tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post116743861033104344..comments2023-11-03T19:05:08.512+11:00Comments on Harry Clarke: Labor rudderless in the uranium debateUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1167603338958989572007-01-01T09:15:00.000+11:002007-01-01T09:15:00.000+11:00Profuse apologies Harry Happy New year to you also...Profuse apologies Harry Happy New year to you also.<BR/><BR/>Don't disagree Harry but Howard has not said he will subsidise nuclear power nor impose a carbon tax which makes nuclear power a big nonoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1167555958987348832006-12-31T20:05:00.000+11:002006-12-31T20:05:00.000+11:00Firstly, Happy New Year Homer!The carbon tax shoul...Firstly, Happy New Year Homer!<BR/><BR/>The carbon tax should come but, even if it doesn't, the real cost of relying on coal is above the market price. <BR/><BR/>You could have nuclear if a government stepped in to fill this gap with a subsidy. Definitely inferior to a carbon tax but it would still work. <BR/><BR/>I think Howard (and the world community) will eventually accept the necessity for a carbon tax. Its also the way to drive the reforms he seeks in the coal industry.hchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13799594181016858701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22031270.post-1167553823278898692006-12-31T19:30:00.000+11:002006-12-31T19:30:00.000+11:00Harry,I am somewhat perplexed.Howard wants nuclear...Harry,<BR/><BR/>I am somewhat perplexed.<BR/><BR/>Howard wants nuclear power but will not put forward a carbon tax.<BR/>Ipsofacto then nuclear power is a no goer.<BR/><BR/>Unless there is a carbon tax there cannot be nuclear power.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps you are being a lazy professor!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com