In a radical move, the French government has quietly dropped their renewables targets from their draft energy bill, risking being seen as unfashionable losers in billionaire ski clubs. The nation that, forty years ago, built 56 nuclear reactors in 15 years has decided they just need to build another 6 to 14 new nuclear plants to reach “Net Zero” by 2050. This puts them in danger of being one of the only nations on Earth that might reach their target.
This, of course, is terrible for the renewables industry as it risks exposing the wanton frivolity and utterly superfluous nature of the wind and solar subsidy farms. If France can do this without the bird chopping, the slave labor and the lithium bombs, so can nearly everywhere else.
It’s a big change from 2014 when France aimed to reduce nuclear power to just 50% by 2025.
As NetZeroWatch says in their email newsletter, this is a win:
France drops renewables targets, prioritises nuclear in new energy bill
The proposed text, which is slated to go before the cabinet early next month and then be submitted to lawmakers, reaffirms France’s commitment to nuclear power to ensure “energy sovereignty”.
So France wants “energy security” as opposed to energy slavery where nations hope their enemies will be nice to them when they get cold.
The proposed text affirms “the sustainable choice of using nuclear energy as a competitive and carbon-free” source of electricity, and targets the construction of at least six but as many as 14 new reactors to pull off the transition to clean energy and meet climate change goals.
Climate activists (also known as renewables salesmen) are tying themselves in knots as France solves the net zero non-problem without their pet socialist technologies.
“It’s a terrible step back,” said Arnaud Gosse, a lawyer specialising in environmental law.
“If you only quantify nuclear power, you do not know the share of non-renewable energies. As a result, nuclear gets prioritised and, depending on remaining coverage needs, non-renewables will be the subject of floating (future) decrees. It’s no longer a mix,” Gosse said.
Lord help us all, “it’s no longer a mix”, what a disaster, and a few environmental lawyers might be out of a job.
In the end renewable energy is free, clean and cheaper than anything else they tell us, but somehow the government still has to force people to use it and set targets or no one will build it. The unwashed masses must be too stupid.
As the World Nuclear Association points out:
“France is the world’s largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over €3 billion per year from this.“
France is saving Germany and others from their own exorbitant experiments. Who will save Australia?
UPDATE: The bottom line is that the French government is testing out the idea of dropping their renewables target. Presumably they are waiting to see how big the protest and pressure is to keep those targets. But this is an important sign that those at the highest levels of French government would prefer to ignore renewables.
Photo: Spiritrespect
They should build 20 or30 and then make good money selling the electricity to countries like Germany and England.
520
The French are definitely not stupid, they can read the writing on German solar panels “Build nuclear and we will come begging!!”
500
They’ve been pariahs for a long time so dumpingrenewables won’t affect their status one bit. They’re not stupid like our mob herein Oz!
430
I thought German solar panels are being made in China because power is too dear in Germany.
280
France has 55 undefended nuke plants, every one of them is a terrorist or war target. Its only a matter of time.
135
How many undefended power transmission towers are subject to adverse weather? And other evil things.
290
How many coal fired power stations are there worldwide, and why would they not be targets in wartime?
The leftist nuclear nonsense is simply ridiculous.
310
All power stations end up being at risk, as we have seen already in the Ukraine.
However, the coal power station makes less mess when it gets hit.
Worth pointing out that dams are also possible targets, and refineries, and pipelines, gas pumping stations, water treatment plants, bridges, rail yards and so on. Although probably no adversary would be stupid enough to bomb a solar power array … those would be safe.
180
Worth pointing out as well that all those things are being taken out without firing a shot by our own western governments’ policies and the useless idjots.
60
Have you verified that they are undefended? In the UK we have the Civil Nuclear Constabulary comprising at least 1500 police and support staff, some of whom are licensed to carry firearms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Nuclear_Constabulary
I’d be surprised if the French don’t have something similar.
60
LMAO! Whoa! Heavy Duty! I bet the enemy are quaking in their boots!
30
Support staff don’t carry firearms. The duty police carry machine guns, not water pistols.
40
They already do that to many Eu countries who have fallen into the wind/solar trap.
180
Yes to UK via Channel Tunnel Interconnector.
50
Germany has become an energy importer since their Fascist idiots shut down their last 3 operating nuclear power plants in April. They have a further 6 that are perfectly usable if they ignored the Stassi Hausfrau’s fear of tidal waves ripping along Germany’s rivers. The UK grid is kept going by imports.
50
And not only money but diplomatic leverage.
50
Great news.
A great win for non-Elites, freedom and the environment.
And just in time for WEF Davos conference.
Herr Kommandant Klaus Schwab will be most displeased.
https://www.weforum.org/events/world-economic-forum-annual-meeting-2024/
And you won’t believe what this year’s theme is. “Rebuilding Trust“.
As with any thing from the Left the way to interpret that is the opposite of what they say so it is all about “establishing mistrust”. I fear some very bad things will emerge from this year’s meeting.
570
A blow for elitist subsidy exploiters.
