StarCore Nuclear’s Post

Benefits of Affordable, Reliable Energy to remote communities. The objective of StarCore Nuclear is to do exactly that for remote off-grid communities around the world, starting in Canada. See the story at https://lnkd.in/gMcp_DyZ

Why is the Australian Labor Party Energy Transition like the Kings New Clothes? All large projects require careful detailed planning and continuity of political support for successful outcomes. Unsurprisingly, when nuclear power stations became politicised in democratic countries during the Vietnam war, approval and construction was delayed and costs increased. Since then, all OECD countries except Australia have come to recognise that nuclear energy is essential to address climate change and either host nuclear power stations or import nuclear energy from neighboring countries. It is also recognised that nuclear project delays and cost increases can be avoided by careful planning. See Massachusetts Institute of Technology https://lnkd.in/gxapnUqS. The Hon. Peter Dutton MP is the first Australian leader to recognise the critical role of nuclear power for Australia, and to commit to its successful implementation. He deserves our support and patience while he carries out the careful planning recommended by MIT. In contrast, the Australian Labor Party ignores the facts and instead are doubling down on their energy "transition". PV solar panels now blanket vast areas of valuable agricultural land. The material consumption, mining and environmental impacts of manufacturing and constructing wind and solar are many times greater than nuclear (UNECE 2022). The tens of thousands of kilometers of new transmission lines forced on rural communities in a vain attempt to firm intermittent wind and solar threatens property rights and political stability. The rushed Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro energy storage project is damaging fragile alpine environments and is too slow and too expensive. The first generation of battery costs are also prohibitively expensive... and require replacement every 10 to 20 years. An entire duplicate energy generation system based on fossil fuels is required to guarantee electricity supply, generating much more GHG emissions than nuclear. At times, the rooftop solar and batteries that you paid for will need to be curtailed, and at other times when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine, businesses and families will be asked to stop using electricity . They call it a demand side response. I call it a supply side failure. Given this massive complexity, it comes as no surprise that energy prices are surging and contributing to a cost of living crisis, imposing needless hardship on families and businesses... and threatening Australia's economy and security. Like the King's new clothes, this failed Australian Labor Party experiment is recognised by all, except by the King and his courtiers.

Best invest in Building Fusion power, space, and maritime propulsion systems and industry, You talk about Nuclear (meaning Fission) and fail to discuss fusion. https://lnkd.in/ge_aeX7M The nuclear fission industry is, ignorant of what's happening around you. Pull your uranium heads out, start adjusting your industry to fusion energy and start preparing to enter the commercially growing fusion energy industry. As it dawns on Earth like the sun. Great Headline Guardian on Nuclear fission. https://lnkd.in/g8sMZtpR Fission is moving towards obsolescence at an accelerated pace, as it is "out of step, out of time, out of place," and merely a temporary industry globally. https://lnkd.in/gbd_mZqk Commercial fusion electrical generation is a promising innovative sustainable and clean energy method. By 2028, Helion is expected to start producing electricity from its first fusion commercial power plant, which will provide electricity to Microsoft. The plant will produce at least 50 MWe after an initial ramp-up period. https://lnkd.in/gY9J3MQY Now see what is happening in the Fusion industry in the world. https://lnkd.in/g9hMBD7a As fission trebles, fuel shortage is increasingly real, https://lnkd.in/gze5rwpr

Nuclear Energy In an era where sustainable energy solutions are paramount, nuclear power stands out as a compelling investment opportunity. Recent observations from France, Europe's nuclear powerhouse, offer valuable insights into the economic and social impacts of nuclear energy infrastructure. At Helix.Earth, we believe these developments align perfectly with our focus on sustainability and the needs of the global under-30 demographic. Helix Transition Index The French Nuclear Landscape France currently operates 56 nuclear reactors across 19 sites, producing up to 76% of the country's electricity. This commitment to nuclear energy, unmatched in the European Union, stems from a strategic decision made in 1973 in response to the oil crisis. The scale of France's nuclear program offers a unique window into the long-term effects of substantial investment in this technology . Leave a comment Economic Benefits for Local Communities One of the most striking observations from the French model is the significant economic boost nuclear power plants provide to local communities: Job Creation : Nuclear power stations are major employers, offering high-skilled jobs directly at the plants and indirectly through supply chain companies. Local Tax Revenue : Municipalities hosting nuclear plants benefit from substantial tax contributions. This influx of funds enables these often rural areas to provide infrastructure and services typically found in much larger urban centers. Community Development : The additional revenue allows for investments in leisure facilities, healthcare centers, and educational institutions, enhancing the overall quality of life for residents. Reduced Local Taxes : Some communities near nuclear plants enjoy lower local tax rates due to the significant contributions from the power companies Helix, by Sowmy VJ is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. . Improving Profitability and Competitiveness The French model demonstrates how a robust nuclear energy sector can enhance national economic competitiveness: Energy Independence : By reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels, countries can insulate themselves from geopolitical energy shocks. Stable Electricity Prices : Nuclear power provides a consistent baseload of electricity, helping to stabilize energy prices for industries and consumers alike. Technological Leadership : Continued investment in nuclear technology fosters innovation, potentially leading to exports of expertise and technology. Helix Transition Strategy Environmental Considerations While nuclear power is not without its challenges, it offers significant environmental benefits: Low Carbon Emissions : Nuclear power plants produce minimal greenhouse gas emissions during operation, aligning with global decarbonization goals. Land Use Efficiency : Nuclear plants have a small physical footprint compared to other forms of energy ge

