<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for John Quiggin</title>
	<atom:link href="http://johnquiggin.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://johnquiggin.com</link>
	<description>Commentary on Australian &#38; world events from a social-democratic perspective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 13:19:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by rog</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174184</link>
		<dc:creator>rog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 13:19:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174184</guid>
		<description>Why would Nullabor be a &quot;more safe&quot; location? Granted the isolation would mean that, in the event of an incident, fewer people would be exposed to radiation. But placing such a plant in an isolated area is an admission that nuclear power is unsafe. The nuclear industry should be promoting nuclear power stations within urban areas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why would Nullabor be a &#8220;more safe&#8221; location? Granted the isolation would mean that, in the event of an incident, fewer people would be exposed to radiation. But placing such a plant in an isolated area is an admission that nuclear power is unsafe. The nuclear industry should be promoting nuclear power stations within urban areas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by Jim Rose</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174183</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Rose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174183</guid>
		<description>don&#039;t you need areally  big grid with high customer density to make nuclear work? maybe thier a samll reactors now? 

in terms of where it could be built without losing an election or two, a plant located in the centre of the Nullarbor would be about as safe as you could get, but hopelessly uneconomic gets to the nub of the matter

can&#039;t even build a second airport in sydney these days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>don&#8217;t you need areally  big grid with high customer density to make nuclear work? maybe thier a samll reactors now? </p>
<p>in terms of where it could be built without losing an election or two, a plant located in the centre of the Nullarbor would be about as safe as you could get, but hopelessly uneconomic gets to the nub of the matter</p>
<p>can&#8217;t even build a second airport in sydney these days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by rog</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174182</link>
		<dc:creator>rog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:52:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174182</guid>
		<description>Those that are pro nuclear should be advocating for a facility close to where they live. Close would be within 30kms, the distance set by both Chernobyl and Fukushima as exclusion zones post meltdowns. The nuclear lobby say that these modern generators are safe and clean so there should be no problem?

The reality is that they will find a host of other factors to site them somewhere else.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Those that are pro nuclear should be advocating for a facility close to where they live. Close would be within 30kms, the distance set by both Chernobyl and Fukushima as exclusion zones post meltdowns. The nuclear lobby say that these modern generators are safe and clean so there should be no problem?</p>
<p>The reality is that they will find a host of other factors to site them somewhere else.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by John Quiggin</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174181</link>
		<dc:creator>John Quiggin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 11:56:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174181</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-174179&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;@Tom Davies &lt;/a&gt; When I visited it 40 years ago, there was a big hole. But I think it&#039;s been filled in since then.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="#comment-174179" rel="nofollow">@Tom Davies </a> When I visited it 40 years ago, there was a big hole. But I think it&#8217;s been filled in since then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by rog</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174180</link>
		<dc:creator>rog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 11:47:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174180</guid>
		<description>Muckaty Station is the best place for a nuclear power station, it&#039;ll bring jobs to the area and give the locals a chance to improve their lot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Muckaty Station is the best place for a nuclear power station, it&#8217;ll bring jobs to the area and give the locals a chance to improve their lot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by Tom Davies</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174179</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Davies</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 11:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174179</guid>
		<description>What&#039;s the status of the site for the planned reactor at Jervis Bay?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What&#8217;s the status of the site for the planned reactor at Jervis Bay?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The green fields of nuclear power by frankis</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/24/the-green-fields-of-nuclear-power/comment-page-1/#comment-174178</link>
		<dc:creator>frankis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 10:34:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.ozblogistan.com.au/?p=10644#comment-174178</guid>
		<description>Well, thinking out loud ... perhaps a larger number of smallish nukes sited beside existing coal burners with existing distribution networks. Smaller nuke implies smaller risks, arguably.

