Comment on Nuclear energy is more expensive than renewables, CSIRO report finds
CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 11 months agoIt’s also kind of a slight of hand. Fossil fuels shouldn’t be part of the mix at all, but the article just accepts the premise that they must. If natural gas or other fossil fuels aren’t allowed, then then the economic case for nuclear power is stronger.
As for needing needing natural gas to “fill in the gaps”, that’s just fossil fuel industry propaganda. It’s a non-issue with nuclear power. Whenever electrical demand drops you can just divert the power to make hydrogen/ammonia to store the extra energy or produce zero-emission fertilizer.
barsoap@lemm.ee 11 months ago
The article says “gas”, not “natural gas”. Australia already has plenty of gas infrastructure including pipelines so the situation might be similar as to Germany: First, use natural gas as the one fossil fuel that you’re using precisely because gas plants regulate fast and natural gas can be replaced by synthesised gas, then, once you have enough renewable capacity, actually do the switch. And boy oh boy has Australia potential for renewable generation, they’ll also want to produce tons of hydrogen anyway to smelt (and stop being a 3rd-world style economy that’s exporting raw ore).
CrimeDad@lemmy.crimedad.work 11 months ago
Is this “gas” not a naturally occurring mixture of gaseous hydrocarbons consisting primarily of methane?
Sounds like an excuse to perpetuate the fossil fuel racket.