(THEME MUSIC PLAYS)
(TRAIN HORN BLASTS)
(DRAMATIC MUSIC PLAYS)
ARCHIVE VOICEOVER: When the gas, the oil and the coal are gone, (DRAMATIC MUSIC PLAYS)
ARCHIVE VOICEOVER: When the gas, the oil and the coal are gone,
they must be replaced. the oil and the coal are gone,
they must be replaced.
ERIC CAMPBELL: In the 1950s
nuclear power was hailed ERIC CAMPBELL: In the 1950s
nuclear power was hailed as the future of energy.
Atomic power is today's answer for tomorrow's problem.
Peter Dutton hopes it's the answer for next year's election.
PETER DUTTON: Nuclear energy in Australia
PETER DUTTON: is an idea whose time has come.
He's promising the Coalition could build the first advanced reactors
in just over a decade.
We can have cheaper, cleaner and consistent energy
if we adopt nuclear power.
No nuclear, no net zero.
So, can you tell Australians how much these power plants will cost?
I won't be making the announcement here today with you.
The work hasn't been done, and if that work were to be done,
the proposal would look more and more absurd.
PROTESTERS: (CHANT) Two, four, six, eight!
PROTESTERS: The cost of nukes is too great!
How would you describe
a policy to build seven nuclear plants in Australia?
Recklessly stupid.
And dangerously stupid.
PETER BRADFORD: What we know about nuclear
is that it's capable of very large disappointments.
PATTY DURAND: There are claims made
that nuclear energy PATTY DURAND: There are claims made
that nuclear energy means cheaper electricity.
that nuclear energy I find that mindboggling.
But there are plenty of supporters in the place where it all began.
I think nuclear energy is the solution
to all of our issues with climate change.
ERIC MEYER: My message to Australians -
ERIC MEYER: give nuclear a shot.
The Coalition says you only have to go to North America
to see what nuclear can do for us.
So, in this episode of Four Corners to see what nuclear can do for us.
So, in this episode of Four Corners
we're crossing the US
to examine whether this is the best way
to tackle the climate crisis.
PRESENTER: Well, it is a big day for the opposition leader today,
PRESENTER: Well, it is a big day really igniting the energy wars.
PANELLIST: I mean, this is huge.
This is going to be the biggest climate election we've ever had.
PETER DUTTON: Today we announce our seven locations
that we have looked at in great detail over a long period of time
that we have looked at in great that can host new nuclear sites.
For decades Australian politicians talked about nuclear energy.
We need to make sure that our economy can function 24/7,
and we can only do that with a strong baseload power.
Now Peter Dutton has staked his future on it.
I'm very happy for the election to be a referendum
on energy, on nuclear, on power prices, on lights, going out, I'm very happy for the election to be a referendum
on energy, on nuclear, on power prices, on lights, going out,
on who has a sustainable pathway for our country going forward.
TED O'BRIEN: As our coal plants retire,
they should be replaced with zero-emissions nuclear energy.
The Coalition has identified seven retiring coal stations
that could be turned into nuclear power plants.
Two sites are earmarked
for small modular reactors, or SMRs,
to be producing electricity by 2035.
All seven plants would be government-owned.
Since the policy launch in June
the Coalition has been busy spreading Since the policy launch in June
the Coalition has been busy spreading the promise of cheaper power.
If we don't do this, power bills are going to go up and up and up.
Renewables are in the firing line.
No other country in the world
can keep the lights on 24/7 with the renewables-only policy.
While the Coalition has named the sites,
it's avoided giving many other details.
No costings, no modelling and no consultation.
There's no price tag yet, nor any modelling to support the claim
There's no price tag yet, nor power bills would be cheaper.
We want the information out there in bite-sized bits, if you like.
We'll release the next stage in due course.
Even if the Coalition
wins the next election,
it's not clear how it would lift
federal and state bans
on nuclear energy
when even some LNP colleagues are resisting.
