Thread by @yestiseye

First re: strategy - don't over promise… that just leads to regret. So this is where the 💯%RE thing is a big mistake, which let's face it is fundamentally about 0% nuclear. And my take is that we need nuclear *with* renewables to make this work ultimately. 2/x @simonahac

There's other stuff: other techs, non-electricity emissions,… But clearly nuclear is the big bogeyman here so I'll focus on that. + the next decade or two will make clear(er) the difference in results b/w those that insist on effectively only relying on renewables vs those… 3/x

…using nuclear+renewables+whatever-else. i.e. California vs New Jersey with New York in the middle somewhere.
This strategy then is a long play. And we must recognise there will be "collateral damage" like X% loss of the Great Barrier Reef, where X>10 4/x

I don't like it, but I don't get a different choice.
Now on the economics: (very) briefly the LCOE argument that renewables are cheaper doesn't hold up at deep decarbonisation levels - lots of existing work there that a tweet tangent can explore. 5/x

Also I'll get more on to nuclear eventually but context is important. If the economic model is renewables+storage vs same but with nuclear, the latter has self-evidently better economics. You need significantly less storage & transmission capacity for starters. 6/x

I want to point out first #InsightSBS's upcoming ep on Narrabri CSG #MustWatchTV & hoping there's some lateral thought to the gas plant component of the #Liddell replacement. This perverse situation arises in large part b/c the 💯%RE approach… 7/x

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @insightSBS view original on Twitter

…is all tactics & hardly any strategy - when you peel back the PR spin of the multitude of "plans" there's nothing there. But that's enough negativity.
How does nuclear fit (in theory) to Australia's energy mix? Consider the Latrobe Valley as a testcase: multi-GWs brown coal 8/x

With a decade+ long plan, you phase out *all* the coal plants and site a multiple of GW-sized Gen-III plants (give South Koreans the contract, since they're the best at it). The ready-made workforce there get upskilled building it, and send their children off to University. 9/x

Who then return to run the plant their parents built. This is what a #JustTransition looks like in reality, not well meaning but ultimately empty promises. Fewer jobs at the nuke plant wrt coal mines+plant, but *better* jobs. Higher paid & able to support secondary economy. 10/x

But this is moot while nuclear remains illegal here. So that *has* to happen first.
Any time you want to state 1) support of de-illegalising nuclear in Australia & 2) supporting people like @CSUnucmed & Lucas Heights against @AusConservation anti-nuke woo, pls feel free. 11/x

There's a side effect to legal nuclear energy in Oz: those of us who are pro‑nuke will have to "put-up or shut-up". No lazy free time to hassle anyone we disagree with; no trolling of internet forums; dog catches car.
Everybody wins. 😉 12/x

Now the politics is a conundrum and I don't have crystal ball. But the whole politics of climate change is such - mostly b/c the right wing don't like being bullied by hippies & Naomi Klein… poor things.
There is a scenario however where *conservatives* solve climate change.13/x

And do so by relying in large part on nuclear. And then rub it in for the Left for the rest of this century.
My thinking is that you don't need to "believe" in climate change, but still get low CO₂ & other pollution reduction, and get the Right on board with nukes. 14/x

The Left then come part way, even though many of them can keep hating on nuclear, because they really do think action on climate change is The Most Important Thing. I'm not saying this strategy is fool-proof, but there is one. 15/x

It looks a bit like these weridos in Ontario, where even the NDP candidate is falling over herself to support the nuke plants. 16/x

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @yestiseye view original on Twitter

So I'm off now. And will be watching Champions League later, so only semi-sentient on Sunday & in bed by 8. But happy to respond over the next few days to the many potential tangents I refused to go down in this thread (for all our sakes). 17/17 -fin-

One last thing: Strategy/Tactics
Nuclear has a strategy that's part of our long term future. It's just that the choices it has as far as tactics go are a bit crap. They are all basically variants of trying to convince a small child it needs to eat the vegetables. Not fun.