I would like to support the comments of Mr Fell (CCN381).
Blind Freddy, Mr Fell and I are in agreement about our present energy policy.
It is an inconvenient truth, ignored by the believers, that renewable, intermittent electricity generation (solar and wind) do not constitute a full replacement for coal or nuclear simply because they are intermittent and require prohibitively expensive storage to give dependable electricity.
That is not to say that renewables do not have a place in the energy generation mix.
While Mr Fell smiled at reading the announcement of the Waratah Super Battery, I felt somewhat depressed, as this almost doomed-to-fail policy will cost us, the taxpayers, probably in the form of blackouts and permanent high costs.
An old adage for investment management is: do not put all your eggs in one basket – diversification reduces risk.
This applies equally in regards to the options available for replacement of fossil fuels.
Nuclear has the big disadvantage in disposal of waste.
This is a major reason why nuclear is shunned in Australia.
It was made illegal before we understood the full effect of carbon dioxide emissions.
However, times have changed.
The manageable risk of nuclear is a lesser risk than the inevitability of harmful heating effects if the world continues to emit carbon dioxide in large quantities.
It is time for Australia to re-appraise nuclear as a part of the energy generation mix.
Email, Mar 11
Charles Hemmings, Woy Woy