Or speaking of the Nullarbor - sure it&#039;s remote but as you say that appears to be an advantage for a nuke scheme in an era of nuclear hysteria. More interestingly though for us may be that the Nullarbor is also somewhere with plenty of bright sunshine for solar power installations, and it also sits beside the southern ocean with some of the most concentrated wave and wind power available on the planet. So toss them all in to the wash and for the extra price of the long distance to the electricity markets you gain a substantial co-location opportunities to ameliorate your transmission losses and costs. Bearing in mind the present economic viability of things like the Tasman DC link and if we also consider seriously mooted concepts like that enormous Nth African solar project (to feed power to Europe), what would seem at first blush to be an unworkable Nullarbor scheme may not be so inconceivable after all. I picture metropolises of happy power workers blooming like electric Kalgoorlies across our deserts ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, thinking out loud &#8230; perhaps a larger number of smallish nukes sited beside existing coal burners with existing distribution networks. Smaller nuke implies smaller risks, arguably.</p>
<p>Or speaking of the Nullarbor &#8211; sure it&#8217;s remote but as you say that appears to be an advantage for a nuke scheme in an era of nuclear hysteria. More interestingly though for us may be that the Nullarbor is also somewhere with plenty of bright sunshine for solar power installations, and it also sits beside the southern ocean with some of the most concentrated wave and wind power available on the planet. So toss them all in to the wash and for the extra price of the long distance to the electricity markets you gain a substantial co-location opportunities to ameliorate your transmission losses and costs. Bearing in mind the present economic viability of things like the Tasman DC link and if we also consider seriously mooted concepts like that enormous Nth African solar project (to feed power to Europe), what would seem at first blush to be an unworkable Nullarbor scheme may not be so inconceivable after all. I picture metropolises of happy power workers blooming like electric Kalgoorlies across our deserts &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Parallel universe collapsing? by Jim Rose</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/22/parallel-universe-collapsing/comment-page-1/#comment-174177</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Rose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 10:20:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.com/?p=10639#comment-174177</guid>
		<description>John, I just noticed cass sunstein&#039;s Why Groups Go to Extremes was published by AEI press in 2008! he makes these points:

In the course of exchanging opinions, like-minded people frequently develop more extreme versions of their original views on such issues as climate change, labor policy, same-sex relationships, and affirmative action. 

Groups ranging from citizens&#039; forums to judicial panels tend to squelch diversity and polarize opinion. 

With the Internet facilitating the formation of like-minded groups, this phenomenon may help account for the intensity and division of contemporary social and political debate. 

p.s Bhagwati is a Democrat and an AEI adjunct scholar (1993-present); 

p.p.s. According to his wife, Samuel Huntington was a life-long Democrat; he was in the carter white house. he was a member of the AEI Council of Academic Advisers (-2008)

p.p.p.s  was James Q. Wilson a republican hack or the best political scientist of the past half-century,? chairman of the AEI Council of Academic Advisers (1991-2012?)

p.p.p.p.s. Seymour Martin Lipset, adjunct scholar (1973-2007) was the only person to have been president of both the American Sociological Association (1992–93) and the American Political Science Association (1979–80).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John, I just noticed cass sunstein&#8217;s Why Groups Go to Extremes was published by AEI press in 2008! he makes these points:</p>
<p>In the course of exchanging opinions, like-minded people frequently develop more extreme versions of their original views on such issues as climate change, labor policy, same-sex relationships, and affirmative action. </p>
<p>Groups ranging from citizens&#8217; forums to judicial panels tend to squelch diversity and polarize opinion. </p>
<p>With the Internet facilitating the formation of like-minded groups, this phenomenon may help account for the intensity and division of contemporary social and political debate. </p>
<p>p.s Bhagwati is a Democrat and an AEI adjunct scholar (1993-present); </p>
<p>p.p.s. According to his wife, Samuel Huntington was a life-long Democrat; he was in the carter white house. he was a member of the AEI Council of Academic Advisers (-2008)</p>
<p>p.p.p.s  was James Q. Wilson a republican hack or the best political scientist of the past half-century,? chairman of the AEI Council of Academic Advisers (1991-2012?)</p>
<p>p.p.p.p.s. Seymour Martin Lipset, adjunct scholar (1973-2007) was the only person to have been president of both the American Sociological Association (1992–93) and the American Political Science Association (1979–80).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Parallel universe collapsing? by rog</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/22/parallel-universe-collapsing/comment-page-1/#comment-174176</link>
		<dc:creator>rog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 09:57:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.com/?p=10639#comment-174176</guid>
		<description>The Republicans refute the allegation of extremism saying that Republican voters are not extremists and there are a lot of Republican voters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Republicans refute the allegation of extremism saying that Republican voters are not extremists and there are a lot of Republican voters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Parallel universe collapsing? by John Quiggin</title>
		<link>http://johnquiggin.com/2012/05/22/parallel-universe-collapsing/comment-page-1/#comment-174175</link>
		<dc:creator>John Quiggin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 09:56:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johnquiggin.com/?p=10639#comment-174175</guid>
		<description>Great, Jim, I assume then you&#039;ll take my word for it that the AEI consists almost entirely of Republican hacks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great, Jim, I assume then you&#8217;ll take my word for it that the AEI consists almost entirely of Republican hacks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

