Gee the mad right at the centre for not so independent studies reckon nuclear can be done cheaper - yeah? Ok, then why the hell is the party of free enterprise and privatisation proposing it be government funded and owned? Surely the private sector would be champing at the bit to build nukes if they are so cost effective. Just throw out all the crap they profess to believe about small government and private ownership, anything to support nukes.
Ah the mad right and rwnjs have done a number on you again. I don’t think they’re gonna build anything. It’s all to get a (non nuclear) reaction from you
As for the constitution, I could have told you the Commonwealth can over-ride the states. Even where the power is clearly a state power in the constitution the Commonwealth still wins
Well good for you but you didnt
- the taxing power and Victoria's challenge to the Commonwealth taking over income taxation after WWII made this obvious.
Well I wasn’t around then to witness that. But I’ll take your word for it
But, that means nothing because nuclear power is prohibited under Commonwealth law.
Yeah, that’s why I said legislation would be needed to overrule the states h that have banned nuclear power and they can add in the Commonwealths ban on it.
They would need to change that first, although I wouldn't trust the ALP not to let it through the Senate. If the ALP hold their line on this there is no chance it would pass and that's the end of the story. Doesn't matter anyway, this is a policy to extend the life of fossil fuels not build nukes.
So you’ve said one thousand time
By the way Willo, if you knew something about climate change and the causes you could answer all of the above questions for yourself.
Well seeing they were “projections” I reserve the right to ask a question or two. Or even make a statement if I want to.
If it’s a projupection I believe putting some dates in would lend to some credibility.
Your misreading is revealing: it is a projection not a prediction or suggestion - they project from the science and the data.
Ah that’s why I said it was a “projection” in my first reply. Obviously you missed that. Again.
And if the data changes? That projection is voided, isn’t it. See if you care to answer this….
So will the all the $billions being spent on renewables in Australia, how much have those projections changed?
Will/ have those “hotter” days dropped I temperature? Have the droughts started to cease? Have we had more rainfall? Have we had less floods?
Or do we need to spend $ trillion more before those projections kick in and /or change.
Funny h
They said hotter days in summer not hot days in summer, even you should be able to work out the difference
Yeah, well where I was born and raised, summer days were *smile* hot. January 16 2019 was 46.3 degC. Is that just hot? Or very hot or hotter than it’s been before. But not since. When I was a kid (1960/70s) we had extreme heat for weeks at a time. I’m talking over 100deg F as measured back then
So don’t tell what hot or hotter is.
. Sea level rise and acidification are already happening, it is documented (see coral bleaching for a start).
Within the Great Barrier Reef? I thought that was mainly due to the crown of thorns starfish. Well there you go,now I find out it’s not.
So with all the renewables in Australia going in, what temperatures, sea levels, snow depth etc will we see in 2030 and at net zero in 2050?