This PDF is well worth a read, it was written by Security Professor Barry W. Brook, it gives a great insight into where we are heading Climate Wise and he gives some answers, PRISM is one of the answers for Australia.
Engineers Australia –Sydney Division Southern Highlands & Tablelands Regional Group, June 2011 Nuclear Power for Energy & Environmental Security Professor Barry W. Brook Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change and ARC Future Fellow Director of Climate Science, Environment Institute School of Earth and Environmental Sciences The University of Adelaide
In this article he basically dismisses everything that Prof Brook writes without any logic applied, for instance he says something about the prohibitive cost of building a PRISM plant?
Just look at what GE offered to the UK as an example as to how it could possibly be financed here in Oz as well?
"GE-Hitachi also provided further clarification during my interview on the financial model they are proposing to the NDA. With potential financing from the US Export-Import Bank, the UK taxpayer would not shoulder the risk of building the plant or even operating it, I am told. Instead, the NDA would pay the operator of the PRISM reactor per tonne of plutonium dealt with – a so-called ‘pay-for-performance’ model. This insulates the taxpayer from the risk that a plant might go over budget, as has been the case at Areva’s EPR reactors being built in France and Finland, and its MOX plant under construction at Savannah River in the US. (The latter was proposed at $550 million, whereas costs are reported to now be close to $5 billion – nearly ten times over budget, and the plant is still a long way from completion.)
We would get paid to treat the used nuclear fuel, the waste is only harmful for a couple of hundred years not hundreds of thousand of years and we will get to employ a lot of people.
If this goose reckons we should bury our heads in the sand and it will all go away, he is delusional.
Australia will not only lose its export market for Uranium, it will also see many jobs associated with Uranium mining disappear as well, something we can ill afford I would think?
GE-Hitachi also provided further clarification during my interview on the financial model they are proposing to the NDA. With potential financing from the US Export-Import Bank, the UK taxpayer would not shoulder the risk of building the plant or even operating it, I am told. Instead, the NDA would pay the operator of the PRISM reactor per tonne of plutonium dealt with – a so-called ‘pay-for-performance’ model. This insulates the taxpayer from the risk that a plant might go over budget, as has been the case at Areva’s EPR reactors being built in France and Finland, and its MOX plant under construction at Savannah River in the US. (The latter was proposed at $550 million, whereas costs are reported to now be close to $5 billion – nearly ten times over budget, and the plant is still a long way from completion.) - See more at: http://www.marklynas.org/2012/07/wo...a-step-closer-in-the-uk/#sthash.1gAkxegB.dpuf
GE-Hitachi also provided further clarification during my interview on the financial model they are proposing to the NDA. With potential financing from the US Export-Import Bank, the UK taxpayer would not shoulder the risk of building the plant or even operating it, I am told. Instead, the NDA would pay the operator of the PRISM reactor per tonne of plutonium dealt with – a so-called ‘pay-for-performance’ model. This insulates the taxpayer from the risk that a plant might go over budget, as has been the case at Areva’s EPR reactors being built in France and Finland, and its MOX plant under construction at Savannah River in the US. (The latter was proposed at $550 million, whereas costs are reported to now be close to $5 billion – nearly ten times over budget, and the plant is still a long way from completion.) - See more at: http://www.marklynas.org/2012/07/wo...a-step-closer-in-the-uk/#sthash.1gAkxegB.dpuf
SLX Price at posting:
56.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)