28
Nuclear power too expensive and slow to be part of Australia’s plans to reach net zero, study finds
(www.theguardian.com)
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
If you're posting anything related to:
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
https://aussie.zone/communities
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]
Yes we do. And projects like Snowy Hydro 2 are significantly cheaper and quicker to build than a nuclear power plant.
Tasmania is near as makes no difference 100% renewable now. South Australia is rapidly heading in the same direction. It's going to take time, but eventually the entire country will get there - because renewable power is just cheaper.
Hydro is not modern technology - humans have been using it for thousands of years. Coal is far more recent, and we never should have switched to it.
Australia could easily run entirely off hydro and we'd be paying less for power than current prices. That won't happen though, because there are even cheaper options than Hydro (solar, for example, is significantly cheaper if you don't need baseload power, and a lot of use cases don't need that).
I agree, it's not possible to run the country off batteries. Nobody (who knows what they're talking about) is suggesting that.
Hydro is great. Problem is we will never have second Snow Hydro, there is no place to build second one. And we also nearly out of places to build hydro generation plants. TAS have some resources but transmission to/from is pita.