We can afford BILLIONS OF DOLLARS for nuclear submarines, we can afford to give 3.8% of the population 39.5 BILLION DOLLARS EVERY YEAR. What’s with the fluffing around with nuclear power that will benefit ALL Australians.?
@davegoldspink5354 Says:
Personally I reckon gas and nuclear power generation should be our main forms of energy and renewables should only form minor roles due to their lack of ability to create base load power their total expense, heavy reliance on rare earth metals and resources and the fact they would be infringing on valuable farmland or would be destroying the beauty of our waterways and in the case of windmills would be adding large amounts of microplastics to the environment.
@Australianfarmer Says:
Cant cop this Chinese reporter, she's a spy for China.
@alistair4937 Says:
The obvious fix includes 2nd gen coal generation, but such sense is political suicide. Go figure.
@smokiebandet Says:
The hell with net zero end all ties with the UN.
@colb715 Says:
It’s all bloody silly bring back gas and coal and hey presto cheap reliable power without the bull shit!
@JIMDEZWAV Says:
Biggest scam in human history , The Sun and changes in the Sun dictate climate not cow fart's .
Not allowing for the Sun = why none of the catastrophic climate prediction's over the last 30 yrs have come to pass ,,,,,,,
@dominicpelle7841 Says:
Ummmm.... ***WE LIVE IN A SUN☀BURNT COUNTRY***
We're not in EUROPE MORONS and our CONTINENT is as big as all the Euro countries put together with 1/15 teenth of their population.. 🤪
@nosilencedthoughts Says:
If there is nuclear, there is no need for renewables like wind power. Why cant the grubbenment look into renewable gas with thermal deploymerisation as a fuel source as a back up power source if a reactor has to go offline. wind power is a joke.
@VK6AB- Says:
You can build an industry for the long term future of Australia that develops and expands very high - end science and engineering capability across the country, you can invest in Australian building and construction, you can use natural resources from Australia and add value to them or you can send our money off shore and buy cheap poorly made panels and batteries from China. One is a long term investment in Australia, the other is a short term investment in the worlds must significant green house gas emitter, China. Its a clear choice. Sweden and Finland, two of the "greenest" countries on the planet get between 30% and 40% of their power from nuclear. Even China has 55 nuclear power plants with another 22 in construction.
@PeterElla Says:
Nuclear power is cheap considering it last so long
@PJC005 Says:
Nucoolier is badz
@kaosthecosmicreviewer1055 Says:
SIGH
Again with the lie about nuclear being zero emissions.
As soon as they mention this cringe phrase, the entire conversation stops since they have no idea what the hell they are talking about.
@kaosthecosmicreviewer1055 Says:
Yes, but how much more will the energy companies slug us for this???
The costs kill the dream immediately.
@simoncarroll-we3hg Says:
Why why why when we produce 1% of global c02
@barneyklingenberg4078 Says:
Very Realistic points.
Going all in on renewables is just suicidal. Just ask the Germans on the streets at this point.
But that coal needs to go for better alternatives is a common sentiment everywhere.
@Poorlineforeva Says:
Nuclear costs too much. The end.
@paythepiper6283 Says:
Why do we need renewables if we have nuclear and gas? Maybe for remote communities renewables would be a good solution but other than that it's ridiculous having two completely different generation and distribution systems. Renewables need another system to firm them up, nuclear/coal/gas do not.
@sirstiffpilchard Says:
Time to query the actual need of a 'net zero?' Why is it important seeing as there is now an awareness that CO2 is a friend and not an enemy. Plants need CO2 sunlight and water and in exchange they supply OXYGEN So who wants to reduce oxygen supply?
LATEST COMMENTS