Former Experimental Test Pilot Explains CSIRO Modelling On Cost Of Nuclear
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 июл 2024
- Senator Fawcett provides a detailed response to the CSIRO's GenCost report on the cost of nuclear energy.
Keep up to date with Senator Fawcett's work:
Facebook: / senatorfawcett
Instagram: / senatorfawcett
Website: senatorfawcett.com.au/
*Your feedback is welcome, but please be respectful of others. Profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments will be deleted.
![mgk - I Think I’m OKAY (with YUNGBLUD) (Sad Version) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7AC1uqQLIg4/mqdefault.jpg)
This video needs to be sent to EVERY mainstream news room in the country. But we know what will happen, even if they bothered to watch and learn, they'd ignore it because it doesn't fit their agenda.
You are right about that and I couldn't have said it better.
They WON'T put it on M S M DOSEN'T fit the
CLIMB MATE
KuIt
AGE ENDER
Finally a politician looking at what is best for the Australian people instead of just playing politics.
What do you know about nuclear reactors and radioactive waste?
@@BrigitteTucker-vn9bf
Instead of asking the question, “What do you know about nuclear waste “‘ , how about telling us what you know., if you know!
@@ianbutler6583 outstanding
@user-jt1gm4qh4x
OK. Too expensive and too long to develop.
Enjoy the 20 year wait. Paying for it in advance every step of the way.
Thank you Senator Fawcett for highlighting the truth to all Australians.
Clever guy with a proven technical background! Peter Dutton has good friends!
Fantastic speech. Well done, Senator.
At least there's one adult in Canberra.
Love it
CSIRO should be ashamed
For what? Giving us the truth and all the tools & equations to test their conclusion or even make adjustments to inputs to test for other results?
Amusingly, they don't even touch on the international and domestic political hurdles that need to be jumped to even think about setting up a civil nuclear industy.
All the CSIRO did was a levelled cost of the comparative power generation methods and published the results & means in which they arrived at those results.
It's 100% publicly available information and because they included the equations and methods used we can test the results ourselves & even alter the inputs to see other results based on those alterd variables.
It's straight forward science and mathematics, not one bit is anything but hard science & mathematics.
It's literally an objective account of what was being compared that anyone can reproduce or input different factual variables as required to check results using relevant data inputs.
Sorry that reality doesn't fit your agenda mate.
@@soulsurvivor8293 The Gencost report was written by an economist, the CSIRO report was written by people who have zero knowledge in generating or distributing electricity. That's reality champ. The coalition are listening to people like Dr Adi Paterson former head of ANSTO. So please tell us again who is being objective?
@@soulsurvivor8293 it has been demonstrated that the assumptions CSIRO used in the that report were not consistent with known facts and actually were distorted to overstate the cost of nuclear and understate the cost of wind and solar generation.
great to see someone in Canberra speaking the truth
This gentleman speaks so well.
It's pretty obvious at this stage, after reading some of GenCost myself and observing the blatant bias against nuclear and coal fired power that the document was compiled by ideologues rather than rational engineers and scientists. The CSIRO used to have a great reputation for producing great science with many citations to their scientific staff. After this last debacle, their credibility is in the toilet.
funded by govt to support the govt
The CSIRO are just using the same reporting process that they use to push anthropogenic climate change
Please provide cited examples of bias in their working and/or results.
As I too have looked it over, used the equations and methods provided with other variables (such as a longer time scale).
I found their work to be accurate, objective and consistent with other findings elsewhere.
Please provide where and/or how you believe they have not followed an objective & scientific method.
Perhaps you're misreading it or made a miscalculation in your own review of the data.
Don't put all of the blame on CSIRO. They and AEMO were subject to directions to follow Minister Mad Dog Chris Bowen's policies. It is all coming unstuck now, just in time for the next Federal election campaigns.
@@soulsurvivor8293 > I found their work to be accurate, objective and consistent with other findings elsewhere.
Well, compare the CSIRO GenCost to Lazard's report. Here is one example:
* CSIRO inputs: NPPs have 50% c.f. and 30 year lifetime
* Lazard inputs: NPPs have 90-95% c.f. and 80 year lifetime
Of course, we don't know if Lazard is more or less correct than CSIRO, but you can't call these 2 inputs 'consistent'. Likewise we don't find many other aspects of the 2 reports or the outputs of the 2 consistent.
I will say, I find the Lazard report much more professional and easier to understand than CSIRO.
Lastly, I can accept CSIRO GenCost report for what it is, but determining capital costs to build a plant isn't the same as determining the retail price - especially as in Australia (per AEMO) generation is only 40% of the retail bill. Clearly your Labor politicians are purposefully conflating those two costs.
Chris Bowen should listen to this but it would likely go in one ear and out the other.
