There are multiple problems with the ideas of nuclear power.
1. Government Cost - Its gonna be crazy expensive to build if the government has their fingers involved. Better to just allow nuclear power and let the commercial entities build and run it.
2. Lead times - Its just a government idea at this stage. Even if they get elected it will be 1-2 years for legislation, 5 years of procrastination then 6-8 years of construction (maybe 10 if the government is involved). So we are looking at 15-20 years before the first plant is operational. What are the energy plans in the meantime?
3. White elephant. just like our subs, by the time they are built bet it will be an obsolete technology.
4.Political Churn. If the political parties slug it out on the nuclear policy, I can see the government spending billions on studies, committees and the likes, only to lose the next election and the whole thing scrapped.
5. In the meantime.. our energy bills are gonna go way higher and they will look to other alternatives until nuclear is online. Then someone is gonna say something like " we just spent zilions on , so do we still need nuclear".
In conclusion, the nuclear debate should have happened 20 years ago, not now.
@graemehollings2461 Says:
Its laughable all the reasons being put up against nuclear energy. Too expensive, the full costs of renewables haven't been disclosed. The latest is nuclear cant be dialled up and down. Really, nor can renewables.
@graemehollings2461 Says:
Do theses fools not realise the sun is actually a giant nuclear reactor but only powers us for half the day
@graemehollings2461 Says:
Albo has already trivalised it.
@elfuturomio Says:
Nuclear power 🤣
@bigearz255 Says:
Go Potato-head...time to walk the plank
@JD-bn2ch Says:
Albo loves to "panda" to China!
@JD-bn2ch Says:
Good on Dutton! We need to get away from this woke net zero rubbish and the renewable fables!
@morfawmforgham4883 Says:
Nuclear is outdated . The world is going towards renewabls ; Japan , South Korea , China , USA , Germany , Canada , USA , Middle East and Africa .
@damiainbrown Says:
Offended with calls to investigate…. Where do you find these peanuts? Labour the libs and this whole system is a joke. We need major change in this country. Where is our Trump or Farage???
@ianenglish123 Says:
Yeh right.
@Gregpriestley-q4e Says:
Special WHAT once again has zero understanding of what citizens are dealing with, bring it on LNP and on your way get rid of the Greens
@jelenapopovic4659 Says:
Not
@Melbournelost66 Says:
Is Bruce Hawker living in reality about Covid from China and the damage it did with lives lost, lock downs. The power issue we have was caused by Labor shutting down power stations too quickly. They CREATED IT! Daniel Andrews dynamited a power station in Victoria!!! Hawker is just a Labor strategist...
@BarbaraHambleton Says:
Stupid comments
@handeecom Says:
Bruce your a narrow minded knob head
@JimboJones-qn4wd Says:
I thought Australia was SMART and would embrace NUCLEAR! But if you don't YOU ARE BUMB AF!!!
@JimboJones-qn4wd Says:
If we don't get Nuclear at the next election, we are Effed!
@JimboJones-qn4wd Says:
1:03 - Because the Teal voters are FROOT LOOPS!!!!
@Red_Line_Images Says:
Just checked the AEMO website where our power is being generated from, Hydro 15%, Solar 0% and the super expensive wind turbines 3%. Where on earth does our base load power come from??
@Red_Line_Images Says:
What ever Labor suggest, do the opposite and you'll be on a winner. Not exactly a good track record
@alastairgair7504 Says:
It all depends on where Australia wants expensive renewable policies by Labor n Greens, or does Australia want long term reliable base power! Thats what this boils down to!! A
@pomaze1 Says:
Fantastic Mr Dutton , let’s GO.
@kinlau8438 Says:
I am not against nuclear energy but just worry about the cost of nuclear power energy.
@nwodestruction3903 Says:
Finally, a politician who's grown a big pair of gohonnes is challenging the Marxist pussy in the lodge.
@sirstiffpilchard Says:
Slow & Steady wins the race Peter Dutton keep it up. And btw Snowy Hydro 2 was Turnbull's idea and he (Turnbull) was a LINO through & through.
@Verrifier-z6z Says:
Get ready for astronomically high power prices so investors can make bank on cheap Chinese solar panels.
@imeagleeye1 Says:
I wish they would stop the Gaslighting and Bullying shoving nuclear down our throats. Maralinga Sellafield Bikini atol when will we learn its not CLEAN.
