Credit: Cathy Wilcox
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@theage.com.au. Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.
ENERGY
I’m fascinated by Opposition Leader Peter’s Dutton’s claims that the nuclear waste produced by one small reactor each year would be “one Coke can” a year (“Dutton’s claim nuclear waste would be size of Coke can ‘hard to swallow’,” 24/6). Rolls-Royce’s small modular reactor specification is that an SMR produces 285 cubic metres of waste over its lifetime. By my calculations – there are 693,333 cans of Coke in the 260 cubic metres volume, and 700,800 hours in 80 years – there is about one can of Coke in nuclear waste produced each hour, not each year, across a plant’s 80 year working life. So the can of Coke measure is correct, except Dutton mixed up his hours and years. A simple mistake really.
Richard Davies, Point Lonsdale
Eliminating all risk
Sean Kelly’s analysis of the black holes in Peter Dutton’s so-called nuclear policy is astute and timely (“Nuclear void a new low for debate”, 24/6). However, Kelly overlooks a gaping hole in the “policy”: the issue of risk.
In 1957, Britain’s Windscale nuclear energy plant leaked radioactive matter into the environment with terrible consequences for nearby villagers and farmers. In 1979, near Harrisburg Pennsylvania, the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor accidentally released radioactive gases and radioactive iodine into the atmosphere, a major disaster for the region. In 1986, in Ukraine, the Chernobyl nuclear plant exploded with disastrous consequences, not only for the region, but for much of Western Europe. A vast area around the plant remains too radioactive for human habitation. In 2011, the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan was inundated by a tsunami and released dangerous radioactive material. Villages and farmlands for miles around the plant’s perimeter remain uninhabitable.
What all of these disasters have in common is that they were mainly the result of incompetent and sometimes venal mismanagement and human error. How does the Dutton Coalition propose to address this issue?
Allan Patience, Newport
Water’s edge
Nuclear power stations are mainly built on coastlines for good reason. Not only do they use several times the amount of water for cooling, compared to coal/gas powered stations, but the extra effluent water comes out very hot. Unless the outflow is mixed with a very large volume of cold water, the extra heat depletes the oxygen and kills off fish and other marine life, and promotes the growth of blue-green algae – green slime. It is called “thermal pollution”. In one US nuclear station, this damage was still evident 300 kilometres downstream. The Latrobe river certainly doesn’t have sufficient water flow to prevent this, even during the wettest of winters.
Rod Cripps, Parkdale
Finding skilled workers
I can’t get a chippie to do a simple job for me but Dutton is going to find thousands of skilled construction workers for seven nuclear power plants? Good luck.
Sean Geary, Southbank
Be straight with communities
David Crowe’s analysis of the pros and cons of a fledgling nuclear industry in Australia (24/6) rightly highlights the “elephant in the room” which is the problem of safely storing radioactive waste. Nuclear power plants generate low-level waste in the form of uranium mill tailings and high-level waste from spent fuel rods and parts from the nuclear reactors. This waste will be radioactive for thousands of years and high-level waste will need specially designed pools to cool the fuel and act as a radioactive shield. Dutton and advocates of a nuclear future must address this problem before any plans are implemented and communities that will be close to radioactive waste dumps must be given the chance to decide whether they want to be part of this industry that will saddle future generations with dangerous waste products.
Graeme Lechte, Brunswick West
Bigger problems
During an interview with David Speers on ABC’s Insiders on Sunday, Coalition energy spokesman Ted O’Brien stated that the Liberals and Nationals were “united around the vision of a net zero electricity grid” by 2050.
Yes, we do need a zero-emissions electricity grid. In 2023, the electricity sector accounted for around 35 per cent of our overall emissions. However, transport accounted for more than 22 per cent in 2023 and increases in those emissions have absorbed almost all the gains in the electricity sector. And the Coalition has just this year opposed the introduction of a Fuel Efficiency Standard.
How exactly does the Coalition propose to tackle transport emissions, to say nothing of other tricky sectors like Stationary Energy and Agriculture. Electricity is the (relatively) easy one.
I’m not against nuclear as part of our future energy mix. As O’Brien also noted in the interview, “weather is going to become more volatile” in the future due to climate change which may reduce our ability to generate from renewables. But this needs to be bipartisan; a lack of which has impeded the renewables rollout.
