Geoff
Actually we report that 76% nuclear is required. That can be from large or small plants
As German press is reporting, the cost of the recent public offerings for new Polish Plants are #,178/kWe for the South Korean plants, $4,671/kWe for the US plants and $4,898/kWe for French plants
CSIRO are unable to point to any small plants that are likely to be built that comes to $16,200/Kwe
We have actively engaged with suppliers and purchasers of new small modular reactors and to our knowledge CSIRO have not.
CSIRO also make extravagant claims for future cost reductions in wind and solar which do not take proper account of future materials demand for renewables
In Match 2022 the IEA produced a revised version of “The Role of Critical Minerals in Clean Energy Transitions”
If renewable generators come to dominate the World’s energy transition then we will have gone from a system of high energy density to high materials demand. This is the inevitable result of going out into the environment to harvest low grade energy to do useful work
An energy system powered by wind and solar technologies differs profoundly from one fuelled by nuclear generators.
From the IEA report wind uses 11 times more materials than conventional nuclear while solar uses 17 times – say 14 times at 50/50 wind and solar. Some small nuclear power plants such as the General Electric BWRX 300 have even halved the materials demand of nuclear energy per unit of installed power.
So, how do you reconcile the difference between our findings?
1) Do more research
2)Take into account who pays the CSIRO bills

Its true we don’t have the anti-nuclear legislation rescinded and that’s a source of bitter disappointment for some coalition pollies.
I think that many pollies are trying to fix things and are doing their best. More and more are becoming better informed.
It would have been better under Angus Taylor’s watch if a proper investigation and ongoing programme of collaboration with nuclear powered nations had taken place
We must never forget however where the greatest harm is being done and that’s with the Greens and ALP opponents of nuclear energy. They do the greatest damage to our climate and energy security ambitions.
These two parties need to be held to account in a more forthright manner.

Thank you John and yes I tried for clarity. The ideas in the article were rattling around for some time and needed connecting.
I invite you to share it with others. Low carbon generators with high energy density are mankind’s future. We also need to ensure we don’t becomes slaves to energy rather than its masters.

It is a prime example of clarity and persuasiveness on a subject that has been very dear to my heart for over a decade.

It takes great skill to find the words. Well done.

Amen to that Malcolm
We don’t need anyone’s permission to get stuck in an learn
I’m heading off to Canada and the USA with others to investigate new nuclear power plants
We’ll keep you posted

Thanks Meg
I’m pleased you got something out of it.
Energy density is really so closely linked to our environmental footprint though we must take care to not create other issues