Atomic Ascendancy: Australians Now See Nuclear Power as the Natural Choice

Wind power: abandoned more than a Century ago.


All of a sudden, any Australian with half a brain is talking about nuclear power generation. Not so long ago, only the bravest would utter the ‘N’ word out loud.

Howled down by the anti-nuke brigade, in the beginning, and later berated by zealots pushing heavily subsidised and chaotically intermittent wind and solar, those with the temerity to talk about nuclear power in this Country were a rare breed. Now, there has been an outbreak of common sense, as if someone put something in the water.

The usual twaddle about Fukushima (a nuclear incident, following a monster tsunami, in which not one single person was killed as a result of that incident) has given way to an understanding that, not only is nuclear power the safest generation source of all, it’s the only stand-alone generation source that does not emit carbon dioxide gas emissions during the process. Which attracts the attention of climate alarmists, everywhere.

True enough, Australia will be powering itself with coal-fired plants well into the future. However, with more than a third of the world’s proven uranium reserves, Australia is ideally situated to catch up with the rest of the world and start generating its own nuclear power, for the first time.

Currently, there are 450 nuclear reactors operating in 30 countries around the world, 15 countries are currently building another 60 reactors and their combined output accounts for over 11% of global electricity production – compared with total global output from wind which, to the nearest decimal point, is zero. And all without so much as a hiccup.

The French use nuclear power to generate around 75% of their electricity and they pay around half of what it costs retail customers in wind ‘powered’ South Australia. Anyone claiming nuclear power is expensive, clearly haven’t been paying attention.

As Tania Constable points out, nuclear power generation in Australia is a complete no-brainer.

Let’s Put a Smile on Our Dial and Vote for Nuclear
The Australian
Tania Constable
28 June 2019

We cannot afford to ignore the case for nuclear

Momentum is building to right the wrong of two decades ago that banned nuclear energy in Australia. Removing this ban is long overdue and community support is building.

Consider the interest just in the past few months.

During the election campaign Scott Morrison was asked about the potential for nuclear power in Australia. And interest has grown ever since.

One Nation’s NSW Legislative Council member Mark Latham, the former federal Labor leader, has introduced a bill in the state parliament’s upper house to normalise the treatment of uranium mining and nuclear energy.

NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro subsequently reconfirmed his support for nuclear power. After attending a seminar in the US on advanced small modular reactors last year, he is convinced they are becoming cheaper and that they could play a role in providing affordable, low-emissions, reliable power.

Barilaro also inadvertently dispelled another myth about nuclear power — that it is unpopular.

He refused to rule out nuclear power in his seat of Monaro, saying he was not going to quarantine his own electorate with a “not in my back yard” attitude. And in the March 23 NSW election he received a robust 11 per cent swing towards him.

Federal Coalition backbenchers are newly emboldened on nuclear power. Queensland Nationals MP Keith Pitt and LNP senator James McGrath delivered a pro-nuclear letter to the Prime Minister this week along with proposed terms of reference for an inquiry into nuclear power.

The letter calls for a review of advances in nuclear energy, including small nuclear reactors and thorium technology, both of which could produce less radio­active waste than traditional nuclear plants. The Australian reported Pitt as saying the nuclear issue was “a debate we are ready to have” and “in our view, the technology has moved on and small, modular reactors and thorium need to be investigated”. He also noted “strong support coming from most people, surprisingly among young people. I think the culture today means people are better informed”.

This growing political momentum reflects recent online polls.

An Essential survey released last week found more Australians support nuclear power plants than oppose them: 44 per cent are in favour, up four points since the question was last asked in November 2015, and 40 per cent are in opposition.

In October last year, 61 per cent of respondents to an SBS Viceland poll were in favour of Australia lifting the ban on nuclear energy, and an ABC Brisbane Facebook poll in March found 57 per cent were in favour of Australia considering nuclear power as an energy source.

These sources are hardly traditional pro-nuclear audiences, so it’s clear public opinion in this country is shifting in favour of this zero-emissions power source.

This will come as no surprise for those who have followed the energy debate and the climate challenges of the 21st century.

Environmentalists and scientists are increasingly supporting fairer treatment of uranium mining and nuclear power, given the twin challenges of providing reliable power to a growing global population and the need to reduce carbon emissions.

In late 2014, 77 conservation scientists called for green groups to reconsider their historical opposition to nuclear power and consider how it could help meet the climate challenge, along with all other technologies and options.

In the US, 65 per cent of a representative sample of scientists connected to the American Association for the Advancement of Science were in favour of building more nuclear power plants.

Everywhere you turn, the evidence is overwhelming that it is long past time to bin the nuclear energy ban.

Yet even with this growing public support, there is a new excuse for stalling this reform, including claims that there is no point removing the ban if nuclear power doesn’t stack up economically or financially. Why should nuclear power be required to prove it is economic when it is used so extensively in advanced economies similar to Australia, such as the US and France?

The economic case for nuclear power in Australia already has been made by South Australia’s Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, which investigated the feasibility of nuclear power in that state. It found that modelling of nuclear power feasibility suggested it “might well be viable” and recommended the ban be removed, saying: “In the event that fast and rapid action is required by Australia after 2030, nuclear power might play a useful role.”

So a royal commission has recommended it; the science is in; and the public is ready. Politicians ignore a shift in public opinion at their peril, especially on the vital issue of energy affordability and reliability. Nuclear power should be legal in Australia and it’s time to get on with it to benefit families, businesses and the planet.
The Australian

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.


  1. I have said it many times. People need to feel the consequences of their actions. They need to feel them hard and unmitigated. This is the only reliable way to bring them back to sanity. No action to bring the renewable industry down is needed by anyone. Just let them have their way, let the people feel the consequences (pay the price and suffer the brownouts) and things will come alright. It’s a big price to pay, YES. Hundreds of Billions will be wasted. Landscapes will be wasted by those windmills and solar arrays. Mountains of dead batteries will grow. But humanity has survived worse and once society has been hammered hard enough by all this nonsense, it will develop a sufficient immune reaction and do the right thing.

  2. wal1957 says:

    Australia…the dumb country!
    We have vast reserves of gas, coal, uranium and oil! Yes folks, vast oil reserves!
    And yet our dumbest politicians, the MSM and the SJWs cry foul at the mere mention of using these reserves.
    Dumb! Dumb! Dumb!

  3. Reblogged this on ajmarciniak.

  4. Craig Lucanus says:

    It’s LNP’s only political option as the voting cohort moving through wants emissions action more and more. It should also be dissing renewables plus gas over emissions, or renewables plus storage over cost.

  5. Pleased to see that the Ozzie’s are waking up. Just wish this was happening here in the UK. currently mired in Green sludge.

    • Quite agree: too many people still trusting the lie-factory BBC & the rest of our MSM.
      Re nuclear safety look up Galen Winsor on youtube.
      An eye-opener.
      John Doran.

      • Yes will have a look; but don’t need to as I have concluded that nuclear is the safest means of generating power. Somehow it is the one area where I have faith in the engineers who sort out the pragmatics from the scientists. They know their stuff.
        Witness commercial flight.
        My bets lie in the modular molten salt technology. An obvious route for development.
        Best regards,
        As for the BBC et al, I despair.

  6. Reblogged this on Climate- Science.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: