Nuclear debate ultimately to revolve around rising demand

Electricity supply has become a highly political issue, and when politics take centre stage emotions often overshadow rational decision-making. This dynamic has profoundly affected renewable energy. Once renewables became politicised, sound engineering principles were frequently sidelined or overlooked. Much of the controversy surrounding renewables stems from poor engineering practices during their rollout. These missteps have led to erratic supply patterns that fail to meet demand, reliability concerns and congestion.

Addressing these problems now requires extensive and expensive retro-engineering. Despite the clear need for solutions, there is little political will to tackle the issue. I believe the debate over nuclear energy will ultimately revolve around the anticipated surge in electricity demand from the rapid growth of artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, artificial general intelligence and the drive toward electrification in all sectors.

Don McMillan, Paddington, Qld

The proponents of renewables technology consistently raise the argument that with the right amount of battery storage to provide backup or “firming” for wind and solar plants, these facilities can provide around-the-clock power to the community.

Leaving aside that the amount of storage required to back up a lack of output for an average 16 hours a day would be impossibly costly, it appears that very few if any wind and solar farms are equipped with any backup at all, battery or otherwise. Why has this been allowed to happen?

K. MacDermott, Binalong, NSW

Grattan Institute director of energy and climate change Tony Wood provides a useful overview of Australia’s energy system, where we are and where we need to get to (“Jury out on nuclear plan”, 23/12). One point he makes is that “expecting that seven nuclear power plants with an average cost of $20bn and capacity of 2GW could be developed and commissioned from scratch in Australia runs counter to all our lived experience of building infrastructure”. In support of Wood’s point is the experience of France, where the 1.6GW Flamanville reactor in Normandy was finally switched on after setbacks led to a 12-year delay and a fourfold increase in the project’s cost. Did Frontier Economics factor in the French data?

Ray Peck, Hawthorn, Vic

The myth that there is no safe method for the disposal of nuclear waste continues to be spread by anti-nuclear propagandists. The truth is that there is technology available for the sequestration of nuclear waste that prevents leaching of radioactive substances into the environment. The technology is Australian, developed in 1977 by Ted Ringwood of the Australian National University with scientists at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisa­tion. The process is called Synroc, a portmanteau of “synthetic rock”, wherein the radioactive elements become part of the crystal structure of rock-like ceramic minerals that may be safely stored underground. The technology has been tested in the US and Britain and, according to ANSTO’s website, a pilot facility to treat materials from its Mo-99 manufacturing facility is being commissioned. Australians should be proud of this groundbreaking technology.

Tom Smith, Bowral, NSW

One of the few objections remaining to nuclear power is the question of waste disposal. The clever Finns have this solved. At Onkalo, they encase spent fuel rods in thick-walled copper canisters surrounded by bentonite clay at a depth of 500m in seismic-free terrane. It is so successful they are now taking radioactive waste from Sweden. One-third of WA has the same stable, Archaen-age rocks as Finland. We could emulate the Finns by taking waste from our friends the Koreans and Japanese. This could be a very lucrative opportunity for Australia.

David Hurburgh, Opossum Bay, Tas

For our welfare’s sake, Australians must demand the PM tests the veracity of Labor’s energy policy by urgently convening a broadly referenced summit to investigate the assertions raised by emeritus professor Alex Coram (“Transition calls for serious analysis, not DIY economics”, 21-22/12). It’s the economics of the energy system that matters medium and long term, not what easily manipulated financial data may indicate.

Anita Maria Horvath, Ballarat North, Vic