Well it was my pleasure to spend some more time with Nigel and Stephen from The Adelaide Show podcast to prepare what one listener endorsed as “a croc (sic) of shit!”.

Croc

The croc(sic) is available in full from the website of The Adelaide Show.  Here is the blurb for the show:

Ben Heard is an environmental professional. He has worked on a number of major environmental initiatives in South Australia for government, private and not-for-profit clients, through a business called ThinkClimate Consulting. He was once a strong opponent of nuclear power until he underwent a Road To Evidence-Based Damascus experience about five years ago and since then has been a strong proponent. Last year, Ben joined us in episode 106 to talk about nuclear power but tonight we have him on the topic of the royal commission into the nuclear fuel cycle and our first taste of having a citizens jury review the findings.

We discuss

  • Why a citizens’ jury is needed after spending money on a royal commission
  • How South Australia is positioning with mining for the nuclear fuel cycle
  • The reasons for not enriching ore
  • Our almost-missed opportunities for nuclear power generation
  • Our safe and lucrative options for nuclear waste storage (and energy extraction)
  • Where the royal commission stopped too short on science and technology
  • The myths and truths of background radiation

Also appearing with our Nuclear Fuel Cycle citizen’s jury

In the musical pilgrimage, we have a band with a lead singer from Kimba

The SA Drink Of The Week is from winemaker Simon Parker of Vinify

In IS IT NEWS, Nigel tests Steve and the boys on atomic stories, including the revelation that Yankalilli has a rich radioactive mineral source just upstream!

We announce a new way to be part of our podcast; join our Inner Circle. It’s an email list. Join it and you might get an email on a Sunday or Monday seeking question ideas, guest ideas and requests for other bits of feedback about YOUR podcast, The Adelaide Show.

4 comments

  1. I have to agree with the comment Ben. I’ve never heard you talk such bullshit before. I felt embarrassed
    for you and for your hosts.

    It was quite a relief when you stopped talking about wine and got back to talking about nuclear!

  2. Keep on keeping on Ben. We desperately need an articulate spokesperson for the solution to so many looming disasters that is nuclear energy. Simple message – no greenhouse gases means nuclear is the solution. I’ve been told the technology for solar that can sustain industrial an domestic demand is 200 years away. Thankyou for your effort, only unhappy people try to make others unhappy, all the best.

  3. Ben is very rare in that he can and often does present the pro-nuclear and low carbon arguments rationally and carefully in two contexts.

    First, the social message, which addresses the need for better than can be provided by so-called renewable energy; something which will address the climate-limited nature of wind and solar electricity and something which is also able to be scaled up mightily in order to meet the needs of industry, transport and those who have access to less energy than the Western average.

    Second, the mathematics and physics and environmental factual basics which demonstrate the strength of nuclear to reduce the uncertainties in our collective futures.

    I wish him every success and hope that he doesn’t run out of steam.

  4. Thanks Ben for posting this and for doing the podcast. There is so much that you say that resonates with me that I’m going to have to listen several times and make notes. I agree with you that the citizen’s jury is a necessary step, and that the Commission’s report is both thorough and cautious (in that it’s recommending goals that don’t require new technology, but that are a good fit to the existing nuclear systems). I also agree that there’s a tremendous opportunity for moral and technological leadership in the world’s fuel, power and energy systems. I hope that the citizen’s juries will get together in face to face meetings (not just via emails and videos) and that there will be facilitators to guide the discussions and bring forward all the relevant matters.

    Who knows? With inspiring facilitation (like, say, by you) the juries might just call for much more than the Commission cautiously recommends. Get the science and technology going! And possibly use citizen juries more often to help chart the course of government initiatives.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s