Democracy - Is It Worth The Fight?

In light of recent elections, it's very tempting to look at the…

Fencing the Ocean: Australia’s Social Media Safety Bill

The Australian government is being run ragged in various quarters. When ragged,…

HECS Debt Forgiveness: Path to Free Education

By Denis Hay Description Explore why HECS debt forgiveness and reinstating free public education…

Implementation will be key to success of Aged…

Palliative Care Australia Media Release This week’s bipartisan support for the Aged Care…

Trump, AUKUS and Australia’s Dim Servitors

There is something enormously satisfying about seeing those in the war racket…

Expert alert: Misinformation bill before Australian Senate…

La Trobe University Media Release The Australian Senate is set to consider the…

Political Futures: Will Conservative Global Middle Powers Go…

By Denis Bright   National elections in Germany and Australia in 2025 will test…

Does the Treasurer have a god complex or…

By Dale Webster THE Senate inquiry into regional bank closures, which delivered its…

«
»
Facebook

Dutton’s nuclear vapourware

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.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

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

6 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Kerri

    The only thing more dangerous than a politician with a fevered belief in nuclear power is
    a stupid politician with a fevered belief in nuclear power.

  2. Phil Pryor

    Dutton is below the low standards of Freud’s works and descriptions, for one cannot easily measure the sub measurement minimum, so, Peter Duckwit-Futton is Australia’s below lowest estimable dill and dunce, the lowest Jules Verne cavern of utter stupidity, emptiness, unreachable to treatment, a captive of the pox of Murdochery, the black hole of bullshitting blackshirtery…

  3. paul walter

    Gotta laugh!!
    What he won’t do for a headline.

  4. Ken Fabian

    Possible there is an element of actual belief mixed in there, belief that nuclear will do emissions reductions better and cheaper, eventually, without having to stop using fossil fuels or changing anything else or upsetting major donors in the process – a bit the way they believe climate change if real at all is not that serious and believe RE doesn’t really make much energy and believe without greens pushing for RE and subsidies no-one would use it are actual, real beliefs.

    I suspect the fantasy is that RE and climate (not being about the top level science advice, but for, by, about environmentalists) can be wedged with faux-environmental concerns – save the whales… from offshore wind power and koalas from transmission lines, environmentalists being stupid, without seeing the big picture, with no sense of perspective – or they would choose nuclear, right? Where taking away taxpayer support for it would see RE collapse into irrelevance but, just to be sure best to obstruct the things that could make them reliable, like those power transmission links and offshore wind farms and big batteries and EV’s and pumped hydro before too much gets spent on them.

    Except RE growth is now primarily driven by… demand for electricity at least cost. How that sits with free market ideology AND loyalty to fossil fuel miners will make for interesting… justifications.

    They got the mature debate they kept claiming they wanted – discussions of costs and timelines by people who wear suits and who are well informed – when that was NOT what they wanted. They had hoped for immature debate from frothing face painted protesters in full protest regalia.

    They can’t stop RE but they can impede and slow things.

  5. New England Cocky

    Perhaps Boofhead Duddo could explain why the used reactor rods should not be stored for millennia in the property nest door to his current principal residence ….. and successive principal residences as he runs away from his ludicrous political position to impede the economic development of Australia as directed by the Murdoch Media Monopoly.

  6. Clakka

    Boofhead’s latest deliveries have been marked by stutters and stammers, and uncertain confected gravitas as he flip-flops between el supremo rocket scientist and alsoran ex-copper.

    Run the country – ha ha ha haaaar – he doesn’t seem to be able to walk and chew gum. By him, I’m reminded of a bent first year copper in the dock fumbling his notes as he refers a jay-walking matter to a snoozing magistrate.

    Sit down Boofhead before you break out in hives.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
Exit mobile version