While thinking in the shower this morning (and when you don’t follow nonsense like the World Cup, your mind has time), I wondered what the excuse is for Australia NOT having nuclear power. As an island, my thought is that it has its own, isolated electrical grid. Therefore, importing power to cover the hoax would be impossible. Here’s wicked’s reasoning:
Australia currently has no nuclear facilities generating electricity. Australia has 31% of the world’s uranium deposits and is the world’s third largest producer of uranium after Kazakhstan and Canada. At the same time, Australia’s extensive, low-cost coal and natural gas reserves have historically been used as strong arguments for avoiding nuclear power.
That’s interesting. Ontario has easy access to low cost (American) coal and natural gas, but we had the great acid rain fable that made us close down all our coal generators. Is Aussie coal so much cleaner?
On Tuesday evening, July 25, Ned Potter of ABC News did athree-minute segment purporting to show how acid rain (caused bysulphur dioxide — SO2 — emissions from Midwestern utilities)was killing trees in Camel’s Hump Mountain in Vermont.
Aerial photos showed a pattern of dead or dying tall spruce trees. We were informed acid rain was sterilizing the soil. An environmentalist guided us through the devastation. It was potent TV.
It was also a hoax.
So how about it, my Aussie friendly fakeologists? What can you dig up on this one? Why aren’t my mates paying the usurious nuclear tax like I am?
via Nuclear power in Australia – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
On a related note and on the opposite side of the spectrum, the hoax is swinging the other way at the moment in France’s nuclear fable narrative.
A proposed French energy law seeks to “find a balance” between the needs of the world’s biggest atomic generator and the country’s ambition to cut nuclear dependence.