Nuclear Energy In an era where sustainable energy solutions are paramount, nuclear power stands out as a compelling investment opportunity. Recent observations from France, Europe's nuclear powerhouse, offer valuable insights into the economic and social impacts of nuclear energy infrastructure. At Helix.Earth, we believe these developments align perfectly with our focus on sustainability and the needs of the global under-30 demographic. Helix Transition Index The French Nuclear Landscape France currently operates 56 nuclear reactors across 19 sites, producing up to 76% of the country's electricity. This commitment to nuclear energy, unmatched in the European Union, stems from a strategic decision made in 1973 in response to the oil crisis. The scale of France's nuclear program offers a unique window into the long-term effects of substantial investment in this technology . Leave a comment Economic Benefits for Local Communities One of the most striking observations from the French model is the significant economic boost nuclear power plants provide to local communities: Job Creation : Nuclear power stations are major employers, offering high-skilled jobs directly at the plants and indirectly through supply chain companies. Local Tax Revenue : Municipalities hosting nuclear plants benefit from substantial tax contributions. This influx of funds enables these often rural areas to provide infrastructure and services typically found in much larger urban centers. Community Development : The additional revenue allows for investments in leisure facilities, healthcare centers, and educational institutions, enhancing the overall quality of life for residents. Reduced Local Taxes : Some communities near nuclear plants enjoy lower local tax rates due to the significant contributions from the power companies Helix, by Sowmy VJ is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. . Improving Profitability and Competitiveness The French model demonstrates how a robust nuclear energy sector can enhance national economic competitiveness: Energy Independence : By reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels, countries can insulate themselves from geopolitical energy shocks. Stable Electricity Prices : Nuclear power provides a consistent baseload of electricity, helping to stabilize energy prices for industries and consumers alike. Technological Leadership : Continued investment in nuclear technology fosters innovation, potentially leading to exports of expertise and technology. Helix Transition Strategy Environmental Considerations While nuclear power is not without its challenges, it offers significant environmental benefits: Low Carbon Emissions : Nuclear power plants produce minimal greenhouse gas emissions during operation, aligning with global decarbonization goals. Land Use Efficiency : Nuclear plants have a small physical footprint compared to other forms of energy ge

"On Sunday, Renew Economy published an analysis on the soaring cost of nuclear power by leading economist John Quiggin. On Monday we attempted to post it in our feed on social media. Facebook removed the item, saying it was an attempt to generate clicks by providing misleading information. We’d like to know on what basis this decision was made, but Facebook has yet to provide an answer. ... It appears to be part of a well-funded and orchestrated plan by vested interests, and the fossil fuel industry in particular, to demonise renewables, electric vehicles, battery storage and other emerging competitors. Much of this is amplified in mainstream media, where outrageous claims against renewables – and claims of blackouts, economic collapse and environmental failure – are repeatedly given voice. Quiggin is a leading economist with the University of Queensland. His analysis is based on verifiable facts and data. It points to the most recent nuclear power plant deals done in Europe, in Czechia, and observes that the revealed prices put the cost of nuclear well above the estimate included in the recent CSIRO GenCost report. That observation is important, because the CSIRO and its GenCost report have been repeatedly attacked by the federal Coalition, conservative media, pro-nuclear lobbyists and the fossil fuel industry. They say that the GenCost report puts too high a price on nuclear power and accuse it of cherry-picking. Quiggin notes that the Czechia deal suggests the opposite is true, and confirms the widely held view in the energy industry itself that GenCost underestimates rather than overestimates the costs of nuclear. Nuclear, he says, is really really expensive. But Facebook has now ruled that such analysis is misleading, and it won’t allow its users to view such information. Over the last few months, this has happened on several occasions to Renew Economy and its sister site The Driven. ... Over on The Driven, a story on how EVs are actually suitable for farmers in regional communities, was also pulled down. No explanation was provided. Despite protests, the posts were not reinstated. ... It’s a shocking development, and one that points to the manipulation of information by naysayers and vested interests. Some attribute it to the work of the Atlas Network, a shadowy group with strong Australian fossil fuel links that has campaigned against renewables, the Voice referendum, climate action, and climate protests. Researchers say that the whole point of the Atlas network of organisations and so called “institutes” and think tanks – which this article in New Republic says includes Australia’s Centre for Independent Studies, which has launched loud attacks against institutions such as the CSIRO, AEMO, and renewables in general – is to drown out actual academic expertise. The Atlas Network does this, researchers say, to reduce the capacity for public and government influence with its own corporate propaganda that is dressed up as ..."