Guaranteed, there is nothing between to stop it.
In a vacuum, there is no sound !!!
@@robertjbrightonA vacuum sucks, so does Boofhead and his bumchum Albo.
He’s too busy parroting the govt’s line as are the rest of his party to hear the most logical discussion I’ve heard.
I live off grid using renewables & batteries. Attempting to run the entire country using this technology will ruin our economy by forcing us to outsource our power generation to foreign nations every decade. They have a vested interest in insuring that we don't succeed at generating our own power using our own resources. Which is exactly why we need to do it. We need to keep those trillions inside Australia.
I do too. My smallish system cost our family over 40k. This realistically will have to be spend on every household and business at least. There is no way 100% renewable energy has been costed to any semblance of reality and why haven't the people been consulted on what is a realistic amount to pay for a system and pay per kWhr. Labor with their pathetic 32% primary vote act like they have a mandate for every dumb, woke garbage idea they dreamt up, no doubt to enrich themselves and their crony corporate supporters.
Absolutely, totally agree from my own experience of running a small off grid solar and battery powered system.
You need double the capacity required when the days following a sunny day turn overcast.
@@user-jt1gm4qh4x I sat down and worked it all out. I created a complex spreadsheet that took me a week and it includes all the data related to solar energy at my geographic location by hour for every day of the year as one of the input datasets. I worked out I would need solar arrays and batteries so massive that energy prices would need to be around 250% higher than they are even today merely to break even on my investment. And even then, the feed in tarrif would have needed to be at least 14 cents and it has been down at 5 cents for years now.
The same could be said for a nuclear approach. We don’t have an industry or any commercial capability to build and run nuclear power stations. We don’t even refine uranium, we just dig it up and ship it. There’s a lot of countries and companies licking their lips at the opportunity to extort this energy strategy if we go down that road, especially with the knowledge that government owned infrastructure won’t have the same cost constraints as a privately funded venture into nuclear power.
Last I looked my bill comes from a foreign company
Brilliant. Should be shown to all Australians.
Brilliant, thanks very much!
Why is it that members of the Liberal and National Parties speak like intelligent beings and Labor like a bunch of braindead thugs? Well done Senator Fawcett. Keep the pressure on. We should have a referendum on whether to go Nuclear. It is far more important than “The Voice”.
Your funny
This guy talks logic and make sense
Well stated Senator. You have my support.
The French are not pinching themselves, they have in construction currently 6 new and planned 8 more nuclear power plants. It should be noted that they currently have 96 reactors - some of them are undergoing modernization and renovation.
financing 'nuclear' give return on investment 80 times whyle wind or solar less than 5. Coal power station return on investment is 50 times. this are official approx figures.
Brilliant presentation. Calm, intelligent & effective. 👏👏 Are you running for PM by any chance? If so, could you also pardon David McBride & Richard Boyle for simply sharing the truth? We'd really appreciate that. We need more folks who tell the truth on behalf of the people. Also, how come every time I see or hear any excellent points being made in parliament, there's never anyone there! Where's the rest of our tax dollars, and why are they never around to hear this stuff?!
Basicly what he's saying is aboish all commities like CSiRO.
They know nothing so they paid someone who does know so they can develop a report.
When the goverment could do that themselves.
This whole thing is stupid.
You need to rid the BAN on nuclear.
Then call up some nuclear power plant developers and get quotes make them compete for the contract.
The CSIRO has lost its way just like the ABC….if you need a pipe fixed you get advice from a plumber… we need engineers and scientists to give the Australian public guidance on this important topic… I fear for my children’s and their children’s future if this lunacy is allowed to continue!
Excellent work. Keep it coming 💪
Thank you for standing up and proving labour wrong again. They should be quiet about that now and lie about the next topic.
I agree with you senator, nuclear energy is the smartest and cheapest option. Australia has the big resources to power nuclear, we are in the best position to own our own setup without relying on other countries. Renewables are held captive to good weather, as a growing country we need reliable endless power to keep the lights on.
much more than keep the lights on. Power goes down in one of those skyscrpaers and the lifts and aircon goes off you are in serious trouble.
For the first time in 40 years voting, I will be changing my vote from Labor to the Liberal party based mainly on this issue. For my sake, my kids and for my country to remain competitive.
Liberals are as bad as labour... remember Morrison you dimwit?...
well thought
No, one nation.
Labor Liberal are the same.
You should remember Howard before you change your mind.
@@Yourbrightspot that’s the past. The now is blackout Bowen and the child must be stopped
Thank you for this much needed input to the non debate with this labor government.
What a refreshing video, thank you for your frank and informative talk, now all we need is for Chris bowen to listen, i wont hold my breath for that though.
Thank you for taking up 🙏
This is why we need the senate
Thank goodness for such an intelligent expose.
