks into the water which surrounds the fuel bundle (which is 27 tonnes.) ___________________________ Difficult to estimate the cost of enriched Uranium in the future. Spot price now is $50-$100USD per kg.. Then it needs to chemically processed into fuel 200-500 per kg? _________________________ Boron is added to the water which is a moderator. (Neutron absorbing) Control rods are fed through the ceiling which also contain a moderator and are used to control the fissioning. When control rods are inserted it supposedly shuts down the reactor core but there is still latent heat which must continuously be cooled by water which surrounds the core/fuel bundle. Water is recycled around the primary loop. The secondary loop receives and discharges into a river or the ocean. The primary loop is connected to a steam generator. From the steam generator there is a pipe that is fed through a heat exchanger and back to the base of the reactor. A heat exchanger receives cold water from a river or the ocean. It cools the super heated steam which is then fed back into the reactor pressure vessel. The reactor is shaped like a huge pill with control rods fed through the roof and two pipes at the base which make the primary loop.

[@decem_unosquattro9538]

@@polarbear7255 So what a fuel bundle of 27 tonnes of uranium cost 13 million AU dollars? So what you saying 13million is negligible? If that's true give me 13 million AU dollars. 😄 It could be more because the average is 1000MW. If hypothetically a 1600 MW was built the cost would increase. On the subject of uranium ore it needs to be mined and less than .7% is used. That's 99.4% of the ore is not used. Dump trucks use diesel and cost 1 million per year each to run and maintain. $50'000 for one tyre. 3 isotopes of which only U-235 is used. The other major isotopes like U-238 and U-234 is a waste products unless it's used to create depleted uranium shells which are then used in war.

[@polarbear7255]

@@decem_unosquattro9538 ok. I’ll drop the arrogance. I normally come out guns blazing because 90% of the dumbass comments on here are from trolls who know nothing other than cut and paste snippets glued together with ideology. I suggest you dig a little deeper into the economics of nuclear energy. The fuel costs are negligible when you consider the amount of energy produced. Kudos to you for demonstrating some level of knowledge of the physics. Again more than most. Now extrapolate on that and compare the costs of energy systems. And then tell me why nuclear electricity to the consumer is 1/3 or less of what a 100% intermittent renewables grid would cost. Also tell me which countries have lower emissions… those with nuclear or those without? The bigger the reactor the more efficient it is and the cheaper the cost per kWh of electricity to the consumer. That’s the key metric that intermittent variable energy cannot deliver on and has a demonstrable history of higher consumer electricity prices everywhere on the planet. Australia will be no different, exactly as we are seeing now and in line with observations and predictions made by the IEA.

[@decem_unosquattro9538]

@@polarbear7255 You don't seem to understand that Australia is bankrupt. We don't have any money to build a nuclear reactor. We have close to 2 trillion in external debt. Interest payments exceed the cost of Medicare. Soon we'll see the end of a free healthcare system. Austerity is everywhere now. They're chopping up pieces of land and selling of state assets. It's insane. We'll up a failed state. Run by the mafia. If your wife spent like our government did you'd shoot her. They spend money like a princess on steroids maxing out a hundreds credit cards. This kind of spending I find scary. It's reckless, irresponsible and insatiable.

[@Bruski68.]

What is the difference between the Labor / Green coalition and the Liberal / National Coalition in Australia? Yeah, no one else can answer that logically either.

[@alient585]

Honestly nothing beside a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

[@alancotterell9207]

What will be the price for the legacy of radioactive waste ? The biggest destroyer of our environment is lack of acceptance of responsibility for end of life of facilitites and products . Our global system is finite - NOT open ended..

[@junebaldwin6784]

It will end like the voice alot of money with no happy end

[@jamesgreig5168]

How can you take anything Mark says seriously. All he needed was a red nose and a curly blonde wig and he becomes Ronald. I think he was saying "of course you add nuclear to the mix" but who really knows.

