ADF General discussion thread

[StevoJH]

As a pro nuclear power advocate if viable alternatives exist then these would be preferable to nuclear primarily due to the waste management issues. Solar and wind are good options but for base load NG is needed. Eventually due to CO2 emissions nuclear will be necessary at some point. Delaying this has one advantage, maybe fusion will arrive (….a big maybe)

Nuclear also costs more (at least in an Australian context) per kWh when taking into account all through life costs.

We should be able to have enough generation capacity through renewables when backed up with sufficient battery capacity via both chemical or kinetic storage.

There has been a lot of work on this, and because of the size of the country and the average weather conditions once you get away from the coast there shouldn't be enough days without either wind or sun to create an issue.

Especially since there are quite a few new gas plants that have been built for when additional capacity may be required.

--------------------

Saying that, it seems a waste to be training nuclear engineers for the Navy and then having no civil career options in Australia for after they leave the military, or even for mid career secondments. Huge risk of brain drain to overseas.

 

[SamB]

Nuclear also costs more (at least in an Australian context) per kWh when taking into account all through life costs.

We should be able to have enough generation capacity through renewables when backed up with sufficient battery capacity via both chemical or kinetic storage.

There has been a lot of work on this, and because of the size of the country and the average weather conditions once you get away from the coast there shouldn't be enough days without either wind or sun to create an issue.

Especially since there are quite a few new gas plants that have been built for when additional capacity may be required.

--------------------

Saying that, it seems a waste to be training nuclear engineers for the Navy and then having no civil career options in Australia for after they leave the military, or even for mid career secondments. Huge risk of brain drain to overseas.

Someone mentioned energy density. It makes sense to place compact reactors or the like closer to urbane areas but where you can place infrastructure next to renewables it would also make sense.

 

[old faithful]

Would you mind naming them. Looking for work now. Got made redundant recently

Have sent you a PM, so as not to railroad this thread.

 

[76mmGuns]

Hi all,

I have a question which will show my non defence industry status...

** How much of military development does the country it occurs in actually own or keep?

For example, Boeing Australia is developing the Ghost Bat in conjunction with the Australian Air Force. But Boeing is an American multinational company. Is the Ghost Bat really an Aussie devlopment, or is Australia simply the location Ghost Bat is developed, and GB is really Boeing's, which makes it more American?

Boeing sweetens its Polish F-15EX offer with local deals, ‘Ghost Bat’

The company hosted an industry day event in Warsaw in an effort to include local companies in a prospective aircraft sale.

www.defensenews.com

Boeing just sweetened their offer to Poland by adding the Ghost Bat to their F15EX's. That implies GB is Boeings first, maybe Australia's a distant second.

 

[Bob53]

The costs to keep a 90 day supply were quoted as 20bn over a 4 year period hence the decision against it

Once the stock gets sold it’s paid for by the consumer…

 

[Bob53]

Nuclear also costs more (at least in an Australian context) per kWh when taking into account all through life costs.

We should be able to have enough generation capacity through renewables when backed up with sufficient battery capacity via both chemical or kinetic storage.

There has been a lot of work on this, and because of the size of the country and the average weather conditions once you get away from the coast there shouldn't be enough days without either wind or sun to create an issue.

Especially since there are quite a few new gas plants that have been built for when additional capacity may be required.

--------------------

Saying that, it seems a waste to be training nuclear engineers for the Navy and then having no civil career options in Australia for after they leave the military, or even for mid career secondments. Huge risk of brain drain to overseas.

I’m not entirely convinced it costs more yet. As for an Australian context…does that mean nuclear is cheaper but we make it more expensive because of the backward way we do things? One thing I see with renewables is that the opp cost of the land and corridors being used is never taken into account. It all sounds wonderful but I haven’t seen anything to realistically suggest batteries can carry the load. As for gas stations…none are getting built. I’m not certain about other states but gas Newport was commissioned about 1980 …500mw and Gas Jeeralang 1979 …which is 450mw are It going to run for ever. Coal fired Loy Yang A …2200mw …30% of Victoria’s electrical generation is due to close around 2034. Yallourn with about 20% of victorian out put 1400mw due to close in 2028. If my maths is correct the lights are going off.

 

[Todjaeger]

Hi all,

I have a question which will show my non defence industry status...

** How much of military development does the country it occurs in actually own or keep?

For example, Boeing Australia is developing the Ghost Bat in conjunction with the Australian Air Force. But Boeing is an American multinational company. Is the Ghost Bat really an Aussie devlopment, or is Australia simply the location Ghost Bat is developed, and GB is really Boeing's, which makes it more American?

Simple question, but I suspect the answer is rather complex, with the shortest, easiest answer being, "it sort of depends..."

As I understand it, the answers you are after are quite dependent on what the respective national laws are, especially the IP laws as well as military/defence law, since some countries (like the US in particular) have enacted laws which regulate defence and defence tech access and dissemination. It is likely that under Australian law, the IP developed by Boeing Australia through R&D is subject to Australian IP laws and control, even though Boeing Australia is a subsidiary of the US company Boeing. In practice, this would likely mean that the parent company Boeing could take profits (earned by Boeing Australia) generated by production and sales of Ghost Bat, but Australia itself could likely block or restrict sales and/or export of the Ghost Bat and related tech. Of course Australia's ability to block or restrict Boeing Australia in such a way would be dictated by what Australian law is in effect. I am uncertain if Australia currently has equivalents to US laws like ITAR or AECA, but I suspect there is at least something on the books.

OTOH the situation could also be a bit more complicated if any of the funding Boeing Australia used for the R&D came from the US or the US gov't, as that could give the US a stake in the tech. IIRC this happened with CEA, where the US gov't provided some funding for CEA to work on AusPAR which was to be a sort of follow-on to the CEA FAR AESA.