Nuclear Gamble is an Economic Wrecking Ball

Kate Hook, independent candidate for Calare (Image from antinuclear.net)

Kate Hook Media Release

Nuclear gamble is an economic wrecking ball – Lithgow and the Central West deserve better

Independent candidate for Calare, Kate Hook, has slammed the Coalition’s nuclear proposal, calling it an economic wrecking ball that will waste billions, push up power prices, and stall job creation in regional Australia.

“Energy experts, market operators and Australia’s leading economists have been clear – Australia can achieve a secure, reliable, and affordable power system without nuclear power,” Ms. Hook said. “The Coalition’s plan is a costly distraction, and I will not support it.”

“The communities that will suffer most from this reckless policy are the very ones that need investment in real, job-creating industries right now – not in 15 or 20 years.”

Ms. Hook called out the nuclear plan for what it is – a stalling tactic to prop up fossil fuel operators, keep government subsidies flowing to outdated industries, and leave Australian taxpayers to foot the bill.

Nuclear reactors take decades to build and cost tens of billions of dollars – public money that could instead be spent on renewables, storage, and grid upgrades today. By the time nuclear power could even begin operating, Australia’s energy system will already be overwhelmingly powered by cheaper, cleaner alternatives.

“We are at 40% renewable energy now and in the last 6 years alone, we’ve already added over 46 TWh (Terra Watt hours) of annual renewable energy generation to the grid. This number might not mean much to most people but it’s huge! It’s the equivalent of six nuclear power stations. And we did it in six years – not 15 or 20 years,” Ms Hook said.

Renewables and Storage: Reliable, Affordable, and Ready Now

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has mapped out the most efficient path forward—and nuclear isn’t part of it. The smart, cost-effective way to secure Australia’s energy future is through renewables, backed by battery storage, pumped hydro, and modern grid technology.

Big battery projects like South Australia’s Hornsdale Power Reserve are already proving their worth. Originally built with a capacity of 129 MWh – enough to power 30,000 homes for a day – it has since expanded to 194 MWh, providing power to 50,000 homes and stabilising the grid within milliseconds during sudden demand spikes.

“This fast response prevents blackouts and keeps energy prices stable—something nuclear power just can’t do,” Ms. Hook said.

Pumped hydro projects like Snowy 2.0 will ensure around-the-clock reliability. When completed, its 2.2 GW capacity will generate enough electricity to power three million homes during peak demand – like when air conditioning use surges on a hot summer evening.

With 350,000 MWh of storage, Snowy 2.0 could power 500,000 homes for an entire week or every home in Sydney for three days.

“We don’t need to waste time and money on nuclear power when we have already invested in proven, ready-to-go solutions that lower energy bills and create jobs right now,” Ms. Hook said.

Lithgow Needs Smart Investments, Not Costly Distractions

Kate Hook recognises that Lithgow has been at the heart of Australia’s energy production for generations. With coal mines closing and Mt Piper Power Station scheduled to shut in 2042, Lithgow needs a real plan for its future – not a decades-long delay.

“Lithgow deserves practical, affordable, and proven energy solutions – not a risky, drawn-out experiment that will leave taxpayers footing the bill for decades,” Ms. Hook said.

Beyond spiralling costs and construction delays, nuclear power comes with long-term risks that regional communities like Lithgow will be forced to bear. The Coalition has no plan for nuclear waste storage, no consultation with impacted communities, and no clear strategy for financing these massive projects.

“The Lithgow community has never been properly consulted on big industrial changes in the past,” Ms. Hook said. “Every time a coal mine or major employer closed, jobs disappeared, and workers were left without a real transition plan.”

She vowed to take a different approach.

“Unlike the major parties, my approach is to do things with the community – not to them. I will push for community-led solutions to transition workers from fossil fuels to secure, well-paid jobs in renewable energy and modern manufacturing.”

The 2024 AEMO report stresses that we must invest in these smart solutions now to ensure affordable energy and economic stability for the future.

“Nuclear is a dead-end policy – an economic wrecking ball that will drive up power prices and leave communities paying the price,” Ms. Hook said. “Instead of pouring billions into an outdated, high-risk technology, we should be investing in industries that will deliver affordable energy and secure jobs for Lithgow and all of Calare.”

A Clear Choice on Election Day

With voters in Calare facing a critical decision at the next election, Kate Hook urged the community to reject the Coalition’s nuclear “plan” and back a renewables-led future.

“This election is about who we trust to deliver cheaper energy, good jobs, and a secure future for our region,” Ms. Hook said. “Nuclear power in Australia is an expensive fantasy which is not backed by economic or energy experts – renewables are the real opportunity for Calare.”

She emphasised that a vote for her is a vote for lower energy bills, regional job growth, and a climate-conscious future.

“The people of Calare deserve real solutions – not costly delays. On election day, we have the power to choose a cleaner, more affordable future.”

 

Also from Kate Hook: Independent Voices Crucial to Australia’s Democratic Future

 

Dear reader, we need your support

Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.

One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.

With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.

Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

4 Comments

  1. Seems that this is an election pitch by Kate Hook using AIMN as a free public platform, that’s novel !

    Whilst on matters politic, I heard yesterday from a reasonably reliable source that if the LNP don’t win the upcoming election, David Littleproud will quit politics as he couldn’t face another three years ‘of nothing’. If Dutton does get up, Littleproud will, of course, get his wish of being Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister which will set him up for the future, give him boardroom access across the nation and a host of directorships…………..we shall see, rooster or feather duster!

  2. In Joseph E Stieglitz book ,the price of inequality ,” as a result of laws that limit the extent of their liabilities ,nuclear power plants and offshore oil rigs are shielded from bearing full costs should they explode. The consequence is that we ( the US) have more nuclear power plants and offshore oil rigs than we would otherwise – in fact it’s questionable wether without a set of government subsidies there would be any nuclear power plants at all”

  3. My error, Terry, which I’ve now fixed.

    It is actually a media release which would have been sent to dozens of independent media sites as well as the mainstream media.

    I’ve now noted that it’s a media release.

  4. It just occurred to me that if nuclear ever got up, it could only do so, could only be sold politically, as a public/private partnership. It could only get up as a risk-free con where in reality it’s the public taking all the risk, even though the justification for PPPs is that the private sector takes the risk.

    But public/private partnerships are by their very nature a con.
    They are not partnerships between the public and the private sector. They are partnerships between govt and the private sector. There’s a world of difference.
    When have members of the public had a say in the establishment and operation of a PPP?

    According to a paper from the UNSW Law School, The need for independent inquiry into PPP arrangements is recognised in Australia and internationally. Greve and Hodge note the scepticism with which many commentators assess PPP outcomes. Research into Australian PPPs has concluded that the departments of treasury are the sole agenda-setters, rule makers and evaluators of PPPs … One hundred and twenty-one projects worth $27 402 million have not been subject to independent oversight by Australia’s auditors-general. NSW has performance audited eight out of a total of 30 PPP projects, Victoria has audited seven of a total of 49 projects, and WA one out of a total of 12 projects. No performance audits have taken place in Queensland, South Australia or Tasmania, despite the cost and number of PPPs
    that have been entered into.

    https://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/29-3-13.pdf

    So we have free market fundamentalists policing the activities of free market players. Wonderful.

    There is a variation on PPPs that can work, and very successfully.
    It was implied in the press release above — the impressive take-up of domestic solar power in Australia.
    But of course this was a p/g partnership, between the public and the government, where the govt provided subsidies for solar installation.
    The beauty of it was and is, that individuals have almost complete control of the process. They do not have to participate.

    Public/government partnerships are the way to go.
    Bye-bye nuclear.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*