I worked in the nuclear energy business in England in the 1960s and I have monitored disappointment after disappointment for the past 50 years (“Coalition nuclear plan a risk to growth”, December 14). The Fast Breeder reactors haven’t worked. The Tokamak “Donut” fission reactor was abandoned by Harwell (in Britain) in the 60s only to be “invented” by the Russians in the 70s. It’s still failing to make progress. There have been many proposals to improve reactor efficiency, none of which have won universal acceptance. Small modular nuclear power plants are still in development, by fewer participants. They might work one day; let’s hope it’s before Earth’s supply of uranium runs out in 80 years’ time.
Wind, solar, and hydro energy are cheap and proven and they are being adopted on a worldwide scale. Cost reductions continue to happen. These investments should last, with maintenance, for four billion years. A good battery changes everything. Put your money on the vast amount of research achieving a battery breakthrough. Ian Walker, Leonay
Peter Dutton announces the Coalition’s nuclear costings. Credit: Monique Westermann
I have an array of solar panels on my roof, rated at 13,000 watts. The total cost of such panels, including all wiring and electronics, is $10,000 in today’s prices. That is $800 per kilowatt. The CSIRO estimates the capital costs of a 2200Mwe nuclear power station, in the range of one of Peter Dutton’s nuclear power stations, is $7675 to $12,500 per kilowatt. That is a minimum of a 10-fold increase in costs over what Australians will now pay for their rooftop solar panels. I pay no electricity bills and the 13,000 watts of panels also charges my EV for free.
Nuclear power stations have huge running costs. Rooftop solar panels have zero running costs for a life span of at least 25 years. We can now run not only our homes but our cars for zilch. Will Chris Bowen stop telling the public the costs of nuclear power are twice as expensive than solar? For domestic purposes nuclear power is at least 10 times more expensive. Tony Lewis, Mount Victoria
Australia is one of the driest places on earth, with erratic or inadequate rainfall and devastating droughts. Nuclear power plants require enormous amounts of water to function. The examples that are being talked about at the moment are all located in the northern hemisphere in countries like Canada and Britain, where lack of water is not an issue. Where is the water going to come from? Which farmers are going to lose their water allocation? Which towns are going to have their water supply reduced? None of these issues are being addressed. Margaret McDonald, Deakin (ACT)
Dutton predicts Australia will need less electricity in 2050 than the government is planning for. If the nuclear plan goes ahead, Australians will be using candles because they will not be able to afford to turn the lights on. The exorbitant cost will probably mean higher taxes and bigger power bills. Robyn Lewis, Raglan
We know the installation of solar-generated electricity is accelerating as we head towards 2030. What will be the financial impact of the Coalition’s nuclear energy plan on the 4 million (or so) domestic homeowners with existing solar generation systems? A nuclear power generation plant has to be operational about 90 per cent of the time. Which I presume means that 90 per cent of the operational time, each nuclear plant must be able to sell all of its electricity to paying consumers. Does the Coalition propose to block our solar-generated electricity exports to the grid during the day and take away the rebates we currently get from our exports to the grid? It appears quite clear the Coalition is proposing that all solar from households will be switched off by the grid operators in each state during the peak solar generation hours during the day. That will affect our solar investments. Paul Fletcher, Berowra
While debates about the cost of nuclear versus renewables may well be valid, developing a nuclear power industry would bring significant spillover economic benefits. Uranium exports could eventually replace coal as global demand for our major export commodity declines. This gradual transition would support coal-dependent communities by giving them time to adapt. Australia’s remote and stable geology makes it ideal for nuclear waste storage. It has been estimated that the cost of storing nuclear waste is about $US1 million ($1.57 million) to $US2 million per tonne, so Australia could generate billions in revenue by hosting waste from other nations. A total of 32 countries use nuclear power. France generates more than 70 per cent of its electricity from nuclear energy and it keeps the costs low. Australia should join these nations to remain competitive in technological innovation and to secure its energy future, benefiting both the economy and the environment. John Kempler, Rose Bay