Coal kills thousands every year. Nuclear? Zero. Yet somehow, fossil fuel plants get greenlit faster than nuclear ones. Why? Because nuclear energy is shackled by a regulator focused solely on its risks, ignoring the far deadlier alternatives. Meanwhile, coal plants in Hadera and Ashkelon remain Israel's top polluters, responsible for hundreds of deaths annually. According to the OECD, air pollution killed 2,200 Israelis in 2015—seven times more than road accidents. And it’s not just coal. A study comparing energy sources revealed this: for every terawatt-hour of electricity, natural gas kills 2.8 people, oil kills 18.4, and coal takes a staggering 24.6 lives. That’s 8 times more than gas and 2,000 times more than nuclear energy. But the deaths coal causes don’t make headlines. They happen slowly, out of sight: through pollution, disease, and the accelerated deaths of the vulnerable. The 2019 HBO series 'Chernobyl' reignited fears about nuclear energy. Environmental groups like Greenpeace actively oppose it, and the 2011 Fukushima disaster further dented its reputation. But while we let outdated fears dictate policy, coal continues to quietly kill—and the most vulnerable pay the price. It’s time for a unified energy regulator to weigh all energy risks and benefits. Nuclear isn’t the villain, coal is.  And the numbers don’t lie.

I frequently post on the need to reenergize the nuclear industry. Fear and emotion over safety concerns conspired to paint the technology in a bad light, but it was a mistake to allow it to atrophy. The nuclear industry is fond of stating that more people die from solar than nuclear. It sounds like propaganda, but it appears to be true. In the last data I could locate, the 2020 U.S. Bureau of Labor Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries report showed that roofers accounted for 111 of the 5,333 fatal injuries that occurred in 2019. Some percentage of those are related to solar installations. Was the response: stop installing solar? No, it was how can we make installing solar safer? The argument against nuclear now is focused on cost and time. Both are valid. Nuclear power does cost too much and take too long to build. It would be easy - but in error - to conclude that it’s not a technology worth pursuing. Except that both problems are self-inflicted and fixable. The nuclear industry has been over-regulated. That has extended development times. And when you turn your back on technology, it stops advancing, and you lose economies of scale. If we once again consider nuclear a key component of our clean energy strategy, costs will decline as they have with every other clean technology – including solar and wind. The good news is that governments around the world have recognized the importance of nuclear energy and are attempting to breathe new life into the industry. This is long overdue. So, to those who have told me that nuclear was a lost cause: you may want to pay attention to recent events along with the missed clean energy goals that have occurred despite installing record levels of solar. #nuclear #nulcearenergy #nuclearpower #nuclearsafety

Would you pay the equivalent of a cup of coffee for the security of baseload nuclear power? According to the CSIRO GenCost Report, that’s all it takes to switch to nuclear. So, should Australia go caffeine free to go fossil free? The report is pretty simple. Take all the costs associated with building and running power plants, divide it by how much they will produce over their lifetime and that gives a unit cost per MWh (LCOE). The formula itself is easy to replicate and I’ve done online versions for years. The current costs for existing technology are actually collated by a third party engineering firm and can be found in the Aurecon“Cost and Technical Parameters Review” report. For technologies that have not been built in Australia such as large scale nuclear, overseas estimates are used and recalculated for local conditions such as expensive tradesman and to re-skill nuclear experts who previously couldn't find a job in their profession because it's considered illegal. The CSIRO estimates this at $A 8655/kW which is based on a continuous building program of multiple nuclear units. Korea uses this cookie cutter approach to prevent first of a kind (FOAK) cost blow-outs that have been common in the USA, UK and Europe. This low capital cost is about the same as solar thermal ($A 8278/kW) and 1.5 times the cost of offshore wind ($A 5545/kW) which you would have to say is very optimistic and if you could get nuclear at this price, you would build it tomorrow. This leads to an electricity wholesale cost of between $A 155-252/MWh. In Q1 2024, Australian wholesale prices were $A 76/MWh which means it’s a bit of a premium to go nuclear. How much will it cost consumers? In cost per kilowatt hour, it works out to be an 7-17 cent premium. With the average Australia household consuming 19 kilowatt hours per day, that works out to be an additional $A 1.5 to $A 3 per day on top of regular prices. With a total wholesale price of nuclear for consumers at $A 3-5/day this works out to be less than the price of a coffee for the security of nuclear baseload. Would you let CSIRO buy you a coffee now? #nuclear #electricity