Peter Dutton has thrown a hand grenade into the energy debate, and the Hunter is in the shrapnel zone.
In the same week Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen named the preferred proponent for a Hunter offshore wind farm and the NSW government dedicated road funding to help truck massive wind turbines to inland clean energy zones, Mr Dutton pivoted to nuclear.
The man now polling as a preferred prime minister to Anthony Albanese wants nuclear reactors at the old Liddell Power Station site near Muswellbrook and at six other locations around the country.
He has not told voters how much the nuclear power stations will cost to build and run and whether Australians' electricity bills will go up or down.
What we do know is that he wants his first reactors firing by 2035, which is way sooner than the CSIRO regards as feasible. The scientific research body estimates nuclear power will be at least twice as expensive as other renewable energy.
Mr Dutton's intervention may be a genuine attempt to shore up electricity supply on the road to net zero in 2050, or it may be a cynical political exercise designed to stimulate a cohort of climate deniers inside and outside his party.
For the seven communities now facing the prospect of nuclear power on their doorsteps, it is hard to take it anything but seriously.
The Hunter community, including business, union, political, environmental and social justice leaders, has put a tremendous amount of time and effort into trying to convince governments to pursue an orderly transition to emissions-free power.
It hasn't always been easy.
Funding programs for coal-reliant areas have appeared then disappeared, investments in programs and infrastructure have been painfully slow to materialise and pleas for action have fallen on deaf ears.
Changes of government have brought new, or no, priorities for the transition.
Not that a discussion about nuclear energy is a bad thing, but it should have happened decades ago.
The Coalition had ample time when in government to get the ball rolling on a nuclear future. Now, in opposition, Mr Dutton wants to have the debate months out from a general election.
As the Newcastle Herald has reported, some in the community will prefer a nuclear option to wind farms off the coast and on farm land. Rural communities, in particular, have been vocal in their opposition to transmission lines.
Upper Hunter Nationals MP Dave Layzell quipped this week that he is dealing with debates about wind turbines, solar panels, transmission towers, gas pipelines and nuclear reactors when all he wants is a few extra doctors.
For the Hunter, the Dutton plan means potential corporate investment in hydrogen, wind, solar and other renewable energy sources, and the supply chains that support them, could face commercial competition from a government-owned nuclear industry.
It means uncertainty about what the Hunter should prepare for. Should our young people be learning about hydrogen or nuclear fission?
The tragedy of the seemingly never-ending climate wars is the prospect of more delays at a time when our region's power stations are closing and our coal industry approaches the finishing straight.
If Mr Dutton becomes PM, the Hunter will need to shift gear yet again.
This is anything but orderly.
