Energy debate must include nuclear option - Opinion - theage.com.au


Too often politicians are criticised for taking short-term decisions and ignoring long-term needs. That is usually because the decisions that look to the long term are often the most difficult.
But I have always taken the view that if people are given the facts, and can be persuaded that the policy is in the national interest - as with the GST - they will respond positively.
So it is with nuclear energy. It is the debate we must have. I will shortly be announcing a review of our approach on nuclear energy.
Concerns about climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, the rising costs of energy and the possible availability of a cheaper source of fuel, will form the basis of our arguments for this debate. The arguments of our opponents, meanwhile, defy logic.
First they say it is OK to mine uranium from three sites but not from others. Then they say it is OK to sell uranium, but not to enrich it. And then they say, well, maybe it is OK to enrich it, but we shouldn't use it to power our towns and cities. It is policy anachronism piled on contradiction, capped by inertia.
These are arguments driven by emotion and by factional rigidities rather than facts, and not by any consideration of the needs of Australians in 10, 20 or even 100 years' time.
These are arguments driven by fear, which would have meant the first fires being snuffed out or the first wheels left in the paddock. Surely we have more confidence in ourselves today and in our ability to tackle difficult issues and find their solution than we did decades ago when this debate surfaced. A comprehensive debate, and a review, will help inform our thinking.
In 1996, my Government abolished Labor's illogical no-new-mines policy. In 2005, Australian uranium exports were a record 12,360 tonnes, valued at $573 million. Uranium mining is carried out under stringent environmental requirements and exports are subject to companies holding valid export permits and passing stringent safeguards assessments on a shipment by shipment basis.
But we need to be informed on how much further we can, or should, go. A review will help establish whether uranium enrichment or nuclear power plants are viable options for Australia. Are they affordable? Are they safe? What technological developments have been made and what methods are being worked on for the disposal of waste? What are the potential benefits for consumers, the environment and the economy?
If nothing else, the high petrol prices of the past few months show that we are approaching a crisis in oil production and consumption. We have entered an environment of high global demand and limited spare capacity for the production and refinement of crude oil. We need to ensure access to diversified sources of power and energy.

The debate on alternative energy sources has to include nuclear energy, or we run the risk of denying Australians an affordable power source that will not pollute the environment, or put a brake on the economy.
The report by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, released yesterday, dissects the costs of nuclear power compared with that of coal and gas-fired electricity generation. This report, prepared by international energy consultant Professor John Gittus, challenges the view that the cost would be prohibitive.
Renowned British scientist, and environmentalist, Sir James Lovelock, argues that the green movement needs to take a more scientific approach on climate change and has argued strongly in favour of nuclear energy.
The facts, not emotion, need to guide this debate. The expert review that I am considering will examine the economics of nuclear energy in Australia, and the circumstances in which it could be competitive with other existing electricity generation technologies, including any implications it would have for the national electricity market.
Naturally, health, safety and proliferation issues will be crucial, including the potential of "next generation" nuclear energy technologies to meet safety, waste and proliferation concerns; the waste processing and storage issues associated with nuclear energy and current world's best practice; and any security, safety or health issues emanating from nuclear energy.
Environmental factors will also be a major consideration, including the extent to which nuclear energy could help reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions to 2050 and beyond.
We have an obligation to look at these issues and we will engage in a full public debate.