Energy giant AGL slams Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plans

Australia’s biggest electricity generator has slammed a nuclear push by the Opposition, ruling out the technology in a move that may sideline a plan to station a reactor in the Latrobe Valley.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Gaye Gerard

Australia’s biggest electricity generator has slammed a nuclear push by the Opposition, ruling out the technology in a move that may sideline a plan to station a reactor in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley.

AGL declared nuclear energy was “unviable” and muddied the investment landscape in comments that pit the near 200-year old company against the Coalition and its plans to reshape Australia’s energy mix.

The move comes as the head of the CSIRO blasted Peter Dutton for “disparaging science” with his “unfounded criticisms” of the ­organisation's annual GenCost ­report and its modelling of the price of renewables.

The Opposition Leader has said he will take to the next election a plan to build small modular reactors at the sites of retiring coal power stations, but AGL chief executive Damien Nicks said on Friday that the soon-to-close generators were already being repurposed and the debate could hinder investments in new renewable energy.

“There is no viable schedule for the regulation or development of nuclear energy in Australia, and the cost, build time and public opinion are all prohibitive,” Mr Nicks said.

“AGL’s ambition to add 12GW of new renewable and firming generation by 2035 does not include nuclear energy. Policy certainty is important for companies like AGL and ongoing debate on the matter runs the risk of unnecessarily complicating the long-term investment decisions necessary for the energy transition.”

One of AGL’s biggest power stations, Loy Yang in the Latrobe Valley, is due to close by 2035.

The comments by Mr Nicks represented one of the most direct interventions from the energy industry, which has largely shied away from overt criticism of the Opposition’s energy policy.

Mr Dutton and the Coalition also came under fire on Friday from the nation’s top science body, the CSIRO, for criticism made about the organisation’s costing of various energy sources.

“For science to be useful and for challenges to be overcome it ­requires the trust of the community. Maintaining trust requires scientists to act with integrity. Maintaining trust also requires our political leaders to resist the temptation to disparage science,” chief executive Douglas Hilton said.

“As chief executive of CSIRO, I will staunchly defend our scientists and our organisation against unfounded criticism. The GenCost report can be trusted by all our elected representatives, irrespective of whether they are advocating for electricity generation by renewables, coal, gas or nuclear energy.”

But Mr Dutton doubled down on his criticism of the report.

“At the moment, that report that was released, it doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables. I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep our prices down,” he told Channel 9.

“All I’m saying is let’s have a fair comparison, instead of a skewed one, and that’s why I was critical of that particular report, not of the CSIRO in general, and I think it was a fair point to make.”

Anthony Albanese said it would “take decades” to get a ­nuclear energy reactor up in Australia and criticised the lack of ­detail over how the technology would be funded and where reactors would be located.

“The tragedy of the nuclear distraction is that it would provide uncertainty for investors, and what investors need is that certainty going forward,” the Prime Minister said.

The Australian Energy Market Operator has said the fleet of coal generators are likely to be retired within 15 years and work must be accelerated on developing replacements or electricity supplies will be unreliable for the next decade.

But Australia is struggling to accelerate zero-emission projects quickly enough as planning laws and transmission delays see projects remain on the shelf, a trend that energy companies have privately insisted would be made more bumpy by a debate about nuclear power.