Why Nuclear Won’t Work in Australia Anymore
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- Nuclear power may well be better than renewables. But is it suitable for a mixed system that is full of renewables already? Or are we mixing chalk and cheese? Find out, in this video…
Sign Up to Fat Tail Daily: signup.fattail...
Welcome to Fat Tail Investment Research, your source for fortifying and growing your wealth with insights from leading experts in finance and investing.
Join us each week as we roll out fresh videos, tapping into the expertise of top-notch specialists in investing, economics, the stock market, real estate, and personal finance, tailored specifically for our Australian investors.
Subscribe to our RUclips channel @FatTailInvestmentResearch
===============================
All content is © Fat Tail Investment Research Pty Ltd All Rights Reserved.
Financial Services Guide
======================================
Please keep this guide for future reference. A copy is available from us on request or can be downloaded from our website at fattail.com.au/financial-services-guide/. If you do not understand anything in it, or require more information, please feel free to contact us
IMPORTANT
===============================
We provide general financial product advice only. The advice published by Fat Tail Investment Research has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situations or needs. Before acting on our recommendations, you should consider their appropriateness to your specific investment objectives, financial situation and needs. If you are uncertain as to what your objectives and needs are, you should contact a financial adviser or stockbroker who is licensed to provide you with personal financial product advice.
#Investing #Finance #bitcoin #ASX News
Your argument is flawed. You need to speak with people in the energy industry. The issue with renewables is the instability it causes to base load energy in the grid. Renewables power farms spend most of their time off because of the instability they cause to the grid. Renewables will never replace base load power. If your replacing coal fired power stations as base load power then you have to use nuclear or gas.
@digby4060 YOUR argument is flawed. Renewables CAN provide "baseload" power (which is a myth, anyway).
The AEMO completely disagrees with your opinion. Can you provide a data source or a reference to some documentation that supports your claim.
@@footbru digby4060
@@footbru digby4060
@@footbru 100 year life cycle? Surely Nuclear is cheaper
We are absolutely not at the point where the sunken cost in renewables is too great to pull the pin on them. Aa a landowner near one of the major new proposed transmission lines, there is a long way to go yet before we even see these projects shovel ready. We need to stop the madness now, turn whatever resources are needed to advancing nuclear ASAP and in the meantime, resume gas exploration and rely on it for the interim. I agree that ultimately, what the government is pushing currently will not be what we have in 30-50 years time.
So, if Australia was a serious country, which it is not, then we would have a nuclear program. But given our status as a colony we are at the mercy of our feudal masters in Macquarie Street.
For a start Australians don't own any uranium.
😂just doing the maths! You must work for Woodside marketing!
James Woodburn, please stop wearing that ridiculous American baseball cap. We are in Australia here, not in America.
stfu. its not even an american hat, its a chang thai beer hat
@@christophergame7977 as far as I’m aware 1. it’s (for now) a free country and 2. caps exist in Australia just as much as anywhere else. Besides, it’s a Chang beer cap from Thailand… and it’s great!
@@frankalun3267 Thank you for your comment. As an Aussie, I think it looks ridiculous. I can forgive it on an American, because it's American.
Intermittent generation was always a bad idea. Ditch the sunk cost & get on with the main game... nuclear power.
We are many decades and a $trillion away from a reliable intermittent-generation grid. The next federal election is time enough to pull the pin on intermittent generation.
That's ridiculous suggestion. Simply don't build the $1.5T of poles and wires. We don't need them.
IMHO you make a sensible argument. I would prefer 100% Nuclear and 0% renewable, because this is the path to lower COST of electricity.
@@SandyMcClintock Nuclear has the highest cost of electricity of all sources.
@@keepitreal2902 Wrong
over an 80 year life cycle Nuclear is cheaper and not reliant on replacing full system replacement from Chinese products. China controls solar manufacturing!!!
Dutton is not proposing 100% nuclear. His proposal is nukes plus renewables plus gas.
@@footbru Dutton is only proposing enough nuclear energy for about 4% of the power needs of the country by 2050. It is therefore just a sideshow and completely ignorable.
@@footbru The problem is that there is so much Solar and Wind that there is too much usually mid-day. The price turns negative at these times. If I owned a Nuclear Reactor that I had set up to supply base-load power, I would not be happy to be charged for the privilege of feeding into the grid! If I were charged, it would reduce the pay-back on my plant. Even if I were permitted to supply at zero price, I would still not be earning as much as my expected returns. The more 'Unreliables" we add to the grid, the poorer the payback on the Reactor.
So short sighted….imagine Australian without oil ? Hydrogen fuel cells for vehicles its here now by the time nuclear power plants are constructed it will be on
This is why the renewable fail overall go to aemo planned generation and you will find the over build to try and make renewable work is X 7 eg to replace about 35,000 mw of generation we need build over 200,000 mw of renewable
Then to get the energy providers to build all this generation that can only supply a portion of the time because of over supply the generators are want a guaranteed return on investment 7.5 per cent appears to be the demand
Therefore we will be paying for 3/4 of wind,solar etc to be on standby
120,000 wind 60,000 solar 20,000 hydro and other
We use on average 25,000mw to 35,000mw depending time of day
The argument against nuclear has some flaws. Because of the low capacity factors of renewables, the AEMO intends to overbuild the renewables by a factor of at least 3. If you account for storage and transmission losses, the overbuild approaches a factor of 5. We are nowhere near the first level build. So, since coal is still supplying about 60% of total annual demand, we are only about 1/3 of the way towards the first level build. So, the sunk costs we have spent on existing renewables are minimal.
So the initial argument is that we don't do nuclear because we have already built expensive infrastructure for renewables? I'm living in the twilight zone :-( Renewables will emerge as the biggest con of this century and when the blackouts become a regular thing will people get that.
Nuclear is a bigger con.
So just say right now let’s do a good non bias assessment of power options and if nuclear is best then don’t build all this expensive transmission for renewables, this argument seems werid in that if we decided to use nuclear as you say that would be our primary power so forget about building anymore renewables seems simple, I don’t think we a past a point on renewables when we can just stop building renewables
But Dutton ISN'T proposing to build enough nukes to replace all the renewables. Seven plants isn't enough. And one of them is isolated on the west coast, so it's only six.
Do you know how much Nuclear would cost the libs have already said that the cost would have to come out of the public purse and we are talking about starting at 17 b but we all know the start figure gets blown up in the end to dabble as it will take 19 years to build
The solution is batteries. Not bigger grids. Put the $14.5 billion p.a. of fossil fuel subsidies into improving & installing battery tech & our intermittent power problems are solved. Solar is the cheapest power & batteries are getting cheaper & more efficient by the day.
@@davep3163The SA Tesla Big Battery cost $90mill and its capacity was the equivalent of what SA uses on average every 5 minutes.
@@rich-au That battery is outdated and a toy compared to what is now available.