@phillip6881 Says:
Peter Dutton commonsence Australians have your back
@timwilson4684 Says:
Peter Dutton has commenced the nuclear energy discussion with the voters and now only has to provide the evidence of what it will cost and eventually save taxpayers. I think the Labor Party are now frightened by the proposal. It fly's in the face of their renewables. Once voters hear the details of Peter Dutton's policy on this it should be a no brainer - it provides for the future - for our kids and grandkids - a chance to prosper once again. Vote Labor out.
@robertnicholson1409 Says:
And it's well overdue !
@troywallace322 Says:
The Teal will squeal if the Chard's get to warm to drink. Best be going Nuclear 🤣🤣🤣
@ianenglish123 Says:
Duttons got to stop lying to Australians. How are nuclear power plants in 15 years going to help struggling Australians now. How are they going to bring down power bills now. Where us the coalition going to get the hundreds of billions required to build, maintain, staff, secure and manage those reactors. As Dutton would say "wheres the detail its a dogs breakfast with many unanswered questions "
@Poorlineforeva Says:
His whole plan has already collapsed. It's still illegal and that won't change
@kitdyer8968 Says:
Nuclear power is cheap power and last for thousand years we can drive our self drive 🚗 24/7
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@jeanettepaetzold6076 Says:
How could it possibly be hard to sell who wants these high power bills who wants this cost of living how on God's earth could you think this is going to be hard to sell when the rest of the world are using nuclear what a stupid comment
@trevorsteel6605 Says:
Bill Rookyard .
Here are all the figures, it's a long read but has every cost, including Transmission.
Bowen states that nuclear is too expensive, so let's look at some real numbers to see just how wrong he is :-
It's quite long, and involves some maths, but if you read it through to the end, I expect you might more clearly see the true cost comparison of wind and solar versus nuclear for similar duration.
The Barakah nuclear plant in the UAE is adjacent to where the latest COP28 was held, so let's compare the cost of that facility with the wind, solar and storage option for Australia.
The Barakah nuclear power station took 10 years from start to full commissioning, it has 4 reactors each of 1.4GWe and each costing AUD10 billion.
So.. 5.6GWe and AUD40 billion cost.
It uses sea water cooling, so there's little demand on fresh water supplies. In fact, the waste heat can be utilised to desalinate seawater and, given our various governments' aversion to building dams, that's a distinct advantage.
Each reactor has a capacity factor of 93%, so the plant can deliver 45,622GWh per year.
The largest wind farm in Australia with a published actual capacity factor is the Coopers Gap Wind Farm in Queensland, with a plated capacity of 450 MW and a cost of $850 million.
It has a capacity factor of 25% so can produce 990GWh per year.
By comparison you would require 48 of those wind farms to have an equal yearly output to the Barakah power station.
48 x $850m = $40.8 billion
The largest solar farm in Australia is the Western Downs farm in Qld, at 400MW, $600 million cost and a capacity factor of 24%, so can produce 876GWh per year.
By comparison you would require 52 of those solar farms to have an equal yearly output to just one Barakah power station.
52 x $600m = $31.2 billion.
At first glance it looks like wind is comparable and solar is cheaper, but that's just an illusion.
The nuclear plant will be in operation for at least 60 years so the establishment cost is fixed at $40B plus a bit for refuelling and general maintenance — allow another $16B over that 60 years — total cost is $56B.
The wind and solar farms will have been replaced twice in that time, so that's $122.4B and $93.6B respectively for similar duration. — excluding inflation, disposal, etc.
Of course the above costs account for only 5.6GW of a grid that typically draws around 5 times that at evening peak, so all nuclear becomes $280B, All wind is $612B, all solar is $458B — 50% wind and solar would still be $535B or 92% dearer than the nuclear option, and that's just the cost of the generators.
As all of these farms are necessarily spread out across the country, the huge added cost of transmission infrastructure — none of which would be required for nuclear, must also be included in costings — currently estimated at $100B, but guaranteed to go much ‐ much higher — (the CSIRO conveniently omitted this and storage in their most recent Gencost report — they've recently admitted this omission).
Add that $100B to the RE above and you're now at $635B.
But wait, there's more... Those wind and solar farms will not produce consistently like the nuclear plant, so let's consider storage of at least the same capacity of just one single nuclear plant...
The Mooroobool battery in Victoria has an instantaneous power of 300MW, cost $300M and has a capacity of 450MWh, so it can provide 300MW for just 1.5 hours till dead flat.
So you're going to need 19 of those batteries to have an equivalent instantaneous capacity as one nuclear plant, but you will need 150 of them to provide the same output for a 12 hour night of a low wind event.