[@vincentburrowes9243]

Aluminium smelters who are Australia’s largest user of electricity will launch a tender soon for wind and solar generated electricity. The majority owner is saying nuclear is out of the question because it is too slow and too expensive. The majority owner has sold their coal operations and closed their uranium mine in the Northern Territory. If hard-nosed resource companies are not supporting nuclear power - Thorium Ted and Plutonium Pete have a significant marketing problem.

[@alfredmcdonald5495]

Dump Labor’s energy plans renewables and go Nuclear plans instead.

[@rob6543]

This bloke has my vote, bad luck his not Australian 🇦🇺

[@johngoard8272]

Well it seems that we are going to experience the folly of this renewables power generating plan sooner than we may be thinking and it is going to be a disaster when the grid just cannot cope with future demands and/or the renewables sources are simply not enough to supply the power needs which is growing at a phenomenal rate as it is right now. I am more worried for the younger generations to come because they are going to be the ones who have to pick up the pieces and get the system put right and the only way to do this is to invest in nuclear power generation.

[@TimGaylard]

Good man well said!👍

[@sneakypress]

This guy looks like he’s been exposed to too much nuclear energy 😂

[@missano3856]

If any country can do it, its Iceland.

[@sunroad7228]

"In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most. No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores. No system of energy can deliver sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it. This universal truth applies to all systems. Energy, like time, flows from past to future" (2017).

[@kumarkandiah8331]

Given the lead time required for nuclear, one of 2 things should have happened. Either Blackout Bowen should not have been born or he shouldn’t have been energy minister. Since neither of that has happened, it is unlikely that we will have cheaper and stable energy in my lifetime. We may soon achieve underdeveloped nation status !

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

$Million /klm × million klm = $TRILLION. The grid COST, and 100years to build. No fossil fuels means 5 TIMES more electricity and 5 TIMES bigger national grid capacity. Now the existing national grid costs = national GDP. 5 TIMES spending the national GDP is insane. Hello 👋 hello 👋 is anyone home??

[@markjmaxwell9819]

I am sure that under the Freedom of Information Act all records from the Lucas Heights facility from the fifties till it was decommissioned will be available for public viewing. The newest designs are much better. 😎🇦🇺

[@Links-Plus2]

so the massively growing renewables industry in wind solar and hydro was a failed experiment? I think not. he shear amount of wind turbines gone up in the past 10 years alone is staggering.

[@trg9765]

Welcome to the WEALTH TRANSFER

[@garyjohnstone6422]

The current discussion about the Energy plan needs affordability, reliability and sustainability. All 3 features are required in the mix for the right answer to be arrived at. Whenever nuclear is mentioned Labor wheezes. The ALP always wants to impede the nuclear aspect of a balanced equation in the decision making process. This is an ideologically driven hangover from the 60`s doing Mother Russia`s bidding. Meanwhile, one of our diesel subs (“Beazley`s Bombs”) had an electrical fire at sea reminding me that ALP`s idea of defence is to pander to a union built navy providing 3rd rate products like them. Frankly, Labor hasn`t got an idea when it comes to defence, it is far too ideologically disaffected to be capable of clear thought. Logic takes a back seat with every decision.

[@davidwilkie9551]

As Murph said, you just want to have a good cry, which was back in the days of the coal-hearted killers of health and welfare, but governments change, and the brain ban continues on behalf of the dead rat smelling crowd. There are some excellent people of all ages and experience who are perfectly capable of doing the math and learning techniques to do the job properly.

[@WeveGotBush]

Love the Moe

[@ianenglish123]

So whose going to build the reactors. Noalition for $2,5 ($12) billion dollars. They couldn't even do the planning and acurate budgeting for Snowy 2.0 could they. How could we trust them to build something as advanced as SMR'S.

[@mawhim]

I'm ok which ever way it goes, I prefer wind and solar, nuclear will NOT be cheaper. So when power goes up with nuclear, I'll put more solar panels and a battery and work to going off grid.

[@leprechaun7667]

This net zero is a scam wake up OZ

[@ohdearearthlings1879]

The horseless carriage will never replace the horse.

