Comments

Re:Voters Reject A Nuclear Australia by Anonymous User — last modified 29-11-2007 14:19

Hi Imogen & thanks for your work.

Can you provide some advice on who's continuing to advocate for renewables and the reduction of Australian emissions? That was also an aspect of your postings that I liked to reference.

Re:If re-elected, PM needs to take a holiday in Austria by Anonymous User — last modified 01-11-2007 10:07

I'm afraid I'm missing your point Imogen.

Austria? Their windfarms are a feel-good political instrument only. They don't generate much power for them. But they are a good way to spend money.

Within Europe, only Spain is farther from achieving their Kyoto targets. My source is here

If you're serious about cutting Australian Emisisons, stay well away from Austria.

Re:Australians Very Concerned About Nuclear Threat by Anonymous User — last modified 18-09-2007 13:14

Wayne, it is very possible to generate power from 'sunshine and breezes', in fact many countries are doing it right now. Countries like Denmark, Spain and the state of California rely significantly on renewable energy. The reason Australia isn't doing the same is because of the wealth and power of the coal and oil industries here. They aren't going to give up their massive profits willingly, and they have the government onside so that they aren't forced to. The world learnt a generation ago that nuclear is no solution, we have other options than that so lets use them.

Re:Australians Very Concerned About Nuclear Threat by Wayne Smith — last modified 10-09-2007 16:43

I think that article highlights how ignorant most people are when it comes to energy. Renewables like solar panels and wind turbines are too expensive to meet baseload power needs. If it was possible to run everything on sunshine and breeezes right now then we'd be doing it. Most options such as wave power and geothermal are from regionalised sources not available to everyone. At present it's a choice between coal and nuclear. Over 30,000 people die every year from coal burning. Nobody dies each year from reactors. All of the fearmongering about captured waste and weapons potential is ignoring the real problem. We need energy to live and the world is heating up from global warming. Nuclear power is the best answer to the greenhouse effect and its time we all realised that fact.

Re:Australia should be world's nuclear dump, says US expert by Anonymous User — last modified 29-08-2007 10:54

if other counties use nuclear power its there responsibility to dump it on there land not our land

Re:TV Ad Reveals PM's Full-Scale Nuclear Ambitions by Anonymous User — last modified 28-08-2007 18:08

No I dont agree with uranium in any way shape or form. These plants still have people in charge of computers to run programs and people make mistakes. Accidents do happen. There is no such thing as a safe site.

Re:Australia should be world's nuclear dump, says US expert by Anonymous User — last modified 28-08-2007 09:25

Biased reporting and scaremongering. I note this was a resolution at the same meeting.

12. Environment (Western Australia)
That Federal Council congratulates the Howard Government on its policies for clean and renewable energy. It notes the encouragement of
• Natural gas/LPG
• Wind
• Solar
• Geothermal
• Tidal
• Wave
• Clean Coal, and
• Lean Nuclear through Thorium.

BTW these resolutions do not necessarily become party policy.

Re:PM reinforces his support for a nuclear Australia by treborahyd — last modified 13-08-2007 21:12

The Prime Minister changes his opinion according to the polls. He has no idea about what is best for Australia, only just what is required to get him re-elected!