The anti-wind farm groups pushing the nuclear option to rural Australia

Conservative economists, lobbyists, commentators and energy boffins have descended on regional communities nominated by the Coalition for nuclear sites, in a raft of events aimed at changing hearts and minds in the bush.

Organisers hope the events will create grassroots support for nuclear energy and stoke scepticism about renewables, particularly wind farms. The events, which organisers say aren’t linked, have featured climate science denier Ian Plimer, who recently wrote a treatise mocking the “blackbirding” slave trade, anti-wind farm activist Grant Piper, and others.

Peter Dutton has a fight on his hands to convince voters of his nuclear power plans.Credit: Monique Westermann

A matter of detail

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton announced a future Coalition government would build seven government-owned nuclear facilities on the sites of existing coal-fired power stations, using existing transmission poles and wires.

To get there, it would need to overturn the federal ban on nuclear energy, and overcome state bans in NSW, Victoria and Queensland. It would also need to overcome community opposition to nuclear energy.

Dutton is yet to offer detailed costings for his nuclear policy, but CSIRO’s latest energy cost report card, compiled with Australia’s energy market regulator AEMO, estimates a large-scale nuclear reactor could cost $16 billion and take nearly two decades to build.

Will Shackel is a year 12 student and founder of Nuclear for Australia.Credit: Jamila Toderas

While the Coalition’s policy details remain scant, Nuclear for Australia, a lobby group founded two years ago by 16-year-old Will Shackel and backed by entrepreneur Dick Smith, has been growing as a political force to sell nuclear to Australia.

The group has more than 10,000 followers on Facebook; it has paid ads on Meta’s social media platforms that can reach up to 500,000 people; and it held a standing-room only pro-nuclear event recently in Lithgow.

Shackel said he wasn’t a political party member, and his organisation received no funding from any party.

But there are clear links between anti-wind farm activists, the pro-nuclear movement and conservative think tanks like the Centre for Independent Studies.

Peter Dutton has announced plans to convert retired coal-fired power sites like Mount Piper power station into nuclear facilities.Credit: James Brickwood

The pro-market CIS in January launched its new Energy Program, focusing on nuclear energy. Its energy research director Aidan Morrison was a keynote speaker at Nuclear for Australia’s Lithgow event.

Morrison, a data analyst, in June told CIS senior fellow Robert Forsyth he was no expert, and that he was still learning about climate science.

“I haven’t, like many people, dived deep into the science on climate change and tried to map out my assessment of all the different mechanisms and how it’s worked, so I rely – like most people – on trusting those in public spaces.”

Nuclear for Australia was established as a charity in October, but it isn’t required to report its financial statements and reports until December.

Dick Smith: “I would be against anyone using this particular accident to stifle the spirit of adventure.”Credit: James Brickwood

Donor Dick Smith told this masthead he had contributed less than $40,000 in the past financial year towards the start-up of the group, which also solicits donations from supporters.

“With our move towards renewables, it’s going to mean incredible environmental destruction,” Smith said of his support for nuclear. “A nuclear power station can mean you can have 400 less wind turbines and, of course, the power’s on 24 hours a day.”

Three people are listed as directors of Nuclear for Australia: former ANSTO chief executive Adrian (Adi) Paterson, also the chairman, Will’s mother Kylie, and Matthew Faint.

Paterson, who told The Guardian he was not a climate change denier, in May nonetheless described concerns about human-induced climate change as “an irrational fear of a trace gas which is plant food”.

Dr Adi Paterson, former chief at ANSTO.Credit: Anna Kucera

Tony Irwin, a member of Nuclear for Australia’s “expert working group”, told this masthead the group was trying to convert hearts and minds in communities earmarked for nuclear sites by the Coalition.

“You’ve got to have a bottom up approach to lifting the ban, and also be able to influence the politicians and the people at the top,” he said.

Irwin said his group had been contacted by communities in NSW and Queensland opposed to the rollout of renewables.

“I’ve just been in Queensland and the Great Dividing Range, who’ve been absolutely devastated with wind turbines and just bulldozing through all the forests up there,” he said. “We seem to be destroying the environment to save the environment.”

Nuclear for Australia’s Tony Irwin, speaking at last week’s event in Lithgow.Credit: Nuclear for Australia/Facebook

Concerns about land use have been promoted by the conservative think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, which in December said “one third of Australia’s prime agricultural farmland” could be covered in solar panels and wind turbines by 2050.