Australia effectively ruled out nuclear as an option in 1974 when we did not see the need for nuclear given the abundant coal reserves; the Australian Atomic Energy Commission was consequently transitioned to the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation. If we want to be the clever country, we could start looking at alternative “smart” energy sources such as thorium-based nuclear power generation, which does not have the waste issues of uranium-based conventional reactors. It would make sense to start a project to add “new nuclear” to the grid to complement renewables for a sustainable and reliable electricity supply. Dale Bailey, St Leonards
After years of climate change denial, the Coalition has presented its “Fission Impossible” alternative to meet our future energy needs. This wildly ambitious plan is a slow-burn solution to an immediate crisis. The risks of accepting the preposterous ideal is far greater than political. Janet Argall, Dulwich Hill
So Dutton wants to reduce the number of rooftop solar panels, discourage electric cars, continue with coal as long as possible and then start a taxpayer-funded nuclear industry from scratch with a start time of 2035. Tell him he’s dreaming. Michael Wright, Chippendale
I believe nuclear power is needed and that it will be ready at the same time as high-speed rail is completed from Hobart to Brisbane via Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney. Peter Kamenyitzky, Castle Hill
Bye, Terry. Stay, Jill
Can I suggest, Ross MacPherson, that you look for Terry’s wife Jill Dupleix’s stellar cookbook, Lighten Up (Letters, September 14). It was published in 2007 and it’s ageless. Full of suggestions and recipes for a healthier way to cook, all touched with Jill’s experience and her very warm style. And to Terry, thank you for your entertaining reviews, always a highlight wherever and whenever they appeared. Along with Helen Atkins, I just have to ask that you please, for the public good, talk Jill out of any thoughts of retiring with you.
Dawn Hope, Wahroonga
Jill Dupleix and Terry Durack Credit: Edwina Pickles
The dismal science
A useful hint, Al Svirskis and Ross Duncan (Letters, December 14). Don’t try to understand economics. On being told that his economics exam paper was the same as it was in the previous year, a professor replied: “That’s true but this year the answers are different.” Mike Bush, Port Macquarie
Memories of Clive
There’s no doubt Clive Robertson was unique in his whimsical look at the world. I so recall fondly his radio meet-up with Caroline Jones as she previewed her forthcoming morning program. Clive’s constant teasing of a possible lunch date in the future. Did it ever take place? However, my most hilarious memory of Clive was recollections of his mother. He was apparently a quirky little chap as a child. Members of his family constantly found it difficult to work him out. After his pram “got away” on the Katoomba street hill, his mother always continued to stress that she had the brake on. Greg Vale, Kiama
Gift of dignity my new year’s resolution
What a great metric, the “dignity index”, to measure the contempt against others that our leaders and ordinary people exhibit (“Dignity has a price we can afford”, December 14). Thanks, Julia Baird for introducing me to it. It’s something I surely can implement in my own life when I talk about controversial issues with my family and friends. It is much easier to wipe out an ideological opponent than it is to address our intellectual points of difference or to look for convergences of ideas, which requires calm, logic, evidence and recognition of humanity. As I finished reading the piece, I read “Person of the Year, again! Expect a more savage Trump”, below it. It is not easy to frame some people with dignity but I do hope to try, as a new year’s resolution. Manbir Singh Kohli, Pemulwuy
The dignity indexCredit: Dionne Gain
Julia Baird’s plea for us to frame people with whom we disagree with dignity rather than contempt echoes Abraham Lincoln’s concluding appeal in his first inaugural address, given in a spirit of reconciliation in the context of the looming civil war, to respond to “the better angels of our nature”. In Baird’s context, this is to choose not to be locked into an in-group versus an out-group mentality but rather to seek to understand others before insisting they understand us and that we bring harmony to a discussion rather than discord. Co-operation and progress are more likely to be obtained by focusing on common goals and adopting respectful attitudes to differences rather than by resorting to ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with us. Paul Casey, Callala Bay
