Everyone knows how it goes, as things get a bit older, they are a little less reliable. This is being typed on a five year old computer. the computer still works but it’s a little slower to start up than it used to be and sometimes it has a conniption or two when swapping between programs. Those that have owned an older car will be well used to the phone call from the mechanic when the car is in for a service telling you that you really should think about getting something else done to maintain reliability.

This also apparently applies to power stations. Gradually the coal fired power stations are closing down as they getting older. There is probably the inevitable phone call from the technicians that maintain the infrastructure suggesting that they really should do something else while they are there. Even then, breakdowns are becoming more common according to AEMO, who have the responsibility to maintain the misnamed ‘National Grid’, which doesn’t include Western Australia.

In 2019, a Hong Kong investment firm was proposing to build two coal fired power stations in the Hunter Valley. It was a great opportunity according to some. It didn’t happen

Those with a memory that goes back further than Opposition Leader Peter Dutton would hope may recall that former Prime Minister Scott Morrison offered to pay a $600 million subsidy to assist in the construction of a gas fired power station in the Hunter Valley. Apart from the obvious ‘up yours’ to the then ALP Opposition Energy Spokesperson whose seat was in the Hunter Valley there was the small problem of the facility having to run on diesel until a gas supply could be secured.

While former

Energy and Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor said the government had given the private sector every opportunity to act.

“Cheap power is crucial to ensuring families, businesses and job-creating industries in NSW can thrive, which is why we are committed to replacing the energy generated by Liddell to keep prices down,” he said in a statement.

“This important project is good news for NSW as well as the broader National Electricity Market.

“We were very clear from the start – we will not stand by and watch prices go up and the lights go off.”

Maybe the private sector knew better

Kerry Schott, chair of Australia’s Energy Security Board, told The Guardian the private sector wasn’t building the plant because gas was “expensive power” and the project “doesn’t stack up”.

“One of the reasons given for [a taxpayer-funded plant in the Hunter] is it will flood the market with gas-fired power and when there’s a tonne of supply in the market, prices go down,” she said.

“We all learned this in economics. However, that doesn’t work when there are a whole lot of other things around that are cheaper in price, like wind, solar and big batteries, like pumped hydro and we’ve got Snowy 2.0 coming.”

So Snowy Hydro (owned by the Federal Government) was told to build it. Stranded assets anyone?

The Coalition’s latest foray into reigniting the climate wars of the 2010’s is to claim nuclear energy is a valid option. It’ll take until the mid 2040’s to organise but we ‘should be right’ for ‘net zero’ by 2050. First the plan was to install a number of small modular nuclear reactors around the country. The fly in the ointment being that they are vapourware – there are absolutely none of them in operation in the western word at the moment.

When this small problem was pointed out to Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, the focus changed to larger nuclear reactors to produce electricity. We have been waiting for a long time – and several promised dates – for the announcement where they will be located. While nuclear reactors are in operation in various parts of the world with a mixed safety record, they also have a few little issues including

• the timelines – about 20 years to be approved and built in various parts of the world,
• the cost – the latest UK nuclear power station is projected to be $88 billion and
• what to do with the waste – the Lucas Heights medical products and research reactor in Sydney which has been in temporary storage now for decades.

There are more problems with nuclear, have a look at this ABC report for details. Nuclear power is also more expensive than renewables.

So we have an aging fleet of coal fired power stations that are getting increasingly unreliable and an Opposition Leader that has a solution that is optimistically available in the 2040s. Regardless of Paris commitments, climate wars and anything else – what does Peter Dutton think is going to produce power in years between the demise of old coal fired power stations and the nuclear future? It wouldn’t be renewables by any chance?

It’s a pity someone hasn’t asked the question.