Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

The old debate…

Tomato : tomato
Democracy : Hypocrisy


Enough said

Where did you get that information from?

Two issues.... Space
Current figures state that Wind power takes up 60 acres of land per megawatt... Solar currently is about 10 acres per megawatt... nuclear is aprox 1 - 1.5 acres per megawatt and coal is about 0.3 acres per megawatt. We do not have the land for massive solar or wind farms, plus most of the available land is unsuitable for wind generators and solar farms... Having solar in the desert is one option, but sending power transmission back to citties is hugely expensive... Government would rather use the land closer to the cities for housing and MONEY!!

Cost...
Cost per megawatt/hour of nuclear... $45 (including refinement Process)
Cost per megawatt/hour of coal... $30
Cost per megawatt/hour of solar... $120 (over a 40 year life, not including maintenance)
Cost per megawatt/hour of wind... $60 (over a 40 year life, not including maintenance)

Fact is with current technology solar, wind and hydro can not compete with nuclear or even coal, with regards to space and costs. We need to look more closely at the technology you linked to. However even they need to get money for research, which is not going to happen if all the energy budget is spent on Nuclear power.

Ahhhh yes....the "leader"...he will save us......and breed???? lmfao I just had this horrible image of lil George Dubbya's running round....very scarey

But Tim, those figures for cost per megawatt are unrealistic because it doesn't take into account the true cost of producing that power, only the monetary value at the time. What cost is put on the coal power production for the future clean up of the carbon being pumped into the atmosphere, the land degredation, polution, etc. Also this is based on the fact that it's still cheap to buy oil to power the dump trucks and trains to mine and transport the coal, as oil increases in price these costs will rise.

I'm waiting for the day when we have a more complete value system, cheapest is not necessarily best.

One thing we have in Australia is vast areas of space with very good levels of sun exposure, all that is required is the set up of systems and then power distribution grids, yes a huge cost to begin with, but then look at the clean up cost of decomissioning a nuclear power station, or the costs of fixing global warming issues that were published in that British paper recently..

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/ ... 773739.htm

HELEN BROWN: A couple of weeks ago it was announced that the hot sun in Victoria's Mallee country would be harnessed by a new solar power station, the first for Australia and once built, the biggest solar generator in the world. It will create enough power for 45,000 homes.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/ ... 773739.htm

TONY JONES: I've done a few rough sums here: The Treasurer says the project will power about 45,000 homes. There are about 8 million households in Australia. On those figures, if you built 178 of these solar powered stations just like the one down there, you could supply power to the whole country. Does that sound right?

TONY JONES: I understand. But can you just explain to us why solar generated electricity is actually going to be more expensive, once the plant is up and running, than coal fired electricity, since it comes from the sun?

IAN CAMPBELL, ENVIRONMENT MINISTER: These are issues that we will know more about once this plant is up and running, once we know that it's built, that all of the engineering challenges this is what a demonstration project is all about. We will know all of those costs, we will know what it costs per unit of electricity, then we'll know what it will look like as it's expanded.

TONY JONES: If it's cheaper than coal-fired power station, why not just decommission all the coal-fired power stations in the country, gradually replacing them with large scale solar powered stations like this, 178 of them?

IAN CAMPBELL: Well there's no reason why you wouldn't, Tony. You'd be mad not too if the sums add up, that's what could happen




Tim ... We really do have lots and lots of sundrenched open plains ...
Cost of transmission is really fairly insignificant




Not sure of your figures Tim ... but as you say, if all the research investment is in nuclear then costs in solar will take longer to lower.

Another point is that it is UNIVERSALLY recognised that to build and operate nuclear power generating plants without having a carbon tax / trading system in place means that they just don't stack up cost wise even against current costs of solar...

and HEH what about the residual cost of dealing with the waste(s) and any (god help us) accidents

I am glad I have stirred up the pot of bee's a bit... a pretty controversial debate is raging here... Please remember I'm on your side... I just love a heated argument.

Last one.... I promise...

Cost to build a three reactor Power station and all infrastructure... NOT including fuel transport and on going costs... ~2 billion dollars. For 1000 MW. Life of the power station = 60+ years. @ $45 per MW per hour, 365 days a year = ~$400m per year operating cost. Sell half of that power @ 13 cents per kw = ~$500m... So at very least $100m profit after 20 years.

Going on the current $10 per watt for just the solar panels that would be 10 billion dollars, not including all other infrastructure, storage, transmission and a munufaturer BIG enough to supply the cells.. Plus solar panels are rated for 20-30 years, but stick them out in the desert and this time could be reduced to 15 years. So more than $10 biilion dollars every 15-20 years (per plant) is not conceivable for any government. And at $500m from selling the power generated with say $50m a year minimum for wages, upkeep and transimission costs, the plant will become profitable in just over 20 years, already past due for replacement....

Current day technology, Nuclear is cheaper than solar in capital costs. In the long run we may be paying for Nuclear with our lives. In the time being we need to do what ever is possible to reduce CO2 emissions.

Having Australia wide solar power is a perfect idea but not economically feasable, the government then chooses Nuclear power instead. We must understand that is enevitable, unless we take strong action towards RENEWABLE energies....!!

All in favour of a rowdy debate TimC

Nice to see someone your age that not only has an opinion but is prepared to back it.

Hey Rupert, you might want to watch out. You could get stuck in the "old" camp on the forum!

Thanks to both of you for a great discussion, its been very interesting.

yeh, it is hard when we don't have too many options for who runs the country... but heather, i'm sure you're doing a hell of a lot more than most others out there (or, as long as monya is!).. something is better than nothing.. saying that, i guess there's more to be be done too!

please ignore my yellow "warning".. i, like hethbo, have been singled out and victimised!!!

Jaymie, Kids occasionally do infer that I'm a "silly old bastard"...

I very politely remind them that "that's Mr. Silly Old Bastard" thank you very much....

Jezz, wish someone had warned me about the "old camp" thing though...
could have lied

Ah, but Rupert, you've posted those great pictures of yourself hard at work. Maybe you could say it was your dad cutting up the blue drums!

drove past a new wind farm installation today, was along the sth gippsland hwy near Lang Lang.....Ugly looking f'ers they is.....................and did I mention rumours of a nuke site 20min from my house lol...........would be interesting hearing comments form those for it when they end up in their "backyard".......at the same time coal is good coal is cheap....but fail to see how it can be chaep after whats its done for air quality and the damage the mines have caused etc........ya dont need to quote figures and stats to be clever

I've said it before, but I think the turbines are beautiful. I would happily have 3 in my yard, and not just for the money they pay for the land.

nah you prob wouldnt want the ones I saw....big bastards they were...big like the MCG light towers lol.....but if huge arse concrete towers are what rock ya boat...the ones in ya pic are ...cute in comparisson.

Lol at one way to F%$K up a perfectly nice lookin countryside....you can hardly see em yeah ...what windmills lol

Jezz, think you've got problems Bundy

Wiki "Jervis Bay Nuclear Power Plant" ....

Thats about 40 - 50km away from me about 20 to 30 mins in a good stiff southerly buster (straight line for the pedantic is prob 30km)