No, no, no. I've got to be really clear. when even some LNP colleagues are resisting.
No, no, no. I've got to be really clear.
It is not part of our plan.
MARK SPEAKMAN: We are facing enormous challenges in getting
clean, reliable, ample, affordable MARK SPEAKMAN: We are facing enormous challenges in getting
clean, reliable, ample, affordable
energy supply in the next few years.
We can't wait for nuclear.
But an overriding message
is that you just have to look overseas
to see what nuclear energy could do here.
Most other comparable countries in the world
have either embraced or are about to embrace
zero-emissions nuclear technology.
So, can you tell Australians how much these power plants will cost?
Yes, we'll be releasing our full economics So, can you tell Australians how much these power plants will cost?
Yes, we'll be releasing our full economics
well ahead of the next election.
You don't know now?
Well, so much as I think you are a terrific guy
and I love the program,
I won't be making the announcement here today with you.
Do you know what percentage of electricity
these nuclear plants would produce?
All of that information,
as I've said many times before through other media outlets
will be released well ahead of the next election.
PROTESTERS: (CHANT) Shame, Dutton, shame!
PROTESTERS: Shame, Dutton, shame!
Shame, Dutton, shame!
Anti-nuclear activists are happily filling the void.
Anti-nuclear activists We don't want your nuclear.
We want renewable energy.
Now. This decade.
(CHEERING)
It's hard to think of a policy launch from opposition
that's as bold, as controversial and as scant on detail as this.
More than three months on there is still little sense
of how much these reactors would cost,
of how much how long it would take to build them
or how they would bring power bills down.
What the Coalition DOES say is "just look overseas,"
particularly in the home of nuclear energy, the United States of America.
This is America's latest manifestation of the nuclear dream.
The Vogtle plant in the southern state of Georgia
The Vogtle plant now has two new reactors,
a milestone for the US industry
that's had hardly any new construction for decades.
The plant's four units generate zero-emissions electricity 24/7,
powering more than a million homes and businesses.
Peter Dutton says Vogtle's new Westinghouse reactors
are the kind of advanced technology Australia needs.
PETER DUTTON: We want to rely on the international experience.
We don't want to be the purchaser of the first in class
or have an Australian-made technology.
We want to rely on the Westinghouse AP1000.
We want to rely SONG: # God bless America... #
The US government had to chip in to get the giant reactors built...
# America! America! #
..the Department of Energy giving US$12 billion in loan guarantees.
Thank you for your service to our nation
in providing this arsenal of clean power.
So, now let's draw up some more battle plans for some more reactors.
I don't know about you, but I, for one, am reporting for duty.
But some see this as a cautionary tale against building big plants.
The AP1000 reactors opened seven years late
at more than double the budgeted cost.
The final bill of around US$35 billion
makes them among the most expensive nuclear generators ever built.
PETER BRADFORD: If nuclear power were a person
it would be weeping with its head in its hands at the Vogtle story.
100% cost overrun.
Far, far more
than the same amount
of electricity, clean electricity,
could have been procured for
if Georgia had gone in a different direction back in 2007, 2008,
when these decisions were being made.
Vogtle is clear proof
that large nuclear construction
is not an economic way to go.
REPORTER: The heat is cranking up for your weekend,
and tonight we are tracking a heat wave,
bringing the hottest temperatures of the year to metro Atlanta.
bringing the hottest temperatures Yeah!
ANNA HAMER: Yeah!
ANNA HAMER: The heat and the humidity together,
ANNA HAMER: it just knocks you out.
I shouldn't have to keep my thermostat at 80 degrees it just knocks you out.
I shouldn't have to keep my thermostat at 80 degrees
I shouldn't have to keep and be uncomfortable in my own home
can still make profit.
so that the corporations can still make profit.
Consumers like Anna Hamer
are paying the price Consumers like Anna Hamer
are paying the price of the cost overruns.
In July she was hit with her highest power bill ever -
In July she was hit US$618 for one month.
