This country got semi-famous for its anti-nuke stance. We are still anti-nuke, but we got famous a lifetime ago and the world has changed.
Amazon and Google and Oracle are building their own nuclear reactors and, if not building, they are buying nuclear deals with places like Three Mile Island, which also a lifetime ago made headlines around the world.
They need nuclear to run data centres. Data centres need astonishing amounts of power.
New Zealand wants to host data centres.
Can New Zealand be a data centre hub, given the power system we now run? No.
Ironically, just yesterday Genesis announced they will be buying more coal for next winter to cover the gap. The ongoing gap.
That’s not for data centres. That's to turn the lights on, on a cold morning.
This country, as we found out this winter, can't handle cold far less data centres, and nothing is changing between now and next winter.
Factor in EV's if you want and we return to the ongoing but unanswered question - just what is it we are going to run the country on?
Hydro is good, but not reliable.
And neither is any of the other options we may or may not ever get around to producing at scale, like wind or solar or batteries.
Nuclear is not only reliable, it's good for the environment.
So we want to run data centres, but we don’t have enough power, we are still burning more coal, and the thing we hate is a viable option and being picked up and run with around the rest of the world.
Are we to be left behind? Or are we to grow up and move forward?
I would have thought it answers itself.
But let's see.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
They need nuclear to run data centres. Data centres need astonishing amounts of power.
New Zealand wants to host data centres.
Can New Zealand be a data centre hub, given the power system we now run? No.
Ironically, just yesterday Genesis announced they will be buying more coal for next winter to cover the gap. The ongoing gap.
That’s not for data centres. That's to turn the lights on, on a cold morning.
This country, as we found out this winter, can't handle cold far less data centres, and nothing is changing between now and next winter.
Factor in EV's if you want and we return to the ongoing but unanswered question - just what is it we are going to run the country on?
Hydro is good, but not reliable.
And neither is any of the other options we may or may not ever get around to producing at scale, like wind or solar or batteries.
Nuclear is not only reliable, it's good for the environment.
So we want to run data centres, but we don’t have enough power, we are still burning more coal, and the thing we hate is a viable option and being picked up and run with around the rest of the world.
Are we to be left behind? Or are we to grow up and move forward?
I would have thought it answers itself.
But let's see.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
8 comments:
Totally agree, but here’s a thought. With the way we go about building anything, it will be the most expensive reactor ever and delivered by …. 2050? If we start tomorrow 🤦♂️
Best not to leave decisions like this to the public. The public are a seething mass of opinions and mostly ignorant on such technical matters.
Take Greenpeace for example, whom you could say are the birth place of bad ideas. They get media and air time for no good reason other than they want to stop progress. The public are bemused then vote green, thinking being green is good.
Time passes, years go by, the old die, the young get left with the bad choices. No power, economy going backwards, no investment , poor wages all because some beatniks waved a rainbow flag and shouted a lot
The nuclear free holy cow needs to go to the abattoir, we cannot afford to keep it alive.
Yes, I realised last week the debate about nuclear is over. It is the obvious choice. However, Peter Thiel on Joe Rogan's podcast recently gave his theory about why nuclear hadn't been rolled out already. He said nuclear power was given to India and then they quickly got the bomb. Would the world be better if every country had the bomb?
Yes, let's go nuke - it's the most sensible option.
But, sort out the nuke waste issue first.
We don't want to be in the same situation as the UK where it's costing several hundred million pounds to clean up Sellafield.
Prediction 1: a Maori god will have objections to nuclear power, so it won't be allowed to proceed.
Prediction 2: the aforesaid deity will prove to be amenable to bribes and it will then be allowed to proceed providing regular homage is paid to the aforesaid.
NZ needs more power but nuclear, which I really like, seems suspect for an earthquake prone country. Although Auckland would be a perfect fit with no downside even though if there was a leak.
Joking aside additional hydro or geothermal would seem obvious choices, but more geothermal may not be practical and more dams unacceptable to our watermelons.
So go for more wind, remembering it’s only about 25% of installed capacity, and use the hydro dams as our battery backup. Expensive, but might get us through until sanity prevails.
Please, no more b****y win farms. Can never produce enough power in this country because our wind is too gusty. Short life, high maintenance, (check out the amount of oil they need at each oil change). Look at what is happening in Europe trying to get rid of old wind turbines. Solar panels have similar issues. Anyone with even a small amount of technical knowledge understands these issues. Which is why Greenies think they are great. They are clueless about everything
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.