WEBVTT - Why Labor wants to fight the election on nuclear power 0:00:01.160 --> 0:00:10.440 From a sports media I'm Daniel James. This is seven am. 0:00:10.680 --> 0:00:13.800 Peter Dutton's first major promise when he became Opposition leader 0:00:14.200 --> 0:00:17.040 was to build nuclear power plants. It was a curious 0:00:17.120 --> 0:00:19.560 idea with no cost attached and not a lot of 0:00:19.560 --> 0:00:20.479 community support. 0:00:20.680 --> 0:00:25.160 According to Poling, Peter Dutton's had an idea nuclear power 0:00:25.160 --> 0:00:28.440 stations that will cost six hundred billion to build. 0:00:29.120 --> 0:00:31.520 Now the government has signaled it wants the next election 0:00:31.640 --> 0:00:34.040 to be fought on the idea, with the release of 0:00:34.080 --> 0:00:35.159 a new attack ad. 0:00:35.440 --> 0:00:38.120 And because nuclear is the most expensive form of energy 0:00:38.120 --> 0:00:40.600 for Australia, your power bill will. 0:00:40.320 --> 0:00:44.200 Go up beyond the cost. Questions remained about the legality 0:00:44.240 --> 0:00:48.240 and safety of nuclear power plants in Australia. Today, emeritus 0:00:48.240 --> 0:00:50.640 professor and the former head of the School of Science 0:00:50.680 --> 0:00:55.360 at Griffith University, Ian Lowe fact checks Peter Dutton's nuclear promise. 0:01:02.360 --> 0:01:04.080 It's Wednesday, September eleventh. 0:01:15.840 --> 0:01:18.520 Okay, Fron, thank you very much for being here today. 0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:21.800 I'm very pleased to be joined by my colleagues because 0:01:21.959 --> 0:01:23.039 it's a major announcement. 0:01:24.240 --> 0:01:27.640 And when Peter Dutton announced that a future coalition government 0:01:27.840 --> 0:01:32.040 would introduce nuclear energy into Australia, what was your immediate 0:01:32.120 --> 0:01:34.800 reaction to the announcement, Well, it. 0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:37.959 Was initially disbelief at the most fundamental level. 0:01:38.200 --> 0:01:41.800 And today we announced seven locations that we have looked 0:01:41.800 --> 0:01:44.720 at in great detail over a long period of time 0:01:45.400 --> 0:01:51.520 that can host nuclear sites, and that will be He. 0:01:51.560 --> 0:01:56.080 Was announcing something that is legally impossible because the Howard 0:01:56.120 --> 0:02:01.200 government twenty five years ago legislated a prohibition of nuclear energy. 0:02:01.720 --> 0:02:05.400 In fact, that legislative prohibition on all stages of the 0:02:05.480 --> 0:02:09.800 nuclear fuel cycle, beyond mining and export of uranium oxide. 0:02:10.280 --> 0:02:14.800 And in addition to the federal prohibition which was legislated 0:02:14.800 --> 0:02:18.640 twenty five years ago by a liberal government, the three 0:02:18.680 --> 0:02:22.720 mainland eastern states, Queens and New South Wales and Victoria 0:02:23.440 --> 0:02:26.920 all have legislation which would prohibit some or all of 0:02:26.960 --> 0:02:30.560 the steps needed to build a nuclear power station. The 0:02:30.600 --> 0:02:35.480 only possible explanation I can see is that there are 0:02:35.520 --> 0:02:39.200 still people on the backbench of the coalition who are 0:02:39.240 --> 0:02:44.480 skeptical about climate change, and given that they lost previously 0:02:44.600 --> 0:02:47.919 rock solid coalition seats at the last election to teel 0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:53.399 independence campaigning to see stronger action on climate change, it's 0:02:53.440 --> 0:02:56.440 not politically credible to go to the electric saying we're 0:02:56.480 --> 0:02:58.640 going to do nothing about climate change. We're going to 0:02:58.720 --> 0:03:02.080 keep burning colon gas. But if you go to the 0:03:02.120 --> 0:03:05.480 electric and say we're going to build nuclear power stations, 0:03:06.280 --> 0:03:09.680 what that's implicitly saying is we need to keep burning cold. 0:03:10.080 --> 0:03:13.520 We already are a nuclear nation, and it's with enormous 0:03:13.560 --> 0:03:17.600 hope and optimism that I look towards the only credible 0:03:17.639 --> 0:03:22.400 pathway to decarbonize and reach net zero while ensuring Australia 0:03:22.440 --> 0:03:26.760 remains a highly prosperous country, a strong country. 