They were telling us everything was going to be OK with this plant,
that it would be on time and it would be on budget.
It's over budget, and we are paying for that.
It's over budget, And that seems wrong to me.
(TRAIN HORN BLASTS)
ROBERT SEARFOSS: Patty, my electric bills are going up.
I haven't done the math on them yet, but I know they're going up.
I think the...
Pensioner Robert Searfoss
is angry that ratepayers were also slugged with a construction tariff
while the reactors were being built.
Nuclear power, meaning cheaper electricity for the customer, while the reactors were being built.
Nuclear power, meaning cheaper electricity for the customer,
Nuclear power, meaning cheaper is absolute nonsense.
It's not true.
Yeah, and I'm hoping that they bring back the consumer...
Yeah, and I'm hoping Patty Durand and Kimberly Scott
are part of a coalition of community organisations
campaigning on behalf of consumers hit by rising electricity bills.
campaigning on behalf of consumers People are suffering.
They're having a hard time People are suffering.
They're having a hard time
trying to pay their... you know, not only their utilities
but their rent, their mortgage,
other bills.
Their quality of life is being impacted by these rate increases.
There have been over 10,000 posts online Their quality of life is being impacted by these rate increases.
There have been over 10,000 posts online
There have been on social media like Reddit
and Nextdoor and Facebook and other sites
of people astonished when they open their bills,
shocked, horrified and upset.
And the number of complaints to the Public Service Commission
And the number of complaints has increased tenfold.
PROMO VOICEOVER: The AP1000 nuclear power plant generates clean energy
while providing the reliable electricity supply
while providing that today's world requires.
This is the power that today's world requires.
This is the power of the Westinghouse AP1000 plant.
Nuclear construction costs at Vogtle
and a failed project Nuclear construction costs at Vogtle
and a failed project in South Carolina
and a failed project sent Westinghouse bankrupt in 2017.
But, under new owners,
its AP1000 technology
is being embraced in China and Eastern Europe.
I think there are power plants the world over
where there have been lessons to be learned,
whether they're good lessons where there have been lessons to be learned,
whether they're good lessons
or lessons of things that can be done better.
or lessons I think, on the Vogtle plant,
there are lessons there that we have learned for our own policy.
Well, Vogtle hasn't brought prices down. It's put them up.
Well, again, this is where the big lessons are.
That decision would ultimately...
Ted O'Brien, the Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy,
has spent years investigating the nuclear industry.
has spent years If you look at the Vogtle example,
we should not be adopting If you look at the Vogtle example,
we should not be adopting first-of-a-kind technology.
we should not be adopting We should only be adopting
what's referred to as 'next of a kind',
proven technology.
When you do the first of a kind, proven technology.
When you do the first of a kind,
maybe not the bankruptcy,
but you do understand when you build
the first-of-a-kind unit
that you will have to establish the process.
It will not be perfect the first time you do it.
But on the positive side, once it's done, the road's been paved.
You can reproduce that with less effort,
You can reproduce that with less uncertainty and less risk.
And I think that's the benefit of where we are today.
(INDISTINCT CHATTER)
And one of the things that we're looking forward to,
and we have visitors from Australia here,
is that our technology and the things that we're innovating here
will be leveraged to better society across the globe.
Steven Biegalski is Chair of Nuclear Engineering
at the Georgia Institute of Technology.
He says, as each new AP1000 reactor is built,
He says, the price should come down.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission...
It's the design that has Nuclear Regulatory Commission...
It's the design that has all the supply chain worked out
It's the design that has and it has everything that we need.
It's a proven entity that can be reproduced,
and I hope it IS reproduced moving forward.
Within this last year
there's a lot of exciting things going on in the nuclear industry
across the US and the world.
(INDISTINCT CHATTER)
One of the challenges for Australia
would be training enough nuclear engineers.
I was originally focused on, like, sulphur decomposition...
These students will soon graduate and join the US workforce.