370
The “timetable” is running down. Partly because all of the “Big fellas” (Male, Female pr “whatever” are getting OLD. Like all megalomaniacs, they want to see the full “glory” of their life’s work come to fruition, so. as per at least one previous European regime, effectively put their ’empire” to the sword for failing to live up to the “dream”. Additionally, all of this needs to be “tied up” before the mug punters can work out just what is going on as they are marched to the cattle wagons.
Eco and actual Nazis, and all of their “fraternal socialist” cousins are serious death-cultists, just like their “best friends forever”, the sand pirates.
The younger “hotshots” in-training by these demonic ancients are learning fast, however. This is going to get very messy. eggs; omelettes and all that.
And a happy new year; if you can find one and keep it.
180
If Europe is not prepared to use its existing hydrocarbon fuel sources for electricity, they can at least use nuclear.
And the French seem to be more rational about nuclear than most others in Europe so they should embark on a major nuclear building program and become the electricity powerhouse of Europe.
451
France went it alone in the face of opposition in the ’60s.
I am wondering if we should read more into Tanya Plibersek’s ban on windmills.
Could this represent an impending total about face on policy? With Tanya in the top job?
390
Elbo has always been nervous when Tanya stands too close.
260
Nice one Ted but don’t give the woman too much credit. I wrote to her once about claims of rising seas. She at least replied with a very nice letter even if I am way out of her electorate. The content of the letter was full of the usual ignorant climate garbage however. I doubt she is a closet skeptic.
290
I wondered if she could be feeling the breeze…or lack of it.
Reports from over the seas might have registered on her.
90
I remember when she criticised Health Minister Abbott claiming he (Howard Government) had cut spending on Health.
My research still on file revealed total spending on Health from 1995/96 Labor to 2006/07 Coalition had increased from $20 billion to $47.6 billion.
Health as a percentage ofAustralian Goverment spending up from 15 per cent to 22 per cent.
Her claim was creative accounting – based on one Forward Estimate of Health Spending that was cut because the Forward Estimate for State GST receipts far exceeded forecast, so grants to State Health was adjusted down accordingly, but spending still increased.
Mixing Current Account and Forward Estimates is a Labor Green specialty, example May 2022 Forward Estimate of gross debt $1 trillion but gross debt Current Account under $900 billion. And over $400 billion came from Labor at September 2013 when their 2013/14 Budget was audited and the report discovered unfunded commitments like NDIS and Gonski Education. Add the debt to pay for those items with no provision to pay for and gross debt exceeded $400 billion, so Coalition real debt was under $500 billion.
120
It was interesting that Bowen is now saying that he supports the decision.
70
“In the end renewable energy is free, clean and cheaper than anything else”.
No, No and No.
430
That needs a tongue-in-cheek emjoi.
170
OK. Satire was a bit thick. Have improved it:
Thank you.
230
You’ve summed that up perfectly Joanne!
40
But… renewable energy IS free, clean and cheaper than anything else! In its natural state, of course.
It’s all the infrastructure needed to capture all that free stuff that costs the most.
230
Ask a yachtsman.
250
Yachtsmen agree that the wind might be free but it costs a huge amount of money to collect.
That’s why yachts (and wind subsidy farms) are hobbies for rich people and poorer people use internal combustion engines in their boats.
320
Yep, not too many people using yachts to transport anything where guaranteed supply is required.
I’m surprised the left haven’t proposed a global transport fleet of supersized yachts, with a diesel fleet to follow them around on standby in case the wind doesn’t blow. No different to their renewable energy plan.
160
Back to the tea clippers.
120
Magnificent bit of nautical engineering, the clippers were , for quite a while, a better bet than the early steam-ships.
They were “square-rigged” for serious speed, BUT, they were high-maintenance and required the best of the best crews to manipulate all of that fancy canvas. It takes YEARS to train such people. The competing “mega-schooners” (fore and aft rigged” were not as fast downwind, but much more agile in tricky waters. The REALLY big schooners were even more dangerous to operate than the square-riggers.
The early steam-ships burned coal, VERY inefficiently. Coaling stations were established all over the place, not unlike the proposed EV recharging concept.
As trade demand grew globally, steamers got “better. Triple-expansion” engines hugely improved “fuel-mileage” and speed. Rapid transition from “side-paddle wheel drive to “screws”. “Composite” (Iron-framed, timber clad hulls), also seen on several of the last of the clippers). Then fully metal hull construction. In the late 19th Century, the steam turbine hit the water. A private venture(remember those>) and their ship, “Turbinia” was demonstrated dramatically at the Spithead Navy Review in 1897. running rings around the Royal Navy’s piston-powered ships. Turbines are more efficient and vibrate a LOT less.
Rudolf Diesel’s little toy then growed and growed. Enter the “cathedral engine” still driving most serious shipping globally.
Nuclear powered vessels started appearing in the late 1950s; basically a heat source for very fancy steam turbines The NS “Savannah’ was the first and, apparently only Nuclear powered “cargo” ship. The military application was also demonstrated by the USN’s submarine, “Nautilus” doing the “North-West Passage thing completely submerged literally under the North Pole.