0:03:27.120 --> 0:03:30.240 The seven nuclear power stations that they announced, what if 0:03:30.240 --> 0:03:34.080 they were built, provide about five percent of the electrical 0:03:34.120 --> 0:03:38.320 capacity that we need to get to zero emissions, and 0:03:39.240 --> 0:03:43.240 both the media release and subsequent comments by the coalition 0:03:43.680 --> 0:03:46.680 have been totally silent about where the other ninety five 0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:50.920 percent of our electricity would come from. And of course, 0:03:51.440 --> 0:03:54.600 in the absence of a nuclear industry, the energy to 0:03:54.640 --> 0:03:58.200 build nuclear power stations would be fossil fuel energy. So 0:03:58.760 --> 0:04:02.520 if we were to build seven nuclear power stations, we'd 0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:06.440 be burning more because it takes considerable amounts of fossil 0:04:06.480 --> 0:04:10.360 fuel energy to build a nuclear power station. So our 0:04:10.440 --> 0:04:14.720 greenhouse gas emissions would actually accelerate in the next ten 0:04:14.840 --> 0:04:17.200 or fifteen years if we were going to go down 0:04:17.279 --> 0:04:21.240 the nuclear path. So I think it's really a smoke 0:04:21.320 --> 0:04:24.600 screen to disguise the fact that their agenda is to 0:04:24.680 --> 0:04:27.440 keep burning fossil fuels for the foreseeable future. 0:04:28.400 --> 0:04:31.960 One of the key claims that PEDIDUTM is also pushing 0:04:32.360 --> 0:04:35.680 is around energy prices. We've all experienced the cost of 0:04:35.800 --> 0:04:40.040 rising energy prices. Pettidutm is claiming that nuclear power would 0:04:40.040 --> 0:04:42.800 help get our bills down, and of course that's an 0:04:42.800 --> 0:04:45.920 appealing thought. The opposition is even said that that nuclear 0:04:45.920 --> 0:04:49.839 has helped bring prices down around the world. Is that correct? 0:04:50.200 --> 0:04:52.840 Well, that's as close to being a bare faced lie 0:04:52.920 --> 0:04:56.880 as you can say in public and get away with it. Firstly, 0:04:57.200 --> 0:04:59.920 nuclear power is not used all around the world. 0:05:00.440 --> 0:05:03.400 People look at what's happening with nuclear around the world. 0:05:03.640 --> 0:05:07.279 Nineteen of the twenty biggest economies have adopted nuclear or 0:05:07.279 --> 0:05:09.800 have signed up to it. They've done it because it's safe, 0:05:10.160 --> 0:05:13.280 it's zero missions, it can deliver cheaper electricity, and it's 0:05:13.279 --> 0:05:15.440 a constant source of twenty four to seven power. 0:05:15.880 --> 0:05:19.200 There are thirty countries that have nuclear power, including the 0:05:19.240 --> 0:05:21.920 four that have one reactor and the six that have two. 0:05:23.000 --> 0:05:25.960 In most countries it either doesn't exist or as a 0:05:26.000 --> 0:05:32.360 minor component of electricity supply. Secondly, it doesn't bring prices down. 0:05:32.480 --> 0:05:36.320 In fact, when I looked at average world prices for 0:05:36.400 --> 0:05:40.640 different forms of energy last year, the figures were solar 0:05:40.760 --> 0:05:43.760 three point seven cents a killer what hour, wind four 0:05:43.800 --> 0:05:49.560 point one, gas eight, coal eleven nuclear sixteen. So it's 0:05:49.600 --> 0:05:53.320 not just a bit more expensive, it's about four times 0:05:53.400 --> 0:05:58.120 as expensive as solar or wind. And I'm in the 0:05:58.240 --> 0:06:01.320 UK at the moment, and not very far from here. 0:06:01.320 --> 0:06:04.920 The UK is building one nuclear power station, Hinckley Point C. 0:06:05.800 --> 0:06:12.080 It was initially supposed to cost about twenty billion Australian 0:06:12.120 --> 0:06:16.719 dollars and befunctioning by twenty sixteen. They're now talking about 0:06:16.880 --> 0:06:21.000 generating electricity by twenty twenty eight, with a final cost 0:06:21.120 --> 0:06:24.640 somewhere north of one hundred billion dollars. And in fact, 0:06:24.680 --> 0:06:28.320 all of the only three nuclear power stations being built 0:06:28.320 --> 0:06:31.839 in Western Europe are all years behind schedule and billions 0:06:31.880 --> 0:06:36.279 over budget. And the claims of cheap electricity were based 0:06:36.320 --> 0:06:41.520 on the industry statements of cost, but nothing built in 0:06:41.560 --> 0:06:44.719 recent years has come anywhere near the cost that the 0:06:44.839 --> 0:06:47.839 industry has claimed that will been way over budget. 