[@francescopaci9435]

I find it ridiculous that a country four times the size of Europe, inhabited by 27 million people, has difficulty producing all the energy it needs from renewables. Then the important thing is to get away from fossil fuels, so nuclear power is welcome, but let's not kid ourselves, if Australia, which is a huge empty country, can't make it, who can? The truth is that nuclear costs a lot to build and perhaps costs even more than building the same amount of power from renewables. Anyway at least you are in the right direction and you sent away Scott Morrison who was the classic defender of strong powers and coal.

[@Seawithinyou]

Can Nuclear power do without water?

[@wraith9869]

not with the current technology water is needed for cooling the reactor which produces radioactive waste the waste can be processed but no one does it as it is cost prohibitive. To get rid of it they would more than likely just burry it or try and release it into the ocean like china wants to do.

[@martinwinlow]

Experiments do *not* either 'work' or 'not work' otherwise they would not be 'experiments' (as any child who has studied science of any sort will tell you). The fact that this 'expert' engineer constantly refers to Australia's dawning realisation that they, of any developed country in the world, have the opportunity to go it alone with renewables (the sunniest country in the Western world - who knew?!) as 'an experiment' utterly undermines his credibility. And he would promote nuclear, wouldn't he! It's in his interests to do so, FCOL!

[@spacescatatford]

Today, solar energy production is about half the cost of nuclear energy. The price of solar keeps on dropping. The unreliable issue is easily solved by battery systems. See Engineering with Rosie, Are Renewables the Cheaper Option?

[@kymcampbell2734]

Ok so is that why all Aus renewables projects are heavily subsidised and..... No 1 : But there are no batteries hey. You're statement has holes in it as big as the ones in Bowens head.

[@spacescatatford]

@@kymcampbell2734 Did you watch the video? Batteries will add another 10% to the total cost. I'm an engineer. My father is an engineer. I have one uncle that's an engineer. My grandfather was an engineer. My great-uncle was a physicist who trained my dad. Fossil fuels are heavily subsidized at about 4 to renewables 1. The price of renewables will continue to drop because they are technologies. Fossil fuel prices will continue to rise because they are a commodity. No matter what, natural gas and oil have about 50 years left before their price makes them unreachable. What do we do after that? Fortunately, there are 16.3 million engineers and scientists in the world.

[@stevehayward1854]

Well he would, wouldn't he

[@ralphhillier676]

China doe not have to worry about complaints on transmission land etc: It is the reason they get things done, but'' would we want that system? Or expropriation is better with money to shut them up?

[@kamra99a]

I suspect both of these guys know that nothing they are saying is true. They are just playing a role and doing their jobs.

[@chastheplayer8367]

Solar panels reflect heat back into the atmosphere

[@anthonytautu6678]

BUY BUY Labour

[@WilliamCooper-l6f]

What did you expect someone with a vested interest in nuclear energy to say? It's not like he's going to tell you the downsides of nuclear power plants, from their toxic eternal waste, to their ability to fail and ruin huge areas. Australia has high migration from Japan because of Fukushima.

[@johnboylan3832]

By the same token, then all the information about wind and solar is similarly compromised. Probably should have just stuck with fossil fuels, eh?

[@Soyuz2578]

Let us know how the next XR protest goes

[@robot336]

CLIMATE ALARMIST'S - THE ONE'S WHO ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR - ARE NARCISSISTIC RACIST'S PUSHING FOR MORE BLACK AFRICAN CHILD AND CHINESE CONCENTRATION CAMP MUSLIM SLAVE LABOUR TO DIG UP AND BUILD THEIR GREEN NIGHTMARE WHILE HANDING OVER OUR ENERGY / NATIONAL SECURITY TO COMMUNIST CHINA 😈😈👿👿😈😈

[@jaybee9269]

“Toxic eternal waste”…that we can eventually reprocess.

[@davidjohnpaul7558]

@@jaybee9269 It can actually be processed now & made into energy. The technology already exists. They just won't do it...more madness...

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Nuclear needs the national electrical grid. The grid cost $TRILLIONS 1/7 th off Australia's energy is electricity. Mark does not look like an Electric Grid Construction Engineer who has priced and built these things. He looks like a smug ignoramus. Like the child who said " I will pay for it, you give me the money ". FMD.

