There should be an internet poll (to save money) asking people if there should have been an enquiry.

$80mil is a joke. No wonder we have no f*cking money.

That's what i mean. 80 mil is a freaking waste of mney ,yet the media havent said it is. If it labour we will hear no end about it. Also did anyone notice abott saying his grocery code of conduct would've stopped all the worlds ills atm. Yep he went there :lol:

I think Senator Carr said it best when he pointed out that the LNP have set a dangerous precedent with these politically motivated vote scoring witch hunts

The question will be whether Labor will be the 'bigger man' and avoid the tit for tat royal commission, when Abbott & Co are inevitably booted in 12 months. I think they should be and promote it as 'not lowering themselves' to the level of the LNP while saving the taxpayer millions (which would also help to nullify the parroted myth of the LNP being 'better economic managers')

Edited by Murdoch Rags Ltd: 11/7/2015 10:22:51 AM

I think you're a bit over confident on the LNP being given the boot. Labor are once again trying there best to lose.

I guess there will always be 'firsts', which in the LNP's case will mean reversing the historically worst political polling, since it began.

People losing it over cutting funding for alternatives. Even as a proponent of mining I think the LNP has gone over the top. They've killed the renewable energy target and this attack on wind turbines is just silly. Not good timing to announce a new coal mine either.

Are the LNP trying to get unelected next year?? Seriously they're become a bunch of do as I say parties. Both parties are the same to appease the same freaking people they both want

We will be a "Pariah" in the eyes of other developed countries so they say, not that it matters.

-PB

Has he gone too far? Yes.
Will people care? No.

Lets face it, if the environment was a major election topic the Greens would have more power.
The Majority dont care where there power comes from, they just want to vote for the guy that gives them more money.
Thats why he can pander to his major funding partners and open more mines for them and help slow down alternative energies.
Many things will lose him this election, this will not be one of them.

I think the Greens are a little too extreme but will likely get more power from this election.

Now abott has said other countries can do these airy fairy ideas but his government should be congratulated on its take on climate change. Geezu christ he is making himself look more a buffon

:lol: oh lordy

Large land mass, small population.

Shit like wind power is a no brainer ffs.

-PB

Or nuclear.

Ill try read it when I get home, but Im sure I saw an article where he was extending his renewable's attack onto the solar power industry as well.
I cant wait to see what the proposed health implications are from solar.

nuclear is fine. I think the major problem a lot of people have is where the hell do you store the waste products??

We've got a vast mostly uninhabited desert to dump our shit in. We're not near any major fault lines (no tsunamis or earthquakes). We've also got shitloads of uranium right under our feet.

We're probably the most equipped nation in the world to deal with nuclear, so the question is why aren't we doing it already?

Because it produces radioactive waste

...which can easily be sealed and stored in that huge desert we've got out the back.

not with the nimbie's we dont . Also we need to make sure that the containers if we do go nuclear arent corresive. Nuclear is brilliant and is effective . Sadly we are beholden to the nimbies

problem with nuclear power is its just really fucking expensive, and knowing how slow construction takes here. it'll probably take a 100 years to finish.

Yup, can only work on it 9-5 no weekends :lol:

-PB

Why have solar panels when you can have radioactive waste

:roll:

Like its that simple.

Nuclear produces far more electricity per dollar invested than solar.

Don't tell me you're a brain-dead hippy who gets frightened when the word "nuclear" is tossed about.

Edited by 433: 14/7/2015 02:01:05 AM

I'm a greens voter and I'd support the development and construction of nuclear power plants in Australia(although i'd still prefer renewables being prioritised). The Greens are generally are notoriously difficult to draw a compromise with so I don't think there will be any movement on this issue soon but there is plenty of party members who would surely support it over fossil fuels.

Anyway, he two reasons it gets a bad rap is Perceived Safety and waste disposal which imo are minor issues in Australia.

Another "Chernobyl" style incident is never going to happen in a western country with proper safety protocols and we can build this in the middle of the desert were the chance of natural disasters (like earthquakes and tsunamis) are between 0 and fuck all.

The disposal of radiocative materials are also a issue we can easily deal with compared to other countries. We've already let the feckin British nuke South Australia a dozen times, it shouldn't be that hard to find a way to store Radioactive waste in a sealed site in the middle of nowhere.

That all said I'd still prefer we spent up on Wind and Solar plants, even if it costs more.

As the Greens supporter here, how do you feel about mining?

Building wind turbines requires a fuck load of mining monzanite to extract Neodymium?

This is why I have to laugh at the political leader Green rhetoric. They're like 'we will close mines' but we want to build shit that requires mining rare earth metals to extract and process a metal that doesn't occur naturally. If only the greenie bandwagoners were so idiotic they'd click on to what a joke current renewables are.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most Nuclear plants near ocean water to provide an endless supply of cooling and as part of the safety protocol?
Being that the plants need to generally turn millions of Gallons water into steam to drive the turbines it would make it too expensive to build a plant in the desert.

In addition I'm sure you lose some of your power output when travelling it long distance.

So we would need to truck in shit loads of water to the desert and the distance between the power and the citys would mean a % of the power generated would be lost anyway.

:lol:

It's not that complex

Nuclear power produces radioactive waste, solar energy produces no pollution

I am a brain dead hippy, more shroom than man etc

Hence use the masses of desert we have to hold the farms.

Only downside to renewables is night time energy drain and how to store/produce it when needed (although things like Tesla's in house battery tech could be a long step towards overcoming that burden for a heap of areas).

-PB