They hope the Vogtle expansion marks the start of an industry boom.
SPENCER SMITH: I do find it inspiring
that I'm in the same state that they were built in.
It's nice that, like, two of them are built, that I'm in the same state that they were built in.
It's nice that, like, two of them are built,
so, hopefully more to come. two of them are built,
so, hopefully more to come.
Hopefully it's the first domino that'll fall.
EMMA ZOCCOLI: I think nuclear energy is the solution
to all of our issues with climate change.
We need a new form of energy development to all of our issues with climate change.
We need a new form of energy development
We need a new form that's going to be more sustainable.
Nuclear energy provides nearly a fifth of US power
Nuclear energy provides and almost half its clean energy.
But its reactors are ageing
and no other commercial plants But its reactors are ageing
and no other commercial plants are being built.
Peter Bradford was a member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
which licenses commercial reactors.
PETER BRADFORD: It was the back end of the golden era
PETER BRADFORD: It was the back end in US nuclear construction,
and the NRC licensed some 20 plants
while I was an NRC commissioner.
I became sceptical of nuclear power
as a result of its economic failures
in the 1980s and '90s.
There's always something available to do the job in the 1980s and '90s.
There's always something available to do the job
at least as cleanly, usually more cleanly,
and much more inexpensively.
The US is not the only nuclear country
The US is not struggling to build new plants.
France's latest reactor struggling to build new plants.
France's latest reactor opened 12 years behind schedule
and around 10 billion euros over budget.
Britain's Hinkley Point plant is running six years late
Britain's Hinkley Point plant and facing a £20 billion overrun.
I started covering the industry in 1980.
I have never seen a project come in on time or budget,
and they've come in way, way over budget
and way over time.
It amazes me that there's so much hype
about something that's been such an abject failure, in my opinion.
I mean, yeah, it's produced electricity, but at what cost?
And...
..maybe I'm sounding way, way too negative,
but I don't think that we should be wasting our money on it.
Plain and simple.
Can you name a single nuclear project
that has come in under budget or on budget in recent years?
Well, the most recent finished build was that in the UAE, that has come in under budget or on budget in recent years?
Well, the most recent finished build was that in the UAE,
which was done on time and on budget.
Now the UAE, not unlike Australia,
did not have experience Now the UAE, not unlike Australia,
did not have experience with nuclear energy,
but they were able to introduce nuclear into a balanced mix.
but they were able to introduce A South Korean consortium
built four reactors in the United Arab Emirates
over 12 years.
We know that their experience is an inspiration to the world
as we all try to go to decarbonise towards net zero.
But, even under an authoritarian regime,
each reactor was connected to the grids
around three years later than expected.
The Coalition also cites the Canadian province of Ontario as a model,
The Coalition also cites the Canadian saying its three nuclear plants
contribute to much lower power bills than Australia.
The plants are owned and subsidised by the provincial government.
So, if you look at Ontario today,
it's probably around about $0.18 a kilowatt hour.
In Australia we're paying up to $0.56.
But that's not entirely because of nuclear or renewables.
There are different circumstances in each country.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
No, not at all. Not at all.
Because, when you actually speak to the Canadians,
one of the reasons they see power prices coming down
is because of the role of nuclear in the mix.
is because of the role of nuclear And again...
Ted O'Brien says a decision on the nuclear technology for Australia
will only be made after a 2.5-year feasibility study.
We'll be having a community engagement process.
Then after then there will be a matching of technologies
Then after then there will be with each site,
and it'll be up to an independent
nuclear-energy coordinating authority
to advise the government on what technology best suits what site.
What if it turns out the only technology that is available
is hugely expensive and will put up power prices?
is hugely expensive Would you abandon the nuclear policy?
Well, that hasn't been the lessons learnt from overseas.
I love it, I love it, I love it, I love it, I love it, I love it.
I love it, I love it, I love it, I love it!
Hey, how familiar are you with nuclear energy?
