Banning the development of a nuclear power industry in Australia on the basis of the Chernobyl disaster, would be like banning PO Cruises on the basis the Titanic sank.
This was one of the many comments I made when I was part of a panel at the 'Noosa Long Weekend' Festival discussing Australia's energy future.
The two hour session has now be cut down to about an hour and can be heard on Radio
National's Big Ideas program click here: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2007/1986711.htm
I'm one of five panelists and described by Robyn Williams as "barracking for technology".
The broadcast can be heard on radio again next Saturday at 7pm and will be on air during the Radio National Summer programming later in the year.
----------------------------------
According to the Radio National Website:
Australia 2050: A New Energy Future?
Hydrocarbons, nuclear or renewables? The temperature is rising on this debate. Join five disputants and an erudite ringmaster for a passionate verbal spar. Can coal be truly clean? Will nuclear energy solve our base load problems? Is talk about wind and sun just a lot of hot air? Richard Neville, who has challenged conventional thinking for 40 years, will argue the toss with supporters of coal, nuclear power and renewable energy. Recorded at the Noosa Longweekend Festival.
Guests
Richard Broinowski
Author
John Harries
Australian Nuclear Association
Jennifer Marohasy
Institute of Public Affairs
Chris Reidy
Institute of Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney
Doug Holden
Australian Coal Association
Listen here: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/bigideas/stories/2007/1986711.htm
Dave Bath; re “confused” I only wish to point out the vast gulf between having concepts on paper and practice in the factory after working round a variety of Australian industry with a lot of man made hazards.
In anticipation of preliminary reports on the Chernobyl disaster I guessed the engineers had an out of phase response to rapidly increasing reaction peaks based on a whole lot of dumb instruments we had in process control at the time. Real time handling of process conditions anywhere was an “illusion” when as I observed most engineers ignored the rate of change knob up front in our automation of remote valves. Analysing a series of oscillations after they settled was always much easier particularly when you don’t believe the accuracy of a remote sensor or two.
Many brand new installations get swamped with spills before design standards are met but there were some odd exceptions. One cryovac natural gas rig we constructed was completely cut up and rebuilt under our electrical gang before it was passed into its high pressure operation for liquid mass storage. Another plant eventually blew up at Sale in Victoria.
Dave; the technical considerations must start at ground level. My dad and his mate once had a biz that specialized in concrete foundations for major commercial projects. My mate is up with the same sort of industry here and is often concerned with our technical standards in a wide range of applications in the building game. There is reason to worry about everything we make when we are so short on practical experience.
What has the Haneff case got in common with the Gunn’s Pulp Mill Project apart from big questions on ethics? There are very few independent technical experts in all crucial areas when it comes to good advice for the general population.
When a plasterer at our common room dining table recalled leaving his battered leather Gladstone bag containing a big pay packet under the public bar in a pub by way down the avenue by a busy intersection we saw a sudden reaction to a need to shower and change followed by a mad dash. Little did he know it was already in hand as the astute barmaid had heard his ticking travel clock. The whole area was cordoned off and the bomb disposal team had a double barrelled shot gun ready to blast that menacing object off the pavement.
The big question is who do you believe the barmaid, the expert system or the harassed looking bloke in splattered boots and shorts?