The Russians have the biggest fleet of Nuclear-powered Ice-Breakers and specialist coastal vessels on the planet. The Chinese are “breaking” into that market at a rapid pace. China operates a couple of serious ice-breakers in support of their Antarctic “research” projects. BOTH countries have openly discussed building “armed” icebreakers. In expectation of a sudden resurgence of Viking Berserkers or perhaps a more modern pestilence?
Amateur maritime nerd mode “off”/
100
The wealthy yatchies are using carbon fibre in their hulls and sails – no decarbonisation here!
70
Or a sailplane pilot
90
Although France has many nuclear plants and plans now to build more. It has not, as implied in the article, stopped building windmills. I live in UK but regularly drive from Calais to Dijon ~500km. The first things you see when you emerge from the channel tunnel are windmills, and they a rarely out of sight throughout the entire journey. I believe the madness was due to the EU declaring nuclear power as not renewable, when they set renewable targets. I think the EU may have now changed that designation, and is possibly why France has now decided to expand its nuclear capacity.
20
Am I paying for coal in its natural state? Is it polluting the environment in its natural state?
141
Coal is free, coal is 100% natural, and cheaper than any other form of energy.
You just dig it out of the ground and dump it onto the conveyor belt > straight into the electricity generating plant right there AT the mine.
Ancient biomass.
Concentrated carbon that used to be in the atmosphere in the form of CO2.
Back when we had much higher and healthier levels of CO2.
70
Funny that burning trees is okay and environmentally sound but burning fossilised trees is bad.
50
Not if you think of “ sustainability”..timescales
Wood will regrow in a short time period, (1-50 yrs) readsorbing the CO2 produced in its burning.
Coal may/(may not) be reproduced , but only on a much longer timescale….millions of years…or effectively never on a human timescale !
10
You’re making a huge assumption that a new tree over 50 years say can reabsorb all the CO2 given off by burning a mature tree over say 5 hours. You may be right but that sounds very tenuous.
Regardless of the science, I was just pointing out the hypocrisy.
10
Very true, I’ve always wondered that if cutting trees down and replanting them is carbon neutral, then surely then we should be able to plant trees to offset coal and oil use. No doubt we’d run out of land eventually.
00
It is never admitted that the hybrid system has much more than wind turbines and solar panels, firming back up generators, battery storage and hydro, grid stabilisers to duplicate power station generators, transmission line from each location to the main grid, removal and replacement costs on average every 20 years.
And a completely new main electricity grid for wind and solar needs only.
180
nicely summarized
80
It’s the energy MIX that creates the TOXIC mess as we’ll find out if the Albo, Bowen donkeys get their way and wreck our environments on land and in the offshore sea.
But who cares and the donkeys Albo and the Vic premier Allan parroted their BS and FRAUD yesterday and claimed our recent floods could be FIXED by changing to TOXIC W & S ASAP.
But even Dr Finkel told the truth at the Senate inquiry that Aussies’ complete reduction of co2 emissions today would make ZERO difference to our future climate.
If these liars and con merchants are so concerned about co2 emissions they should look up the data since 1950 and then explain how we should try and make a difference?
AGAIN, does anyone really want to turn back Human flourishing to the much lower levels of life expectancy in 1950 or 1970 ?
And why do they try to hide the fact that 80 + % of global primary BASE-LOAD energy today is generated by FOSSIL FUELS?
The best of luck to France and what a pity we haven’t got the political will and intelligence to follow their example.
510
If you add coal, oil, gas and traditional biomass plus modern bio fuels you find that this adds up to 93% of global primary energy by source.
But useless, TOXIC W & S only generates 2.13% in 2022. Does anyone not understand the OWI Data link?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy-share-inc-biomass?time=latest
170
That is indeed the plan, Neville.
Most of the anti-energy lobby still subscribe to the views of:
Paul Ehrlich “The Population Bomb“, 1968
and
Club of Rome “The Limits to Growth“, 1972
https://www.clubofrome.org/publication/the-limits-to-growth/
The dire predictions of The Limits to Growth are based on the World3 computer model, which like later climate models was non-validated and defective.
From Wikipedia “World3”:
200
Is the French government really demonstrating political will, or are they in fact giving in to pressure from Marine le Pen and economic reality?
170
Mike I think it’s a bit of both but the French have a long history of Nuclear energy and there seems to be an acceptance from all sides of politics and a trust that it is safe and it is very RELIABLE and BASE-LOAD.
But I’m sure there will also be a brainless minority of Greens pollies and voters who’ll never wake up.
180
stop subsidising ‘GREEN ENERGY’,cut the money flow, no government non repayable loans.
the renewable industry will die.
we need to use our coal resources to create cheap power and power up our nations living standards.
310
Reality bites. The French lower classes have always been a bit more ‘reactive’ 🙂
150
Interesting article about how natural climate change influenced the French Revolution.
https://www.moneymuseum.com/en/archive/the-french-revolution-1789-449
70
I’d love to be a fly on the wall of BOB (blackout Bowen) office. What little hair that currently resides on his cranium will soon shrivel up. He must realise his position as Minister of Climate Change is like a “the King has no clothes” moment.
