Australia needs to go nuclear: engineers

Canberra Times
Saturday 17/1/2009 Page: 5

Australia will probably have to go nuclear to tackle climate change, engineers and scientists say. They say nuclear energy is the only reliable, proven source of electricity with a minimal carbon footprint. They're tipping 15% of the country's electricity will come from nuclear reactors by 2050. And the first plant could swing into action just 10 years after approval is given. The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, which represents more than 700 experts, has issued a report calling for nuclear energy to be on the table.

The report's lead author, John Burgess, said the problem with coal and gas-fired power was that it emitted carbon pollution, which caused climate change. But renewable energy, often touted as the solution, was either not baseload power or not proven. "We need power that runs for 24 hours a day, as opposed to just when the sun shines or the wind blows," Dr Burgess said. "[Nuclear power] is an existing technology which is operating quite safely." He said public hostility to nuclear energy could fade as concerns about climate change grew.

The report said Australia was well-placed to go nuclear because of an abundance both of uranium reserves and remote sites for dumping waste. There are more than 440 nuclear energy reactors in the world, in 31 countries. The report said Australia would probably have a "generation 3 plus" style of nuclear reactor, which was safer and more fuel-efficient than current plants. A plant would produce between 2 and 10 cubic metres of waste a year, a small amount compared with some other technologies, the report said.

But the Australian Conservation Foundation was not having a bar of the engineers' nuclear push. The foundation's nuclear-free campaigner, David Noonan, said, "It's completely unrealistic of them, they're on a hiding to nothing." He said Australians did not want nuclear energy or nuclear waste. Renewable energy was the way to tackle climate change, and it could be a cheap, baseload source of power, Mr Noonan said. And if Australia opted for nuclear energy, it could send a message to other countries that nuclear weapons would also be developed.

The Federal Government opposes domestic nuclear energy. Energy minister Martin Ferguson reiterated the message when questioned on the academy's report yesterday. "It is the Government's view that nuclear energy is not needed as part of Australia's energy mix given our country's abundance and diversity of low-cost renewable energy sources," he said. "The Government has a clear policy of prohibiting the development of an Australian nuclear energy industry." The report, which looked at the best ways for Australia to generate electricity in a climate-friendly way, said a technological revolution was needed. Emissions trading was a good start but would not do enough to encourage low-emission technologies.

It said $6 billion should be spent by 2020 on researching greener electricity generation. New technologies must be deployed on a massive scale, and there should be ''relentless'' work on energy efficiency programs.