Petrol Prices Rant.

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

Solution-Nuclear power for the win! Then we can use all the spare oil we have saved to power our automobiles!Waits for angry comeback

I'll spare you the angry comeback by saying that it's not that bad an idea but unfortunately there is such a large NIMBY mentality -particularly in Australia- which prevents serious discussion on the subject.

Sure it's by o meas a perfect system but we're fast running out of options, also safety standards and technology have come a long way from the days of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. The only sticky problem we're still left with is waste, but given the advances in technology that go along with further proliferation this may become less of an issue in the future.

 

[|Matt|]

The only sticky problem we're still left with is waste, but given the advances in technology that go along with further proliferation this may become less of an issue in the future.

I wonder what would happen if we fired drums of it at the sun .

Or maybe useless stars? (on a slightly more serious note).

 

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

And then either die from a giant explosion or get cancer and die a slow and painful death.

Ironically we're coming up on the 20th anniversary of the Piper Alpha disaster and I'm pretty sure the emissions from coal and oil fired power stations, car exhausts and petrochemical plants aren't all sunshine and lollipops either.

 

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

Or maybe useless stars? (on a more serious note).

What, like Bec Cartwright?

 

[red death]

I'll spare you the angry comeback by saying that it's not that bad an idea but unfortunately there is such a large NIMBY mentality -particularly in Australia- which prevents serious discussion on the subject.

Sure it's by o meas a perfect system but we're fast running out of options, also safety standards and technology have come a long way from the days of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. The only sticky problem we're still left with is waste, but given the advances in technology that go along with further proliferation this may become less of an issue in the future.

lets get a practical all electric car first then see if we can generate enough electricity through renewables like wind/solar/geothermal/waves etc before we go to nuclear to generate. Not that I'm dismissing it entirely!

 

[Sps.]

Ironically we're coming up on the 20th anniversary of the Piper Alpha disaster and I'm pretty sure the emissions from coal and oil fired power stations, car exhausts and petrochemical plants aren't all sunshine and lollipops either.

Shit happens.

 

[jrewing]

Lets get real here aren't there other pressures which we should be more concerned about? I for one am more concerned with things like the increased cost of living and buying my first home.

Unfortunately, petrol is a cost of living with flow on effects through to transport costs. It shits me though when because of associated costs other contributors in the chain jack their prices up above their true costs. Fucking thieving supermarket chains and airlines...

Another eg. of the lil person getting screwed is rising borrowing costs of money for financial institutes. The upper management will do anything to make their company better last years profit results, hence seeing them lift rates far further than official rates. But that is capitalism for you.

 

[lucky13]

can someone explain to a dumb blacksmith how a nuclear submarine or ship works....as in, do they have a reactor on board?

 

[red death]

...Piper Alpha disaster ...

sorta pale in comparison to Chernobyl though.

 

[Oz_Ash]

Rather then looking to cut 5c off the excise we should be lookin for other fuels to run our cars such as Ethanol and Gas.

The problem with ethanol is that farmers are growing crops to produce ethanol where they would previously have grown food crops which is one of the factors leading to global food shortages and price hikes.

 

[red death]

can someone explain to a dumb blacksmith how a nuclear submarine or ship works....as in, do they have a reactor on board?

Indeed they do, powering a steam turbine as I recall. But they're not made in car size yet.

 

[stoff]

I'm not sure you do Ben. The govt has not put the price up or down, the market does that. It's called capitalism. The govt has made no change to the tax arrangements re fuel I'm aware of since being elected.

Then again if you really do understand Rudd's plans, can you fill the rest of us in please.

Rudd secretly plans to nationalise all fuel infrastructure, using the profits to offset the removal of tariffs. Or maybe not.

 

[|Matt|]

Rudd secretly plans to nationalise all fuel infrastructure, using the profits to offset the removal of tariffs. Or maybe not.

Word on the street is that to battle inflation, Rudd plans to increase GST to 45%.

 

[lucky13]

Indeed they do, powering a steam turbine as I recall. But they're not made in car size yet.

so when folks talk about nuclear cars, i assume they mean electric cars (with the electricity coming from nuclear power plants)?

 

[Tomas]

Solution-Nuclear power for the win! Then we can use all the spare oil we have saved to power our automobiles!Waits for angry comeback

You think so. Australia is SERIOUSLY (highlighted for impact) positive in Natural Gas and Uranium, yet they play only a tiny tiny part of our infrastructure....

I would have thought some government somewhere along the line would have seen the trillion dollar prospects of all that uranium buried in australian soil and reuduced Australian dependancy on oil.

Not shipping uranium overseas = fucking gold.
Reduce oil price dependancy and sensitivity = brilliant.
Convince the greenies that we can entirely account for all energy lost from system = what a plan!
Make australia a serious energy positive country, not entirely dependant on oil = fuckin golden.

 

[downhillerBen]

Ok then, obviously you guys are to touchy on this topic and i just wanted to put in my opinions but obviously i'm wrong so i'm keeping out of this, i don't know rudds plans and honestly i'm not a politics person so ignore my comments..

And gimme a bit of a break i'm alot younger than any of youse, but i still stand by my opinions that the price is to high, apart from that discard my opinions..
And i don't exactly like being called a dumbfuck either, mate

 

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

sorta pale in comparison to Chernobyl though.

Theres only ever been one Chernobyl though and that was down to Soviet ingenuity. Explosions in the oil and gas industry are a bit more frequent and whilst their after-effects may not be as long-lasting they can still be quite devastating.

How much environmental damage has been caused by ship-wrecked tankers for instance. Or Saddam Hussein's big well burn-off after the first gulf war? How many Chinese miners die every year trying to fuel the power stations that are poisoning the lungs of their compatriots? How many Nigerian villages have been wiped out by exploding pipelines?

I'm not trying to whitewash chernobyl, just stating that our current methods of energy production are in no way 'safe'

 

[L.P.]

maybe fuel tax's should increase, and the extra profit put towards better, and/or cheaper public transport.

For example....
It only costs me about $2 less to take the train to uni, on concession prices, rather than driveing my 4x4 ute into uni alone. but driving saves 30 minutes.

really, if public transport was a viable option, it would solve a lot of problems.

 

[Breaka]

The problem with ethanol is that farmers are growing crops to produce ethanol where they would previously have grown food crops which is one of the factors leading to global food shortages and price hikes.

I think that's a bit of a myth. I had a look at some figures which came from that world food shortage meeting that was held not so long ago. I can't remember the exact figures but it didn't actually indicate that was the case. But then again these figures came from an American farmer, so they could be skewed

 

[LJohn]

sorta pale in comparison to Chernobyl though.

Chernobyl was human error. They bypassed safety interlocks designed to prevent meltdown. I'm not sure why, but I was under the impression that specialist staff were not there and they were experimenting. Basically, a big cock-up not the fault of the reactor itself.

It is MUCH cleaner in terms of air-born pollutants as well. As soon as they figure out what to do with the waste it's by far the best option. AFAIK a lot of Europe use it to great effect.

Firing it into space would be great, but it costs so much per unit mass to fire anything up there, there is no way it would be economically viable. The synroc solution is much better.

And Rudd's solution to the energy crisis failed when he realised he couldn't subsidise Australia's electricity grid with the solar power generated by the sun he apparently thought shone out his arse.