300
Flinders Island at 91% diesel now.
320
Great news.
Diesel saves the day yet again, otherwise they’d have no electricity.
I wonder what they’ll do when government policies make the cost of diesel unaffordable for non-Elites?
250
Are the wind generators getting paid for their indolence?
131
I’ll substitute inactivity for indolence.
90
Yes, over $12 billion between them every year before operating profits.
40
Think it’s a bit more than that. Somebody advised that wind turbine subsidies were around $500k to 700k each per annum, and there is quite a few thousand of them out there.
Thought the total renewable subsidies amount to $7bn annually, but have never seen how this is determined.
80
I have been watching King Island now for months and it never seems to change. 60% diesel and 19% wind plus bits and bobs from elsewhere. It never seems to update?
100
Maybe they are building a steam powered generator to harvest from the UN predicted boiling ocean?
sarc.
80
Well,…. Actually there is also a wave power generator on King Island !
It is not included in their data dashboard for some reason ?
10
How can we know how real those figures are?
10
Just in case our moron that identifies as an energy minister can’t read could someone please pop into his office & explain to him in easily understood language exactly what is happening in the world around it,
210
Climate crisis solved! Even holdouts like Australia seem to have jumped the fence. Does this mean Greenies will just have to go back to being Greenies?
80
Australia should apply to participate in the 2024 Global Pariah Status Award competition and adopt Nuclear Power Now.
140
Frankly I am astonished this is happening, really wonder what caused the about face to a very different energy production strategy.
110
Existing reactors are aged, and France has yet to bring the first of a new generation of nuclear power plants online. Yet, authorities realize this is the best option; economists call it “opportunity cost.” Extending existing lifetimes by 10 years {from 40} or a bit more, new ones can be constructed – in France. The USA likely needs 20 years to move the needle.
120
Could it be that the parasites realize their renewables experiment will go down in flames and so obviously if they don’t have at least one solid source of electricity on the continent?
France provides the cover… blackouts would be so inconvenient.
150
You’ve got to hand it to the French; they put France first (hmmmm, that sounds familiar).
Exports In 2021, France exported $356M in Nuclear Reactors, making it the 3rd largest exporter of Nuclear Reactors in the world.
https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/nuclear-reactors/reporter/fra
But could it be that globalists in some other European countries are considering rolling back their net zero agenda, and mass immigration (or so they claim!) because they know that their people have had enough and are voting for centrist parties (what the far-left call the far-right) that will represent the interests of ordinary people? Are they hoping this will be sufficient to placate the voters and distract them while they, the globalists, push ahead with their global governance agenda?
80
Bear necessity, peut-etre, sunsettommy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BH-Rxd-NBo&ab_channel=DisneyMusicVEVO
20
perhaps they saw people dusting of an old guillotine on the Place de la Concorde.
50
Could that have been why the ‘yellow jacket protest’s were happening? Is that why the MSM was not covering them?
10
“Ziggy” Switkowski, was an Australian business executive (Telstra)and nuclear physicist. In 2006, Switkowski was appointed to chair a Commonwealth Government inquiry into the viability of a domestic nuclear power industry. The inquiry concluded that Australia was well positioned to increase its production and export of uranium as well as adding nuclear power to its own energy mix. But the recommendation was qualified with the fact that there was no immediate need to rush to nuclear because Australia was blessed with ample readily available coal and gas supplies. Hence, maybe pivot towards nuclear but there was no panic. Personally, I can’t see anything has changed in about 20 years- only politics and ideology. We’ve really messed up energy policy in this country haven’t we?
420
Australia has two reasonable scale wind and solar experiments on Flinders and King Islands in Bass Strait.
They have no backup cable to the mainland and are located right in the Roaring Forties.
If a wind and solar plantation could work anywhere it would be on those two islands.
And yet they are both miserable failures and require extensive diesel generator backup.
The fact that no one in Government, the CSIRO or other “professional” (sic) bodies can see this and are committing Australia to even more wind and solar plantations is a disgrace.
420
Interesting to find out the CF of the renewable installations over the last 12 months.
70
TonyfromOz, along with others?, studied the NEM wind turbine CF for over 1000 consecutive days, and found it to be around 30%. Yet our clueless govt agencies and others still claim much higher CFs.
70
Bumped from “Tuesday”
“Lessons to the left of them
Lessons to the right of them
Lessons in front of them”
“In a recent article from Hot Air, titled “Note to Self: ‘Flying Canadian Blades’ Is Not a Hockey Team, But Do Wear a Helmet,” we are given a front-row seat to the spectacular failure of green energy initiatives, specifically a wind farm project on Prince Edward Island (PEI), Canada. This debacle serves as a stark reminder of the pitfalls of blindly embracing renewable energy without considering practical realities and economic viability.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/01/08/a-cautionary-tale-from-prince-edward-island/
80
This what the Hydro-Electric Corporation has to say!
Track Record?
130
The Hydro-Electric Corporation spokesman is obviously a comedian or maybe a relative of Chris Bowen.
As you noted, the track record speaks for itself.
Facts obviously don’t matter to these people.
