After Tuesday’s storms and blackouts in Victoria came Wednesday’s press releases from Canberra. Familiar positions were rapidly occupied and defended.
Nationals leader David Littleproud issued a statement arguing that the collapse of transmission towers carrying power from Loy Yang in south-eastern Victoria underscored the vulnerability of Labor’s plan to replace the nation’s ageing coal power stations with renewable power generation and storage projects distributed across the country.
“If small-scale nuclear power plants were built where retiring coal-fired power stations are now,we could minimise the need for new transmission lines,reducing the risk of these incidents,” he said.
Opposition spokesman on climate change and energy,Ted O’Brien,also an advocate of nuclear,criticised Labor’s “blinkered renewables only” approach to rebuilding the grid,saying Australia needed an “electricity system resilient to the weather,not reliant on it”.
Loading
The opposition’s case is that if we replace our clapped-out coal stations with small modular nuclear reactors on the same sites,we would obviate the need to replace the transmission lines they use. This would save money and reduce the need for extra transmission lines that would be needed to move power in a grid where generation is more widely spread over the countryside.
The problem with this argument – aside from the fact these reactors don’t yet exist – is that however power may be generated at the old power stations,it would still need to be moved to the cities.
If Loy Yang had been producing nuclear power on Tuesday,the grid would still have been threatened by a storm that took down transmission lines to it.