The ACT government's all electric vision is just unaffordable

Mr Rattenbury continues to ignore the key issue: most sensible people would like to eliminate emissions. But we cannot afford the huge expense of converting our existing gas-ducted heating arrangements to electric heating, particularly when figures of $30,000 or more are mentioned.

When asked if our existing poles and wires could cope in the future with all the anticipated increased demand for electricity consumption, he dodged the question.

He dissembled about somebody's tree falling on a powerline but the biggest impact of his policy will be on our current power distribution system.

I'm reliably informed that, from time to time, the energy provider cuts back power inputs into the grid from solar rooftop panels because of overload. Our power system was designed in the 1960s when everyone used oil heating.

I'm told that if everybody had their air conditioners on for heating in winter the system wouldn't cope. Blackouts would not be caused by fallen trees, but just plain ideological stupidity.

Government money has to be spent, and that needs a AAA credit rating.

If Greens-Labor had any sense, they'd be talking to the current gas and electric heating manufacturers to ascertain if it was possible to remove your current gas heater and replace it with an electric furnace feeding into the existing underfloor ducts and heating vents.

Yes, "the right track" (Editorial, June 18) cited by Premier Li Qiang is the correct diplomatic reference to our earlier blundering references when PM Morrison and another politician took it upon themselves to tell the world that China would have to let others into their country to investigate COVID-19.

The following import bans by the Chinese were entirely consistent with their regard for face, a sensitivity way beyond ours.

At last, an EOFY saving and less drain on the upcoming ACT budget ("CIT CEO resigns after two years on paid leave during integrity investigation", June 19). But the costs of lack of access to transparency have just escalated ("Watchdog's interim CIT report faces court action", June 20).

Surely this new CIT investigation development gives the ACT government cause for concern. Hopefully, matters linked to this latest delay are resolved very soon so that the ACT Integrity Commission's initial findings can be delivered to the current Assembly speaker, rather than to the new one who will be appointed after October 19.

The public expects to learn much more over the next few months.

If ever there was evidence that we need to change our flag to reflect who we really are, the picture of Mr Dutton meeting the Chinese PM in The Canberra Times on June 20 said it all. Mr Dutton is tall but surely whoever placed the flag could have made sure more than the gaudy British Union Jack pattern was shown.

Peter Dutton's nuclear policy is being rubbished as unrealistic by "experts" including the CSIRO.

But out of the world's 20 leading economies (and 12 other smaller economies) Australia is the laggard that has not embraced nuclear power to date.

Had the 1969 proposal by the Coalition to build a nuclear reactor at Jervis Bay, which was started but never completed, come to fruition, we would in all probability not be experiencing the current power supply problems.

Cost is irrelevant. Sufficiency and reliability is of paramount importance. You only get what you pay for.

Procrastination on nuclear will get us nowhere fast. It's time for this "easy as she goes", small-target Albanese government to show some leadership by taking the necessary steps towards making nuclear reactors as part of our energy mix.

In the interim the installation of renewables should be accelerated (and backed up with gas generation).

The Coalition's "expert" nuclear energy spokesman, Keith Pitt, keeps spouting the virtues of Canada's nuclear-powered Ontario province. However, he never mentions that right next door, hydro-electric powered Quebec produces electricity at half the cost of Ontario's.

To be fair, I haven't yet heard the media query him on this clear disparity, but journalistic standards, including the ABC's, is another problem in the debate that I fear will continue to help obscure the facts.

It has been made clear, including by the CSIRO, that nuclear energy is far and away the most expensive form of new energy available to Australia. Estimates vary between two and eight times the cost of renewable energy. Private industry and financial institutions won't touch it - for good reason. Costs would be borne by taxpayers and energy consumers.

Some future government would likely sell off any nuclear assets into private hands at a loss, nationalising the losses and privatising the profits (if any).

There is no safe way to deal with nuclear waste for the necessary thousands of years.

Reactor locations are already strongly contested including by state governments. Waste storage locations will be similarly contested.

Australia has neither the required nuclear industry nor the regulatory structure for all this and would have to start these from scratch, adding to the timescale.

