Australia needs bipartisan support for nuclear power plants and there is no sign of it | Samantha Maiden

It was just three years ago that Scott Morrison was promising AUKUS would not open the door to civilian nuclear technology, writes Samantha Maiden.

Just three years ago, Scott Morrison was quick to quash the hopes of Australian nuclear energy advocates as he announced a new nuclear-powered submarine deal with the United States.

Despite the fact that Australia contains a third of the world’s uranium, he insisted that “there was no reason” for Australia to relax the ban on nuclear energy.

“This doesn’t require the development of Australia’s civil nuclear capability,’’ Mr Morrison said.

“Australia has capability here – we don’t come to this new – but in terms of going ahead with a civil nuclear capability, that is not something that is linked to this decision.”

Cue the screeching sound of Peter Dutton’s nuclear ute reversing hard this week.

“I’m very happy for the election to be a referendum on energy, on nuclear, on power prices, on lights going out, on who has a sustainable pathway for our country going forward,” Liberal leader Peter Dutton said.

Under his plan, seven government-owned reactors would be built on the sites of what are mostly coal-fired electricity plants in five of Australia’s six states.

Federal Opposition leader Peter Dutton with Angus Taylor on Wednesday. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short

He announced a wishlist of seven locations for nuclear power plants including Port Augusta in South Australia, Gladstone in Queensland, the Liddell Power Station in the Hunter Valley of NSW, Loy Yang in the Latrobe Valley, Victoria, Callide in Queensland and Muja in Western Australia.

The first two would be built from 2035 to 2037 – an ambitious timetable – and the last in the 2040s.

The proposal would see the nuclear power plants owned by the government under the same set-up as entities such as the Snowy Hydro scheme.

Announcing the sites, Mr Dutton said it was all about delivering cheaper, cleaner, electricity.

“I want to make sure that the Australian public understands today that we have a vision for our country to deliver cleaner electricity, cheaper electricity and consistent electricity,’’ he said.

“This is a plan for our country which will underpin a century of economic growth and jobs for these communities.

“The assets will be owned by the Commonwealth, a very important point.”

Intriguingly, some Liberal frontbenchers insist the big announcement about “going nuclear” does have links to the original AUKUS deal and the desire of some within the Coalition to frame nuclear energy as a national security issue.

“To be honest, I don’t think that we would have been able to have this conversation without the AUKUS deal,’’ Mr Dutton conceded.

“Because the Labor Party, essentially, is saying that they don’t have any concerns about safety.

“They don’t have concerns about the disposal of waste. And I think that the technology is so different now in 2024 than it was in 1964.”

Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. Picture: Lukas Coch/pool/AFP

What Prime Minister Anthony Albanese did say of Mr Dutton’s plan is that it did not stack up economically.

“It’ll be a taxpayer-funded nuclear fantasy,” Mr Albanese said.

“Here in Australia, we have the best solar resources in the world.

“This makes no economic sense, as well as leaving us in a position of energy insecurity because of the time that it will take to roll out a nuclear reactor.”

South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas said nuclear power would make energy prices more expensive, not less.

“We know from report after report that in the Australia context [nuclear] will make power more expensive, so why on earth would we pursue it?” he said.

The history of nuclear power in Australia has been full of false starts.

It was 1970 when the John Gorton-led Coalition Government backed the building of a nuclear power station at Jervis Bay in NSW.

There was even a Jetson-style building planned to be plonked not far from the world-renowned Hyams Beach.

In a 1969 election speech he declared: “We shall, during the next parliament, take Australia into the atomic age by beginning the construction of an atomic plant at Jervis Bay, to generate electricity. We believe that Australia will make increasing use of atomic power in the years ahead and that the time for this nation to enter the atomic age has now arrived.”

Turns out it had not.

The Treasury prepared the first comprehensive cost analysis in 1971, finding that nuclear was a far more expensive alternative to a coal plant and the project was shelved.

And of course way back in 2006, it was John Howard who promised a “full-blooded” debate and announced former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski would chair a federal government inquiry into nuclear energy in Australia.

What happened? Not much.

The taskforce’s final report – Uranium mining, processing and nuclear energy: opportunities for Australia? – found that under one scenario there could be up to 25 reactors generating about a third of Australia’s electricity, but also flagged the need for community and bipartisan support.

And there’s no sign of that to date.

Originally published as Australia needs bipartisan support for nuclear power plants and there is no sign of it | Samantha Maiden