[Peakoil] Uranium power push

[Alex P]

Hi folks,

The current "nuclear debate" is likely going to shape up like this:

First, the Howard Govt pushes uranium. Then when people ask why, Howard 
finally comes clean on Peak Oil.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/energy-debate-must-include-nuclear-
option/2006/06/04/1149359604546.html

I expect they are going to be "open and honest" about Peak Oil, but only 
after they have done the ground work portraying uranium as the only option.

As to why the push for uranium, I can only guess that the big producers 
want to

a) guarantee an expansion of mining in Australia - is the push for uranium 
power an ambit claim?

b) prevent Australia from going down the renewables path as this would be a 
good example to the world and make nuclear less attractive internationally.

c) related to b), hot rocks geothermal in South Australia should be as 
cheap as coal and produce no emissions. After Geodynamics start producing 
power, the nuclear debate will be over (at least for 70 years which is how 
long they could power the whole of Australia for)

Basically, uranium power is only relevant to Peak Oil if it could power our 
transport system. So electrified rail is essential. But the Howard Govt has 
done absolutely nothing for electrified rail and has yet to mention it. ie 
they're only leading public debate for the benefit of uranium producers, 
not for ordinary people whose transport costs are going to explode.

What do we do to shape and alter the debate?

Alex
O4O4873828

ACT Peak Oil
http://act-peakoil.org