Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has released modelled costings for his nuclear energy proposal. Photo: Peter Dutton Facebook.
Unions are warning Peter Dutton’s nuclear proposal will drive up power bills and worsen the cost of living for working Australians.
The Opposition Leader has released costings for his nuclear energy plan. He says that a government he leads would keep coal working much longer than renewables.
Mr Dutton estimates the seven proposed nuclear reactor sites would cost around $331 billion.
According to ACTU research, that’s enough to install solar panels on every roof in Australia 10 times over, with plenty left over for increased funding for schools and hospitals.
Pointing to the latest analysis from Frontier Economics, Mr Dutton said it reveals the Coalition’s balanced energy mix, including zero-emissions nuclear power, offers a cheaper, cleaner and more consistent alternative, delivering massive savings for Australian families and businesses.
“The Coalition’s energy plan will save Australians up to $263 billion compared to Labor’s renewables-only approach – a 44 per cent saving for taxpayers and businesses,” he said.
The modelling estimates that the Coalition’s nuclear plan will cost $331 billion over 25 years, which Mr Dutton says is $263 billion less than Labor’s renewables transition plan.
The Coalition’s policy would have renewables provide 54 per cent of the nation’s electricity by 2050, with nuclear providing 38 per cent, and storage and gas providing 8 per cent.
Labor wants 82 per cent renewables by 2030 and almost all energy generation from renewables by 2050.
Mr Dutton says his plan to build seven nuclear reactors around Australia would be 44 per cent cheaper than Labor’s plan over a 25-year period.
“By avoiding Labor’s unnecessary overdevelopment on pristine landscapes and farmland, the Coalition ensures a more sustainable and responsible shift from coal to zero emissions nuclear,” the Opposition Leader said.
“Under Anthony Albanese, emissions are higher now than when the Coalition left office, proving that Labor’s chaotic renewables-only agenda isn’t just expensive, it’s ineffective.
“Our plan responsibly integrates renewables, increasing large-scale solar and wind capacity while protecting regional communities from overdevelopment.
“At the same time, zero-emissions nuclear energy and gas provide the reliability that Labor’s plan fails to deliver.”
However, the Australian Council of Trade Unions has cited an Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis estimate that Mr Dutton’s nuclear proposal would increase the average Australian household’s electricity bill by $665 a year.
By contrast, it says Australians with rooftop solar are already saving an average of $1594 every year.
ACTU President Michele O’Neil said working people can’t afford to see their energy bills go up $665 every year for the Coalition’s nuclear proposal when they’re facing cost-of-living pressures.
“For the cost of Peter Dutton’s nuclear proposal, every Australian household could have rooftop solar 10 times over, and we would still have billions left over for schools and hospitals,” Ms O’Neil said.
“The Liberal Party’s priorities show they are out of touch with the issues that working people care about.
“Today’s announcement is a radioactive distraction that is too slow, too dangerous, and way too expensive for working people to afford.
“Unions want to make sure that no worker or community is left behind in the energy transition. Dutton’s proposal is avoiding what is really needed, which is creating well-paid, safe, and secure jobs now.”
The Dutton plan also assumes Australia would build nuclear power plants faster than any other country has before.
Even under that assumption, the first nuclear reactor would not come online until nearly every coal power plant has already shut down, says the ACTU, leaving those workers without good quality jobs to move into and risking years of blackouts and unreliable energy.
The CSIRO has restated in its GenCost report this week that nuclear power is at least twice as expensive as renewable energy.
Its report forecasts that the cost of a regular large-scale nuclear plant operating 90 per cent of the time would be $155 a megawatt hour, blowing out to $252 a megawatt hour if only used half of the time.
“Nuclear advocates have asked for greater recognition of the potential cost advantages of nuclear technology’s long operational life, and CSIRO has calculated those cost advantages for the first time,” the report states.
“Our finding is that there are no unique cost advantages arising from nuclear technology’s long operational life.
“Similar cost savings are achievable from shorter-lived technologies, even accounting for the fact that shorter-lived technologies need to be built twice to achieve the same life.”
Loading ...