0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:52.520 You mentioned the cost of building a nucular reactor in Britain. 0:06:53.480 --> 0:06:56.440 We haven't spoken about the costs of building these seven 0:06:56.960 --> 0:07:01.240 reactors here. What does the opposition said about the cost 0:07:02.040 --> 0:07:02.680 of their plan. 0:07:03.279 --> 0:07:06.360 The silence has been deafening. The Coalition have released no 0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:11.880 figures and in a sense they probably can't because at 0:07:11.880 --> 0:07:16.680 the moment there are no working small modular reactors. You 0:07:16.720 --> 0:07:19.360 can't write a check and buy a small modular reactor. 0:07:19.800 --> 0:07:22.160 Nobody knows what the cost will be because they are 0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:26.560 not yet operational, and the Australian Academy of Technology and 0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:31.840 Engineering has released a discussion paper about small modular reactors, 0:07:32.440 --> 0:07:36.360 pointing out that there are several possible designs being considered 0:07:36.400 --> 0:07:40.320 around the world, but none of them are yet commercially available, 0:07:40.880 --> 0:07:43.320 and they said it would probably be the twenty forties 0:07:43.400 --> 0:07:46.480 before it's possible to write a check and buy a 0:07:46.560 --> 0:07:49.440 so called small modular reactor if we wanted to go 0:07:49.520 --> 0:07:52.600 down that path, and similarly, if we were to build 0:07:52.920 --> 0:07:58.520 large nuclear reactors. The cost depends on what design you 0:07:58.600 --> 0:08:04.360 adopt and who you to build them. Basically, the nuclear 0:08:04.400 --> 0:08:07.520 industry in recent years has been going way of a budget, 0:08:07.840 --> 0:08:11.240 with every new nuclear power station that's been built in 0:08:11.280 --> 0:08:12.360 the northern hemisphere. 0:08:13.320 --> 0:08:17.000 Okay, but what about one of the claims underpinning this 0:08:17.120 --> 0:08:21.440 announcement and actually arguably spurred this announcement on, and that 0:08:21.560 --> 0:08:24.680 is that coal fired power stations are coming to the 0:08:24.800 --> 0:08:28.600 end of their life over the next ten to fifteen years. 0:08:29.640 --> 0:08:31.480 That much is true, isn't it? And why did they 0:08:31.560 --> 0:08:33.719 need to be replaced by something. 0:08:34.280 --> 0:08:38.120 That is certainly true? There are two problems that they're announcement. 0:08:38.200 --> 0:08:41.800 One is that they've said that some stations that aren't 0:08:41.800 --> 0:08:45.120 projected to close will close. If we were to close 0:08:45.200 --> 0:08:48.760 down the power stations that are listed in their media 0:08:48.800 --> 0:08:52.480 release as due to close by twenty thirty seven, and 0:08:52.559 --> 0:08:56.760 if we were improbably to build seven nuclear power stations 0:08:56.800 --> 0:09:00.120 by twenty thirty seven, they would only provide about a 0:09:00.280 --> 0:09:03.440 third of the electricity that we will have lost through 0:09:03.480 --> 0:09:06.960 the closure of coal So the numbers just don't add up. 0:09:09.679 --> 0:09:13.080 It's also wildly improbable that we could build seven nuclear 0:09:13.120 --> 0:09:19.240 power stations in the next twelve years, because the Switzkowski report, 0:09:19.400 --> 0:09:23.280 chaired by the head of the Australian Nuclear Organization, presented 0:09:23.320 --> 0:09:26.160 to the Howard government, said that it would take at 0:09:26.240 --> 0:09:29.600 least ten years in more likely fifteen to build one 0:09:29.720 --> 0:09:33.000 nuclear power station, so the idea we could build seven 0:09:33.440 --> 0:09:35.760 by twenty thirty seven seems pure fantasy. 