Former Liberal minister Christopher Pyne says Peter Dutton’s nuclear pitch unlikely to succeed   :)


News.com.au
January 7, 2025

Former high-profile Liberal minister Christopher Pyne has effectively written off the Coalition’s nuclear election pitch, stating the likelihood of Peter Dutton actually commissioning a plant is “limited” at best.   :)

Writing for Nine newspapers on Tuesday, the former cabinet minister under the Howard, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments said that even though a returned Coalition government would struggle to convince state governments to adopt nuclear power and pass legislation and regulations for a plant to succeed, it wouldn’t matter.

“But in more good news for Dutton, by the time anyone has worked out that the likelihood of a nuclear power plant actually being commissioned in Australia is, let’s be generous and say, limited, the election cycle will well and truly have clicked over,” he wrote.

Former Liberal minister Christopher Pyne said while it was unlikely Peter Dutton would build nuclear reactors, even in government, it didn’t matter.
Instead, Mr Pyne said the key benefit of the nuclear plan was its ability to unite the Liberals and Nationals on a climate strategy, with the party split against renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

Nationals MPs, like Barnaby Joyce and party leader David Littleproud, have protested Australia’s transmission to renewable energy, stating large-scale project and transmission lines disproportionately affect residents in regional areas.

“If nuclear power never happens, the Coalition can hardly turn back the clock. This is a seismic shift that has been achieved with almost no animus,” Mr Pine wrote.

“In many ways, Dutton has already won – he has united the Liberal Party room, navigated the debate about future energy policy away from coal and moved the Coalition to an acceptance of action on climate change that eluded former opposition leader Brendan Nelson and prime ministers Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison, without losing any skin.”

Nationals senator Matt Canavan has also said the Coalition’s nuclear election pitch is ‘not going to cut it’.   :)

Mr Pyne’s comments mirror those made by Nationals senator Matt Canavan, who said in December that nuclear was a “political fix” and conceded it wasn’t the “cheapest form of power”.

“Nuclear is not going to cut it. I mean, we’re as guilty of this too – we’re not serious. We’re latching onto nuclear,” he told the National Conservative Institute.   

“I fully support getting the ban (lifted) … but we’re latching on to it as a silver bullet, as a panacea because it fixes a political issue for us, that it’s low-emission and it’s reliable. But it ain’t the cheapest form of power.”

whiteknight wrote on Jan 8^th, 2025 at 5:13pm:

But it ain’t the cheapest form of power

But is far more efficient than solar and wind. ;)

But tell us how cheap the batteries will be. You know ones that will last more than a few minutes.

"The capital cost of a 1 MWh BESS can vary depending on several factors, including the type of batteries used, the performance specifications of the system, and the installation location. Generally, lithium-ion batteries are more expensive than lead-acid batteries, but they offer better performance and a longer lifespan. The cost of a 1 MWh BESS can range from $500,000 to $1.5 million or more, depending on these factors."

https://www.ritarpower.com/industry_information/1-MWh-Battery-Energy-Storage-System-amp40BESSamp41-A-Comprehensive-Overview_290.html

Nationals senator Matt Canavan has also said the Coalition’s nuclear election pitch is ‘not going to cut it’.   :)

whiteknight wrote on Jan 8^th, 2025 at 5:35pm:

Nationals senator Matt Canavan has also said the Coalition’s nuclear election pitch is ‘not going to cut it’.

Yes. Silly isn't he. Nuclear output will be less than renewable output? Only if you take the nameplate capacity of the renewables. ;D ;D ;D ;D

The coalition does not want nuclear to succeed. They just want to delay action on climate change for another decade. At the moment they are getting the blame for high electricity prices. When nuclear fails, they can blame it all on Labor.

I've got a few Afghanis doing shifts on my treadmill for electricity. ⚡

freediver wrote on Jan 8^th, 2025 at 7:15pm:

The coalition does not want nuclear to succeed. They just want to delay action on climate change for another decade.

So tell us your fears on climate change. Not hotter than the Roman Warm period, the Holocene Optimum and others. I guess we moderns just can't cope with warmer temperatures, even though cold still kills more than warm.