120
Track maintenance from wharf to diesel generators for transport of fuel drums?
40
This is from 2014 – Will Chrissy Bowen put up the $2 billion PLUS for this project to now go ahead?
There is always the spin of “supplying X number of homes” without any mention of back-up power provisions when the wind is not blowing.
If Australia were to have a solar and wind only grid, the cost of providing sufficient battery back-up would be around $10 TRILLION!
160
“The wind farm was expected to produce 2,400 gigawatt hours (GWh) of renewable energy….”
Intermittently, occasionally perhaps but most likely never after the excitement of the initial proposal
50
Why not look at the situation on the islands as being based on diesel generation, but augmented by wind and solar to minimise the use of expensive diesel fuel? It might make more sense.
60
“It’s a terrible step back,” said Arnaud Goose
Fixed it for you Jo.
130
From head text:
France is saving Germany and others from results of their own stupid ideololgy.
Fixed the error 😀
170
[…] From Jo Nova […]
00
I think now is the time for Australia to plan to go nuclear for power generation. We’ve had that small reactor at Lucas Heights for donks. It’s been doing a great job supplying the medical industry with isotopes all these years without a problem. Then we’re planning to buy nuclear subs from the US and hopefully get them in the next 10 years if all goes well. Interestingly these subs will be mobile nuclear power. So it’s not really a big unsurmountable problem for us to go nuclear for power. A smart move to get nuclear power would be to get a network of Small Modular Reactors (SMR’s). These could be placed strategically to take advantage of the existing and future grid network. Of course the biggest obstacle to even tooling up for nuclear power generation is our embarrassing Energy Minister, aided and abetted by the largely parasite class Labour Party. Anyway, assuming we do see some sense and vote these fifth column sabotaging clowns out the door in 2024, here’s a link to SMR’s:
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-are-small-modular-reactors-smrs
90
HIFAR was shut down in 2007.
There’s a whole new reactor been built.
00
Can someone please send the article to Chris Bowen, and make sure he reads it, it is not written in french.
60
France can reach net zero emission,
With new plants of nuclear fission,
Which could save nearby states,
From renewable dire straits,
With gigawatts on lines of transmission.
180
Ruairi writes some excellent rhymes
Which I get to see from time to time
They hit the mark
And provide a spark
Of good sense, humour and a word I can’t find just at the moment but it rhymes with rhymes.
140
Ruairi writes excellent lines
Which I get to see from time to times
They hit the mark
And provide a spark
With good sense, humour and rhymes.
There, fixed it for you Gerry.
90
Excellent work there Peter …thank you for finishing it off so nicely…
30
Paris ? (Correction) Canberra Uni-party Agreement.
Maybe Australia can take over as lead lemming in the rush for the cliff.
100
When asked by an Aussie attendee at the COP 28 conference about Australia’s ongoing refusal to develop nuclear plants, Macron said (quoted by The Australian), “I hope that you will manage to lift the ban. Nuclear energy is a source that is necessary to succeed for carbon neutrality in 2050.”
According to Dutton:
Regardless of what happens with nuclear regulations Down Under, a sharp upswing in global demand amid low levels of new supplies has already seen uranium trading at 15-year highs, at just over US$80 per pound, in late November.
From 2005 to 2016, Australia sold 25,804 tonnes of natural uranium to France.
90
So France wants “energy security” and correctly proposes “the sustainable choice of using nuclear energy as a competitive and carbon-free” source of electricity, and it proposes new reactors to pull off the transition to clean energy, and to MEET CLIMATE CHANGE CO2 REDUCTION TARGETS at the same time.
Climate activists are now seriously wedged and only have themselves to blame for this predictable dilemma, as France solves the net zero non-problem without their pet socialist technologies.
They must acknowledge that either it’s only man-made CO2 that causes CAGW/climate change or it’s not.
80
Australia’s “Minister for Climate Change and Energy” and simpleton, Chris Bowen was just live on Sky News and made many stupid and untruthful statements including that the “opposition” (sic) of a Dutton Government would cause the planet to “cook”.
I sometimes wonder if he even believes the BS his speech writers instruct him to say, but then realise that he really IS that stupid.
https://fb.watch/ptDVUtqadL/
140
The farce is strong in that one!
To be fair, he can say anything he likes with a media which doesn’t ask him for facts on live feeds and keep skewering him as to how a country which sells the nuclear energy raw materials, is then smarter than its customers by not using it for themselves to benefit their citizens and save the planet too? Hallelujah, all praise Klaus!
Like all politicians he is adept at ignoring the question and wasting the interview time, but a compilation of his lies, incompetence and idiocy would hasten his exit into the pantheon of past Marxist activists to be given a government portfolio or Premiership!
Especially after his acknowledgement of the Oil rich tax free Bedouins while bleating that same blackout/bird killer drivel at an international renewables multi level marketing conference!
Anything he says domestically pales in comparison to that gormless comedy routine!
100
Sorry, had to chuckle as I had not seen that one before!
I add;
The Fascist is strong in that one!
60
Thought I would float this idea.
