Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - AU
The Guardian - AU
National
Paul Karp Chief political correspondent

‘Long held denialism’: Paul Keating launches stinging attack on Coalition’s nuclear power push

Former Prime Minister Paul Keating speaks to the media
Paul Keating has lashed the Coalition’s plan to build seven nuclear power plants if it wins the next federal election. Photograph: Bianca de Marchi/AAP

Paul Keating has launched a broadside at Peter Dutton’s nuclear policy, accusing him of “seeking to camouflage” the Coalition’s “long held denialism in an industrial fantasy”.

The former Labor prime minister said in a statement the plan for seven nuclear power plants amounted to “resort to the most dangerous and expensive energy source on the face of the earth”.

The Coalition argues that nuclear power will help it achieve net zero by 2050, but abandoning the interim 2030 target has prompted warnings the policy will reduce investment in renewables that bring prices down.

“Dutton, like [Tony] Abbott, will do everything he can to de-legitimise renewables and stand in the way of their use as the remedy nature has given us to underwrite our life on earth,” Keating said.

“Dutton, in his low rent opportunism, mocks the decency and earnestness which recognises that carbon must be abated and with all urgency.”

On Tuesday, Dutton said the federal Coalition wants “to have renewables in the system but we want to do it in a responsible way”, with nuclear energy providing baseload power.

Australia “can’t be reliant on the weather for the ability to turn on the lights. A modern economy just doesn’t work like that”, the opposition leader told reporters.

“I want to make sure we’ve got renewables in the system. We’re happy for batteries, but we can’t pretend that batteries can provide the storage,” he said.

Keating argued the Coalition policy attacks Labor’s efforts to create a “reliable and dependable framework for investment in renewables – the one thing, however late in the piece, the country needs to rely upon to lift the carbon menace off its back”.

Earlier, the shadow energy minister, Ted O’Brien, revealed an independent authority would determine how much nuclear power is produced at each of its seven proposed sites, despite the Coalition claiming it would set the proportion of nuclear in the national energy mix.

On Sunday, O’Brien urged Labor to respect that if the Coalition wins the next election, it arguably has a mandate for nuclear power, but then refused to commit to the opposition dropping the policy if it loses the poll, due by 2025.

In a cagey interview with the ABC’s Insiders, O’Brien repeatedly refused to reveal or even say if he knew how much of Australia’s power could be supplied by nuclear, nor to say if the Coalition would push ahead if local communities rejected the plan.

Asked if electricity prices would go up as coal power plants shut down and nuclear is unavailable for at least 10 years, O’Brien said: “You’re right in that if you have limited supply then prices go up.”

O’Brien said the Coalition’s proposal was to bring in more gas supply and that it supports “the continuation of rolling out renewables”.

Last Monday the Nationals leader, David Littleproud, had suggested the Coalition wanted to cap or limit the rollout of large-scale renewables, but was immediately contradicted by Simon Birmingham, a leading moderate who said they are an “important part of the mix”.

O’Brien confirmed there is “no discussion about capping investment” and Littleproud had since acknowledged this is not Coalition policy.

The Smart Energy Council has estimated the Coalition’s pledge to build seven nuclear reactors could cost taxpayers as much as $600bn while supplying just 3.7% of Australia’s energy mix by 2050.

But O’Brien noted although the Coalition had nominated seven sites there was potential for “multi-unit sites” such as multiple 300 megawatt small modular reactors on the same site.

“In terms of exactly how many on any plant, we’ll be leaving that to the independent nuclear energy coordinating authority,” he said. “It is right we want multi-unit sites. That’s how to get costs down.”

O’Brien said the Coalition would release details of the energy mix “in due course”, after further announcements on gas, renewable energy and market reforms.

“The real question is not – on nuclear, for example – how much it costs. But: is it value for money?”

O’Brien said it would be “crystal clear” how much nuclear the Coalition is planning to implement but up to the independent authority “to work out at each site what’s the feasibility of certain technologies and only from there, can you come down to a specific number of gigawatts”.

This week the deputy Nationals leader, Perin Davey, suggested if communities are “absolutely adamant” they didn’t want nuclear power plants then the Coalition “will not proceed”, but was contradicted by Littleproud.

O’Brien said the Coalition would undertake a two-and-a-half-year consultation with communities, claiming he didn’t think they would reject nuclear power.

“Ultimately the decision … will be a matter for the minister.”

O’Brien said he would base any decision on the “independent coordinating authority’s feasibility report, what is in our national interest, and what’s in the community interest” including “economic, social, and environmental issues”.

O’Brien said that the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, must answer “if we actually get a mandate, will they respect and will he facilitate the uplifting of the moratorium?”

O’Brien then refused to say if the Coalition would ditch the nuclear plan if it lost the election, arguing that it is also advocating for renewables and gas but would not be expected to jettison those.

“We’re doing this because it’s in our national interest,” he said.

On Sunday the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, told Sky News that the Coalition plan could cost $387bn, and that the CSIRO had estimated that each reactor would cost $8 to 9bn.

Plibersek has approved 54 renewables projects since Labor was elected in May 2022, with a total of 8.6 gigawatts of capacity, comparable to 8.6 large-scale nuclear reactors.

On Sunday, Littleproud told Sky News that the $8.6bn cost of a theoretical 1,000MW nuclear plant built today, outlined in the CSIRO’s GenCost report, “is in the ballpark”.

Littleproud said the Coalition would be “upfront and honest” and acknowledged when asked about the $387bn figure that “there is an upfront capital cost”.

“There is an upfront cost but you get to amortise that over 80 or 100 years,” he said.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.