Peter Dutton reveals how CHEAP it will be for Australia to use nuclear power

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised that the Coalition’s election promise to build seven nuclear reactors will cost less than what he claims is Labor’s $1.3 trillion renewable energy strategy, but he has again refused to provide details of the cost.

However, the $1.3 trillion price tag is disputed by Labor. According to the organisation, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has estimated the construction of the wind and solar generators, plus storage and transmission lines, at an investment of $121 billion by 2050.

Mr Dutton made the comments in his speech to the Australian Economic Development Commission on Monday, saying the Coalition “will release our cost estimates in due course, at a time that we choose to do so”.

However, he said he would be “upfront about the locations of our nuclear power plants, we would be upfront about the costs of nuclear power” and that costs would be calculated independently.

He added that an 80-year lifespan for a nuclear reactor would ultimately be cheaper than solar and wind projects, which would need to be replaced every 25 to 40 years.

The oldest nuclear power plant still in operation, the Swiss Beznau nuclear power plant, is 55 years old.

“Yes, our nuclear plan has significant upfront costs, but it does not require a completely new and expanded transmission network and infrastructure. Furthermore, the costs of our nuclear power plants can be written off and spread over the 80-year life of a reactor,” Mr Dutton said.

PETER DUTTON NUCLEAR POWER

‘Under Labor’s plan, which focuses solely on renewables, all solar panels and wind turbines would have to be replaced three to four times over the same period.’

Mr Dutton also said embracing nuclear energy was Australia’s only chance of meeting its 2050 net zero target, requiring a mix of energy sources.

Australia’s energy mix currently consists of around 40 percent renewable energy sources, with the aim of increasing this to 82 percent by 2030.

He also ruled out placing a cap on the contribution of renewable energy to Australia’s electricity grid.

“I think we want to get a result where we have a good mix and where we keep an eye on the prize,” he said.

Dutton voices support for gas, criticises renewables

Mr Dutton also acknowledged that it would take time for Australia to transition to nuclear power, noting that the Coalition supports increasing Australia’s gas production.

“We cannot switch to nuclear power tomorrow even if the ban is lifted last night,” he said.

‘Like other countries, we need to increase our domestic gas production in the short term to reduce electricity prices and restore stability to our electricity grid. But we can also ensure that Australia doesn’t miss the nuclear train.’

Mr Dutton said Australia would have to rely on “domestic gas production” in the more immediate term, despite its unpopularity with the Teals and Greens.

“More gas is needed and we have been very clear about our desire to improve the approval processes while being environmentally responsible and getting more of those projects out faster,” he said.

During his speech, Mr Dutton criticised the approach that focuses solely on renewables, saying it would be ‘disastrous’ and ‘doomed to fail’.

He said an “energy policy focused solely on renewables” was “an act of economic self-harm” and argued that Australia should generate its energy in Australia.

He cited energy bills in California, where residents paid the “highest residential electricity prices in the U.S.,” despite the fact that solar and wind make up more than 49 percent of the energy mix there.

Mr Dutton also said that “weather-dependent energy cannot power a country”, adding that nuclear power could produce more energy using less land.

His comments follow a backlash from farmers and regional communities who claim the construction of power lines has reduced land values.

“In other words, the nuclear power plant produces the same amount of energy using less than 1 percent of the land area required for solar energy,” he said.

“With nuclear power, there is no need to blanket our landscape and coastline with large-scale solar and wind farms, or the 17,000 miles of new transmission lines needed to make them work.”