I'm a little slow eh..

I just noticed that our good friend Dr Ziggy, is the head of the Nuclear Task Force for looking into and setting up Nuke power plants in Aus. I'm not sure, did Tel$tra run some sort of Nuke program? Do the abilities of Chief Executive Officer of Telstra have alot in common with that of Nuke Power Industry?
Does it even matter? Once your up that high, can you just job slut around to whatever sounds good?
I've seen it happen before and was equally confussed when an Environmental Minister changed jobs to Defense, because you know, keeping the environment maintained has everything in common with blowing stuff up and shooting stuff.

?

I didn't like him when he was with Telstra but his nuclear activities are quite positive:

Dr Switkowski this week released his report on a possible nuclear energy industry in Australia, concluding 25 nuclear reactors could produce a third of Australia's electricity by 2050.

Dr Switkowski said if Australia moved quickly it could have a new nuclear power plant in action in 10 years, but a more likely time frame would be 15 years.

(Source)

just dont worry about it.

and yes, telstra ran 17 nuke programs

i like peanuts.

Do the abilities of Chief Executive Officer of Telstra have alot in common with that of Nuke Power Industry?

He has a phd in Nuclear Physics - hence the 'Dr' in his title.

The rest of your post is irrelevant.

HA! Guess I shoulda found out what his PHD was in, I got pwned nicly, by Ziggy, and he didnt even lift a finger :(

our modems are all powered by protonic fusion. how could you not know that? the ac adapter just runs the cooling circuit which is why they warn you to never unplug it.

My thoughts on this topic:

-Ziggy is in Johnny Howards back pocket.

-Nuclear Power is a good, but expensive short-term solution to our energy problems and it will reduce our Carbon Emissions. But it comes with alot of problems that will bite us all in the arse. Renewables are the only long term answer.

more nuclear power plants and more desalination plants to be run by the power plants to supply water for the nuclear power plants. woo.
the circle of life

sLaps_Forehead - renewables (imho as an EE working in the power industry) can't really be relied upon for base-load generation. I'm definitely in favour of a nuclear solution for base generation, and as much renewables as possible.

Aus is the biggest exporter of coal in the world - it would be financial suicide to kurb this. Who wants to pay more for power when we have plenty of coal left?

Depends on whether you value cheap coal power higher than climatic and econonomic catastrophe.

Tesla Coil would have solved all our problems if not for Thomas Edison! Damn you Thomas Edison!!

ps The prestige is a great movie.

renewable energy might be a long term answer but they aren't now. all the cheap renewable that can be done has been done.

solar is 6x the cost of nuclear

go smoke your crack pipe hippy

Depends on whether you value cheap coal power higher than climatic and econonomic catastrophe.

this is a false dilemma

you can still pump CO2 into the atmosphere and not have climate change. you just need to get it out of the atmosphere or reduce the amount of sunlight getting to earth. i'm sure both of these will be cheaper than giving up coal power by the time we get to 2100.

then there is the problem of catastrophic climate change

where is the evidence of this?

and why is it more expensive than giving up coal.

All well and good to have all that power available. Isn't gonna mean squat if it CAN'T BE DELIVERED over the current system

(imho as an EE working in the power industry)

I don't see why you think that makes you qualified to discuss matters of power generation, frankly

Hast, best book your tickets to the Arctic and The Great Barrier reef. They are dissappearing fast.

In the meantime go suck on the end of your tailpipe.

last edited by sLaps_Forehead at 16:23:28 27/Nov/06

The prestige is a great movie.

The movie had f***ing David Bowie playing a Croat...

your point being...

your point being...

It's just wrong, so very very wrong!

solar is 6x the cost of nuclear

Does that factor in the cost of laying millions upon millions of kilometers of infrastructure to deliver the power?

If I have enough solar panels on my roof and I'm not trying to transport myself to another place a la the Prestige, I can probably be relatively self sufficient (during the day time, anyway). The difference that'd make for peak daytime power demand would easily be worth the cost, I reckon.

TROG:

decentralised solar power is a joke (at the moment)

most of us live and work at different places so already we are massively duplicating power infrastructure

many industrial sites have no chance of generating enough solar power on their own so we would need energy transport anyway

you need extra investment in storage and generation when individuals aren't connected because you can't spread the risk