Everything to know about the Coalition's nuclear power plan

The Federal Election is this Saturday.

This week, The Daily Aus is breaking down the biggest policy areas dominating the campaign.

In this piece, we’ll focus on nuclear energy, which is the main pillar of the Coalition’s energy policy.

Context

First, let’s set out the issue: Australia’s energy mix is transforming. All coal-fired power stations are planned to close in Australia by 2038, due to a range of reasons.

With the imminent closure of these coal-fired power stations comes a gap in the market that needs to be filled.

That’s because 46% of electricity generation in 2023 in Australia came from coal.

As such, the Coalition says Australia is “running out of energy,” which it says will mean inconsistent energy sources (more blackouts) and higher energy bills.

Their answer? Nuclear energy. The Coalition claims nuclear is the “cheaper, cleaner, and more consistent alternative” than relying solely on renewables.

They want to build nuclear reactors on these retired coal-fired power stations to keep Australia’s energy grid running smoothly.

Let’s unpack it.

Nuclear

Before we discuss the Coalition’s policy, we need to explain what nuclear energy is, and how it’s produced.

Nuclear energy is produced through the process of fission, where atoms (tiny bits of matter) are heated and split into many parts.

The process is normally fuelled by uranium (a rare metal), which starts a chain reaction. Heat is created before a cooling agent like water is used, producing steam.

The steam then spins machines called turbines, which generate electricity.

Nuclear power is not considered renewable because it is powered by uranium, which is a finite resource (there is a limited supply of it, compared to something like the sun).

However, while nuclear is not considered renewable, nuclear power plants themselves don’t produce carbon emissions.

Instead, they produce radioactive waste, which takes a long time to break down and poses health hazards to humans.

Australian ban

If you’re confused why you’ve never heard about nuclear power in Australia, it’s because it’s been banned for decades.

The ban came in response to growing public concerns.

You have read 0 articles this year.

Your contribution ensures The Daily Aus can continue doing the work you love.

In 1986, the Soviet nuclear power plant Chernobyl melted down. The immediate aftermath killed dozens of people, while the exposure to nuclear radiation caused thousands of cases of thyroid cancer in the following years.

In the late 1990s, the then-Coalition Government banned building nuclear facilities in Australia. Some states, including NSW and Queensland, passed their own bans on uranium mining.

Australia’s only operational nuclear site is south of Sydney and is used for research, not to generate energy.

Coalition

Now that you understand the context, let’s move onto the Coalition’s plan.

If the Coalition were to win the next election, they would develop seven nuclear reactors at existing coal plants in Western Australia, South Australia, NSW, Victoria, and Queensland.

The Coalition argues nuclear energy would create a “consistent 24/7 electricity” source after coal plants close. They also say the plan will help the country reach its goal of net zero emissions by 2050.

Net zero

Net zero refers to balancing the amount of carbon emissions released and taken out of the atmosphere. The government’s current plan to reach net zero involves replacing fossil fuels in the electricity mix with renewables.

Analysis from the independent Climate Change Authority found this plan would release up to two billion tonnes of additional carbon emissions by 2050, because we would likely need to rely on gas and coal for longer.

Its chair, Matt Kean, said it would be “virtually impossible” to reach net zero under a nuclear plan.

How much would it cost?

In terms of how much this plan would cost, the Coalition commissioned an independent review of its plan by consulting firm Frontier Economics. It estimated nuclear power would cost $331 billion over 25 years.

The modelling estimated nuclear power would cost $263 billion less than proceeding with primarily renewable energy.

However, Energy Minister Chris Bowen described the modelling as “dodgy”, saying the figures were based on “bold claims” about the cost of transmitting power and lower national energy usage.