[@redrocker85]

Ask Japan how nuclear has affected their environment.

[@StrikeBuster-b2b]

I dought Australia will get flooded by a tsunami.

[@warsum-xw5zh]

Its old tech that let japan down…check out their new plant…can be turned off for weeks without meltdown 6:08

[@alanb9337]

@@StrikeBuster-b2b There are a number of Australian Mega-Tsunami of the past videos on youtube (e.g 1500AD Tsunami in what is now the Melbourne area.)

[@mariahewitt9787]

Nuclear energy has come a long way since Fukoshima days.

[@aaronsinspirationdaily4896]

Japan has just decided to build more nuclear power plants using latest generation modern reactors and bring some of their existing reactors back online. Their government is still in office. The people of Japan have spoken. France gets 70-80% of their energy from nuclear power plants. When was the last time you heard of any problems with nuclear in France? Ask the average French person what their thought is about nuclear power safety.

[@ambientspacem]

What is the experiment , did not inderstand

[@matthewherwig1748]

I can't tell if this is a comedy skit

[@Camptonweat]

He's right about one thing, SMRs are a crock.

[@axle.australian.patriot]

They are not. They have a place in the greater scheme, but are small and far more expensive than the equivalent in a single nuclear power station. You need to treat them (SMRs) a bit more like the big emergency diesel generators they roll out during a major power failures.

[@robot336]

CLIMATE ALARMIST'S - THE ONE'S WHO ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR - ARE NARCISSISTIC RACIST'S PUSHING FOR MORE BLACK AFRICAN CHILD AND CHINESE CONCENTRATION CAMP MUSLIM SLAVE LABOUR TO DIG UP AND BUILD THEIR GREEN NIGHTMARE WHILE HANDING OVER OUR ENERGY / NATIONAL SECURITY TO COMMUNIST CHINA 😈😈👿👿😈😈

[@gladishilton1943]

I am surprised that this Nuclear engineer didn't address some of the significant challenges facing Nuclear Power. For instance: Informed people such as Sabine Hossenfelder - Physicist - and others report that current estimates of the amount of Uranium235 to be found on earth is approximately 8 million tonnes. Current consumption of U235 is about 60,000 tonnes/yr. If we increased Nuclear energy production by a factor of 10 across the world, the available fuels would run out in approx. 15-20 years. In that time, it is estimated that Nuclear Power would reduce CO2 emissions by 2% - it's not nothing but considering other factors such as the dramatically decrease in levelized costs of energy from renewable energy sources, whilst the levelized cost of Nuclear-generated energy continues to increase and is currently the most expensive, banking on Nuclear power may not be worthwhile. Other Nuclear Power option are possible but they too have formidable challenges. If Mark Nelson was really so concerned with "levelling with the Australian people" I am surprised he didn't offer a realistic and balanced representation of the risks currently associated with pursing Nuclear power.

[@polarbear7255]

That is with known reserves and an open fuel cycle. Reprocessing increases the length of time considerably. LLNL is looking at ways to massively increase the longevity of nuclear fuel. This is why the trillions of dollars worth of spent fuel is stores onsite in dry casks at US reactors. Australia has 40% ish of the worlds know Uranium reserves and that would power us for Millennia. Then there’s breeder reactors like CANDU which can burn spent fuel and breed PU as new fuel. So using them means our current fuel reserves will only last about 5.1 billion years. Then there’s Th232 and Copenhagen Atomics… yet another energy source with massive amounts of cheap fuel available. So fuel available is not a reason for Australia not to adopt nuclear energy for the century or two it will take for nuclear Fusion to become commercially available.

[@gladishilton1943]

@@polarbear7255 What are the state of development of these programs and Reactors types? Are there any in commercial operation or are they in experimental / development stages. Most of these concept for reactors have been around for decades - have they addresses some of the major issues? Again, if we're going to "level with the Australian public" and manage the risk of where we invest our efforts into the future, this should all be spelled out. It seems to me that we don't have the luxury of time, though of course, that is not to say that we can't be researching multiple things at once. I've go nothing against Nuclear power, but after listening to details presented by people like of Sabine, it seems that if Nuclear energy has a future, it's far off. It's not to be ignored but not something for our near term needs.

