Dick Smith has criticized the CSIRO for suggesting nuclear energy would be twice as expensive as unproven renewable energy. He accused the CSIRO of promoting Labor Party policies in the run-up to the election.
The federal government’s science and research body released a GenCost report on Monday suggesting establishing a nuclear power industry in Australia would take at least 15 years – despite evidence overseas it could be done much sooner.
“Nuclear power does not currently provide the most competitive solution for low-emissions electricity in Australia,” the report said.
But Mr Smith, an entrepreneur who campaigns for nuclear energy, said the CSIRO report simply reflected the political views of Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen and Science Minister Ed Husic.
“I think their numbers are wrong,” he told Daily Mail Australia.
‘They are all employed by a government, by a minister who is against nuclear energy, so you’re not going to make much of a career in the CSIRO if you say that your minister in the government is wrong and the government is completely against going nuclear.’
A CSIRO spokeswoman said the analysis was “highly collaborative” and based on “the best information available globally, applied to the Australian context, in consultation with a range of industry and broader stakeholders”.
Dick Smith has criticized the CSIRO for suggesting nuclear power would be twice as expensive – and accused the organization of promoting Labor Party policies in the run-up to the election (he is pictured left with his wife Pip)
While both sides of politics favor a net zero climate target by 2050, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton heads into the next election with a plan to build seven nuclear reactors, while Labor promises renewable energy will supply 100 percent of Australia’s electricity in short order. more than two decades.
Mr Dutton agreed with Mr Smith, saying the report had a “heavy hand” from Chris Bowen.
“It’s been discussed before, and you know what? They haven’t even seen our plan yet, and yet they are working on it.
“I think this is important to point out: in Ontario, where nuclear is 60 per cent of the energy mix, people are paying 18 cents per kilowatt hour, in South Australia people are currently paying 56 cents per kilowatt hour,” he says. explained.
“In Tennessee, where there’s over 44 percent nuclear in the mix and renewables are still in the mix, they’re paying 18 cents per kilowatt hour.”
However, the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator’s GenCost report said renewable energy had the lowest costs for the seventh year in a row and annual battery storage costs had fallen by 20 percent.
The report also argued that it would take 15 years for nuclear energy to become established in Australia, despite the United Arab Emirates doing so in eight years with a new plant in Barakah in 2020, built with South Korean technology.
“There is some statistical evidence for the impact of the level of democracy on nuclear weapons lead times,” the report said.
The report by the CSIRO’s chief energy policy economist, Paul Graham, also argued that while nuclear reactors tend to last longer than photovoltaic solar and wind farms, renewable energy generation was cheaper to replace.
It predicted that by 2030, nuclear power could be generated more widely at a cost of $150 to $245 per megawatt hour, compared with $121 to $164 for solar and $67 to $137 for solar and wind.
Nuclear power from small modular reactors, or SMRs, would cost between $285 and $487 per hour, the report said.
The report also argued that it would take 15 years for nuclear energy to become established in Australia, despite the United Arab Emirates doing so in eight years with a new factory in Barakah (pictured) in 2020, built with South Korean technology.
“There are no unique cost benefits arising from the long operational life of nuclear technology,” the report said.
‘Similar cost savings are achievable with shorter-lived technologies, even taking into account that shorter-lived technologies have to be built twice.
“This is because shorter-lived technologies, such as solar and wind, tend to be available at lower costs over time, making the second build less expensive.”
But Mr Smith responded by saying battery storage technology is still inefficient, meaning renewable energy would only work if there was back-up energy storage from pumped hydro to achieve zero carbon emissions.
He paid $6,000 for an advertisement in Monday’s edition of The Sydney Morning Herald, arguing that renewable energy would be unaffordable because it would require building 50 hydropower stations to have zero carbon emissions.
The entrepreneur argued that solar and wind power are dependent on changeable weather and therefore could not meet 98 percent of Australia’s energy needs by 2040, according to a government target.
In his ad, he quoted Griffith University’s emeritus professor of environmental sciences, Ian Lowe, asking the climate change minister where the pumped hydro would go.
“Mr. Bowen, where will the fifty hydroelectric dams and one hundred dams be located so that the intermittent wind and solar farms can provide reliable electricity?”
Former Liberal Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull – an opponent of nuclear energy who is at odds with Mr Dutton – announced in 2017 that his government would start work on Snowy Hydo 2.0 in southern New South Wales.
But costs for the pumped hydro project rose to $12 billion last year, with the ad asking about the price of damming 100 rivers and valleys to create 50 pumped hydro projects.
Mr Smith argued that it would not be possible for renewable energy to supply almost all of Australia’s energy within 15 years without environmentally destructive dams being built to house pumped hydro projects.
“With renewables you’re going to need those dams because battery storage is just way too expensive,” he told Daily Mail Australia.
‘If we don’t want nuclear energy, I think we should have fifty pumped storage systems with a hundred dams.
Opposition leader Peter Dutton, who monitors sites in seven regional centres, has promised to release the coalition’s nuclear costs ‘this week’.
Opposition leader Peter Dutton has pledged to build two small modular reactors by 2035
‘That means nothing can grow. Then you get the most incredible erosion because there is no vegetation anymore, because it all dies if they are under water half the time.’
Mr Smith argued that droughts would also jeopardize the reliability of hydropower stations, arguing that existing battery storage technology would be insufficient to cope with the lack of sunshine or wind droughts that hampered the reliability of solar and wind energy .
“Someone will get through to them that there is a drought,” he said.
“You could have a terrible drought on the East Coast, causing the water to evaporate.”
Mr Smith predicted that the ALP would come to support nuclear energy at federal and state levels – arguing that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was now backing nuclear submarines as part of the AUKUS deal.
“We woke up one day and Labor… they thought it was in the national interest,” Smith said.
‘I think Labor will be on the sidelines. I am absolutely certain they will, just as they sided with the nuclear submarines.
‘Eventually it will be identical to nuclear energy; it’s the only way you can move forward.’
The Labor governments in New South Wales and Victoria have laws blocking nuclear power, but Mr Smith predicts they will eventually legislate to overturn these bans as they realize renewable energy is unreliable.
“They will be convinced because there is simply no alternative,” Smith said.
“There will be power outages; you cannot run a country on intermittent solar and wind energy; it’s impossible.
“I understand that every state has a ban on nuclear energy, and we also have a federal ban on nuclear energy, so those bans are going to have to be lifted.
“We’re one of the biggest sellers of uranium in the world, but we have legislation that says you can’t even think about that, and that’s completely ridiculous.
“We’re going to have to change the laws in every state and federally.”