Nuclear must be part of our strategy despite the cost

The contrast between Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen and opposition counterpart Ted O’Brien couldn’t be more stark. Bowen is myopically transfixed by a renewables superpower dream that is becoming a nightmare by the day (“Boos for Bowen amid Hunter offshore wind farms”, 20/9). Meanwhile, O’Brien is keeping abreast of international energy developments, including nuclear power technologies as pragmatic options for replacing our coal-fired power stations without incurring the trillion-dollar cost of the Bowen pathway. In all jurisdictions where renewables take-up has been high, unaffordable electricity prices have eventuated. Nuclear is recognised increasingly as the best option for producing 24/7, zero emissions, long-term power. Nuclear for Climate Australia estimates the nation’s coal-fired power plants could be replaced by nuclear small modular reactors at a cost of $168bn to generate power at half the cost of a fully renewables system.

Ron Hobba, Camberwell, Vic

If the planet is to get near its emissions reductions targets, the world does need to be on a “warlike footing”, as Greg Combet suggests. But as American Petroleum Institute senior vice-president Megan Bloomgren said in response to the tens of thousands who joined the worldwide March to End Fossil Fuels last weekend, “eliminating America’s energy options … would leave American families and businesses beholden to unstable foreign regions for higher cost and far less reliable energy”.

Never mind the global instability that will result from global heating and its cascading effects of food and water insecurity, refugee crises, health and myriad other impacts of hotter temperatures.

It is understandable that there are concerns over visual downsides of wind and solar – the blight of power lines in cities is an ugliness we accept for its convenience. But the urgency of the emissions problem means compromises all around. Will the opposition now seek to stoke any concerns for purely political purposes? Its promotion of unrealistic nuclear appears a distraction and yet another kite-flying exercise to garner support among climate action nay-sayers.

Fiona Colin, Malvern East, Vic

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has just announced a slowing of the UK trajectory to achieve carbon net zero. Specifically, with electricity consumers in mind, his government has retreated from the overturning of fossil fuel use for boilers. Additionally, the phasing out of diesel and petrol cars has been delayed.

As in Britain, it is clear that the unreliability of renewables, the slow rollout of the grid and the rapid shutting down of fossil fuels will lead to higher power prices and blackouts. We need to start working on a plan B, which may include deferral of shutting down of coal-fired generators and consideration of nuclear power.

John Kempler, Rose Bay, NSW

My dealings with rural communities when opening and operating metallurgical mines have been excellent. I have found farming families usually in favour of development, with respectful negotiating skills to ensure balanced outcomes for all involved. Unfortunately the renewables industry from politicians down has had a tendency to override or ignore balanced review and discussion, sometimes attempting to force development through with elements of arrogance and disrespect. Push invites pushback. The Australian farming community has a level of knowledge and intelligence beyond that of renewable energy proponents and when development makes no sense, with more rational alternatives available, they will inevitably resist.

Barrie Hill, Lane Cove, NSW

I have just returned from a long visit to the UK and Ireland, and the resistance developing against more wind farms in Australia is timely. Everywhere we went we saw broken or worn-out windmills, but there wasn’t any money left to fix or replace them or store the now useless structures. Europe was 10-15 years ahead of Australia on this journey and now has realised its folly. Nineteen of the G20 countries use nuclear baseload power. Why is Australia the odd one out despite having some of the world’s largest uranium reserves, the most isolated, barren, geologically stable places for the tiny area needed for nuclear waste storage and the most obvious places to install beside retiring coal-fired power stations?

Ian Brake, Mackay, Qld