Australia

3613 readers

122 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

Fluid@aussie.zone

bestusername@aussie.zone

eatham@aussie.zone

Coalition criticised over calls to transition australia to nuclear energy (www.news.com.au)

submitted 1 year ago by Mountaineer@lemmy.world to c/australia@aussie.zone

1 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I'm a bit surprised that news.com.au let this little bit of truth slip through:

“They’re yet to come up with a plan with where the reactors can go and how much they will cost,” the spokesperson told news.com.au.

“Even if we started today, having nuclear power ready within 10 years is being generous. They’re very much against renewables, where we are backing it. Labor has implemented the $20b rewiring the nation policy, which has produced an actual change for the future.

“There are credible reports that nuclear is the most expensive source of energy in the world, so they really need to show people the plan.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

Sweden just announced this and it's going to take them over 20 years assuming no delays. By the time these reactors come online how expensive will solar + storage be? Because if it's cheaper then you now have a nice expensive asset producing something nobody wants to buy because they can get it cheaper elsewhere.

Don't get me wrong, I think when it comes to moving away from fossil fuels all options should be on the table but nuclear definitely is no silver bullet. I'd be interested to see the analysis though, maybe I'm wrong but my understanding is it's already more expensive than the alternatives.