As the shift away from fossil fuels gathers pace, the Coalition has turned to an emissions-free technology with a long and contentious history — nuclear fission. These are the numbers you should keep in mind when thinking about its place in Australia’s energy transition.

I encourage you to at least glance through the article before you leave a comment that other commenters will dunk on you for.

  • psud@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    We are talking in the Australian context where the dams were built in the '50s for hydro power.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        because of their huge risk of catastrophe

        Dams help prevent natural disasters. Preventing flooding is famously why the Aswan High Dam was built in Egypt, and the presence of flood-managed dams in SEQ is possibly one of the reasons we were affected so much less badly here in 2022 than Northern NSW, where the dams are comparatively small, ungated, and have no active management during flood conditions.

        I agree that dams are not great ecologically and we should avoid building them, especially given how incredibly useful solar and wind power are (though wind has its own ecological problems). But it’s not especially useful to say that they have a “huge risk of catastrophe”.

        • psud@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          There are a class of American privately owned dams that recently got press for being at risk of catastrophe. I think that’s what informed that lemming

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Just take them down? With what people paid with what money? Keep in mind that these dams are our best black start capability, that they have important use