Thank you Sir for your intelligent, objective analysis illustrating the contempt these unaccountable, un-elected, public servants possess for both Government and the Australian people.
If Peter Dutton explained the whole of his augment like Senator Fawcett, I believe Australian people will be more readily accept nuclear powered generators.
Fantastic speech
It's not only unaffordable but it is unachievable to run the country on renewables and the labour government as a whole have their heads in the sand thinking this is possible. We also have other groups pushing the green (monetary) energy ticket (not mentioning any names) and we will see where that goes. Let's see if Sarah fergusan from the ABC runs that article. Thanks Senator.
This was a much better video than yesterday. Great references made to your sources. I’ll definitely be having a read through.
Thank you Senator Fawcett. Your findings are very similar to those of Senator Roberts from his recent interchange with the deplorable head of CSIRO. ($1.04M pay check) The conduct of which was intentional criminal fraud. The chair of that Senate committee should have been held in contempt of assisting CSIRO’s fraudulent activity. 🙏
God bless you Senator…….
Thanks Senator. Its a relief to hear from someone who isnt trying to ‘situate the appreciation’.
Well researched well spoken made lots important comments hope they take him seriously in what he said
Listen to this man then listen to Bowen .. Bowen is way out of his depth.
Finally someone who speaks staight facts❤🎉
Absolutely well said!!
Well done on presenting this research and point of view so clearly
Yes indeed the cost of 100% renewables (wind and solar) is ridiculously expensive and there may not be enough materials to do it (see Simon Michaux’s work).
What does the sun charge us to produce 1kwh? Why are you paying 40 cents per kWh. Why are you paying for the power generated by your neighbours solar. The cost lie does not fly high.
@@Yourbrightspot Energy from the sun powers life and the weather system of Earth. It is free and essential to us all. Also it can be utilised to our benefit.
I’m paying the rate I pay for electricity because it is the rate that those who control our electricity system decided that should be the rate.
It would be better if I paid my neighbour for any of their surplus energy that I can use - cut out the middle man.
Ask any accountant and they are likely to tell you that “profit is a matter of opinion”. It is a matter of opinion because costs can be measured in different ways.
There are many lies told so sometimes it is hard to come to the truth especially since it depends on from where the observations or conclusions are made.
I trust that answers your questions.
well researched and clearly and concisely presented,Senator Keep up the good work.The C.S.I.R.O. are taking taxpayers money to do a lousy job.They were fired from one important job that I know of for incompetence.
How very interesting. Why is this not front page news?
thanks. Reasoned and balanced look (for a change).
Brilliant. A politician talking sense
We had cheap energy with coal and only emitting carbon dioxide plant food for a green environment
Hello Senator. I was in the Post Group at DOCM-A in '98-'99. I do remember your name and your AAAvn career - Dave Dixon was the CA AAAvn at the time.
Did you know that we introduced the post nominal "tp", (like "psc") for Test Pilots? I'm sure that Dave Dixon nominated you for the Empire Test Pilots' School, Boscombe Down in '98 or '99 - correct me if I'm wrong. Anyway, we got CGS (now CA) approval in '98, and retrospectively, for the post nominal "tp". Type it in with pride.
btw, still serving.
make this THE ENERGY ELECTION. You will win.
A top guy. I hope he will be in the next Coalition cabinet.
Brilliant job senator
But know one talks about how long it would take to build?10+ years at that stage battery technology will be sufficient enough.
Anyone know off Tony Seva ?
CSIRO wouldn't pass a year 10 science project 40 years ago...
We have to have multiple sources, compare and contrast , identify the pro's and con for each, identify the ""best"" taking into account the cost to benefit et al ( a 25 page report, yes really only an initial pre-report, or a summary).
I did Enviromental Science in year 11/12; i even looked at thorium reactors...
Modelling: garbage in, garbage out; ideology in, ideology out...
Is there a link to the full video?
Dave run for PM, you'll get my vote !
A lot of smart people is the field of generation know this and a lot of smart people who are not knew something was a little wrong with the CSIROs conclusion to nuclear generation. Thank you Sen Fawcett for clearing that up. Now I would like to hear from Albanese on the matter. Maybe his slide to the left will prevent him from giving a response.
Well done Sir, excellent presentation
David,
Detailed yet readily understandable. On the basis of your presentation there will be little appetite for private capital investment into the $1trillion for transmission lines etc. Goodbye Renewables Religion.
Well said ⚛️
Three Mile Island residents are loving their cheaper electricity. It helps with the chemo.
Being a pilot qualifies him in economics and science LOL
Can we please have the link to the OECD report?
How can we ever believe in cheaper power when even if we produce our own, by solar, they want to charge more for that!
Because it's owned by companies. The nuke will also be owned by companies. They need to profit.