[@polarbear7255]

@@gladishilton1943 much respect to Sabine, but nuclear’s time is now. It is so much better for the environment than renewables and a far smarter use of resources and produces far less waste that is tightly controlled and can be reused hundreds of times. Go check out Copenhagen Atomics for Th232 reactors. Nuclear is a well established and proven technology that gives humans all the energy we will ever need. The Canadian CANDU is a great design that could be built here and we run closed fuel cycle with breeder cycle: we’d never run out of fuel, ever. Then we need a nuclear industry for when Fusion becomes commercially available in the later half of this century. In the meantime, Ethiopia is building nuclear reactors… Australia better put the big boy pants on and grow up… stop the politicising and go with proven engineering solutions for the good of the nation. Like we did with coal 60 years ago… we need to reinvest in our energy infrastructure so we better pick a proven energy source when we a gambling with the national prosperity. I don’t hate renewables, they have their place. It’s just not dispatchable baseload.

[@anthonynixon6193]

BS

[@tatiyana8934]

😒 Я категорически противница "заводов" атомной энергии, и любых видов активностей с использованием атомных станций... Я называю это лозунгом "свой Чернобыль - в каждый город?"... "👍🏻" 😒

[@Stikibits]

Sky: Real Shills; Shills' Views.

[@tassied12]

Sky News continuing to flog the nuclear dead horse. Nuclear is going nowhere. It is too slow and expensive. Nuclear generated less power globally last year than it did nearly 2 decades ago. For 8 out of the last 15 years, global nuclear capacity has gone backwards, with closures exceeding new generation coming online. Every western nuclear project over the last 20 years has gone hopelessly over time and budget.

[@polarbear7255]

😂 T12. You don’t give up do you? It is you that is going nowhere. The argument has moved on. Australia will have little choice but to adopt nuclear energy. You just heard it from a nuclear engineer and you still deny reality. How’s my questions going T12? At what percentage of grid generation do intermittent renewables lower consumer electricity costs?😂 How is it that in developed countries that use nuclear they have far cheaper electricity and far lower emissions than countries that don’t use nuclear? In countries that use nuclear it still generates more than all forms of intermittent renewables combined. Your arguments don’t hold water. It’s ok, you’re politically opposed to nuclear, we get it. But stop spreading lies and propaganda. Have a nice day.

[@lordgarion514]

Renewable is only more expensive than nuclear when groups help pass laws to make renewables more expensive.

[@seanworkman431]

I just checked, the entire planet could be powered by 7000 tons of uranium per year. Renewable does not include the devices that change the sun and wind into electricity.

[@kramrollin69]

Tell that to the Koalas and wildlife, as these idiots cut down huge swathes of virgin forest land, to erect giant environmentally polluting windmills, to blot the Earth.

[@kentonge1812]

we have to rid of the wierd,os say no more

[@automateTec]

Compare pumping carbon dioxide into hothouses to releasing radioactive waste water into the Pacific. Oh wait.

[@bretloyd8097]

Hahaha bahahaha hahaha bahaha Hahahahaha bahaha Hahahahaha bahaha Hahahahaha bahaha Hahahaha brought to you by Shell, Santos, Chevron BHP and Co.

[@polarbear7255]

Except that big oil backs intermittent renewables because they know that intermittent renewables will ALWAYS need fossil fuelled generators as backup. Nuclear ends fossil fuels. Hence big oil won’t touch it.

[@muzzleflash1]

Canadian house speaker Anthony Rota apologizes after inviting a man who fought for Nazis to parliament. The entire Canadian parliament stood up twice for an enthusiastic round of applause for Yaroslav Hunka, of the Ukrainian 14th Waffen SS division. ⚡️⚡️

[@spikeprotein5924]

Scraping the barrel here. Sky’s usual speed.

[@simongoh9461]

So next, Sky will get a coal miner singing about the virtues of coal fired power stations. For a balanced view why not look at SA's success with renewables.