I always look forward to reading Julia Baird’s latest philosophical gem. I’m tempted to compare her highly developed and insightful wisdom with the likes of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. However, Julia wouldn’t have been allowed anywhere near Athens’ marbled halls. There were one or two female thinkers of the time, but they were kept well in the background and I can’t imagine Julia being content to play second fiddle to her male counterparts, even in ancient Greece. To which I say, thank you, Julia for being such a valued contributor to the Herald’s pages. Eric Hunter, Cook (ACT)
Healthscope insult
Expecting highly trained nurses and midwives, who are mostly female, to do menial chores as part of their duties appears to be a case of systematic and historical discrimination against women who work in hospitals (“Ultimatum given to nurses in pay row”, December 14). Doctors, who have predominantly been men, are not asked to mop floors, move beds and deliver meals because they’re too busy doing the important stuff, like making sure you have a pulse, to also bring you your pulses. Alicia Dawson, Balmain
I couldn’t believe what I was reading, about nurses being expected to do the work of cleaners and ward staff. This lack of respect for their professional status and responsibilities is appalling; I can’t help noticing that nothing similar has been put to the doctors on staff. You’d certainly have to wonder whether sexism is alive and kicking here, as most nurses are women. And it would be extremely interesting to know the male/female ratio of those of “hospital giant” Healthscope’s decision-makers who are calling the shots in this case. Anne Ring, Coogee
Andrews caused anguish
While not wishing to denigrate many of Kevin Andrews’ political achievements, it must still be remembered that he scuppered the Northern Territory’s fledgling voluntary euthanasia bill, thus causing considerable anguish to those, not of his religious persuasion, who wished to avail themselves of it (“PMs, MPs join family in tribute to Andrews”, December 15). Yola Center, Lane Cove
Kevin Andrews Credit: The Age
No doubt Kevin Andrews was a religiously devout person and a hardworking politician but his policies were regressive, controlling and overly governed by his reactionary views. They offered little to the improvement of daily lives; like so many of his ilk, he was a “straightener” who used government to set people right. Tony Sullivan, Adamstown Heights
Why are so many remembering Kevin Andrews as a man of conviction and faith as though that were an indisputably good thing? I will remember Andrews for his less than Christian attitude to refugees and his opposition to assisted suicide and same-sex marriage. Alynn Pratt, Grenfell
Kevin Andrews will be remembered for his Euthanasia Laws Bill 1996 overriding the Northern Territory legislation of the rights of the terminally ill. His overriding of the NT legislation set the right to die back decades. Nothing to be proud of. Robert Pallister, Punchbowl
Regaining one’s marbles
A wonderful win-win all round (“Replicas may close Marbles debate”, December 14). Greeks around the world (including here in Australia) will rejoice at the return of the Parthenon Marbles to the beautiful new museum in the city where they belong. Visitors to the British Museum will be able to see exact replicas of these marvellous sculptures. And Britain will remove the stain of one of its dodgy imperialistic thefts. Are the descendants of the avaricious aristocrat Lord Elgin and the equally scurrilous, tax-avoiding Lord Castlereagh being investigated, by the way, for profiting from the proceeds of crime? Thirty thousand English quid is a tidy sum to have got out of the government in the early 19th century. Bruce Marshall, Bundanoon
Visitors look at sculptures that are part of the Parthenon Marbles at the British Museum in London.Credit: AP
Plenty to build on
Max Maddison’s article is a good introduction to the person coming into the important government role of NSW building commissioner (“Commissioner condemns lazy building work”, December 14). One cause of the “bare minimum” culture he refers to is profit maximisation. While profits are essential in our society, profit maximisation has, over the past 30 years, led businesses to the default mantra of perpetual and relentless cost minimisation.
In the building industry, this means awarding work to the lowest cost provider. It is in this environment that the bare minimum becomes dangerous, as we have seen in a couple of new apartment complexes in Sydney in the recent past.
To avoid this, builders and their subcontractors have to be regulated by government. Critics call this regulatory environment “government red tape”.
There is tension between cost minimisation and fit for purpose. Until builders and developers stop making profit maximisation their No.1 objective, building regulation will remain necessary. An effective commissioner is required to administer that environment; cultural change is not overnight. Graham Hansen, Denistone
- To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
- The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.