tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post9034169923827873588..comments2023-09-25T21:20:27.863+10:00Comments on Nuclear Australia: Greenfield to head ANSTO boardEdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00021931700499537674noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-48239495096118651772011-11-11T09:30:24.612+11:002011-11-11T09:30:24.612+11:00I support the development of Thorium. But it will ...I support the development of Thorium. But it will be some time before Thorium based reactors become commercially available. The question we have to answer (and I think we should work hard to answer it thoroughly and correctly), is can we afford to wait?Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-80395128011972288122011-11-10T10:24:12.598+11:002011-11-10T10:24:12.598+11:00I am all for considering nuclear power in Australi...I am all for considering nuclear power in Australia provided that the isotope used is Thorium due to the fact that Thorium is more abundant than Uranium, it is harder to make bomb out of and liquid fluoride Thorium reators are safer (LFTR Oak Ridge National Laboratories).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-37310370072073594012011-03-21T07:04:21.564+11:002011-03-21T07:04:21.564+11:00I understand a study was completed in 2010 that to...I understand a study was completed in 2010 that took into consideration just this subject - probably motivated by the impact an earthquake had on the Kashiwazaki Kariwa reactors. And that Japanese plants - particularly the older units - had been targeted for significant upgrades.<br /><br />Of course this is now irrelevant for Daiichi units 1 through 4.Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-87063109000037312492011-03-20T22:18:10.495+11:002011-03-20T22:18:10.495+11:00Thanks for the censorship. That writes your little...Thanks for the censorship. That writes your little blog off.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-85836955355376461072011-03-20T15:37:00.127+11:002011-03-20T15:37:00.127+11:00Well the good Professor will be doing us all a fav...Well the good Professor will be doing us all a favour if he can at least try to get rid of the supercilious superannuated public service jerk offs at Lucas Heights who continue to produce, as recently as January 2011, this kind of BULLSHIT:<br /><br />http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf18.html?je<br /><br />in the context of this extract from yesterday's Guardian:<br /><br />The fires at Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-32067031013738470432011-03-09T16:41:03.225+11:002011-03-09T16:41:03.225+11:00I think they can coexist... if the system is re-en...I think they can coexist... if the system is re-engineeered. The key difference now being the <b>rate</b> at which human activity is dumping carbon dioxide and other gases into the atmosphere. Normal mechanisms that could mitigate this will not have the time necessary to come into play.<br /><br />I agree in your other reasons for supporting nuclear energy. I just doubt their combined Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-3752031507732099082011-03-09T11:12:09.813+11:002011-03-09T11:12:09.813+11:00He's an engineer, which has to be a good thing...He's an engineer, which has to be a good thing. (Bias alert: I'm also an engineer).<br /><br />I find that an interesting viewpoint from a paleoclimate perspective - the data shows that it has been both higher and lower temperature than it is now across recorded history. History shows there is a range that temperature bounces around between, (mostly deeply cooler than it is now) and Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-52591866850722908062011-03-09T05:36:19.118+11:002011-03-09T05:36:19.118+11:00I can't say. I don't know him. He's an...I can't say. I don't know him. He's an academic and based on my own experiences, my preferences are for someone who brings a bit more practical experience (speaking only from the support of a nuclear energy industry in the future). He seems to have relevant scientific related experience.<br /><br />If the need for low emissions does not bring nuclear energy to Australia, I very much Nuclear Australiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17626325905460792450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-451989601890385172.post-6791536523690547562011-03-08T22:41:36.646+11:002011-03-08T22:41:36.646+11:00So.. Is this positive for nuclear energy in Austra...So.. Is this positive for nuclear energy in Australia or not?<br /><br />But seriously.. I'm all for nuclear energy in Australia, and a carbon tax will tend to tilt things that direction, but depending on 'climate change' as an argument for it is a recipe for failure.<br /><br />In terms of the most discredited science fields around, climate science sits somewhere between economics Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com