O/T:- Trump Presidency 2.0 [hic sunt dracones]

[i961pie]

The future has to be nuclear power whose only drawback is the disposal of the radioactive waste, not a problem if it's shot out into the cosmic void, a one -way trip to Jupiter? Or Australia? It's not beyond the possibility of future science finding a way to make it useful or at least neutral, not that it would matter if it was Australia, or the USA.

There's no pollution, it's cleaner, a lower cost of production and safer than any alternative. We could have led the world if we had started it in the early 199o's when Maggie shut the pits.

Why didn't Blair do it in the 90s instead of carrying on shutting pits?

[Lullapie]

Why didn't Blair do it in the 90s instead of carrying on shutting pits?

The nuclear discussion is huge in Australia at the moment. With the high possibility of the Australian Labor Party getting trounced in the election, Peter Dutton, leader of the opposition, is openly discussing nuclear power.

There is something in the Australian Constitution that prevents nuclear power being brought in, so a referendum is likely.

The irony is that that Australia is the biggest Uranium exporter in the world. It also exports a huge amount of coal - mainly to Third World nations, so we all know how environmentally sensitively that will be used.

Nuclear power is the ONLY way forward to reduce emissions - but the left have the same old excuses. Too dangerous, too expensive.

However, we are slowly learning that letting ideologists control policy creates the opposite effect to what is needed to be done.

Chris Kenny from Sky News Australia did this documentary a while back. A very interesting watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN77CqRfABg

[Jampie]

The nuclear discussion is huge in Australia at the moment. With the high possibility of the Australian Labor Party getting trounced in the election, Peter Dutton, leader of the opposition, is openly discussing nuclear power.

There is something in the Australian Constitution that prevents nuclear power being brought in, so a referendum is likely.

The irony is that that Australia is the biggest Uranium exporter in the world. It also exports a huge amount of coal - mainly to Third World nations, so we all know how environmentally sensitively that will be used.

Nuclear power is the ONLY way forward to reduce emissions - but the left have the same old excuses. Too dangerous, too expensive.

However, we are slowly learning that letting ideologists control policy creates the opposite effect to what is needed to be done.

Chris Kenny from Sky News Australia did this documentary a while back. A very interesting watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN77CqRfABg

There is nothing in the constitution about nuclear power. The constitution was written before it was conceived of and no amendment touches on it.

There is a federal law that could easily be overturned to bring it in. No referendum is required.

Nuclear power isn't the only way forward. We've come a long way without it, the rest requires grid-scale storage, which, annoyingly, the left also refuse to talk about sensibly. Because it means huge new hydro dams...

Sky News Australia is a murdoch outlet BTW. Propaganda.