If Australia were to follow North America down the nuclear path,
it would need to secure public support.
Because that's just water vapour. It's steam.
Maybe I'll even get to hug a storage cask.
Maybe I'll even get to hug (CHEERING)
In the US there's an increasingly visible movement
of so-called 'nuke-fluencers' - visible movement
of so-called 'nuke-fluencers' -
nuclear influencers using creative tactics to push the cause.
(SINGS) nuclear influencers using creative tactics to push the cause.
(SINGS)
(SINGS) # Hydro
# Geothermal too... #
I founded a non-profit, Generation Atomic, in 2016...
I founded a non-profit, # No CO2. #
..because nuclear power is one # No CO2. #
..because nuclear power is one of our most important solutions
..because nuclear power is one for climate change,
and most people
don't see that truth. and most people
don't see that truth.
And we need to...
We need to get that message out there
for us to have our best chances to decarbonise in time.
(LAUGHS)
Oh, man.
The cutest, least practical clothing in existence. Oh, man.
The cutest, least practical clothing in existence.
As young progressives who grew up after the Cold War,
Eric Meyer and his pregnant wife, Sarah,
Eric Meyer don't fear nuclear.
Strawberries from Rosie...
They see it as a tool to make the planet safe for their child.
I want to be able to look my daughter in the eye
and her children, if she decides to have any,
and say that I did everything I could to address this.
And the particles move faster than the speed of light...
Social media is their main tool for changing attitudes,
Social media is their main tool helped by supporters across the US.
We put the waste in these storage casks,
which just chill on site of the plant.
They're safe enough to hug, even kiss,
They're safe enough to hug, even if you're pregnant.
(CHUCKLES)
So, we got 23% clean, (CHUCKLES)
So, we got 23% clean, and of that most of it's nuclear.
So, we got 23% clean, One of the other gas plants...
I love the optimism of the atomic age.
I love the optimism You know, it was a time
when we were really dreaming You know, it was a time
when we were really dreaming of the future
when we were really dreaming as a better place than it is today.
And you just don't see that as much now.
And now it's... We're just trying to cling on
and weather the apocalypse, essentially.
Eric Meyer took us out to see one of the two ageing nuclear plants
in his home state of Minnesota.
Monticello opened in the 1970s
before soaring costs
started to make building new nuclear power plants uneconomical.
It cost about $500 million to build.
That would be quite a deal these days.
Why are they so expensive now? Oh, man.
Well, we've had changes in the regulation that...
Additional redundant safety systems upon safety systems.
But a big part of it is that we forgot how to build them.
My message to Australians - give nuclear a shot.
My message to Australians - We need every tool that we can have.
And it's one of our best clean-energy sources.
ARCHIVE VOICEOVER: It may take decades,
but success will be rewarding beyond measure.
Nuclear energy began in an era when anything seemed possible.
Reactors could supply our major energy needs for centuries to come.
We could both have our cake and eat it.
Here, the nuclear reaction is contained...
After atomic bombs were dropped on Japan,
scientists searched for a peaceful use for this astonishing technology.
In 1951 they proved it could create electricity
by lighting four light bulbs.
DOCUMENTARY VOICEOVER: Electricity flows from atomic energy.
You can still sense that optimism at the place where it all began,
You can still sense that optimism the Idaho National Laboratory.
Nearly 6,000 people work here.
(INDISTINCT CHATTER)
Nuclear engineer Shannon Bragg-Sitton
is an INL director working on clean-energy systems.
SHANNON BRAGG-SITTON: This is one of the largest hot cells in the world.
Behind this window
we work with materials that have been irradiated.
Today, this high-security facility, run by the US Department of Energy,
is at the forefront of nuclear research.
We haven't built reactors for quite some time
because the energy demands weren't there.
But, as we see demands begin to increase again,
and, really, within the last five or six years,
and, really, we've begun to see a major push
toward net-zero commitments we've begun to see a major push
toward net-zero commitments globally.
