Caleb Bond: Forget the hysterics — let’s allow nuclear energy in Australia
Nuclear energy has zero emissions and is widely used around the world without any issue. It’s time to lift the ban on this clean, reliable power, writes Caleb Bond.
Anyone would think the world was liable to cave in every time Australia considers nuclear energy.
It’s become a thought crime. Nuclear energy has been turned into such a pariah that we’re not even supposed to investigate it, or voice any desire for it.
Just ask Anthony Albanese, who spent the weekend trying to defend us from evil nuclear. Or, more accurately, from an inquiry into the possibility of nuclear.
Energy Minister Angus Taylor has asked the Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy to investigate the possibility of nuclear power in Australia.
Mr Albanese’s main accusation is this is proof the Federal Government is softening its position on nuclear and may consider lifting the national ban that has been in place for only 21 years.
Big deal. The Government has a responsibility to investigate the make-up of our energy system at a time when coal use is decreasing. It would be irresponsible to write off nuclear simply because green types hate it.
It was banned in ’98 as part of a deal to centralise radiation laws federally. Victoria had already banned nuclear power stations.
The main thing holding back nuclear power in this country is a strong green movement that is opposed to uranium in all its forms.
They claim material could end up being used to make nuclear weapons. And they carry on about extremely rare disasters that happened decades ago.
Admittedly, it is easy to point to examples like Chernobyl or Fukushima and instil fear. But they are outliers and should be treated as such.
The Fukushima disaster was caused by an earthquake and then a tsunami. The water went over the plant’s sea wall and flooded the basement, killing its emergency generators which were pumping coolant through the reactors. That led to the explosions that destroyed the plant.
The earthquake and tsunami did far more damage than the nuclear meltdown.
Only one cancer death has been linked to the meltdown. Two workers were hospitalised with suspected radiation burns and 16 people were injured due to hydrogen explosions.
Of course, no deaths or injuries are good. But in the context of the imminent danger some would have us believe is caused by nuclear energy, one death from an extraordinary event is a low toll.
Even more so, given the operators of the plant have since admitted they failed to maintain basic safety requirements. Had they done so, we might not be talking about it today.
This, more than anything, is an argument for strict regulation of nuclear power — not its banishment.
It is an emission-free form of power with a much smaller land footprint than any source of renewable energy. Technology is improving by the day and it provides reliable base-load power — the kind we need to replace as coal is phased out.
Australia is the only country in the top-20 energy consumers to not have, or plan to have, nuclear energy in its power mix.
The US, China, Canada and United Kingdom all rely on nuclear energy. The US gets about 20 per cent of its energy from nuclear and has close to 100 reactors. But no one thinks of a looming nuclear disaster — or feels like they’re going to be fried — when they think of America.
It’s time for Australia to lift the ban on nuclear energy and put in place strict regulations on its existence.
Simply lifting the ban would not cause power plants to pop up overnight. The market will ultimately decide whether or not it is viable to build reactors in Australia.
We have a third of the world’s uranium deposits. We happily export it overseas so other countries can use it for cheap, reliable power.
It would be stupid for us to not, at the very least, open the door to nuclear power. If no one thinks it’s worth investing in, then so be it. But that’s not the Government’s call to make.
Strip back the irrational, emotionally charged rhetoric and nuclear power is nowhere near as bad as it seems. If greenies really want to cut emissions, they’ll wholeheartedly support an investigation.