• manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Australian politicians have been arguing about nuclear energy for decades, and with whats going on now, petty distracting squabbling while state governments are gutting public infrastructure

    The most frustrating thing is the antinuclear party is obviously fine with nuclear power, and nuclear armaments, just look at the aukus submarines

    labors cries about the dangers to our communities and the environment are obviously disingenuous, or they wouldnt be setting a green light for the billionaire robber barons to continue tearing oil and minerals out of the ground (they promise to restore the land for real-sies this time)

    Anyway, a nuclear power plant runs a steam turbine and will never be more than what, 30% efficient?

    • rainynight65@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I would remind you that Aukus is a mess of the Coalition’s making - after they made a mess of the original submarine replacement project under Abbott and Turnbull, insisting on Diesel.

      But for Labor to withdraw from Aukus would cause a shitstorm of unseen proportions.

    • problematicPanther@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      Photovoltaic cells are even less efficient, I think they’re somewhere between 10-20% efficient. I think the way to go would be a solar collector, like the Archimedes death ray, but much much bigger.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        The fantastic thing about renewables is how much they lend themselves to a less centralised model. Solar collector? Sure, why not‽ Rooftop solar on people’s houses? You bet! Geothermal? If local conditions are favourable to it, absolutely!

        Instead of a small number of massive power plants that only governments or really large corporations can operate individuals can generate the power for themselves, or companies can offset their costs by generating a little power, or cities can operate a smaller plant to power what operations in their city aren’t handled by other means. It’s not a one-size-fits-all approach.

        This contrasts with nuclear. SMRs could theoretically do the same thing, but haven’t yet proven viable. And traditional plants just put out way too much power. They’re one-size-fits-all by definition, and only have the ability to operate alongside other modes with the other modes filling in a small amount around the edges.

      • chaosmarine92@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        That is already a thing and it’s called concentrated solar power. Basically aim a shit load of mirrors at a target to heat it, run some working fluid through the target and use that to make steam to turn a turbine. There are a few power plants that use it but in general it has been more finicky and disruptive to the local environment than traditional PV panels would be.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        There are designs for a giant glass cone put in the middle of the desert. Air under the cone gets warmed and it rises up through a couple turbines on its way out of the device.