So, we have to start taking a look at this differently. toward net-zero commitments globally.
So, we have to start taking a look at this differently.
So, is nuclear making a comeback now?
Nuclear is absolutely So, is nuclear making a comeback now?
Nuclear is absolutely making a comeback.
There's a new business model in nuclear, Nuclear is absolutely making a comeback.
There's a new business model in nuclear,
which is called 'harvesting subsidies'.
And if the government money wasn't there,
I don't think you'd see as much activity
I don't think you'd see as you see at the present moment.
So, nuclear industry does not stand up on its own two feet?
No, it never has.
Nuclear's share of global power generation
has been falling for years. Nuclear's share of global power generation
has been falling for years.
Reversing that may depend
on reactors being built
faster and cheaper.
PROMO VOICEOVER: Investment in clean energy is paying off.
The holy grail for the US Department of Energy
and a key plank of Peter Dutton's policy
and a key plank is the small modular reactor.
Small modular reactors, or SMRs, is the small modular reactor.
Small modular reactors, or SMRs,
are simpler, smaller-scale manufactured versions
of traditional reactors. manufactured versions
of traditional reactors.
The components can be built in US-based factories
and shipped to site locations by truck, rail or barge,
making them quicker to build and far less expensive
making them quicker to build than large-plant construction.
But they're a long way from than large-plant construction.
But they're a long way from being widely available commercially.
Only one project has won regulatory approval in the United States.
PROMO VOICEOVER: NuScale Power has developed
a new modular light-water reactor nuclear power plant
to supply energy for electrical generation.
Last November it was scrapped due to soaring costs,
even after the Department of Energy
pledged more than $500 million in grants.
SHANNON BRAGG-SITTON: It is a challenge to get through that,
but we still have to say that first unit of anything will cost more.
Somebody has to bear that cost.
And it's a challenge that we do have to get over.
That's where the federal investment, the loans come in.
Yes, there was significant DOE support,
Yes, there was significant but we need to get over that hurdle
so that we can prove but we need to get over that hurdle
so that we can prove the costs can come down.
I can sense the optimism and the determination,
I can sense the optimism but there's no certainty
in cheap SMRs coming online, being mass produced for the market,
is there?
There's no certainty in tomorrow.
So, no, I can't give you 100% certainty
that the economics will play out exactly like we hope they will.
I can't give you certainty that energy storage can be built
to the extent necessary to support a 100%-renewable solution.
to the extent necessary to support There's not certainty in that.
The best solution we have There's not certainty in that.
The best solution we have for a clean-energy future
is an energy mix that meets the demands appropriately for a region.
How are you going to have small modular reactors by 2035
on a mass-produced basis that would make them cheaper?
So, by the time Australia would be making procurement decisions, on a mass-produced basis that would make them cheaper?
So, by the time Australia would be making procurement decisions,
So, by the time Australia would be there will be multiple SMR designs.
The latest attempt at an SMR in the United States
is in this small coal town.
We've come to Kemmerer in south-west Wyoming.
Like many Australian communities built on fossil fuels,
Like many Australian communities it's weathered boom and bust.
Now it's the host of a billion-dollar gamble.
They are going through a journey from coal to nuclear,
They are going through a journey which I believe is very similar
to what Australia should be considering.
Ted O'Brien visited Wyoming last year
on what he called a 'due-diligence tour'
to look at the viability of nuclear for Australia.
The Wyoming story is a fascinating one
because here you have a state in the US
which has been traditionally very proudly coal.
which has been I think that is a wonderful example
of how you can practically go from coal to nuclear
of how you can practically and leverage the existing workforce.
The man behind this SMR project is Microsoft founder, Bill Gates.
He's putting $1 billion of his own money in
to try to build the first commercial SMR.
This is a big step toward safe, abundant zero-carbon energy.
The small modular reactor
would replace the town's The small modular reactor
would replace the town's coal-fired power plant,
which is scheduled to close next decade,
and use its transmission lines.