[@paulveenings6861]

Have they managed to run 100% on renewables ?

[@typetersen8809]

😅

[@gavinsmiyh6218]

@@paulveenings6861 yes. I refer you to the Electric Viking channel

[@batmanlives6456]

@@gavinsmiyh6218the electric Viking is full of it !!!

[@robot336]

CLIMATE ALARMIST'S - THE ONE'S WHO ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR - ARE NARCISSISTIC RACIST'S PUSHING FOR MORE BLACK AFRICAN CHILD AND CHINESE CONCENTRATION CAMP MUSLIM SLAVE LABOUR TO DIG UP AND BUILD THEIR GREEN NIGHTMARE WHILE HANDING OVER OUR ENERGY / NATIONAL SECURITY TO COMMUNIST CHINA 😈😈👿👿😈😈

[@gregoryogrady2174]

Great Davo from the nucleea department! Stuth! Nucleea z great mate. So good for sky news viewers?…😂

[@peterschaefer2946]

nuclear and coal the way to go and we cam make nuclear weapons as well

[@smellbag]

Sounds like we need another Enquiry. There goes the next 50 years and $100 billion. Australia - glacial progress, perennial enquiries and stagnation.

[@DJ-yj1vg]

There are some days i am just embarrassed to be Australian. We always think we can reinvent the wheel.

[@Brian-bg2cb]

We have too many people believing in things that don't work. In the USA as an example to the rest of the world of how "far south" people allow their thinking to go in the midst of unworkability coupled with authoritarian perpetrated convenience, safety and comfort.

[@jonassimon2412]

Germany is also embarrassing. We stopped all nuclear energy plants while our neighbors build up new ones right at the border so they can sell us their nuclear electricity because we don’t have enough sun and wind power to serve our countries needs.

[@Camptonweat]

At least now we admit that climate change is real and we need to reduce emissions. It really is heart warming to see Sky News debating what path toward a low carbon future we should take.

[@robot336]

CLIMATE ALARMIST'S - THE ONE'S WHO ARE AGAINST NUCLEAR - ARE NARCISSISTIC RACIST'S PUSHING FOR MORE BLACK AFRICAN CHILD AND CHINESE CONCENTRATION CAMP MUSLIM SLAVE LABOUR TO DIG UP AND BUILD THEIR GREEN NIGHTMARE WHILE HANDING OVER OUR ENERGY / NATIONAL SECURITY TO COMMUNIST CHINA 😈😈👿👿😈😈

[@leeevans2929]

@@Camptonweatno we don’t. What a stupid thing to say

[@andyc1175]

The thing with Bowen is he thinks everyone is as stupid as he is. Classic Dunning & Kruger effect.

[@davegoldspink5354]

As I’m told often in comments I waffle on about the benefits of nuclear energy I’m just going to say like adopting EVs adopting wind and solar is just plain stupid and will send this country to the poorhouse very quickly with absolutely no environmental gains.

[@Jopacob]

Oldest Nuclear Plant is in Switzerland, built in 1967. Nuclear Safety breaches are rated from 1-7 with Fukishima and Chernobyl rated 7, with zero and 14 deaths respectively. The oldest one has 1x level 3, 4x level 2 and some level 1s.... zero deaths, zero emissions in 55 years! Its a No Brainer.

[@tassied12]

Nuclear safety has been achieved by considerable amounts of regulation which has made it too expensive. Every single nuclear construction project in the west over the last 20 years has gone way over cost and budget.

[@Jopacob]

@@tassied12 Every factory, energy plant etc has safety regulation, and so much regulation that it impedes progress, manufacturing, fast builds etc. Snowy 2.0 Budgeted $2.4 Billion, current cost $8 Billion and far from complete with a stuck Tunnelling machine. The Bowen Green Dream cost between $1.1-$1.5 TRILLION, and that is just the estimated budget before blowouts. Vic - any project you like- way over. Cost is not a factor as it is cheaper and less environmentally destructive and the plant can last 60+ years, latest Solar panel start to degrade after 12 years and lifespan of 20, Wind turbines life and eco waste just as bad. Also, without a breakthrough in battery storage, W&S is intermitted, where is the Baseload coming from. Currently on any given day 55-75% is still coal.

