Nuclear was likely the answer a few decades ago, but given the...

  1. Obi
    792 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 35
    Nuclear was likely the answer a few decades ago, but given the accidents and subsequent political policy it has been on the nose for a long time. Not helped by the French blowing up Mururoa Atoll the south Pacific.

    It took us about 40 years to decide where to build a second airport for Sydney so building a reactor and selecting a waste storage site would cause intractable arguments. Unless it bipartisan its not happening. As another poster stated , people are losing their **** over wind turbines FFS. We're terrible at big infrastructure.

    Using gas, LNG and or hydrogen, to back up renewables is likely what will happen. The coal lobby has a hand in the nuclear push for sure.


 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.