Bill Gates' point man is clean-energy lobbyist Jeff Navin.
JEFF NAVIN: If you've lived next to a coal plant,
you're going to love living next to a nuclear power plant.
you're going to love living It's clean, it's quiet,
there's no soot, there's no particulate matter,
there's no soot, there's no big ash pile.
It's a really good neighbour, there's no big ash pile.
It's a really good neighbour,
it provides great jobs for many, many decades.
And it's a good part of your community.
Bill Gates has worked hard to build community support,
Bill Gates has worked hard even crashing a local poker game.
Oh, boy. Alright. Here it goes.
And he called his bluff, and he was right.
And Mr Gates had a small pocket pair, which is almost nothing,
And Mr Gates had a small pocket and he called me and won.
(LAUGHS)
I still sit back and go,
"Was that for real?"
OK, so, that's 5,000. "Was that for real?"
OK, so, that's 5,000. We got one, two, three, four.
OK, so, that's 5,000. Another 50. Don't show weakness.
Don't let her bluff you.
You know she hasn't lost yet.
Joyce Chadwick, You know she hasn't lost yet.
Joyce Chadwick, born and raised in Kemmerer,
thinks the nuclear plant is just what the town needs.
thinks the nuclear plant Oh, man!
It can be my neighbour, Oh, man!
It can be my neighbour, I don't care.
I'm glad it's coming here. I really am.
I'm glad it's coming here. (LAUGHS)
Won every hand tonight.
I've got a lot of confidence Won every hand tonight.
I've got a lot of confidence in the plant coming here.
What do you think it's going to do for the town?
What do you think it's going to do Oh, it's definitely jobs, you know.
And not just jobs. It's bringing careers.
This plant's going to be around 60 years, 80 years.
This plant's going to be around You know, who knows how long?
So, it's careers for our children and our grandchildren.
Yeah, I may be the only negative person at the table, I'm guessing.
I'm not 100% sure.
I'm just...
I like my sleepy little Kemmerer town.
I'm...
..not sure...
..how safe it's really going to be.
(HORSE NEIGHS)
Steve Peternell is a fourth-generation rancher.
His two sons aim to stay on as the fifth.
His two sons (CATTLE LOW)
Raising cattle is as much a part of Wyoming life as mining coal.
We get along great with the coal mine.
They give you access to their pipeline for water all summer,
They give you access to their and it's a very good relationship.
And that's the way and it's a very good relationship.
And that's the way he'd like things to stay.
You know, I realise people need jobs and the town to grow, but...
..I like MY way of life, and... You know, I realise people need jobs and the town to grow, but...
..I like MY way of life, and...
..and that may even be selfish on my part, but I'm...
That's just how I feel.
(HORSE SNORTS)
Just throughout the history of nuclear power
there's always that smidgen of a chance
that something could go wrong.
So, I'm just leery that way.
I do not want nuclear in my backyard.
Bill Gates is yet to convince the ranchers.
Bill Gates is yet to convince The immediate priority
is to win over The immediate priority
is to win over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
As yet, the experimental reactor doesn't have approval,
so, they can only build the bits around it.
JEFF NAVIN: We expect to get our licence from the NRC
in another year and a half to two years.
And I suspect, when that happens,
number of orders coming up
we'll start to see a significant number of orders coming up
so people can get in line and get into the queue.
In this industry
vendor claims about cheaper nuclear costs
have a long,
well-documented and very sad history.
well-documented They just don't come true.
There is no basis for believing
that this utterly unproven technology
that this utterly unproven is going to sweep in
and make a success of a field
that up to now has been and make a success of a field
that up to now has been an unmitigated economic failure.
The SMR would only produce a third of the electricity
The SMR would only produce of a big nuclear plant.
The idea is that it would partner of a big nuclear plant.
The idea is that it would partner much better with renewables.
The problem with conventional nuclear reactors
is they can't really vary how much power they're producing.
