Nuclear not viable, AEMO declares as climate wars escalate

The head of Australia’s energy market operator has heightened pressure on the Coalition’s signature energy policy by ruling out nuclear as a solution to replace coal, which is retiring too fast.

Nuclear energy is not a viable replacement for coal as it will take too long to develop, the head of Australia’s energy market operator has said.

The comments will bolster the federal Labor government’s critique of the Coalition’s signature energy policy.

The Coalition has unveiled a policy of developing seven nuclear facilities to replace coal, but Daniel Westerman, chief executive of the Australian Energy Market Operator, on Tuesday said there is an urgent need to develop replacements and nuclear is going to take too long.

“Even on the most optimistic outlook, nuclear power won’t be ready in time for the exit of Australia’s coal-fired power stations,” said Mr Westerman.

“And the imperative to replace that retiring coal generation is with us now.”

AEMO estimates some 6GW of new renewable energy has to be installed each year to hit Labor’s ambitious transition targets of having zero emission sources generate 82 per cent of the country’s power by 2030.

Australia is currently installing around half the necessary new capacity, AEMO said last month.

AEMO earlier this month said discussions with the country’s energy industry shows that Australia’s fleet of coal power stations will be retired by 2037 when the Coalition expects the first of its nuclear power plants to be operational.

The comments will heighten pressure on the Coalition to spell out how it intends to power the country with the vast majority of Australia’s coal power fleet likely retired years before 2037.

Opposition energy spokesman Ted O’Brien said last month the Coalition will make additional policy announcements in due course as he hinted gas would likely be the cornerstone of the plan.

Mr O’Brien on Tuesday rejected AEMO’s stance, indicating the Coalition if elected would prolong baseload generation.

“Australia can’t afford to prematurely close its 24/7 baseload power stations before a replacement is ready,” Mr O’Brien said.

“AEMO’s forecasts of closure of baseload power is due to Labor policy, which prioritises ideology over energy security. The Coalition believes in a balanced mix of technologies including renewables and gas, with zero-emissions nuclear energy replacing coal as it retires from the system,” said Mr O’Brien.

Extending coal would likely see taxpayers underwrite the losses of coal power stations, which are increasingly unprofitable due to the rapid influx of solar.

Such deals have been done in Victoria and NSW, but there is uncertainty about whether some coal power stations – many of which are decades old – can be extended to allow for the introduction of nuclear power.

The rival plan has won favour with some, especially in rural and regional communities who oppose the development of high-voltage transmission lines, though the country’s renewable energy industry has described the plan as a fallacy

Rob Wheals, head of the Andrew Forrest-owned Squadron Energy – one of Australia’s largest renewable energy developers – joined the chorus of criticism, as he raised the prospect of ulterior motives.

“If you look at what has been proposed – the first nuclear by 2037 – I think we all know that is not going to happen. It is going to take longer and cost more. Just for a thought experiment – lets assume that one is available by 2037. Well we know that coal is coming out between now and 2035 so [nuclear] does not solve the problem,” said Mr Wheals.

“The sceptic in me says this whole debate is about kicking the can down the road for as long as possible so coal can stay there for as long as possible. I think if we see the fossil industry supporting this then we know the true motives.”

The debate about Australia’s future energy grid is increasingly hostile.

Matt Kean, chair of the Climate Change Authority, challenged the renewable energy industry to heighten its pushback against efforts to what he described as efforts to erode public confidence in renewable energy.

“Those whose interest is maintaining the status quo and their own super profits and self-interest at the expense of Australian families and the national interest are hard at work undermining the transition,” Mr Kean said.

“The facts, the benefits, and the positive outcomes are on your side. It’s time for you to enter the debate and argue for Australia.”