What does Chrissy Bowen have to say about this idea?
Seawater already contains 3 bbp of Uranium and the costs of extraction is coming down.
More here:
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/floating-nuclear-power-plants-benefits-and-challenges-discussed-at-iaea-symposium#
Video on the Akademik Lomonosov here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHAHORkpo2g
More on Australian progress on extracting Uranium from seawater here:
https://www.ansto.gov.au/news/promising-material-provides-a-simple-effective-method-capable-of-extracting-uranium-from
50
Surely there is no need to do this. The plan for most SMRs is to bring the plant modules onto site by trucks then assemble the plant. This also means that SMRs could be assembled close to where they are needed, or close to main transmission line hubs.
100
Remember we’re supposed to be wrecking our environments + WASTING TRILLIONS of $ because the climate today is so terrible and even unprecedented according to our extremist left wing donkeys.
But the long Ashcroft study from 1839 to 2017 clearly shows the extreme climate variability when co2 levels were very low.
Sydney’s rainfall was very high in the 1890s and drought in the 1940s.
The wettest year was 1950 and the driest year 1849. But also 2 very wet years in the 1840s.
Melbourne had a very bad drought during the FED drought and the 1997 to 2008 Millenium drought was also severe.
Melbourne’s wettest year was 1849 , but the 1870s, the 1920s and the 1950s were also very wet periods.
Adelaide was very wet in the 1850s and 1920s. Adelaide’s wettest year was 1992 and the wettest day was in FEB 1925.
BTW Dr Karoly was also a member of this 178 year Ashcroft study.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221209471930009X?via%3Dihub
90
Here’s the SE Aussie rainfall anomaly from 1900 to 2023 and note the very dry period from 1900 to 1945 and our more recent Millennium drought.
http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=rranom&area=seaus&season=0112&ave_yr=8&ave_period=6190
30
BTW co2 levels were about 295 ppm in 1900, 311 ppm in 1950, about 350 ppm in 1988 and 420 ppm today.
60
If you look at extreme heat and cold records at the World Meteorological Organization, globally, by continent, by hemisphere , whatever, it’s quite noticeable that generally most extreme heat records are much further in the past than extreme cold records. Its seems the rising tide of hottest evah and boiling oceans and stuff does not actually raise all boats.
Matters not. Its more about the vibe and memes that actual facts and data.
70
We should be praying for some global warming, if we get cooling, it will cause droughts, crop reductions, etc, also it will give us an edge if we cop a big rock from space.
20
Too much cold, (brrr,) not good!
The Inter-glacial eras*(approx 12000 yrs,)
are good.
The Ice Ages*( approx 100 000 yrs plus,)
not so good.
*Ice Core data ‘n Milankovitch Cycles ref
https://www.britannica.com/science/Last-Glacial-Maximum
30
For those interested, I wrote an article on small modular reactors in 2016.
https://www.siliconchip.com.au/Issue/2016/June/Small+Nuclear+Reactors%3A+Reliable+Power+At+Low+Risk
50
There have already been many “small modular nuclear reactors” that have operated in Australia!
The only caveat is that their operation has been short-term.
If this has not created a problem in the past – then why not alllow longer term operation?
https://www.navy.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Port%20Visits%20to%20Australia%20by%20Nuclear-Powered%20Vessels%20-%20A%20Historical%20Context.pdf
30
Nuclear power is fine, but proposing it as “the answer” means the wrong question is being asked.
Nuclear power is wonderful but as with any engineering project a proper cost benefit analysis needs to be made.
It might be the best in a given situation, but alternatively coal, gas or real hydro (not SH2) might also be the more cost effective solutions.
And in the case of Australia, the “can’t do” country, don’t forget that the fake conservative Liberal Party outlawed nuclear power forever. Plus also consider the huge regulatory hurdles to do just about anything. It took 50 years just to decide on a second Sydney International Airport….
In proposing nuclear power Dutton knows he’s safe from controversy because it will never be built in his lifetime, even if he had the numbers to change the Liberal’s own law banning nuclear power. (And don’t forget the Liberals are also responsible for Australia’s renewables disaster.)
90
Oz has 35% of the world’s uranium. 1.75 million tons of it.
What Oz needs to realize, is that nuke power is an integrated system. Mining, concentrating, and enriching ore. Then there is fuel reprocessing requirements. Then there is the limitation of pressure vessel ring forgings (10 per yr from Japan Steel Works). Then there is support infrastructure for piping, turbines, alternators, transformers, valves, specialized welders, control systems, standardization of designs and components.
This isn’t a simple thing to do. At present, Oz cannot do it. Oz can build and fuel coal plants whilst analyzing the nuclear options. And that is what they ought do: Build what is possible and maintainable now, with a 25 year plan for the future. A great many things must happen prior to being energy independent with nuclear power. Does Oz even have a nuclear engineering educational resource? Or reprocessing capability? or ASME Section 9 capable welders? Is there an approved design? Are the skills available to build them?
Nuke reactors take at least 10 years to build and certify for operation. What does Oz do in the meantime?