150 X $300m = $45 billion — that's more than the establishment cost of one nuclear power station.
The entire East coast NEM area recently suffered a wind drought for almost a fortnight during which wind generation was as low as 96MW, or just 1.2% of plated capacity — when that occurs, storage alone will be available to keep the lights on at night.
Typical NEM evening 3 hour peak demand is around 27GW tapering off to 20GW overnight the sun has gone down so there's no solar, and wind is almost non-existent.
So.. you now need to supply the entire East coast NEM area from storage alone.
Just 1 hour of that peak demand will require an instantaneous 27GW :- that's 90 of those big batteries, but they can only do that for 1.5 hours till dead flat, so you need 180 of them to cover the 3 hour peak.
You still have 9 hours of night to go at — let's be generous and say an average of just 17GW..
17GW X 9hrs = 153GWh.
Remember that the first 180 batteries are all depleted, so now you need another :-
153GWh ÷ 450MWh = 340 batteries.
Total batteries is now 520 @ $300 million = $156 billion.
Now you have to add that $156B to the RE costs above, and you're at $156B + $635B = $791B.
That's not the end of our costs though:-
Grid battery life expectancy is 8 to 10 years, so they will be replaced 5 times in the 60 year life of the nuclear plant :-
$156B x 5 = $780B plus inflation.
Add that to the $791B and it's now a whopping $1.571 Trillion
That's about 6 times dearer than the nuclear option, and almost exactly the cost projection that Net Zero Australia put forward in its report.
What about community batteries?
East coast NEM night time instantaneous demand is normally around 20GW with a 3 hour peak around 6pm of 27GW.
A typical large community battery has 500KWh storage — so 13hrs minimum at — let's be generous again and go with that 17GW average = 221,000,000 KWh of energy requirement.
221,000,000 ÷ 500 = 442,000 community batteries at a cost of around $1 million each, or $442 billion total — all of which will require recharging the following day and replacing in 10 years.
Think you can do it with EV battery back up via V2G technology?
If you were to drain say 30KWh from each EV connected to the grid, that 221,000,000KWh overnight load would require 7.4 million EVs, all of which would require recharging next day.
How many EV owners are going to be willing to sacrifice their battery life by depleting them so heavily for that fortnight?
What about hydro? — the biggest hydro storage in Australia is the Snowy scheme — if all of its 9 power stations have all of their 33 turbines running flat out, they can generate only 4GW.
Add the 2.6GW maximum from Tasmania, Wivenhoe's 0.5GW and the 2GW of Snowy 2 pumped Hydro — if it ever gets built at a cost estimate so far of $12B and counting,
and you're still way short of the typical NEM instantaneous evening peak of 27GW that's required to avoid blackouts or, as AEMO prefer to call them... Load shedding.
Drought conditions frequently restrict how much generating capacity our hydro can manage.
Is pumped hydro going to save us?
They're just another form of even more expensive battery, you always get less energy out than you put in and, just like those batteries, it has to be recharged by the renewables that are struggling to even supply the grid.
Granted.... The generation and storage would be a combination of all of those things mentioned plus a few others, but the total costs will change very little (batteries are the cheapest and most efficient option), and will still be orders of magnitude higher than would be the case for nuclear, and would take up vast swathes of land — A 1GW nuclear power station occupies just 3.5sq km.
For similar annual generation capacity, a wind farm will occupy 800sq km, and a solar farm will occupy 200sq km.
Add the purchase or lease of that land to the costs.
At some stage Bowen will be dragged kicking and screaming to the realisation, it's just a matter of how much pain he will put us through before then.
@slshusker Says:
Nuclear is the first option.
The second option is more nuclear.
@olihaub Says:
I think this labour hack is in for a big surprise!
@chrismitchell4622 Says:
Australians know nothing about Nuclear energy, so education is the first step, Modern western reactors are safe! Only Russian reactors are dangerous!
@Dismas2503 Says:
A big shift that will take the Coalition down the path of electoral extinction. Take Dutton's advice, Vote NO if you don't know.
@jennymills3147 Says:
Keep at it Peter Dutton. The country is watching.
@dominicpelle7841 Says:
**Funny how the LNP are now SOCIALIST and want to NATIONALISE Energy**
by owning the Nuclear power plants costing BILLIONS of taxpayers money.
@paythepiper6283 Says:
Any credibility he had went out the window when he claims US voters are moving away from Trump.
LATEST COMMENTS