Cheaper electricity, less emissions and ready by 2035 are some of the Coalition’s core promises on nuclear energy, but are they backed by evidence?

tl;dr - no

  • muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Well then the coalition are fucking morons then. Have they actually said what they are going to use? Thw guardian references SMRs cos thats the only one that was included in the csiro report despite not a single watt of power being generate by them ask the csiro why they did this?

    • ⸻ Ban DHMO 🇦🇺 ⸻@aussie.zoneM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      I can’t remember where but they mention in the report that SMRs were the most suitable form of reactor for Australia according to some industry consultation and it being difficult to realise the full costings of the large scale “traditional” nuclear reactors due to government subsidies, lack of transparency and different labour costs in Australia VS somewhere else 50 years ago.

      Do you think the Coalition (or any hypothetical but still possible Australian Government) could actually deliver nuclear by 2040? Given the lack of expertise and experience, as well as pushback from States and lack of private investment I think it’s really unlikely

      • muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        Hell no they got no chance delivering it on time and on budget but thats literally every single government project in the history of government projects.