I suspect what youâd see in polling is that thereâs a huge portion of the population who will support any action, they just want action. So youâll get a big chunk of people who say they want wind, solar, nuclear or thousands of hamsters in wheels. Just as long as it isnât coal.
Need to be careful to not conflate a yes on nuclear meaning a no on renewables.
Iâm pro on the desal plant. The next time we get a severe prolonged drought, in what has become the largest city of Australia, weâll be ready. And we might be able to maintain greenery round the home to maintain a cooler temperature, be outside even.
There are water wars elsewhere, some of which have spilled into armed conflict.
Arenât they spreading the cost over 60 years now instead of 20 odd? If renewables can provide the energy required for desal itâs probably not the worst thing to have in your arsenal. 455gigalitres provided to catchments since 2012, fark knows whatâs in store for us over the next 20 except that it wonât be good.
The loooooong game is the only game, Iâd rather governments put their balls on the line with (realistic) infrastructure than quick fixes for electoral purposes.
If our current weather patterns continue, that desal plant in Gippsland will become very important in the next year or so. I argued then and will argue now that you need long term thinking in infrastructure.
Same with the question on nuclear power generation, as I donât see building these as a problem and if it takes 30 years to get a good solution then just plan for it and do it.
We have just been in Palm Cove and went out to the reef, and if it is not in danger then I am missing something. The diving instructors on our boat told me that diving is the wrost they have seen it in the last 20 years. They say that in the next years diving the reef will probably disappear as diving is better eslewhere.