4 ms·

The idea of nuclear in Australia is mostly just a con to keep coal going longer by the conservative side of politics. They are not currently in power and even i

The idea of nuclear in Australia is mostly just a con to keep coal going longer by the conservative side of politics. They are not currently in power and even if they do get elected this year market forces will basically scupper the plan in the medium term anyway. It's 100% about their connections to the resources (coal) and oil & gas political donors, nothing to do with actual policy. At worst a few billions will go to politically connected people to keep some coal plants running a few more years, but I doubt any nuclear plants will actually pass any kind of business case because they will cost too much and take too long to build (we would have needed to start 25 years ago for them to be economically viable, so they could have replaced the coal plants while the renewables were being built out).

junto 2y ago
This is currently the same in Europe and especially in Germany. Social media has been pushing a pro-nuclear power stance since Russia invaded Ukraine (you’ll notice this on /r/europe), with people using the “ecological” no-carbon argument, and are also simultaneously pushing an anti-wind and solar policy. The neonazi AfD has not held back about its anti-renewables stance, and pro-Russian perspective, but even the probable new German Chancellor came out recently saying that he hate wind turbines because they are “ugly”. It’s clear that nuclear is being peddled as an option because it’s clear to fossil fuel peddlers that nuclear is a great Trojan horse. It claims to be carbon free but it’s a 25-30 year program until one is operational and when you take everything into account, they actually cost more to run. The insurance alone is devastatingly expensive.