News

‘Dumb idea’: Energy minister fires at Dutton’s nuclear power plan - Sky News Australia

Sky News Australia · last updated

‘Dumb idea’: Energy minister fires at Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plan, urging him to ‘come clean’ about the facts | Sky News Australia

'Dumb idea': Energy minister fires at Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plan, urging him to ‘come clean’ about the facts

The Climate Change and Energy Minister took aim at the Liberal leader’s “dumb” nuclear power plan, telling him to “come clean” about the facts of the alternate energy source.

Minister for Climate Change and Energy Chris Bowen has debunked nuclear power statements spruiked by Coalition leader Peter Dutton.

Mr Dutton in his second budget reply on Friday said that “any sensible government must consider small modular nuclear as part of the energy mix”.

He disputed the Labor government’s climate change policies, warning they were putting the country “on the wrong energy path”.

In response, senator Bowen took to social media with an almost 2-minute-long video on “why Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan is a dumb idea for Australia”.

3 reasons why Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan is a dumb idea for Australia…— Chris Bowen (@Bowenchris)
pic.twitter.com/vmcxgoXxwW May 13, 2023

He took aim at the Opposition leader, questioning why the former Liberal government had nine years to introduce the nuclear energy but “never got around” to it.

“Because it’s a very bad idea,” he answered in the video.

The Labor Minister factchecked Mr Dutton with three reasons why nuclear power was not suitable for Australia, with the first being its hefty $400 billion price tag.

He referenced CSIRO findings that detail how renewable energy is the cheapest form of power while nuclear energy the most expensive.

“Wherever nuclear power plants are being built around the world, they are taking longer and costing much more than budgeted for,” he said.

“Even small modular reactors would cost a massive $5 billion each to build and proponents say we need as many as 80 small nuclear reactors spread across the country.

“That’s a whopping $400 billion in cost.”

Mr Bowen then fired at the “huge delays” in nuclear reactor construction, claiming that it would take more than a decade to establish a nuclear power industry.

“Even if we started today, the first small reactor wouldn’t be in operation to meet the urgent need to deliver dispatchable power now,” he said.

“We don’t have a nuclear power industry, a regulatory or safety framework, nuclear power expertise or nuclear power workforce.”

The Energy Minister concluded his video, saying Australia is already struggling to store nuclear waste from one small medical reactor and probed Liberals over how they would dispose of waste from 80 reactors.

“If the Liberals want lots of nuclear power plants across Australia, they would need to explain where they’re going to store the nuclear waste,” he said.

“If Mr Dutton and the Liberals want to be taken seriously on their nuclear energy plan, they need to come clean on a few key things.

“Where will these nuclear power plants go? What will they do with the radioactive waste that generate? And when will they be operational? And how on earth are we going to pay for it?”

Former prime minister Malcom Turnbull threw his support behind Senator Bowen after the scathing attack.

"Very good video and absolutely right," he wrote to Twitter.

Related Knowledge Center: ENERGY BASICS: nuclear

State of Play

Nuclear energy provides almost 20 percent of the U.S. electricity supply. Advocates have called for an expanded role for nuclear as an emissions-free fuel source. But the economics of building new reactors are daunting. In addition, lingering safety concerns are an institutionalized part of the calculation of nuclear regulation, and highly radioactive nuclear waste remains a can that public officials have been inclined to kick down the road. The Energy Information Administration projects a sharp decline in nuclear power generation over the next decade, as new nuclear plants — two are planned — are more than offset by anticipated retirements of several operating reactors.

More informationabout ENERGY BASICS: nuclear