Quick! Have your say on nuclear power generation in Victoria

This week you have the chance to have your say on keeping Victoria nuclear free.

The federal Parliament is receiving feedback into its inquiry into nuclear power. We’ve heard the pro-nuclear lobby is planning to flood the inquiry with messages in favour. We need to make sure the inquiry hears our voices. But we only have until Friday!

Help keep the Latrobe Valley nuclear free. Add your voice today.

First Name

Last Name

Postcode

Phone

Your message

Email Subject

If you live in or are connected to the Latrobe Valley, please explain your connection to the area (this will be inserted at the start of your message).

Edit your submission email below (we will automatically include your name, email and postcode at the bottom)

I do not support the development of nuclear power in Australia. Renewable energy is already generating 40% of our electricity and is on track to replace fossil fuels.

The development of a nuclear industry, which the best data says would not be ready until the mid 2040’s at the earliest, threatens to derail the progress we are making. It also generates dangerous waste, uses large amounts of water and would be prohibitively expensive to build and eventually decommission.

The problems with nuclear are outlined in more detail below:

1. It will take too long

Australia has no nuclear energy industry, so developing the required infrastructure, regulations and training programs needed would be a long process. The most credible estimates show nuclear wouldn’t be producing any energy in Australia until at least 2040. [1]

If we were to stop building renewable energy and wait for nuclear, we would need to keep old coal burning power stations running that are already unreliable and expensive to operate. That would generate more than two billion additional tons of climate pollution between now and 2050, compared to the Australian energy market operators’ latest energy transition plan. [2]

Alternatively, wind and solar projects can be up and operational within a couple of years. [3]

2. It’s expensive (for taxpayers and energy consumers)

Estimates from the CSIRO demonstrate that nuclear is the most expensive way to produce electricity, meaning it would drive up energy bills.

Best case scenario, constructing just one nuclear plant would cost $8.65 billion. As Australia has never built a nuclear power station before it’s likely this price would be higher, potentially $17 billion or more. [4]

Nuclear energy projects have a long history of delays and massive cost blowouts. In the UK, the Hinkley Point C reactor was originally budgeted to cost $35 billion (AUD) but will now cost up to $94 billion (AUD). And this is in a country that already has an established nuclear industry. [5]

These extraordinary costs are passed on to every household and business through energy bills, and/or paid directly by taxpayers.

3. It’s unnecessary

In 2010 just 10% of our electricity production came from renewable energy, but by 2023 that number had climbed to almost 40%. [6]

Rapid advances in energy technology, including large-scale batteries, as well as changes in the way we consume energy, means we no longer require energy grids to be designed around the old ‘baseload’ model, where large, centralised power stations operated at a constant rate and can’t quickly or efficiently vary their output.

Clean energy grids are being designed around a combination of variable but predictable solar and wind, and dispatchable sources. ‘Dispatchable’ means they can quickly ramp up and down their output like batteries and pumped hydro.

This is a new way of designing an energy grid. But AEMO's 2024 Integrated System Plan shows exactly how it is possible using the technology we already have.

4. It’s unsafe

Radioactive waste:
Since the 1990s, Australia has attempted to establish national facilities for storing and disposing of low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste, but all efforts have failed. This track record does not inspire confidence in the ability to safely manage the far more complex high-level nuclear waste that a nuclear power program would generate.

5. It uses too much water

Water use:

The World Economic Forum states that water consumption for nuclear power is 2,870 to 3,270 litres per megawatt-hour (l/MWh), far thirstier than coal (1,220 to 2,270 l/MWh) and gas (700 to 1,200 l/MWh).

A standard 1,000-megawatt reactor consumes 36.3 to 65.4 million litres per day (13.2 to 23.9 billion litres per year).

Water is already scarce in the Latrobe Valley and mine operators are presently attempting to solve the problem of the vast amounts of water required for rehabilitation of the three large brown coal mines In the Latrobe Valley – Hazelwood, which closed in 2017 and Yallourn and Loy Yang. The water currently used by Loy Yang A is earmarked to fill the open cut coal mine (for safety and stability) for 30 years after the coal fired power stops in 2035. Therefore, the water is allocated to mine stability until at least 2065.

Water scarcity has been a problem for nuclear reactors in other jurisdictions. In France, nuclear was turned off or down because water in inland rivers became scarce, and/or became too warm to cool the reactor. This raises the question of what happens to the power system and other water users when Gippsland is in drought.

Thank you for your consideration,

[YOUR NAME AND POSTCODE WILL BE ADDED HERE]

References

[1] Paul Graham, J. H. (2024). GenCost 2023‐24. CSIRO. Pg 36.

[2] Solutions for Climate Australia. (2024). Nuclear Disaster: The impact on climate emissions of Australia attempting to adopt nuclear energy. Pg 2.

[3] Climate Council. (2024, May 10). NUCLEAR POWER STATIONS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE FOR AUSTRALIA – AND NEVER WILL BE. Retrieved from Climate Council: https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/nuclear-power-stations-are-not-appropriate-for-australia-and-probably-never-will-be/

[4] Paul Graham, J. H. (2024). GenCost 2023‐24. CSIRO.

[5] Liebreich, M. (2024, January 25). Hinkley C – don’t say I didn’t warn you! Retrieved from Thoughts of Chairman Michael: https://mliebreich.substack.com/p/hinkley-c-dont-say-i-didnt-warn-you

[6] Clean Energy Council. (2024). Clean Energy Australia 2024. Clean Energy Council. Pg 2.

Nuclear power would be a disaster for the Latrobe Valley and for all Victorians.

So, we’re glad that the federal government has established a parliamentary inquiry to ask for your feedback on whether or not nukes should play a role in Australia’s future.

Will you make a submission to tell the government that you say no to nukes? We’ve made it easy for you!

Nukes are wildly expensive, would take decades to build (requiring us to keep burning coal), and would leave Australians with a toxic radioactive waste legacy. They’re nothing but an attempt to distract and delay the transition to clean energy.

The Latrobe Valley community has spent years pushing for a safe, sustainable future and a just transition away from coal. They deserve better than a nuclear distraction.

Read our blog to learn more and hear directly from Latrobe Valley resident and community organiser Hayley Sestokas on why nuclear doesn’t stack up for the Valley.