The opposition’s proposal would slow down the renewables rollout,creating time to replace ageing coal plants with nuclear technology.
But many questions remain.
Which communities would host a nuclear plant? How much would they cost? Where will the high-grade nuclear waste generated by the power plants be stored? And crucially,do Australians support an end to the Howard government’s 1999 ban on nuclear power?
What’s powering nuclear policy?
The Coalition’s caution over nuclear power when it was in government has waned since the 2022 election,not just because the alternative to renewables provides an opportunity to attack the government,but because it is also the most likely way for Dutton to hold his party room together.
Former federal energy minister Angus Taylor said in 2019 that the Morrison government had no plans to lift the moratorium and “any changes to the moratorium would need bipartisan support and broad community acceptance”.
But Dutton is alive to the risks for a Coalition leader promoting renewables.
Loading
The Turnbull government’s National Energy Guarantee,which ultimately failed after opposition from the Coalition backbench due to its promotion of renewable energy,was a major factor in the downfall of the then-prime minister.
For now,the Coalition is united behind the nuclear push.
Senior moderate Simon Birmingham,the leader of the opposition in the Senate,is backing nuclear as a clean energy option to drive down emissions.
“This is a matter of some political courage by Peter Dutton and our team to look at something that historically has been put off the table in Australia,” Birmingham said earlier this week.
The Nationals,and the right wing of the Liberals,also back nuclear as a way to slow down the energy transition until retiring coal plants can be replaced with another form of baseload power.
“I’m proud to say I made it clear to Peter Dutton that when I became[Nationals] leader,we were going to run with this. But he’s had the courage to come with us,” David Littleproud said on Wednesday.
The Paris Agreement requires members to cut emissions in line with international efforts to keep global warming under 2 degrees – a goal the Albanese government has not yet met – and to increase the ambition of emissions reduction goals every five years.
However,Littleproud called for a moratorium on the renewables rollout last month,and argued that Australia should prioritise reaching net zero emissions over short-term targets.
“We don’t need to do all this by 2030. We’ve got to 2050,so why wouldn’t we pause and get this right,” he said.
Voter shifts
Loading
Nevertheless,Dutton has selected energy as amajor policy battle for the election.
The federal government in 2022set a legally binding climate target to reduce emissions by 43 per cent by the end of this decade,in large part by slashing reliance on fossil fuels and doubling the share of clean energy in the electricity grid to 82 per cent by 2030.
Albanese has rejected the Coalition’s nuclear policy escalation as implausible,many Labor MPs are opposed to nuclear power,and Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen has derided the Coalition’s policy as an unaffordable,ideological tactic to delay renewables.
However,the Coalition is banking on growing support for nuclear power,particularly among younger voters who don’t remember meltdowns at Three Mile Island in the United States in 1979,Chernobyl in the former USSR in 1986 and Fukushima,Japan in 2011.
Dutton said this week that concerns relating to older reactors did not apply to modern nuclear technology,and Australia should follow the lead of the 19 other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development that used nuclear power.
“It’s like comparing a motor vehicle you’re driving off the showroom floor today in 2024 … to something in 1954,” he said.
“Why younger people are embracing nuclear technology is because they’re well-read,they’re passionate about reducing emissions,and they understand what’s happening in Europe,what’s happening in North America,what’s happening in Asia.”
The Resolve Political Monitor,conducted for this masthead by research company Resolve Strategic,surveyed 1603 Australians in February and found36 per cent supported the use of nuclear power,23 per cent opposed it and 27 per cent were open to the government investigating its use,with 15 per cent undecided.
Support for nuclear power has ticked up since October last year,when 33 per cent supported it and 24 per cent opposed it.
Resolve director Jim Reed said voters were increasingly open to the potential of nuclear power now the Coalition was advocating for existing technology in large-scale plants,but support for the policy would not be truly tested until Australia’s ban was lifted and a construction site selected.
“We’ve got a new generation of younger people,and they actually are quite positive towards nuclear power,” Reed said.
“It’s swung towards at least openness to nuclear power,but it’s weak support at the moment simply because people aren’t being asked to approve an actual site.”
Power policy costs
ACSIRO report found in December that by 2030,a grid with 90 per cent wind and solar power would generate electricity at $70 to $100 a megawatt hour. This figure includes more than $30 billion of new transmission lines and battery and pumped hydro projects to provide back-up power.
Coal generation is more expensive at $85 to $135 a megawatt hour in 2030.
CSIRO found that if small modular reactors were available today,based on the current projections,they would generate electricity at a cost of $210 to $350 a megawatt hour in 2030.
Loading
The report did not calculate a cost for large-scale nuclear,but addressed the argument that Australia should follow the lead of countries that use it such as France,the United Kingdom,the United States,Canada,Spain and South Korea.
CSIRO said claims of cheap nuclear power in these countries were ignoring the fact that their plants were either funded by taxpayers as opposed to private investors or had been in operation for a considerable time – over which the capital costs had already been recovered.
“Such prices will not be available to countries that do not have existing nuclear generation such as Australia,” the report said.
Wind and solar cripple coal
Cheaper renewables are displacing coal power in the grid quicker than expected. The Australian Energy Market Operatorin December forecast the country’s last coal plant would shut in 2038,five years earlier than it predicted just two years ago,with cheaper renewables undercutting fossil fuel profitability.
Dutton says the government is forcing too much renewable energy into the grid without sufficient back-up power.
“They’re trying to turn the old system off before the new system is ready,and if you do that,not only will you have that disruption to supply,you’ll have an increase in prices,” he said on Wednesday.
The market operator does not agree with Dutton. Its latest projections show wind and solar will boom,with the most likely outcome that the electricity grid will continue to meet its reliability targets and operate without blackouts,as it is powered by 95 per cent renewables backed with 5 per cent gas power.
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news,views and expert analysis from Jacqueline Maley. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletterhere.