Do you support the use of nuclear energy?

Yes, specifically low pressure high temperature thorium reactors.

Yes and create a governmental ministry or national corporation should be created to manage both nuclear and fossil fuels according to Fascist doctrine

Yes, but the focus should be on cleaner alternative and it should be used and prepared for in case of electricity shortages

Nuclear energy should be explored if it it allows us to meet our economic and environmental objectives. It should only be subsidised if the use of it uniquely saves the government money elsewhere or aligns with Australia's long-term national interests.

Federal government question. We should focus on safe renewable energy sources like hydroelectric, thorium, geothermal, wind, soalr, and water powered energy. Only yes -if it's safe

yes and no. Its fast, efficient and helps with environmental and medical and all sorts of studies. But the uranium used in it can effect the health of humans. If we are able to work with it in affordable cost and between our safety measures we should more than happy to be continuing with its work

Government have no control on solar provider prices. In any circumstances the buy back price should be less than 5 year. Should fine to solar provider those are charging more than the market. Every solar quote must approved by authority. I have never received subsidy as advertised. No any service provider provide any details of subsidy. Government should put the commossion.

Yes, whilst nuclear energy has its negatives, it is also very useful and when used properly it is beneficial for society.

yes but as a backup for cleaner alternatives, we should prioritise and transition to clean energy renewables first

Yes, provided we can dispose of the waste properly.

Yes, but not in Australia as so many sustainable natural resources could be used instead. Nuclear power plants are a great for smaller countries that don't have that option.

If there's a few disaster such as earthquakes or tsunami or whatever , I agree with it but if there's a lot , I think we should avoid using it .

Yes, but there needs to be more inquiry’s and planning around it besides the weekend it took liberal to think it up

Use fossil fuels and reserve nuclear for maritime and space affairs, or just the powering of large remote vessels in general

Yes and it should be implemented post haste to the fullest extent of its current capability in consultion with relevant scientific communities

Before using nuclear power we need an effective and safe way of dealing with nuclear waste. that or further developement in nuclear energy such as effective fusion energy instead of fision to remove the danger of radioactive waste.

i support nuclear energy as long as it is done properly and that workers at the power plants are trained in how to run the generators and systems, Australia overall should have a nuclear with solar on roofs and that all our energy companies should be owned by the federal government.

Any current nuclear energy powerplants are helpful but renewable energy is the best way to supply energy into the future as nuclear plants take long to get going. Also nationalise the energy sector.

Although I support the use of nuclear energy broadly in the context of Australia solar and other renewable alternatives seem far more applicable compared to other places in the world and carry less danger then nuclear (even if the risks of it are getting increasingly smaller)

make the submarines and bomb china

Depedning on the renewable resources we have available, nuclear should be used as a last resort

thorium is still nuclear energy

No, the window to set up a strong energy sector dependent on nuclear energy has unfortunately passed.

only if safe

Yes, unless it is being used for good

Yes, as long as they follow extremely rigourous standards

No, stay with fossel Fuels.

Yes, with strong regulation

i want another chernobyl

If they keep me safe then yep hit that big red button

Yes if it stored properly and does not harm the neivronment

No, Nuclear energy is too much of a safety risk

Yes, but only nuclear fusion and not fission

no simply due to the fact that humans with pockets are not to be trusted with such responsibilities

Yes, provided there is support given to safe nuclear technologies

No, everyone Needs to be more educated first and be aware of the risks

No, There have been too many incidents involving nuclear power

I’m impartial

yes, as long as they pay higher tax

There’s no point unless it’s long term, therefore we need to invest in other clean alternatives.

No, Nuclear energy is not economically competitive with green alternatives like wind, solar and batteries

I believe that we should enforce laws and regulations on nuclear weapons

The cheapest form of energy is coal and oil. Continue to use these. All other forms of energy are more expensive to produce and the decommissioning is massive.

yes as long as it is 100% safe

With safe reliable new technology, some new reactors can reuse nuclear waste and are cheaper to build and we have lots of uranium. We than can focus on renewables with a nuclear powered Australia

Yes, with very strict control and safety measures

Yes but to ensure safety of citizens we should do the nuclear tests or production in an unpopulated area of Australia

Yes, but we need to first sort out the disposal and storage of the by products.

Yes, but only if new uranium is not mined

Nuclear Energy is Objectively the Best Energy Source their is and Once we Store it in a much more Safer Container there's no going back.

I think nuclear energy is fine, but yes we should try to be more environmentally friendly.

Yes along with more renewables

I do not feel I have an adequate understanding

Coal for life

Yes, but only for the production of materials for radiography (Lucas Heights). The cost outweighs the benefits

Yes, but we should prioritise cleaner alternatives such as wind and solar

I don’t have enough of an understanding to form an opinion.

Too expensive & slow to set up

We should invest in both nuclear energy as well as other sustainable practices

Yes, but not immediately

literally don’t know

Yes, on principle.

We can but not to much because we don’t want to fully put pollution into the earth

Only when waste can be safely and sustainably disposed

Yes, and make moves towards cleaner forms such as fusion.

Nominally yes, but the cost is prohibitive and it would take too long to help us in the transition to true renewables.

We should be funding more research into nuclear fusion technology

Only for nuclear fusion

Only Gen IV waste eaters and fusion.

Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy. We should also investigate the long term potential of cleaner alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal.

More research should be done on this first

Yes but only government controlled

Yes, if it makes economical sense without subsidy, can be done safely (both in life and post life), and owned by the public.

I used to but the cost of nuclear setup does not make it viable when renewables are so widely available.

Yes, so long as it can be used safely and with minimal to no damage to the environment

Yes, but with proper training and strict rules.

Hard call heap energy But high risk for disasters As above in another i answered Should be free energy the sun free we get solar and still pay a bill like wtf

Don't really know much about it

As long as can get rid of the byproduct safely.

Yes, providing they are Thorium plants

It is no longer financially viable

Yes, and use the small modular Rolls-Royce reactors like the UK

Nuclear energy is dangerous and bad

Yes, in remote areas

Yes, with a priority of safety

No, other alternatives are cheaper and it requires too much investment and risk

We need more coal fired Power Stations because it's more stable and reliable

I need to know more about this?

Yes, but no subside to increase tech knowledge.

Yes if new designs prove to be safe and efficient. Having a nuclear industry may long term be more important than needing nuclear electricity specifically for our grid.

I belive we should start using Thorium as it makes more energy, makes less waste, and can be held in the hand without the issue of radiation because it is less fissionable then standard uranium.

Only if it doesn't harm people or citizens

Only once technology has been created to reduce waste and improve storage

I do not have all of the relevant information to have an opinion on this question.

Yes, as long as it's far away from civilian areas.

Yes, as long as it it completely safe and that it isn’t near any major towns so that if an accident happened not too many people will be harmed.

Only in safe designated unpopulated areas

Yes, as it is much cleaner than traditional coal-burning methods.

yes if its done properly and safely.