It’s an assessment rejected by Australian National University professor of engineering Andrew Blakers, who estimates we could fulfil Australia’s solar and wind energy needs in just 1200 square kilometres, a tiny fraction of the 4.2 million square kilometres devoted to agriculture.

Professed concerns about wind turbines, and their effects on landscapes, are common among pro-nuclear campaigners.

At a separate event held last weekend at Oberon Lake Estate, one of the keynote speakers was Grant Piper, a cattle farmer near Dubbo who became involved in campaigns against wind farms near his property, before setting up the National Rational Energy Network.

Wind farms like this one on the edge of the southern tablelands in NSW are becoming an increasingly common feature of Australian landscapes.Credit: Martin Ollman

Tony Alevras, who owns the estate with his wife Julie, organised the two-day “Climate Change and Energy Solutions Symposium”, citing community concerns with wind farms and climate change. One advertised discussion point was “the alleged climate crisis”.

The lead speaker was Plimer, a geologist and a former professor emeritus at the University of Melbourne, who rejects the human contribution to climate change.

Last year, Plimer authored a seemingly tongue-in-cheek piece in The Spectator titled “Bring back Blackbirding”, suggesting “if blackbirded [sic] Tuvalu teenagers received a Wokeless [sic] Australian education, they could bring back knowledge to their homeland and make Tuvalu a better place”.

In 2022, Plimer told a conservative conference: “No one has ever shown that human emissions of CO2 drive global warming … and if it could be shown, then you would have to show that the 97 per cent of emissions which are natural do not drive global warming.”

Climate change denialist Ian Plimer.Credit: Paul Harris

Also speaking was Dr Alan Moran, an economist and former director at Institute of Public Affairs, who on his website derides “green radicals”.

In June, Moran, now principal at Regulation Economics, wrote in The Spectator: “Hopefully, if Mr Dutton prevails at the next election, Australia will buy time to come to a sensible energy policy founded on coal with some nuclear.”

Nuclear for Australia has secured frequent and positive coverage in News Corp outlets, including front page coverage in the Daily Telegraph and on Sky News, Chris Smith’s show TNT Radio, and with 2GB’s Ben Fordham.

Exclusive polling conducted by Resolve Political Monitor for this masthead in June showed voters are open to the prospect of nuclear: 41 per cent support it, and 35 per cent are opposed.

But renewable projects have far stronger support: 73 per cent are in favour, amid warnings that investment in wind and solar may weaken after Dutton promised to set up seven nuclear plants if he wins the next election.

Change is coming

Queensland farmer and former National Farmers Federation president Brent Finlay, pictured at Parliament House, Canberra.Credit: AAPIMAGE

Queensland farmer Brent Finlay runs cattle, sheep, goats and now wind turbines as part of the Macintyre wind farm on the 4000-hectare property that has been in his family for more than 100 years.

Finlay said the 2019 drought had forced farmers like himself to diversify into a mix of agriculture and renewable energy.

“We’re [usually] 650mm rainfall here, but in 2019 we had 125mm for the 12-month period. Our ecosystem collapsed. Our country is still recovering from that.”

Finlay is a country pragmatist: he’s worked with coal-seam gas, gas and coal in his capacity as former president of AgForce Queensland, but he says wind turbines now make sense for his property.

“Having some visibility of how big this industry is going to be will certainly help rural and regional Australia,” Finlay said. “I think we’re only 10 per cent into this renewable energy surge, and there’s a long way to go.”

What we hear matters

It’s a truth of politics that a simple message repeated often enough becomes accepted wisdom. But this month a group of Australian National University academics released research that shows this is also true of climate change and renewables.

The team, led by PhD candidate Mary Jiang, showed even the most committed climate science believers could be swayed by hearing repeated scepticism; while sceptics could be affected by repeated statements of science.

“It shows that the power of repetition is quite strong,” Jiang said. “It can influence truth assessment.”

Nuclear for Australia’s Shackel said his group was now planning events across the country.

“If a community want to know about nuclear, we will provide our experts and support our experts to get out there,” he said.

Kate Hook says renewable energy offers exciting opportunities for regional Australia.

For those living in regions under a nuclear shadow the questions are more complex, says Kate Hook, who is considering a run against Nationals MP-turned-independent Andrew Gee in Calare next election.

“[What] I’m hearing from people is the nuclear proposal, as a best-case scenario, could be up and running in 15 years [and] that’s not a ‘now’ thing. Whereas you can see renewable energy projects coming up in the region, and that is a ‘now’ thing,” she said.