Even the IPCC says that there is no climate emergency.  ;)

If you are familiar with the IPCC recommendations, then I have nothing to add.

Australia toyed with the idea of going nuclear in the 80's, if it did happen things would be different now. We would have a solid reliable system that would not need coal and gas would only be needed for frequency control. Just think how different it would be now if we had nuclear power, industry would have clean power, it would be cheap, coal would be obsolete, we can still look for alternatives and use what we have.

Quote:

it would be cheap

Nuclear is currently the most expensive option available. And getting more expensive, while renewables keep getting cheaper. That's why it is unlikely to succeed. Also, a lot of the costs of nuclear, such as long term waste storage, are still unknown and not included in the price. Try renting storage space for 100,000 years, then ask them what it would cost for radioactive waste.

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 10:55am:

Quote: it would be cheap Nuclear is currently the most expensive option available. And getting more expensive, while renewables keep getting cheaper. That's why it is unlikely to succeed. Also, a lot of the costs of nuclear, such as long term waste storage, are still unknown and not included in the price. Try renting storage space for 100,000 years, then ask them what it would cost for radioactive waste.

It's only expensive to set up and start. Once it's running, it isn't that expensive and could deliver Australians the cheapest electricity they've ever known. If only the Greens and Labor would stop with their scare campaign based on nothing but lies and misinformation. Renewables are NOT the answer. They have a role to play but it is not the answer and will not provide enough power generation to replace coal or nuclear power generation. Just look at the facts - to power Australia on solar alone would require more than 400 million solar panels covering over 700 square kilometres of land. That's almost half the land area of the ACT and would cost more than $140,000,000,000.

Quote:

It's only expensive to set up and start.

And run.

And decommission.

And also store the radioactive waste for the next few hundred thousand years.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 12:27pm:

It's only expensive to set up and start. Once it's running, it isn't that expensive and could deliver Australians the cheapest electricity they've ever known

:D :D :D :D

So it's cheap but only if we ignore the costs of set up and starting it, the  the clean up and the disposal costs and the storage costs for the waste


that gentlemen is a lesson in liberalnomics 101

:D :D :D :D

Houses and cars are also really cheap, if you ignore the setup cost. Much cheaper than renting or getting a taxi.

Is ignoring the cost the basis of the new LNP election strategy?

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 10:55am:

Quote: it would be cheap Nuclear is currently the most expensive option available. And getting more expensive, while renewables keep getting cheaper. That's why it is unlikely to succeed. Also, a lot of the costs of nuclear, such as long term waste storage, are still unknown and not included in the price. Try renting storage space for 100,000 years, then ask them what it would cost for radioactive waste.

Yes anything can be cheap if you leave out 98% of the cost.

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 9:36am:

If you are familiar with the IPCC recommendations, then I have nothing to add.

From the IPCC AR6  The Physical Science Basis

https://ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/figures/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12_Table_12_12_1.jpg

https://ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/figures/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12_Table_12_12_2.jpg

Please tell us where you see the Climate Emergency. Please, I would like your input. ;)

lee wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 3:25pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 9th, 2025 at 9:36am: If you are familiar with the IPCC recommendations, then I have nothing to add. From the IPCC AR6  The Physical Science Basis https://ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/figures/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12_Table_12_12_1.jpg https://ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/figures/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12_Table_12_12_2.jpg Please tell us where you see the Climate Emergency. Please, I would like your input. ;)

I already told you I have nothing to add. You have figured out where to get the IPCC info all by yourself. Clever boy.

freediver wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 3:51pm:

I already told you I have nothing to add.

So you know there is no climate crisis. Thanks for elucidating on your thoughts, instead of deflection by question. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

lee wrote on Jan 9^th, 2025 at 3:53pm:

freediver wrote on Jan 9th, 2025 at 3:51pm: I already told you I have nothing to add. So you know there is no climate crisis. Thanks for elucidating on your thoughts, instead of deflection by question. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Do you think the LNP uses the same logic as you Lee?

Anyone thinking this Nuclear agenda is just for public and business energy are missing the real reason...
LETS MAKE AUSTRALIA A NUKE SUPERPOWER!!!🤑

Just like you thought Drones were just for Google earth 😝