Nuclear power accounts for more than a quarter of Europe's electricity, but Peter Dutton faces some significant hurdles before he can roll out atomic plants across Australia.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
The Opposition leader announced on Wednesday that a Coalition government would build seven nuclear reactors in Australia, including one on the site of the decommissioned Liddell Power Station near Muswellbrook, to shore up power supplies in concert with renewables and gas.
Mr Dutton said the proposed Hunter and Lithgow sites could host either conventional, large-scale nuclear reactors or small modular reactors (SMRs).
The choice he makes for the Hunter could be critical in winning the community's support.
Is it safe?
Nuclear does not produce harmful climate-change pollution but has had a bad reputation since the catastrophic Chernobyl plant meltdown in 1986.
The earthquake-generated Fukushima nuclear accident in 2011 dealt the industry another blow.
Both of those plants were large reactors pumping out up to 3500 and 4700 megawatts of power respectively.
Nuclear power stations work by splitting uranium atoms contained in ceramic pellets inside a fuel rod and creating a chain reaction which releases huge amounts of heat to produce steam and spin turbines.
The Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents were caused by cooling-system failures resulting in massive steam explosions and core meltdowns which released harmful radiation into the atmosphere.
Only workers at the plant were found to have suffered adverse health effects from the Fukushima accident, but 164,000 surrounding residents were permanently or temporarily displaced.
SMRs are potentially safer than large-scale plants.
The International Atomic Energy Agency, the intergovernmental body that promotes nuclear power, says the SMRs' low operating pressure and passive safety systems reduce the risk of accidents.
"This means that in such cases no human intervention or external power or force is required to shut down systems," it said.
"These increased safety margins, in some cases, eliminate or significantly lower the potential for unsafe releases of radioactivity to the environment and the public in case of an accident."
Mr Dutton must also convince the electorate that he has a plan for what to do with the radioactive waste produced by nuclear plants.
SMRs require less frequent refuelling, but large nuclear reactors must have their highly radioactive waste removed every two or three years, cooled on site for several years in spent fuel pools then stored for hundreds or thousands of years.
What about costs?
Mr Dutton has thrown a hand grenade into the climate debate without revealing costings, designs or an analysis of how nuclear will affect energy prices and the renewables rollout.
A CSIRO and Australian Energy Market Operator report in May estimated nuclear power would be up to twice as expensive as renewables and would take at least 15 years to develop and build.
"This reflects the absence of a development pipeline, the additional legal, safety and security steps required, and weighing the evidence provided by stakeholders," the report said.
The report, using South Korea's nuclear industry as a reference point, estimated the cost of a large-scale nuclear plant at $8.5 billion.
NSW Premier Chris Minns said on Wednesday that Mr Dutton's plan would put billions of dollars worth of investment in renewables at risk.
The US Office of Nuclear Energy says America's large-scale nuclear plants employ up to 800 workers with salaries 50 per cent higher than in other electricity industries.
What are small reactors?
The small modular reactors Mr Dutton says could be part of the energy mix are a fledgling technology with a limited track record in the real world.
The International Atomic Energy Agency is positive about their potential but unsure about their commercial viability.
"Though SMRs have lower upfront capital cost per unit, their economic competitiveness is still to be proven in practice once they are deployed," the agency said in September.
SMRs produce up to 300 megawatts per unit, compared with the Liddell coal plant's 2000-megawatt capacity.
The SMR technology is prefabricated and modular, meaning more units can be added to the grid if required.
They are theoretically safer, cheaper and quicker to build.
The agency reported that more than 80 commercial SMR designs of various sizes were being developed around the world, but so far only two are in operation, one in Russia and the other in China.
The Russian plant, which floats on a barge, produces energy from two 35-megawatt reactors.
China's high-temperature, gas-cooled HTR-PM twin reactors have a combined capacity of 210 megawatts and started commercial operation late last year.
Each reactor is loaded with more than 400,000 uranium pebbles coated in graphite.
The first SMR proposed for the US, a 462-megawatt plant due to open in 2030 in Utah, was cancelled in November after customers baulked at rising costs.
Why these seven sites?
All of the seven proposed locations (two in NSW, two in Queensland and one each in Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia) are former coal power plant sites.
Mr Dutton has said coal communities have a "high IQ" when it comes to energy production and the chosen sites have relatively easy access to transmission lines.
He says the first two SMRs could be in operation by 2035 and larger plants by 2037, though a CSIRO report estimated no nuclear plant could be built before at least 2040.
Five of the seven sites are in federal seats held by the Coalition.
Liddell is the only location in a Labor-held seat, though an Australian Electoral Commission boundary redistribution is likely to shift Muswellbrook into Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce's New England patch before the next election.
The Nationals' state Upper Hunter MP, Dave Layzell, said on Wednesday that he was not against nuclear power but did not support a plant in the region "unless we better understand the local benefits".
What about the law?
Mr Minns said NSW would not overturn its "prohibition" on nuclear power, but a closer look at the NSW Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Act shows the state ban does not apply to atomic plants run by the federal government.
Mr Dutton, if he becomes prime minister, would have to convince the Senate to overturn long-term Commonwealth laws which ban nuclear plants.
He must also convince Australia to vote for him and his plan.
Australia has a chequered history with nuclear after Britain's controversial atomic weapons testing program at Maralinga in the 1950s and 1960s.
The nation has one nuclear reactor, at Lucas Heights in Sydney, which supplies most of Australia's nuclear medicine but has never generated electricity.
Michael Parris
Michael Parris reports on politics for the Newcastle Herald. He started at the Herald in 1994 after working in the ABC Newcastle newsroom. Michael spent much of his career as a sub-editor before moving into political reporting in 2017. He was a finalist in the Sports Australia national media awards for his stories about a male-only tennis club in Newcastle. He has covered NSW and federal elections, state and federal budgets and local politics. He has also written extensively about the COVID-19 pandemic with a special focus on data analysis and the effects of lockdowns on the Hunter community.
Michael Parris reports on politics for the Newcastle Herald. He started at the Herald in 1994 after working in the ABC Newcastle newsroom. Michael spent much of his career as a sub-editor before moving into political reporting in 2017. He was a finalist in the Sports Australia national media awards for his stories about a male-only tennis club in Newcastle. He has covered NSW and federal elections, state and federal budgets and local politics. He has also written extensively about the COVID-19 pandemic with a special focus on data analysis and the effects of lockdowns on the Hunter community.
