Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s highly anticipated speech on the Coalition’s nuclear energy plans did not deliver a crucial detail: the expected budget.
Despite repeated government pressure on the cost question, Dutton said the Coalition’s nuclear plan would cost “a fraction” of the Albanese government’s $1.3 trillion energy transition scheme.
“I can guarantee you this: our nuclear plan will cost a fraction of the Government’s reckless $1.3 trillion plan, with its 28,000 kilometres of new transmission lines ripping up agricultural land and national parks,” Dutton stated before the Committee for Economic Development Australia (CEDA) in Sydney on Sept. 23.
Dutton acknowledged that the plan will require a significant upfront cost and promised to release the full costings “at a time of our choosing,” as he criticised Labor for misleading Australians with their previous energy modelling.
“And just as we were upfront about the locations of our nuclear sites, we will be upfront about the cost of nuclear energy.”
As per the plan, Coalition wants to build seven nuclear power stations and has identified the sites at Tarong and Callide in Queensland, Liddell and Mount Piper in New South Wales (NSW), Port Augusta in South Australia, Loy Yang in Victoria, and Muja in Western Australia.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese criticised Dutton for failing to provide the expected details on the nuclear plan.
“He promised to be transparent but hasn’t shared any numbers. It seems like they planned this speech and then realised the figures don’t add up,” Albanese said.
On Sept. 20, Energy Minister Chris Bowen criticised the Coalition’s energy policies, warning it would result in a 49 percent shortfall in electricity supply by 2035.
Bowen’s remarks come from an opinion piece discussing the opposition’s proposed shift towards nuclear and a pause on new renewable investment.
Dutton Bullish on Nuclear
Dutton insisted that, unlike Labor’s approach, the Coalition would utilise the existing transmission network, avoiding the need for extensive new infrastructure.He stressed the long-term benefits of nuclear power, noting that reactors have an 80-year lifespan, while renewable energy infrastructure like solar panels and wind turbines would require replacement multiple times in that period.
“It’s an investment our nation can and must undertake.”
He also shared the long list of nations that have moved to nuclear energy use and have immensely benefited from it.
“Nuclear power works. It’s a proven, decades-old technology. More than 400 reactors operate worldwide today. More than 30 countries use nuclear power.”
As one of the examples he cited UAE that recently completed its first nuclear power plant with an output of 5.6-gigawatts – enough to supply 60 per cent of New South Wales’s energy needs.
“It takes 52 million solar panels to generate the same amount of energy—but the energy is only available when the sun is shining.”
Dutton added that there is bipartisan support for Australia’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines, including the disposal of nuclear waste, and argued that safety concerns over civilian nuclear energy were “illogical and inconsistent” with that support.
“Just as nuclear technology is safe for our submariners, it’s safe for our citizens,” he said, dismissing scare campaigns. He also pointed out that communities near nuclear plants globally have become centres for new industries and investment, and Australia would be no different.
The Coalition is optimistic that the move will also create jobs and industries noting that over 75 percent of coal plant workers have transferable skills for nuclear plants.