0:09:38.280 --> 0:09:45.160 Coming up after the break Peter Dutton versus the States, 0:09:50.160 --> 0:09:52.840 and we've been talking about the claims that have been 0:09:52.920 --> 0:09:57.520 in the opposition's planned for nucular power. You've mentioned that 0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:02.520 they have outlined seven sites in which they are looking 0:10:02.559 --> 0:10:08.400 to build these nuclear power stations. Tell me about where 0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:12.719 these nuclear stations are proposed to go well. 0:10:12.720 --> 0:10:17.520 The proposal is to cite them where existing coal fired 0:10:17.640 --> 0:10:22.520 power stations are likely to close in the next twelve years. 0:10:22.840 --> 0:10:26.640 The argument for citing nuclear power stations where coal is 0:10:26.679 --> 0:10:30.360 being closed down is that there is a distribution system 0:10:30.440 --> 0:10:33.360 so you don't need to invest in new power lines. 0:10:35.080 --> 0:10:38.880 Not all those sites are even potentially available in the 0:10:39.280 --> 0:10:42.640 state governments in Queens and New Southales. Victoria said they 0:10:42.760 --> 0:10:46.839 are not interested at all in overturning their state prohibitions. 0:10:47.440 --> 0:10:52.240 We've got a prohibition on nuclear generated power in New 0:10:52.280 --> 0:10:55.040 South Wales and we're not going to remove that in 0:10:55.120 --> 0:10:57.160 the state. And I don't know whether the Opposition is 0:10:57.200 --> 0:11:00.000 planning or doing it if they were to win government either. 0:11:00.400 --> 0:11:01.319 I think it's the same. 0:11:01.559 --> 0:11:03.840 And we would fight him every step of the way. 0:11:04.040 --> 0:11:07.080 As I have said, we own the sites. We own 0:11:07.200 --> 0:11:09.640 the sites that he wants to use, and we own 0:11:09.720 --> 0:11:12.120 the transmission lines that he wants toxic. 0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:15.439 It's risky, it's more expensive. 0:11:14.920 --> 0:11:18.400 And it is decades and decades are white. 0:11:18.280 --> 0:11:23.880 And the L and P. Dutton's own political colleagues in 0:11:24.000 --> 0:11:27.360 Queensland have said that they're not interested in building nuclear 0:11:27.400 --> 0:11:28.160 power stations. 0:11:28.679 --> 0:11:31.600 No, no, no, I got to be really clear. It's not 0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:32.360 part of our plan. 0:11:32.679 --> 0:11:34.000 We won't look at it. 0:11:34.000 --> 0:11:35.440 It is not part of our plan. 0:11:35.720 --> 0:11:37.199 He didn't know's my position on it. 0:11:37.760 --> 0:11:42.320 So none of the state governments where nuclear power would 0:11:42.400 --> 0:11:46.520 need to be established, and even the potential alternative government 0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:50.839 in Queensland have said they're not on board with this proposal. 0:11:52.679 --> 0:11:56.760 It just seems politically unrealistic. Even if the government were 0:11:56.800 --> 0:12:01.280 somehow to find a majority in both houses in Parliament 0:12:01.320 --> 0:12:04.640 to repeal the federal prohibition of nuclear power, and there's 0:12:04.640 --> 0:12:07.120 only been one brief period in the last thirty years 0:12:07.120 --> 0:12:09.640 where the government in power had control of the Senate, 0:12:10.320 --> 0:12:13.880 and since it was the Crossbench that persuaded John Howard 0:12:13.920 --> 0:12:17.160 to put the ban on nuclear power in the Environmental 0:12:17.160 --> 0:12:22.160 Protection of Vadavasity Conservation Act. It defires credibility to suggest 0:12:22.240 --> 0:12:26.880 that a coalition government would be able to persuade the 0:12:26.920 --> 0:12:30.599 Crossbench to support moving that from the federal legislation. 