The irrational optimism of the nuclear power lobby

The LNP Opposition is the prime example of this unfounded optimism. Coalition leader Peter Dutton is full of enthusiasm in his nuclear plan:

“Our plan will deliver a net-zero electricity grid by 2050 and a strong and resilient economy. It will set our country up for decades to come. At the front of this next wave of growth will be those communities which host zero-emissions nuclear plants. Not only will local communities benefit from high paying, multi-generational jobs but communities will be empowered to maximise the benefits from hosting an asset of national importance ...

A Federal Coalition Government will initially develop two establishment projects using either small modular reactors or modern larger plants such as the AP1000 or APR1400. They will start producing electricity by 2035 (with small modular reactors) or 2037 (if modern larger plants are found to be the best option).”

Dutton and his chief nuclear spruiker, Ted O’Brien, gloss easily over concerns about costs, safety, water shortage, environmental effects, timing, and of comparisons with wind and solar power.

Ted O’Brien is indeed a master at this stuff. He looks just the right guy to be a reassuring expert to farmers, and rural communities. His background in marketing shows, with his perfect marketing style. Pleasant, affable – even warm, calm and confident, O’Brien doesn’t need the detailed facts to interfere with his comfortable assertions about Australia’s wonderful nuclear energy future:

“… because hand on heart that’s in our national interest It is the right thing to do. It is why other countries all around the world are now introducing nuclear energy. It’s in Australia’s interest … We’ll always have to focus on what is right for Australia.

Australia is already behind the eight ball when it comes to zero-emission nuclear energy. The sooner we get going the better It has proven around the world to be the fastest way to decarbonise electricity grids.” 

Australia, geographically remote from the countries that do have nuclear power, is vulnerable to this kind of “style over substance” persuasion.

If we look at the substance of what is going on in those countries, we find a very mixed bag indeed. The national governments of France, USA, UK, Canada, Japan, Russia, are all for new nuclear power – encouraging and subsidising big and (so far non-existent) small nuclear reactors. Not so much China, which is going all out for renewable energy.

The politicians might be backing nuclear power – but the economic realities tell a different story:

BRITAIN: Let’s start with the COSTS – Hinkley Point C nuclear will cost at least £75 billion – highly unlikely that Sizewell C will be any cheaper. Then there’s the WASTES problem – Nuclear bosses quizzed by MPs over Sellafield’s £130 billion century-long clean up. And there’s the OPPOSITION to the industry and to its wastes – Resistance to nuke dump grows in South Copeland.

FRANCE: Is in all sorts of trouble with its nuclear programme – France delays EPR2 reactors to 2038. The Flamanville EPR nuclear reactor will not be able to deliver its full power without major works. Squabble with Britain over who pays for France’s nuclear projects in the UK. And there’s The poisonous problem of France’s nuclear waste.

USA – COSTS: USA nuclear power companies feeling the financial pain- future very dubious. Failure of small nuclear reactor project. Attempts to restart old reactors – Groups Demand DOE Environmental Impact Statement Before Agency Bails Out Palisades Zombie Reactor Restart.

JAPAN: Has a huge nuclear WASTE problem. And it’s not just the Fukushima continuing waste disaster. There is little enthusiasm in government or community for reviving the nuclear industry – TEPCO’s rehabilitation plan delays expose limits to nuke power reliance.

CANADA: The government is gung-ho for nuclear power, but here is strong and well-informed opposition to it. And those peskyindigenous opponents are having legal winson waste plans, – the wastes problem does put a damper on new nuclear.

These are all nations that are stuck with existing nuclear reactors, many of them aging, and stuck with the very significant waste problem – which, by the way, doesn’t get a mention from the comforting Mr Ted O’Brien.

Australia’s Liberal-National Coalition has as its main policy, the setting up of a tax-payer funded nuclear industry. This is a breathtakingly bold step for a Liberal party, traditionally the champion of private enterprise, and sworn enemy of socialism.

The Coalition doesn’t seem to have much else in the way of policies. Their leader, Peter Dutton. is currently inclined to shut up a bit about nuclear:

 

 

It’s up to Ted O’Brien to work his marketing magic. He will probably be helped with his “style above substance” message, by well-funded groups like Advance and The Atlas Network.

Well, it worked in America. Voters, tired of all the bad stuff, turned away from facts and policy details, and voted for an entertaining charlatan. It could work in Australia, and would certainly be a triumph for the nice Mr O’Brien.

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