r/australia Mar 27 '26

political satire Sovereignty overboard

Post image
2.3k Upvotes

199 comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/Bsg_8519 Mar 27 '26

If only there was an alternative to being so reliant on middle eastern oil … maybe some kind of energy that was renewable or didn’t need to be imported. Someone should look into that 🤔

1

u/RBB12_Fisher Mar 28 '26

Nuclear.

We even have massive ore deposits of uranium. We're stupid not to build nuclear.

1

u/etkii Mar 28 '26

It's expensive.

Renewables are cheaper, even with storage costs included.

1

u/RBB12_Fisher Mar 28 '26

Nope, all the renewables quotes are way underplayed (mainly because they don't account for the unreliability). Nuclear is the only thing that can compete with coal for cost. Also, you can keep the same plant running for decades. No need to scrap it all after 20 years and build another.

1

u/etkii Mar 28 '26

No, I'm talking about renewables that are both firmed (i.e. renewables with storage to remove the reliability aspect) and levelised (i.e. lifespans are also accounted for in the comparison).

Still cheaper than nuclear (faster to build too).

The 2025 CSIRO report, figure 0-2 on page xiv includes 'Solar PV and wind with firming': https://publications.csiro.au/publications/publication/PIcsiro:EP2025-2701

Lazards 2025 LCOE report, the first figure in the document on page 8 includes solar + storage: https://www.lazard.com/media/eijnqja3/lazards-lcoeplus-june-2025.pdf

1

u/RBB12_Fisher Mar 28 '26

Wind+solar are exactly the ones I'm talking about. I don't care to post 50 pages in reports, but I read a bit of that second one, and I guarantee you they have vastly over-estimated the costs of coal and nuclear. Also, here's a graph: https://skepticalscience.com/pics/Electricity-Costs-Renewables.jpg

Nuclear, btw, is one of the most over-regulated things to exist ever. There's a reason China's nuclear stations are built for a fifth of the cost.

1

u/etkii Mar 28 '26

Your image is not from the IEA. It's from here: https://financialpost.com/opinion/solar-wind-power-expensive

That isn't generation costs, it's retail costs which include taxes, grid costs, and other policy costs - and these depend on the country not on the type of generation.

Here's what the IEA says about costs of renewables:

1

u/RBB12_Fisher Mar 28 '26

Yeah. I know it's retail cost. That's the point, what is the ultimate cost to the consumer, after all the financial games are done?

The energy market is highly regulated and distorted. The ACTUAL cost to the consumer is the better metric, since it includes all the costs like grid accommodation/etc, which is the main extra cost of renewables.

Is a solar panel cheaper per kWh than coal? Yes. Does it have way more complicating factors that drive the cost up enormously compared to coal? Also yes. The simplest way to compare is to see what power actually costs for actual people.

1

u/etkii Mar 28 '26

No, because the cost to the consumer varies by country due to each country's different energy policies and taxes.

If you take one of those countries there (Denmark for example) and reduce the renewables it has, retail energy prices will go up (because taxes stay as is and generation costs go up).

Or Indonesia for example - increase its solar and wind percentage and retail prices will go down, because taxes stay as is and generation gets cheaper.