Antinuclear

Coalition ignores nuclear problems: water, cost, dangers

Thirsty energy

ABC News 4 Dec 09 Scott Ludlam says there are issues with where the nuclear power plants would be sited.

“We don’t know where the propositions for siting these plants are yet but we know they would need to go near sources of water because it is a very thirsty source of energy, and near sources of population and power demand,” he said.

During the debate, Senator Cormann was asked how much it would cost to roll out the technology.

But, he said it was not possible to estimate costs at this point….http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/12/04/2761513.htm

Coalition’s nuclear power play to inflate bills

THE Opposition’s desire to embrace nuclear power in the absence of an emissions trading scheme or carbon tax would result in electricity price rises of between 10 per cent and 33 per cent, according to estimates by the Howard government’s nuclear energy expert, Ziggy Switkowski…………….In a report for John Howard in 2006, Dr Switkowski found nuclear power would never be commercially viable unless fossil fuel-generated electricity was made more expensive using an ETS or carbon tax.

This resulted in Mr Howard embracing an emissions trading scheme as a way to reduce greenhouse gases while keeping open the nuclear option for the future.

In a dramatic departure from policy, the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, has abandoned support for any market-based mechanism, such as an ETS or a carbon tax, as part of the Coalition’s greenhouse strategy…………….Dr Switkowski, a passionate advocate of nuclear power, maintained yesterday the price of power from coal-fired stations needed to be lifted using an ETS or carbon tax before nuclear would become viable…………….http://www.smh.com.au/environment/coalitions-nuclear-play-to-inflate-power-bills-20091203-k8v8.html

Australians won’t tolerate nuclear power: Bob Brown

Australia would never support the pro-nuclear push of the new-look coalition, says Greens leader Bob Brown.

New Liberal leader Tony Abbott said on Wednesday he was not a “theological opponent” of nuclear power and refused to rule out it becoming coalition policy……..

Following the Senate’s rejection of legislation to establish a carbon pollution reduction scheme, Senator Brown has urged the Government to now consider the Greens’ proposed amendments.

Greens senators voted against the bills on Wednesday because the Government did not accept their amendments.

“The amendments are sitting there for the Government to take up,” Senator Brown said while visiting the northern Sydney suburb of Chatswood ahead of the Bradfield byelection on Saturday.

“They’re cheaper, they’re fairer, they’re safer and they’re non-nuclear,” he said………..http://www.smh.com.au/environment/australians-wont-tolerate-nuclear-power-bob-brown-20091203-k7wx.html

December 4, 2009 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, energy, environment, uranium | antinuclear, Australia, climate change, climate change - global warming, energy, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear wastes, nuclear weapons, radioactive, uranium