I’m all supportive of a rational nuclear energy cycle and system. But it is an integrated physical system, not a political concept. And then there’s the Will to actually do it.
80
Yes it was Mr Turnbull who had Snowy 2.0 as his legacy project to be remembered by! Australians will be remembering this Green Elephant for many years to come – if it is ever completed!
90
$6 billion of costs to date were buying the shareholdings of State Governments in Snowy Hydro.
50
Vive la France!!
60
Dr Pielke jr has just called out NOAA for “an egregious failure of Scientific integrity” and he has a link to his latest study about their so called billion $ disasters.
He has asked for comments to his claims and I’m sure he’ll get a good response from his educated blog readers.
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/an-egregious-failure-of-scientific
30
BTW I’ll never forget how Dr Pielke jr took on Obama and his so called Science adviser Holdren(?????) in 2014 and he also sorted out the other clueless Demorats during his testimony to the Senate.
These pig ignorant cowards were belted around the ears with DATA and evidence from Dr Pielke jr and they soon lost interest.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/01/white-house-science-adviser-attacks-roger-pieke-jr-for-his-senate-testimony-pielke-responds-with-a-skillfull-counterstrike/
50
If the Joe Bandon administration wasn’t approving, then NOAA would be concerned about the egregious failure of Scientific integrity.
How many voters, because of this, will abandon the Democratic Party next November and install a more rational administration?
Religious cults (The ClimateCult™) are not easily dissolved.
Sad.
50
Gosse has proven how large a dose of koolaid has been prescribed by the renewables sovereign wealth grifters! Repeated often enough on propaganda trashmedia with the matter-a-fact air of ‘as we all know, because we are the science, there’s only our way to net zero!’
Interesting when reality bites though where the line in the sand is, as it’s apparent that Macron is more fearful of the historic French public revolutionary reaction to subjugation, than adhering to his Hitler youth, sorry, Schwab Economic Forum youth, Marxist indoctrination programming! Also interesting that he’s anointed a young PM, for his succession plan, so is there a change in ideology, or merely pragmatism, because he doesn’t want to go the same way his classmate Rutte did in Holland?
The inherent problem for Marxists is that they continue to pontificate and gain consensus on ideology, but can’t actually make it work in reality. Funny isn’t it, when individuals want the lights on, phone charged and heating working on a -20 degree evening? You know, just like those sanctimonious ideologues have ensured they will always have access to for themselves!
40
What sensible plan, no new land required here, utilise existing power station locations and electricity grid.
* Maintain and continue operating coal fired power stations scheduled for closure after 50 years in service and extend to 70-80 years.
* Replace coal fired boilers with small modular reactor for steam supply.
* Replace coal fired power stations over time with factory produced SMR generator units.
* Areas off grid replace diesel fuelled generators with Mini Modular Reactor generator units.
50
You would probably need a big fridge and to be running a Hairdresser 24/7 to make an off grid area run off a mini reactor.
Here is the pacemaker that was used Pu-238 that allowed your heart to go off-grid for life
20
Also maybe reclaim taxpayer’s investment in the nuclear power station foundations still on Commonwealth land at Jervis Bay NSW, near Nowra.
30
The Folly of Climate Leadership
Rupert Darwall – DEC | 2023
Net zero and Britain’s DISASTROUS ENERGY POLICIES – 76 Page PDF
This report is the first comprehensive analysis of Britain’s climate and energy policies and their impact
on electricity generation and costs, as well as on energy security.
It shows how increasingly stringent climate policies have been justified on the basis of false claims of low and falling renewable energy costs, especially of offshore wind, so that net zero was adopted in ignorance of its likely costs.
Subsequent official analyses of net zero paint an optimistic picture based on economic make-believe.
Part I places Britain’s claim to climate leadership in context and notes how accelerating
reductions in carbon dioxide emissions have been accompanied by unprecedentedly weak
economic growth.
Part II is a critical examination of the evolution of energy policy since 2015 and demonstrates
how politicians and civil servants were willingly duped by climate-lobby claims of low wind
costs; it contrasts these claims with actual offshore wind cost data and goes on to examine
the flawed assessments of the economic consequences of net zero by the Treasury and the
Office for Budget Responsibility. It ends with a brief analysis of public opinion, which
broadly—albeit weakly—accepts Britain’s net zero policy consensus.
Part III comments on Britain powering past coal, which worsened the 2022 energy crisis by
raising costs and sacrificed coal as the best hedge against threats to energy security.
Part IV is an overview of the electricity sector, and
Part V is a deep dive into the Big Six energy companies’ segmental data, illustrating the
importance of data transparency.
Part VI offers some concluding thoughts on the antidemocratic gambit of legislating
a net zero target, with the aim of putting net zero beyond politics. It tables two policy
recommendations: de-legislating net zero; and opening the books on all publicly supported
renewable energy projects as a necessary condition to having a properly informed debate on
energy policy.
50
The BIAS Of Google Bard – https://bard.google.com
Q. Review The Folly of Climate Leadership
Net zero and Britain’s DISASTROUS ENERGY POLICIES https://assets.realclear.com/files/2023/12/2321_2320_realclear-report-rupert-darwall-v7_1.pdf
A.
