Neither renewables nor nuclear can save our grid

Donald Horne's idea of the "lucky country" postulates that, while other developed nations created their wealth using means such as technology, innovation, and their citizenry's hard work, Australia largely did not. Instead, Horne believed that our economic prosperity was largely derived from Australia's rich natural resources and from immigrant labour. Horne felt the country was being run by second-rate elites, and that, unless Australia lifted its game, its good run would not last.

Australia's attitude to coal, nuclear energy and "net zero" is consistent with a nation run by nervous second-rate elites, insistent on turning what was an energy powerhouse (with competitive heavy industry and minerals processing) into a post-industrial nation with a failing and increasingly expensive energy system. The stagnant per capita GDP of recent years is partly the result of this.

On the left, our politicians are intent on rushing to totally replace Australia's tried-and-proven coal-based electricity system with one overwhelmingly dependent on intermittent solar and wind. (The most extreme even want to ban most of our energy exports.) All of this is for seemingly doubtful environmental benefits.

Australia's left is no longer a working-class movement. Instead, it more represents middle-class university-educated elites (often in the public sector), who are commonly anti-business, and habitually have their hand in the taxpayer's pocket.

Net zero itself is a pipedream because solar panels and wind farms all have a substantial carbon footprint stemming from the energy required to make their constituent parts. "Renewables" (being intermittent) also need to be entirely backed up, and their hardware needs to be replaced periodically. Major extensions to electricity transmission infrastructure, required by geographically decentralised solar and wind farms, have their own additional but similarly ignored carbon footprint.

The lack of (all but very short term) energy storage, along with the high cost of "renewables", is at the core of problems that are in the course of breaking our electricity grid.

It has been suggestedthat every time we put up a large wind turbine about 900 tonnes of steel and about 2,500 tonnes of concrete are required. According to BHP, around 770 kilograms of coking coal is used to make each ton of steel required.)

Our so-called "conservative" politicians, when it comes to energy policy, are all over the place. The only skeptics questioning net zero and "renewables" are a few dissenting politicians like Senator Matt Canavanand some right-wing commentators. It was the Morrison Coalition Government (not Labor) that signed the Paris Agreement, and officially committed Australia to deliver (unachievable) net zero emissions by 2050.

At state level, the Libs in every jurisdiction support the transition to "renewable" energy, and there is little to separate them from Labor except for a slower rate of transition.

Put simply, there is no political commitment to change course, despite the recent call from Peter Dutton (drawing lackluster support) for the use of nuclear power. (Note that Dutton remains committed to the move away from coal but simply prefers nuclear power to solar and wind.)

Even if Dutton won the next election, and all the state Liberal parties eventually agreed to install nuclear plants, about a decade of lead time would be necessary before nuclear power could become a reality in Australia. We have been warnedthat our electricity grid will hit deep trouble well before then.

A look at Australia's historic attitude to nuclear technology is enlightening.