Dutton’s nuclear thuggery

Davey was corrected by Littleproud, who said: “She is not correct and we made this very clear. Peter Dutton and David Littleproud as part of a Coalition government are prepared to make the tough decisions in the national interest.”

Likewise, Dutton said: “Perin I think made a mistake yesterday as everybody does from time to time … We’ve identified the seven locations and we believe it’s in the community’s interests and the national interest to proceed.”

Democracy is for wimps, apparently, and for traitors who oppose the ‘national interest’ as Comrades Dutton and Littleproud see it.

All this stands in stark contrast to a 2019 parliamentary inquiry led by current shadow energy minister Ted O’Brien. The Committee’s report was titled ‘Not without your approval: a way forward for nuclear technology in Australia’.

Announcing the release of the parliamentary report, O’Brien said in 2019 that a future government should only proceed with nuclear power on the condition that it make “a commitment to community consent as a condition of approval for any nuclear power or nuclear waste disposal facility”. He also waffled on about “maintaining a social license based on trust and transparency” and putting the Australian people “at the centre of any approval process”.

That was then, this is now. The ‘national interest’ is at stake.

Prof. Anne Twomey notes that the Dutton government would need to get legislation through Parliament, including the Senate, both to repeal federal laws banning nuclear power and also “to provide any necessary legal support and protection for a nuclear power industry in Australia”.

An uncooperative Senate could block Dutton’s nuclear power plans, but could not stop him expanding and prolonging the use of fossil fuels and derailing the renewable energy transition. Only voters can do that.

South Australia

Here in SA, we’ll get one or more nuclear power reactors in SA whether we like it or not and whether or not we need the additional power supply.SA has gone from 1 percent renewable electricity supply to 74 percentover the past 16 years and the government aims to reach 100 percent net renewables by 2027.

While there’s doubt about the 2027 timeline, it’s a safe bet we’ll reach 100 percent net renewables by the time a nuclear reactor could possibly begin generating electricity 20+ years from now.

The Northern Power Station near Port Augusta, one of the seven sites targeted by the Coalition, was shut down in 2016 and the region has since become a renewableshub. Are Dutton and O’Brien unaware of these developments? Are they planning a renewables-to-nuclear transition for SA? It’s difficult to see their non-negotiable plan for a nuclear power plant in SA as anything other than an ill-conceived, uncosted thought bubble.

The Coalition insists that nuclear power would reduce power bills. But there’s no evidence to support that claim, and plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise. The claim isn’t supported by CSIRO’s ‘GenCost’ report; or in a recent report prepared for the Clean Energy Council by Egis, a leading global consulting, construction and engineering firm; or in a recent report on small modular reactors by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis; or in the latest economic analysis released by investment firm Lazard.

SA Premier Peter Malinauskas isn’t convinced about the Coalition’s economic claims, saying: “Every single objective, independent analysis that has looked at this has said nuclear power would make power more expensive in Australia rather than cheaper. Why we would impose that burden on power consumers in our country is completely beyond me.”