Nuclear energy would be at least 15 years away (very probably longer) - far too late to make any useful contribution to carbon emissions reduction.

The fact that nuclear power is already in use in many advanced countries is irrelevant to the case for new Australian energy. It is necessary to examine the options here, now and in the future.

Nuclear energy for Australia is nonsense; the idea is just a cynical distraction to prolong the heavily subsidised existence of fossil-fuelled industry. Let's get on with solar, wind, storage and transmission.

So our leaders want to go all electric in the ACT. Okay. So how do you cook meals or charge your electric vehicle when the grid goes down? We have had three outages in Waramanga during the past week. But many thanks to ACTEW for being quickly on the scene.

While Peter Dutton might well be a gift for the Labor government he is an absolute disaster for Australia. He is a spoiler without a policy; "just say no", divide and disrupt.

Now he is fantasising that nuclear power is a viable alternative to renewables, that a massive reduction in immigrants will solve the housing and cost-of-living crises, and that Labor must willy nilly decimate NDIS funding and services.

But why weren't any comprehensive Coalition policies (oxymoron?) on these, and numerous other significant issues ever developed when the Coalition was in government?

His "just say no" to the Voice referendum completely scuppered it, even before any final wording was developed or meaningful discussion took place. What a legacy for Indigenous people and for Australia. And, like his predecessors, he remains stoically belligerent to China.

Why doesn't the Labor Government call him out more, and more comprehensively, rather than allowing him to dominate Australia's political agenda? He only became Liberal leader by default following the election rout.

Just say no to Peter Dutton is what I say.

I simply do not believe the accuracy of the latest Resolve poll indicating that Peter Dutton is now preferred prime minister over Albanese and the LNP is in front. That well-known Senate intellectual Malcolm Roberts always refers to Canberra as an ivory tower. If he means people in the ACT have functioning cortexes and think he's right.

According to this poll result Australians no longer prioritise climate change, believe immigrants are the cause of all our woes and are ready to embrace nuclear energy in spite of the fact the CSIRO says it's a turkey and is being ditched in numerous countries because it's not financially viable.

I'm confident I could conduct a poll suggesting Ken Done is a greater artist than Leonardo da Vinci if I framed the question in a certain way. Polls can play an important role but sometimes they are designed to create debate.

I am appalled at what is happening with regard to increasing diagnoses of concussion In sport, particularly in football. Surely it is time to change the rules so these sorts of injuries which have such long lasting and devastating effects are prevented.

Ian Morison (Letters, June 18) wrote "Australia's future depends on sensible centre-right government", but offered no justification for this assertion. Why not a sensible centre-left government that cares more about the people it governs than about money?

I know that Bruce Lehrmann put in a request for Peter Costello's personal protection services. However can I suggest that Cheng Lei be given first dibs? (And my sincere apologies to anyone who now has Whitney Houston playing in their head).

On July 1 top APS bosses will receive salary increases similar to what some people earn in a whole year. The lucky country indeed. But only for some.

The Australian War Memorial was intended as a shrine of remembrance. But obsequious administrations and mercenary politicians have desecrated its sacred purpose by converting it into a shop-window for merchants of war to display their deadly wares. (Letters, June 18).

R J Wenholz (Letters, June 19) defends the use of "gotten" by referring to its use in a Broadway play (the excellent Man of La Mancha). But that's my point: it's an American work. Australian English should reject creeping Americanism.

I'm not aware of significant tunnelling problems when original Snowy Hydro was dug (by explosives and by hand). Nor am I aware of major issues with the Bullocks Flat train tunnelling. But Florence is blocked again for Snowy 2.0. What's different this time around.

I understand that Peter Dutton will shortly announce plans for the construction of a number of flamingo flatulence factories. These high cost, high energy production installations will tide the country over until the fanciful arrival of his even higher cost nuclear facilities.

Before criticising Peter Dutton's future energy plans it would help if Chris Bowen gave us the costs of the transition to renewables, including all related infrastructure and life of type estimates, until 2050 and beyond. I reckon Dutton's plan will be better, cheaper and cause less environmental damage.

Peter Dutton will be remembered as the guy who nuked his own election prospects. Nice work.