John Heywood, Hillside
Shifting mandates
Ted O’Brien said on Sunday that the Coalition was seeking a mandate from voters for their nuclear “policy” and that they would expect the ALP to respect and support that mandate. What about the mandate delivered to the Albanese government at the last election with voters returning close to two thirds of members in the House of Representatives who supported Labor’s detailed and costed renewables policy? Where is the Coalition’s respect and support for that mandate?
Robin Lohrey, Howrah, Tas
Getting their attention
Australian politicians have for decades debated where the waste from our nuclear operations can be safely stored. It needs to be kept somewhere it can be constantly monitored and readily accessed should urgent action be required at short notice. Peter Dutton’s vision of a future with nuclear power stations will only increase the need to answer this question. May I suggest the waste be stored in a purpose-built bunker under Parliament House in Canberra. In this location we can be confident that every politician will have its safe storage at the front of their mind well into the foreseeable future.
Robin Anderson, Mentone
Energy security
One issue associated with depending on seven nuclear power plants that has failed to attract sufficient attention is that of security. Those war hawks should be most concerned that our power security would become an easy target. Consider also the resulting contamination and the unliveable resulting situation for all should they be targeted. I would think many solar panels and wind turbines spread throughout our nation is a far more secure option.
Denis Liubinas, Blairgowrie
Worthwhile shift
Dutton and the Coalition’s apparent denials of climate change aside; their move to adopt nuclear power is both much better than their past stances on environmental and energy issues, and astute policy. Nuclear power is measurably the cleanest and safest form of energy generation. While meltdowns were a risk with the older technology, it is not so with newer technologies that use molten salts as their core.
We have strong reasons to want to develop civil nuclear power: it will replace coal and gas, it will allow for us to develop manufacturing industries related to emerging civil nuclear technologies, such as batteries that last centuries, and SMR manufacturing, both of which can be exported to appropriate partner nations, both of which help reduce waste and pollution. Adapting the bureaucratic process to suit the needs of the actual technology to keep the public and the environment safe, instead of applying standards unilaterally to every site, will dramatically reduce the lifetime cost of these plants. The centralised mass production nature of SMRs will also bring down the cost.
Lastly, we need to accept that we can no longer completely rely or depend on the US nuclear umbrella.
Dale Hartley, Brentwood, WA
Credit: Matt Golding
Nuclear debate
The latest polling shows Australians are divided on Peter Dutton’s plans for nuclear power plants. Not the first time he’s managed to divide Australians.
Bruce McMillan, Grovedale
Distractions
Well done Peter Dutton, for successfully getting everyone thinking and talking about nuclear. No costings, proper time frames, disposal of waste and so on, only tossed an idea into the air that has taken on a life of its own. Brilliant.
Margaret Collings, Anglesea
Never?
Dutton is promising nuclear on the never-never; I’d prefer the never ever.
Dale Crisp, Brighton
Conversations
Another topic for our mature conversation with Peter Dutton – a price on carbon emissions.
Sarah Brennan, Hawthorn
Vision
What a coincidence, your correspondent saying Dutton will be seen as a visionary pushing the nuclear option (“Dutton the Brave”, 24/6) is how I see Daniel Andrews driving forward public transport infrastructure despite the short-sighted opinions of others.
Peter McGill, Lancefield
THE FORUM
NATO: A defence
NATO isn’t a hostile neighbour to Russia (“Farage’s words”, Letters, 24/6). It’s purely a defence pact, at the heart of which is Article 5, which regards an attack on one member state as an attack on all. It’s been invoked only once in its long existence; with the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. NATO members are free to stand aside if another member state starts a war of aggression as happened in Iraq in 2003. Putin doesn’t like NATO because it limits his ability to wage war.
Wayne Robinson, Kingsley, WA
Go green
The development of seven new towers, ranging from 19 to 50 storeys high in Box Hill (“High-rises up to 50 storeys get green light for Melbourne suburb”, 24/6) containing 1700 homes, emphasises the need for more parkland. The towers would presumably house at least 3000 new residents. On the near south of these new towers lies the privately owned (and fenced off) old Box Hill Brickworks, a site of seven hectares adjoining another area of sporting and aquatic facilities.
