Peta Credlin: Time for debate – Net Zero and nuclear, or junk Net Zero

If Australia is to get to Net Zero, AND keep the lights on, nuclear is the only way – or do we just junk Net Zero? Surely we should at least have the debate, writes Peta Credlin.

At the National Press Club this week, Labor National Secretary Paul Erickson tried to sucker punch the Liberal Party, claiming the election had been lost due to Labor weaponising the Liberals’ nuclear policy. The Liberals would be idiots if they took advice from their enemies, especially as energy remains Labor’s Achilles heel.

For the government to reach its 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2030, coal-fired power will have to drop from 60 per cent currently to hardly 10 per of total electricity supply within five years. Plainly, this is not going to happen, given all the delays to new energy projects such as Snowy 2.0, supposed to cost $2 billion and be finished two years ago, but now costing $12 billion and unlikely to be completed within five years.

Labor National Secretary Paul Erickson. The Liberals would be idiots if they took advice from their enemies. Picture: NewsWire/Martin Ollman

Farmers and many conservationists don’t see how carpeting national parks and prime agricultural land with solar panels and forests of wind turbines is “saving the planet”.

All around the world, bitter experience says that more renewables mean higher costs; because while the sun and the wind might be free, the infrastructure to harness their power, the power lines to transport it and the gas generation to “firm” it when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, is anything but free.

If we are ever to get to Net Zero, AND keep the lights on, nuclear is the only way. Picture: John Thys/AFP

How could the election really be an endorsement of Labor’s energy policy when Energy Minister Chris Bowen was in hiding throughout the campaign – only to emerge subsequently claiming vindication.

Labor will soon make the coming energy train wreck even more destructive by announcing the “ambitious” 2035 emissions target that was hidden during the campaign. When the UK Labour Party and the US Democratic Party are both supporting it, how can nuclear power be a “hard right” policy? And last week Germany, too, announced it was recommitting to nuclear power.

If we are ever to get to Net Zero, AND keep the lights on, nuclear is the only way. Or do we do what former UK Labour PM Tony Blair suggests, and junk Net Zero? That’s just what New Zealand did two days ago, so surely we should at least have the debate?

THUMBS UP

New Zealand government: “We are not prepared to sit on the sidelines and watch our industrial and manufacturing dwindle because of energy security concerns,” said Resources Minister Shane Jones as they abandoned net zero.

THUMBS DOWN

Lack of vision: Can’t we do something about harvesting too much water in the north for the benefit of drought-affected farmers in the south? Come on Canberra – think big!

Watch Peta on Credlin on Sky News, weeknights at 6pm

Originally published as Peta Credlin: Time for debate – Net Zero and nuclear, or junk Net Zero