[Oz-envirolink] Howard considers subsidizing nukes

[hugh spencer]

from  brent_ns at hotmail.com
energyresources at yahoogroups.com

A NUCLEAR power industry appears closer to reality after John Howard hinted
he was prepared to consider subsidising the initial cost.
The Prime Minister cited the findings of a report by the International
Energy Agency which warned that nuclear energy might become necessary as a
result of rising oil prices.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/howard-suggests-hell-foot-bill-for-nuclear-b
lastoff/2006/11/08/1162661756777.html

........................................................



The real tragedy is that the concept of efficiency and energy conservation
seems so totally unacceptable to our 'leaders' - that investment in
centralised short term energy production - nukes - seems the only way
forward ... to them.

NZ is looking at exploiting lignite coal, Alberta nukes and tar sands -
(http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/November2006/08/c2211.html)




As Energyresources moderator Tom Robertson comments....

>So you take the low Energy Returned on Energy Invested (EROEI) of nuclear
>power and combine it with the low EROEI of oil sands and what do you get?

Folks better learn the answers to such questions, because for example,
trying to clean up a nuclear mess when the world is reacting to declining
energy availability due to peak oil could mean it will not be done.  <




 Worst part is that the new energy chairman - a Democrat, is as bad as the
republicans - USA won't require better energy efficiency of Automobiles!!!
bad for business! (he does represent detroit)..


Hugh