0:12:31.120 --> 0:12:37.120 And do we have the expertise to build these reactors here? 0:12:37.160 --> 0:12:39.040 Do we have an industry to build these things? 0:12:39.840 --> 0:12:43.600 That would be a massive challenge. We don't have a 0:12:43.679 --> 0:12:47.360 workforce that is skilled in building nuclear reactors, and we 0:12:47.400 --> 0:12:51.319 don't have a regulatory regime that would give the community 0:12:51.400 --> 0:12:54.120 confidence that a nuclear power station could be built and 0:12:54.160 --> 0:12:58.440 operated safely. And that was why these Swurdkowski reports said 0:12:58.440 --> 0:13:01.600 it would take at least ten years fifteen to build 0:13:01.640 --> 0:13:05.160 one nuclear reactor because we would need to develop the 0:13:05.200 --> 0:13:09.840 workforce and develop the regulatory regime that would allow that. 0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:14.480 Even in countries that have an existing regulation system and 0:13:15.040 --> 0:13:19.160 a trained workforce like the UK, nuclear power stations are 0:13:19.200 --> 0:13:20.920 taking much longer than that to build. 0:13:21.360 --> 0:13:24.120 And what about the risks of waste management when it 0:13:24.160 --> 0:13:27.240 comes to nuclear power plants. Have you had the coalition 0:13:27.320 --> 0:13:28.240 speak about that at all? 0:13:28.880 --> 0:13:32.760 The Coalition is silent about the issue of waste management. 0:13:32.840 --> 0:13:36.120 But I was on the expert Advisory committee for the 0:13:36.200 --> 0:13:41.080 South Australian Nuclear Oil Commission, and it estimated in twenty fifteen, 0:13:41.280 --> 0:13:45.000 nearly a decade ago, that it would then cost about 0:13:45.200 --> 0:13:49.520 forty billion Australian dollars to build a secure storage for 0:13:49.600 --> 0:13:54.760 the radioactive waste that comes from nuclear power stations. So 0:13:55.280 --> 0:13:58.680 as well as the huge cost of building nuclear power stations, 0:13:59.320 --> 0:14:04.200 there is the unexplained and yet unknowable cost of managing 0:14:04.200 --> 0:14:08.280 the radioactive waste which needs to be managed for geological time. 0:14:08.400 --> 0:14:11.520 I mean we're not talking about a few years or 0:14:11.559 --> 0:14:15.360 a few decades. We're talking about tens of thousands, possibly 0:14:15.440 --> 0:14:18.800 hundreds of thousands of years, is the period for which 0:14:18.960 --> 0:14:23.320 radioactive waste from nuclear power stations needs to be isolated 0:14:23.360 --> 0:14:28.160 from the biosphere to prevent damage to humans and ecological systems. 0:14:29.440 --> 0:14:45.040 Allan thank you for your time, A real pleasure mate. 0:14:46.240 --> 0:14:49.480 Also in the use today, Prime Minister Anthony Alberesi has 0:14:49.560 --> 0:14:53.120 vowed to ban children from social media, with legislation to 0:14:53.120 --> 0:14:56.360 be introduced by the end of this year. Children up 0:14:56.360 --> 0:14:59.080 to the age of sixteen could be prevented from platforms 0:14:59.120 --> 0:15:02.440 like Snapchat Instagram, but the cutoff age won't be decided 0:15:02.480 --> 0:15:06.400 until the government has trialed age verification technology. The Prime 0:15:06.480 --> 0:15:08.920 minister says he wants to get kids off devices and 0:15:08.960 --> 0:15:12.320 onto footy fields. Oppositional lyder Peter Dunne says he will 0:15:12.320 --> 0:15:15.880 support a ban, and thousands of farmers have gathered at 0:15:15.920 --> 0:15:18.680 parliam the House to protest the government's ban on live 0:15:18.840 --> 0:15:21.960 sheep exports. The ban, which is said to be phased 0:15:22.000 --> 0:15:24.720 in over four years, passed the House and the Senate 0:15:24.760 --> 0:15:28.520 overwhelmingly earlier this year, but National's leader David little Proud 0:15:28.880 --> 0:15:30.880 has told the crowd of farmers that the first bill 0:15:30.920 --> 0:15:33.080 he would bring to Parliament if the Coalition wins the 0:15:33.160 --> 0:15:36.440 next election will be a repeal of the live export ban. 0:15:37.080 --> 0:15:40.480 I'm Daniel James. This is seven am. Thanks for listening.