|
Just kidding brisbane is poo poo and full of poo poo people
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:03 |
|
|
# ? May 23, 2024 13:40 |
|
It's always a nice day in Brisbane
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:03 |
|
Also. Lol you are jealous of our superior Queensland genes. *thumps chest and drinks four x*
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:05 |
|
I think you mean clinical sub-retarded population
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:07 |
|
EvilElmo posted:Greens selling out their core values to expand their vote to the wider public? That'd never happen! Funny that a hack apologising for a Stalinist party tries (and fails) to obliquely invoke 1984.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:08 |
|
EvilElmo posted:Greens selling out their core values to expand their vote to the wider public? That'd never happen! To be fair, this would actually be a good thing. I really don't care if the Greens sell out the core values which are misinformed.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:14 |
|
Shakugan posted:To be fair, this would actually be a good thing. I really don't care if the Greens sell out the core values which are misinformed. Yeah check this out. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-07/di-natale-breaks-greens-policy-on-genetically-modified-crops/7073086 quote:"The concerns are less around human health and much more around the application of the technology when it comes to giving farmers choice, ensuring that farmers are able to produce a non-GM product if they choose, making sure we don't use this technology simply to drive up the use of more herbicides and pesticides, which is not which is not good land management," he said. Careful now, this obviously heralds Winston Di Natale turning Australia into Boat Launch One.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:17 |
|
I await the shitstorm when Richard goes pro-nuclear.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:19 |
|
The out of hand dismissal of nuclear power is one of the most idiotic positions of leftist parties the world over.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:43 |
|
120 new posts overnight, what ha... oh, right.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:49 |
EXAKT Science posted:The out of hand dismissal of nuclear power is one of the most idiotic positions of leftist parties the world over. I actually conversed with Scott Ludlam about this, and he convinced me that nuclear power is not right for Australia. It's not needed, it will take too long, the risks are too high compared to other generation methods and as long as there is humans in control of the systems, there will always be a giant glaring weak spot. That's not to say it's not right for other nations, but it's not right for Australia.
|
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:58 |
In news that I swear isn't from the onion, Abbott tells turnbull to keep promises http://www.afr.com/news/tony-abbott-calls-for-malcolm-turnbull-to-lay-out-budget-repair-plan-20160105-gm027k
|
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 02:59 |
|
Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Nooo! IT'S SUPER DUTTON!quote:HE has a nodding kind of mumble that gives the impression he is harmless. A middle-aged man in a blue suit, with nothing much to contribute.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 03:00 |
|
This is coolquote:Western Australia would not be able to privatise its electricity assets “even if they gave it to them for nothing” because the popularity of rooftop solar panels has made state-owned power stations unprofitable, a renewable energy expert has said. Could be that we start seeing the 'death spiral' of the power grid over there as they keep introducing more tariffs to support the costs of running an increasingly underused network.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 03:06 |
|
Hope so. Max solar power ahoy. Now we just need solar V6s and I'm made.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 03:17 |
|
EvilElmo posted:Greens selling out their core values to expand their vote to the wider public? That'd never happen! hey dude how goes the change from within
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 03:38 |
|
Frogmanv2 posted:I actually conversed with Scott Ludlam about this, and he convinced me that nuclear power is not right for Australia. It's not needed, it will take too long, the risks are too high compared to other generation methods and as long as there is humans in control of the systems, there will always be a giant glaring weak spot. I agree 100%. However, having policy to not involve Australia in any aspect of waste reprocessing and/or storage is real head in the sand stuff after being very responsible for letting the uranium genie out of the bottle.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 04:00 |
|
EXAKT Science posted:The out of hand dismissal of nuclear power is one of the most idiotic positions of leftist parties the world over. You'd fit right in over at r/australia
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 04:07 |
|
A more pressing concern about this alleged "green" energy is the impact that wind turbines are having on local residents. Those things just aren't safe. You aren't taking energy debates seriously unless you consider the health impacts these wind farms and wind turbines have.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 04:39 |
|
Recoome posted:A more pressing concern about this alleged "green" energy is the impact that wind turbines are having on local residents. Those things just aren't safe. You aren't taking energy debates seriously unless you consider the health impacts these wind farms and wind turbines have. indeed *scratches foul scrote* m. quite *stands up from wicker chair, look to horizon with thoughtful hilbily stare*
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 04:48 |
|
Why are people talking about Joyce as Deputy PM today? Did people finally remember Truss existed only to check in on him and find out he died months ago?