[@tassied12]

@@Jopacob You are mixing up very different things. The $trillion figure is to completely decarbonise the grid, including moving to EVs, green steel and hydrogen exports. The research from Net Zero Australia that produced that figure also noted that it would be much more expensive to decarbonise with nuclear. As for Snowy Hydro, there are many in the energy sector that think it was unnecessary given the rate at which other technologies are advancing. It is a fallacy that nuclear plants last 60 years. The world’s two longest-running power reactors, Beznau-1 in Switzerland and Nine Mile Point-1 in the US, are in their 54th year. The 40 US units closed by mid-2021 - 30% of total nuclear grid connections - averaged 22 years, and only eight had reached 40; the six closed in 2016-20 averaged 46 even though they were licensed for 60. Nuclear generation, like any thermal generation, puts significant stress on parts which limits lifespans and raises maintenance costs. French plants are nowhere near 60 years old. Their expected lifespan is 40 - 50 years but with an average age of 37 years they are already experiencing major maintenance issues. In August last year at the peak of summer demand, less than 50% of French nuclear capacity was available. And when a nuclear plant goes down, it can take a very long time to get it back up. Of 92 operating US power reactors by mid-2017 only 28 did not suffer at least one outage of a year or more. At least the sun gets up each day.

[@Youser57]

So, we need renewable energy but more importantly we need base load energy which can come from coal and nuclear reactors most efficiently? In my opinion we need nuclear reactors, would have been good if we had several by now in Australia

[@Philip-hv2kc]

There were allota deaths from Chernobyl and an ongoing record of continuing deaths . Birth defects too . But the important thing is it did change weather patterns or cause any extinctions . On the contrary the fauna and flora has thrived where the humans have abandoned. Oddly enough people still live normal lives in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[@ChuddmasterZero]

Can we please stop using this word “renewables”? All energy production involves inputs and outputs, with all energy approaching entropy regardless of its form. Solar panels, wind turbines, electrical transmission lines all require materials, manufacturing, transport, labour etc. “Renewables” is a propaganda terms designed to create the impression that it’s an endless supply of ‘free’ energy. It isn’t.

[@Bluehealer123]

Nuclear in the hands of stupidity is stupid!

[@garyprince2867]

Nuclear power = 100% energy security for electricity + power to refine Australian minerals at or close to an export hub.

[@tassied12]

If you think nuclear offers 100% energy security you obviously didnt see the pictures from last year where they turned off the lights on the Eiffel tower to save power. French nuclear is in serious trouble. Its nuclear fleet is ageing and output is is declining fast (32% decline in output since 2015, now at its lowest level in 30 years ). Last August, at the peak of summer demand, over 50% of French nuclear was offline for maintenance and repairs

[@garyprince2867]

@@tassied12 Ok, I should have qualified my remark: potential for 100% energy security, as our supply of uranium would be assured and unaffected by global supply chains.

[@tassied12]

@@garyprince2867 Unfortunately, there is much more to this than just having the uranium. Nuclear power uses huge amounts of water and we are a dry country. The French are having problems due to lack of water flow on their river run plants. We could use sea water, but that increases maintenance costs, especially if you are using warm sea water. The other problem with nuclear is that it needs to be backed up by fast dispatch, as it is slow to ramp up and down to match peaks in demand. Canada, France, Japan, China all have access to extensive hydro to provide fast dispatch support. You could use gas, but it is expensive.

[@clemnunn3832]

This is what Peter Dutton has talking about what this guy is saying about nuclear power

[@alancotterell9207]

When I work as a scientist, I always try to work 'for the common good'. I don't work to improve my own prospects, without regard for ethics and risk.

[@PaulHigginbothamSr]

Mark the problem with your full size giggawatt plant is time and money. A country can build 5 or even ten 300 megawatt smrs in much less time if in a factory. That is still 1200 gigs no matter sir Markum.