This is an article about the negative effects of Britain’s net zero policy. It discusses the policy’s high costs and its negative impact on the economy. The author argues that Britain’s energy policy has been captured by special interests. He also criticizes the high price of renewable energy.
Overall, the article is critical of Britain’s net zero policy and argues that it is not in the country’s best interests.
However, it is important to note that the article is from a conservative think tank and may not reflect the views of all experts.
Here are some specific points from the article:
The author argues that Britain’s net zero policy is too expensive and will damage the economy.
He claims that the policy has been captured by special interests, such as renewable energy companies.
He criticizes the high price of renewable energy and argues that it is not a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
It is important to consider these points in the context of the wider debate about climate change and energy policy. There is no consensus on the best way to address climate change, and there are a variety of different perspectives on the issue.
I hope this summary is helpful. Please let me know if you have any other questions.
40
It was coal that powered the Industrial Revolution in Britain and weather dependent wind mills and water wheels were quicklly replaced by steam engines.
The expansion of the British Empire was due to the Industrial Revolution.
Coal is making a big comeback in other countries annd I will cover this in future posts
30
Hey, BOB Wake up to reality! Very expensive electric buses remain idle in Norway’s cold weather!
https://principia-scientific.com/norwegian-electric-buses-idle-in-cold-weather/
40
You can have a warm bus or one that can complete its run, but not both.
40
Meanwhile, back in Oz, our learned and politically-correct Minister for Energy & Climate Change (or is it the other way around?) says “Nuclear is the most expensive form of energy … it’s a complete joke”! And that must be true, given his qualifications and experience.
So, aren’t we just so fortunate to have someone so well-informed and educated in charge of such matters. After all, what would the French know about nuclear power? So there!
Now here’s a little bit of sacrilege, should anyone dare to look: http://www.galileomovement.com.au/media‘SaveThePlanetStart.pdf. (And who was Galileo anyway? Wasn’t he some nut-case who claimed that the Sun didn’t orbit the Earth, or some such nonsense – as was pointed out by the ‘scientific experts’ of his day?)
20
Well I hope the French can improve on their recent nuclear plant constructions as EDF has built a plant in Finland that was TWELVE years late and FIVE times over budget and has only just started working. The plant at Flammanville in Normandy is yet to start and has the same delay and cost explosion. And a third plant is being built here at Sizewell and has already gone over budget and I believe is also running late – time will tell if they can beat the x12 and x5 figures of the other two.
20
Gerry. I believe that management incompetence and political interference are the primary reasons for delays to these projects.
As in all engineering projects the requirements are key and need to be fully defined before proceeding to design and development. Unfortunately, in most engineering projects the requirements change on a regular basis right up to commissioning. ‘Herding cats’ and ‘trying to nail jello to the wall’ comes to mind.
40
Growing worldwide competition for the industrial resources needed to build new energy infrastructure — all classes of energy infrastructure, not just wind, solar, and battery storage — this growing competition means that every dollar spent on low energy density renewables is a dollar which is not available for constructing new-build coal-fired, gas-fired, and nuclear generation.
Which means that it will not be possible to fully replace our legacy coal-fired, gas-fired, and nuclear generation power plants as these are being systematically shut down without spending huge sums of money which far exceed the sums spent to originally acquire those legacy energy systems.
Here in the US, take for example the permanent closure of the two Indian Point reactors in New York state with the loss of 2 GW of reliable generation capacity, a decision which is now impossible to reverse. These two reactors had another thirty or more years of reliable service left in them, and yet the two were shuttered for largely political reasons.
The two Indian Point units, completed in 1976, cost 3 billion dollars to originally construct as stated in 2023 dollars. A replacement two-unit nuclear facility using cookie-cutter 1,100 Mw AP1000 reactor designs as used at Vogtle 3 & 4 would likely cost from 35 to 40 billion dollars, ten times what the equivalent legacy reactors cost in 1976.
It wasn’t the US-NRC’s over-regulation of nuclear power which caused this steep rise in the real cost of building an equivalent nuclear reactor facility in the United States.
Rather, it was the systematic de-industrialization of the United States and of other western nations which destroyed the highly robust and diverse industrial base needed to support cost effective construction of all classes of energy infrastructure, not just nuclear.
The oncoming forced shutdowns of our legacy coal-fired and gas-fired power generation capacity without adequately reliable replacement is a looming disaster of immense proportions.
Once those plants are gone, only a portion of the lost capacity can be recovered through new-build construction. Strictly enforced energy conservation measures must cover the gap, because there won’t be any practical alternative. Enforced energy rationing, in other words. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
30
VIVA LA FRANCE
The first country on the planet that has finally worked out that renewables are not the answer to the worlds energy crisis.
10
[…] published JoNova, NetZeroWatch; Greens are furious the wrong kind of zero carbon energy is being […]
10
[…] By Jo Nova […]
00
Though I 100% agree withe France’s policy it’d disingenuous to suggest France will acquire a pariah status when more than a dozen other nations at COP28 publicised their aim to increase nuclear by 30%.
00