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 04:51 |
|
I wouldn't have thought it that controversial that the health impacts of energy generation should be considered.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 04:51 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Why are people talking about Joyce as Deputy PM today? Did people finally remember Truss existed only to check in on him and find out he died months ago? Joyce has come out and said he feels ready to lead. That's about it.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:04 |
|
open24hours posted:I wouldn't have thought it that controversial that the health impacts of energy generation should be considered. wind turbines
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:04 |
|
Recoome posted:wind turbines I'm far more concerned about how ugly they are.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:06 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Why are people talking about Joyce as Deputy PM today? Did people finally remember Truss existed only to check in on him and find out he died months ago? Many months ago.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:07 |
|
open24hours posted:I wouldn't have thought it that controversial that the health impacts of energy generation should be considered. They have been. The point is there are no health concerns regarding wind turbines.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:09 |
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:Why are people talking about Joyce as Deputy PM today? Did people finally remember Truss existed only to check in on him and find out he died months ago? The current leadership bloc has been unsuccessfully stalling for alternatives to Joyce as leader for quite a while and Joyce's statement today is being read as a sign that they've finally run out of time/options, basically.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:15 |
|
starkebn posted:They have been. The point is there are no health concerns regarding wind turbines. Yes and we know this because we took the time to consider the impacts and continue to monitor them.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:28 |
|
Jonah Galtberg posted:You'd fit right in over at r/australia Mostly I'm jealous that your Greens are a functional party rather than a bunch of impotent whiners who couldn't run a campaign to save their lives. Also nuclear power has the highest ratio of power generated to space used of any means of power generation side from hydro and doesn't belch tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to do it. Are there arguments against it and circumstances where it shouldn't be used? Absolutely. The operative phrase in my post was "dismissed out of hand," I.e. because "nukes are scary" or some such bollocks, rather than an actual reasoned argument.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:29 |
|
What do you do with nuclear waste?
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:30 |
|
starkebn posted:They have been. The point is there are no health concerns regarding wind turbines. Yeah tell that to the birds you loving monster
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:30 |
|
Recoome posted:What do you do with nuclear waste? Use it as part of a multistage process to generate more power, and ultimately end up with byproducts that have half-lifes orders of magnitude shorter than what the waste from a single-stage reactor has. Look at India's nuclear program as an example.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:36 |
|
Recoome posted:What do you do with nuclear waste? That's part of the discussion about pro/con of nuclear power. I agree that it a mistake to dismiss nuclear power out of hand and I think the greens need to move to more reasoned position on it and GM rather than holding onto NUKE BAD GM BAD, lest they walk the same ideology over facts path as Labor and Libs. EDIT: I do think nuclear power is probably not the best decision for Australia right now. We probably should have gone nuclear in the 80's and now be replacing it with renewables but lol coal. hooman fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Jan 7, 2016 |
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:47 |
|
EXAKT Science posted:The operative phrase in my post was "dismissed out of hand," I.e. because "nukes are scary" or some such bollocks, rather than an actual reasoned argument. good thing the greens have a very strongly reasoned argument against nuclear power, then. glad we're in agreement
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:49 |
|
EXAKT Science posted:Use it as part of a multistage process to generate more power, and ultimately end up with byproducts that have half-lifes orders of magnitude shorter than what the waste from a single-stage reactor has. Look at India's nuclear program as an example. hooman posted:That's part of the discussion about pro/con of nuclear power. Ah that's cool, I wasn't being snarky or poo poo I actually was legit curious
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:03 |
|
BBJoey posted:good thing the greens have a very strongly reasoned argument against nuclear power, then. glad we're in agreement where can I read about this?
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:21 |
|
hooman posted:That's part of the discussion about pro/con of nuclear power. As I recall, Ludlam went over the reasons the Greens aren't pro-nuclear last year, and it was something along the lines of 'it's better than what we do have now, but it's not better than what we could have now'.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:23 |
|
EvilElmo posted:Greens selling out their core values to expand their vote to the wider public? That'd never happen! lol since when was being anti-GM a core Greens policy you sad flaccid man. Here is what Scott Ludlam recently wrote about nuclear power in Australia. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/06/call-me-emotional-if-you-like-but-my-anti-nuclear-arguments-are-based-on-evidence
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:23 |
|
|
# ? May 23, 2024 13:40 |
|
Yeah, prior to the early 1990's, we would have likely come out ahead by investing in nuclear technology. At this point the technology is getting good enough and we have so much free open space that investing in renewable energy like solar thermal is so obviously the best long term idea. That said, I'm all in favour of nuclear waste being stored in Australia. We make money selling uranium to the world, the correct thing to do is to take responsibility for disposing of it. If we don't want to bury it again here, then we shouldn't be digging it up in the first place. edit: Beaten by Ludlum linkage.
|
# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:28 |