Four Reasons Why Nuclear Power is a Dumb Idea for Australia, page-169

I always find it interesting that no one adresses the elephant in the room when bagging out nuclear. Its all well and good to winge avout nuclear being unsafe, or slow, or involving storage of 'dangerous' waste products. But no one adresses things like the life cycle of wind turbines.

They want to put wind turbines in the ocean, but whats the life span on a metal fan stuck in salt water? whats the plan for the old blades once they are passed their usable life cycle? It is my understanding the metal is treated in a way to make it very strong, but it is currently impossible to reuse. So where do these blades end up in 10 or 20 years? What is the damage to local eco systems during installation and then during the life cycle?

To me it makes far more sense to moove towards nuclear. We have agreed to take a bunch of the subs so we need to consider that as well. Plus a lot if what that video stated it pretty outdated. There is pretty interesting things happening in smaller style reactors and provisional plant systems to help transition to nuclear.

Also, just quietly, it would be easier to manage any energy transition if we dont set shutdown dates for our current systems without new, proven systems in place, whatever they end up being. Otherwise you give the developers and builders too much power as they can demand what they want once the majority of society risks being impacted by the project not going ahead.

tl;dr. Its all about what presents the most profitable option. And if you think we are going to end up with wind turbines because they are the 'greener' option and not because its the more expensive option you havent been paying attention.