Skip to main content

Australia Nuclear Update

By Eric McErlain
Yesterday, we gave you a general update on happenings in Australia around nuclear energy, and it's clear now that the debate is really heating up. Click here to participate in an online debate that's been sparked by comments by New South Wales Premier Bob Carr that Australia needs to have a national debate on nuclear energy.

The Skeleton is one blogger who is ready for an honest discussion on the topic:
It'’s time to more beyond the screeching of extreme conservationists and at least have a civilised public discussion on the issue. I can't see that nuclear power used properly would be any worse than a coal-fired power station. Time for people to stop going off their respective rockers and discuss the factual pros and cons.
And in many ways, it's clear that nuclear energy has some important advantages over other elements of the fuel supply.

Here's Leslie Kemeny of the International Nuclear Energy Academy, writing in the Australian:
Japan's 54 nuclear power stations alone save the equivalent of Australia's total greenhouse emissions. And the secret of this success is uranium fuel imported from Australia. Over a critical window of the next 20 years no other energy technology can achieve such results and satisfy the immense growth in energy demand by the world's developing nations.
For more from reporter Dave King, click here.

Thanks to reader Matthew Bohun and Pharoz for the links.

UPDATE: Here's more from the Brisbane Courier-Mail.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Matthew66 said…
The electronic forum on the ABC's website has now closed. The forum canvassed a wide variety of views - 360 responses were posted. The ABC will likely keep the responses on its site for six months or so, so there is plenty of opportunity to read the different threads. It was interesting to see the wide variety of responses. Unfortunately, many contributors based their arguments on outdated scientific opinions, or just plain prejudice. I was also disappointed to read that Bob Carr, the NSW Premier who started the ball rolling, is willing to have Nuclear Power plants in his State, but does not want to accept responsibility for managing used nuclear fuel. I don't think you can do one without the other.
June 8, 2005 at 4:47 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

By
You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...
1 comment
Read more

Wednesday Update

By
From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more