A parkland area, Box Hill Gardens, near the current towers, is just the north of Box Hill station. It is already heavily used. And some space in those Gardens is to be taken over for the suburban rail loop build. There is the opportunity of a lifetime for the government or council to buy the Box Hill Brickworks site. Quiet space on the Brickworks site, for walking or “getting away from it all”, would contribute to the attractions of the new Box Hill.
Box Hill needs a vision much bigger than the notion offered by developers of an “urban park” squeezed in among the new towers, the bustle, the trade and the traffic.
Elaine Hopper, Blackburn
Out, not up
Is it good for one’s health to live in a high-rise tower? (“Where state’s housing will boom”, 16/6). Melbourne is one of the world’s most liveable cities. The ability to live in suburbia surrounded by gardens, and other joys of the natural world, brings health and happiness. Not far from Melbourne are beautiful regional cities like Ballarat, Bendigo and Geelong. If express trains linked these cities with Melbourne, and if businesses moved there to attract workers, regional cities could grow and prosper. New arrivals could enjoy the benefits of work in Melbourne, a beautiful place to live and perhaps growing work opportunities in their newly adopted cities. This could also enable more people to own their own home instead of being shut out of the housing market in more expensive Melbourne.
Marguerite Marshall, Eltham
Simple shopping
It’s simple what Australians want from their supermarkets (“Woolworths and Coles face billion-dollar fines under stronger grocery code”, 23/6): healthy competition, Australian-made and Australian-owned brands where possible, a decent stock range, prices that are fair to both the consumer and the grower/manufacturer, and a reduction in plastic packaging. How hard is that?
Vikki O’Neill, Ashburton
Lift our game
I have recently visited Brisbane and surrounds where the cleanliness and minimum graffiti of public spaces and transport; the mown verges and lack of weeds and rubbish on roads and freeways is in stark contrast to Melbourne. Customer service in all public areas was exemplary. Melbourne was once a beautiful city to be proud of — it is not now. Melbourne needs to lift its game in all areas.
Heather Kroll, Mt Waverley
Hit the trails
Melbourne is blessed with many trails and connected paths and, on my bike, I have travelled nearly all of them. There are some hidden gems of natural areas as well as historic industrial sites and relics to look over. Many coffees along the way. When I travel past the gymnasiums, people are paying to puff on their stationary bikes and staring at screens or through the tinted windows. I wonder why don’t they get out in the fresh air and see interesting Melbourne from a moving bike saddle.
Ray Barnett, Pascoe Vale South
Verification pains
I waited on the phone for an hour to speak to a person at a government agency to ask them to unlock an account so I could access it online. Having gone through the ID process, the responder merrily said access would be available in two or three days. Five days later I sent an email. A week later I received a phone call, the number showing on my phone as the agency’s. I was asked to confirm my details, including account details, for security purposes. As they had phoned me, I refused and asked how I could confirm the caller was legit. He agreed that I couldn’t. My only option is to phone back. Oh for a real building to walk into.
Heather Barker, Albert Park
Quiet cheers
You won’t hear it but the sound of jubilant celebration is echoing around darkened bedrooms across Australia. Silent and invisible, armies of people suffering from ME/CFS (myalgic encephalomyelitis) have been doggedly fighting from our beds for over two decades for unsafe clinical guidelines to be replaced. We wrote endless emails to anybody who would listen as well as to those who looked the other way. We formed alliances with patients whose voices we never heard and faces we never saw. Many keyboard warriors vanished only to reappear to resume the fight when symptoms eased. Some were never heard from again.
Last week, Health Minister Mark Butler announced funding for new clinical guidelines. Keyboards rattled as a silent cheer erupted.
Jenny Meagher, East Malvern
AND ANOTHER THING
Transport
While we wait and wait for the airport rail link, we need an airport bus link that is part of the public transport network. Not privately run and relatively expensive, as at present.
Phil Lipshut, Elsternwick
There is a new road law in Melbourne. If a driver confronted with a left or right turning arrow does not proceed within a nanosecond, they can expect a cacophony of horn toots from behind. Remember drivers, the early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Mark Hulls, Sandringham
Furthermore
Looking at the list of nominees for the 2024 Gold Logie, I find they have left off the best entertainer on TV today, Colin the border terrier from Colin from Accounts. Like Bluey before him, it’s dog discrimination.
Peter Heffernan, Balaclava
Re the health crisis, Victoria has the world’s worst health system – apart from all the others.
William Puls, Mentone
The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@theage.com.au. Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.