Vote One Nation.
Last senator I saw like this got pushed out *edit, one that understands science I mean
Because it's never part of labor's policy. Let the coalition take it to the people whenever they get in.
👍👍👍
Well researched
Thankyou
Just a question. The senator states that the GenCost report is "a modelling exercise with assumptions based on an incomplete set of data." Isn't the Liberal nuclear plan also a modelling exercise with assumptions based on an incomplete set of data?
Well wouldn't removing the ban and opening up the process to tender assist in this process. How would we go for an accurate estimation on setting up Solar and Wind powered systems if they too were banned in Australia? Would you sharpen your pencil to submit a tender?
No .. many other countries have transitioned to nuclear so costs are known .. NO country has implemented a solar and wind only transition so those costs are unknown
@@evanshapley-sc9np The poster @mersinalou7397 states the costs are known for nuclear so why can't an accurate estimation be reached?
@@mersinalou7397 The poster above @evanshapley-sc9np implies that an accurate estimation on solar and wind could be calculated because they are not banned in Australia like nuclear.
@@virtuallycasey6121 How come Labor hasn't disclosed the total cost of renewables?? They have been in power for two years and still no answer!!
Well articulated 😊
Fantastic good onya
Labor lies.
Fantastic speech. I fear however that the emotion triggered by virtuous idealism associated with renewables will still trump science…
👍👏👏👏👏 not hard to see Albo's lying again!
The solar panels on the roof of my house in Perth WA, generate five times more electricity than I can possibly use, and have done so for almost five years, no assumptions needed. Electricity now costs me zero as the system has already paid for itself, and should ideally run for a further twenty years prior to requiring replacement.
Until a hail storm takes it out.
Thanks for your comment.
Good to know you make more electricity than you need and don't produce radioactive waste. Yay
Do you have storage batteries for your power after sunset - or do you draw from the grid?
When has cheaper to produce actually lead to cheaper consumer price?
Interesting I can’t find the Canadian examples you are quoting but a very good speech and info all the same
Will you price in the dècomissioning cost .1000 plants world wide an cost to commission ,not able to be calculated
I'm a former experimental scullery cook and I reckon he's full of it.
Thank you for analysing the science of nuclear energy. Let's hope rational arguments are the basis of all Liberal Party statements.
Just dont place it in mi backyard.
Can we trust someone who pronounces it nucular instead of nuclear?
Fawcett obviously gets called a drip all the time.
Senator Fawcett, is it exhausting being the only adult in the room?
This is hard to believe……😳
To be fair, at the end a cost of nuclear by 2060 would have made a better point
👍
Simon Michaux
A Politician with an axe to grind, a self deception specialist, ideology of LNP.
No, it does not. Renewables & storage are objectively the cheapest form on energy on earth
But it is not cheaper, according to actual multiple qualified individuals and he said nuk-ular multiple times. It is called nuclear, this joker doesn't have a clue. For instance, after around 30 years of operation, nuclear power plants require refurbishment at great expense, particularly in Canada. He is probably aware of solar thermal power, considering he is from SA, but does not want to affirm that this option is cheaper.
amazing an old fashioned logical conservative evaluation- seeking logic and highlighting contentious matters C Bowen is lost to this approach merely sneer and ignorant adherence to the mantra
Please senator, have you considered the capital cost of constructing a nuclear power facility. Surely you are familiar with the cost over-runs of the latest construction efforts in USA and UK, which would be comparible to a construction approach in Australia.
Or is this information not suitable for your scientific approach ?
Or do you want to ignore the construction cost recovery for nuclear generation of power?
Your selective choice of cost components is hardly a scientific approach.
The senator's main point is that the capital costs of the plant are only one component of the total electricity bill (about 40% in the Australian context, according to AEMO). The total retail costs is the burden that will fall on the consumer (i.e. + the other 60%: transmission, distribution, firming, etc).
NPPs are expensive, the _electricity from NPPs_ is cheap.
What a disgrace
Scientists: Nuclear power generation is too slow and too costly to make any sense. Why would you anyway? Renewables are cheap, abundant and can be deployed rapidly to make a real difference very quickly. Additionally, the amount of nuclear power you are talking about will only power 10% of the grid and cost 6 times as much and take 15 years to build.
Politician: I have a science degree and I am smart, I tried to harass you and you could not or would not indulge my stupid questions, therefore your estimates and therefore statements are wrong. I don't need to produce any figures or estimates of my own, you are just wrong and therefore it is now cheap and affordable without question.
Australia committed itself being a nuclear free country long ago. Well done !
Great content but I so so wish people will say "Nuclear" (that is new clear) not nucular. Sorry but a pet hate.
Batchelor of science … damn undergrad . Doesn’t have a clue in the world .