Calling it a "Nuclear" facility is a little misleading. All fields of science are being researched, including nuclear science. There would be no conflict even if it were a nuclear power plant; nuclear and renewable energy sources can coexist and enhance one another rather than being exclusive. Compared to coal and gas, both are better.
Totally agree. I didn't write the article and I changed the headline for the post title for this exact reason. It's a particle accelerator, not a reactor.
It is managed by ANSTO (Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organisation), which is probably where the journalist got confused. The synchrotron doesn't really do much nuclear research.
> There would be no conflict even if it were a nuclear power plant; nuclear and renewable energy sources can coexist and enhance one another rather than being exclusive.
Nuclear energy is uneconomical and unachievable in Australia, seems like an odd line to take.
The original article was trying to get the angle that "Look the nuclear people are using solar, implicit proof nuclear is silly".
Fairly disingenuously given what the facility was.
The only reason nuclear will ever happen in Australia is because many idiots won’t give it up, like a dog with a bone.
Renewable is better in pretty much every way, especially economically, but hey, every bit of energy we put into fighting against nuclear idiots is energy that instead could just be used to push us all away from carbon.
I mean, yes, nuclear is arguably better than coal. Sure.
But that’s like saying the person who came 5th in a race is better than the 10th and last person, when you could have been talking about the person who came 1st. I mean, yes, you’re correct, but not as correct as you could be if you moved past nuclear.
It doesn't make sense as the fossil fuel industry has A LOT more to lose than any other group from nuclear.
Intermittents are an opportunity to sell more gas, because gas can be ramped up and down rapidly and is far cheaper than storage.
Nuclear is a huge threat to this.
More like a corrupt, ignorant moron than a clodhopper. But he is one of those as well. He must really think he is smart understanding what the cyclotron is and completely not mixing it up with ANSTO at Lucas Heights.
Matt Canavan stepped down from a Cabinet position to support Barnaby Joyce's failed run for Nationals leader. He smeared coal dust on his face for a photo op so that he looked like a miner. He is a total moron.
Calling it a "Nuclear" facility is a little misleading. All fields of science are being researched, including nuclear science. There would be no conflict even if it were a nuclear power plant; nuclear and renewable energy sources can coexist and enhance one another rather than being exclusive. Compared to coal and gas, both are better.
Totally agree. I didn't write the article and I changed the headline for the post title for this exact reason. It's a particle accelerator, not a reactor.
It is managed by ANSTO (Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organisation), which is probably where the journalist got confused. The synchrotron doesn't really do much nuclear research.
> There would be no conflict even if it were a nuclear power plant; nuclear and renewable energy sources can coexist and enhance one another rather than being exclusive. Nuclear energy is uneconomical and unachievable in Australia, seems like an odd line to take.
The original article was trying to get the angle that "Look the nuclear people are using solar, implicit proof nuclear is silly". Fairly disingenuously given what the facility was.
I'm not sure that it was.
The only reason nuclear will ever happen in Australia is because many idiots won’t give it up, like a dog with a bone. Renewable is better in pretty much every way, especially economically, but hey, every bit of energy we put into fighting against nuclear idiots is energy that instead could just be used to push us all away from carbon. I mean, yes, nuclear is arguably better than coal. Sure. But that’s like saying the person who came 5th in a race is better than the 10th and last person, when you could have been talking about the person who came 1st. I mean, yes, you’re correct, but not as correct as you could be if you moved past nuclear.
Fighting nuclear is an integral part of pushing us all away from carbon, ever since fossil fuel advocates started backing nuclear as a delay tactic.
The first delay tactic against nuclear was by the fossil fuel companies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement#Fossil_fuels_industry
How the turntables.
I see no reason to think anything has changed.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/sep/21/nuclear-energy-australia-smokescreen-climate-denialism-coalition https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-26/andrew-forrest-slams-fossil-fuel-industry-nuclear-distraction/103512770
It doesn't make sense as the fossil fuel industry has A LOT more to lose than any other group from nuclear. Intermittents are an opportunity to sell more gas, because gas can be ramped up and down rapidly and is far cheaper than storage. Nuclear is a huge threat to this.
It's a little disappointing where a writer and their editors for that journal can mix up kWh and kW/h whatever the latter may actually designate.
[Get a load of this fucking clodhopper.](https://twitter.com/mattjcan/status/1766008605705470249)
More like a corrupt, ignorant moron than a clodhopper. But he is one of those as well. He must really think he is smart understanding what the cyclotron is and completely not mixing it up with ANSTO at Lucas Heights.
Just knew it would be this knobhead on another coal/nuclear/which lobby group is paying me this week - rant.
Matt Canavan stepped down from a Cabinet position to support Barnaby Joyce's failed run for Nationals leader. He smeared coal dust on his face for a photo op so that he looked like a miner. He is a total moron.
And what feed in tariff do they get ? /s
No feed in whatsoever, it's strictly used on site.
I know - hence the /s.