It's not efficient, it's not economical.
So, they tend to run at full bore
whether the grid needs the electricity or not.
But this small modular reactor, if it works,
But this small modular reactor, would be different
because, instead of heating water,
it would heat molten sodium
that can store power
that could be used to top up the grid if it's running short.
Well, in a place like Wyoming,
they have a tremendous wind resource.
When the wind doesn't blow, we can ramp up to meet that demand.
When the wind doesn't blow, When the wind is blowing,
we can scale back down When the wind is blowing,
we can scale back down and store that energy.
So, where does all this leave Australia?
Like the Kemmerer plant,
Australia's 18 coal power plants are expected to close next decade.
It will not just leave a huge shortfall in the grid,
by 2050 electricity consumption is expected to more than double.
It's only in opposition
that the Coalition It's only in opposition
that the Coalition has embraced nuclear as a solution.
The problem with it is that it doesn't make sense economically,
and there was nobody in any sort of senior responsible position
during my time as prime minister
who took nuclear power seriously from an economic point of view.
There are plenty of people there in the Coalition party room
that know this is nonsense.
You see, Dutton is only interested in winning a political point.
And what he's seeking to do
is to disrupt And what he's seeking to do
is to disrupt the transition to renewable energy.
is to disrupt (HUMS)
(INDISTINCT CHATTER)
ANNOUNCER: Hello. Thank you very much.
Mr Dutton will do an initial presentation.
PETER DUTTON: I want our children to inherit a prosperous economy
underpinned by cheaper and consistent energy.
When Peter Dutton addressed a business lunch last month,
When Peter Dutton addressed he was still on message...
Zero-emission nuclear power is our only chance
Zero-emission nuclear power to reach net zero by 2050.
..and short on detail.
We'll have more information about the cost of nuclear.
We'll have more information We'll have it in good time.
But he insisted renewables ARE part of the plan...
The Coalition, like other countries,
sees renewables and nuclear as companions, not as competitors.
sees renewables and nuclear ..they just need help.
No country can run effectively on part-time power,
on solar, wind and batteries alone.
Baseload power is critical.
'Baseload power' is the continuous supply of energy
you get from nuclear or coal plants.
The Coalition argues it's essential
to back up weather-dependent renewables.
The best battery technology,
which we all want to be better than what it is today,
which we all want to be better only provides a few hours of backup.
So, renewables must be firmed up.
To firm renewables, which are intermittent
because they operate when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing,
you need something that you can turn on and off at the flick of a switch.
And that ain't a nuclear power station.
Many energy experts say batteries combined with hydro and gas backup
can do the job.
PETER BRADFORD: The term 'baseload power'
is outmoded now. PETER BRADFORD: The term 'baseload power'
is outmoded now.
You don't need 1,000-megawatt plants is outmoded now.
You don't need 1,000-megawatt plants running all the time
You don't need 1,000-megawatt plants to give it to you.
You can combine so-called intermittent sources -
You can combine wind, solar -
first of all, with each other
because they're not all available at exactly the same time,
because they're not all available but, secondly, with batteries
so that you get the storage ability to store it when you have an excess
and use it when you need it.
It is possible for people who care equally about climate change
to land on opposite sides of this debate.
Hey. Hey, mate.
Hey. Good to see you. Good to see you.
Clean-energy analyst Simon Holmes a Court
and environmental engineer David Collins
and environmental engineer are self-confessed energy nerds.
Last year they did a nuclear road trip together around the US.
This was the day we were both in Vogtle.
That's my photography. You were a good photographer.
Yeah, two weeks in the car together, driving around North America...
Yeah. ..we covered a lot of ground
and found...you know, found a lot of common ground.
It's true. So true.
But they came back with starkly different conclusions.
But they came back Meanwhile, demand is going up
because nuclear cannot supply
the energy that we need in the time frame we need it.
the energy that we need Right?
That's an absolutely critical point, that time frame.
(STEAM HISSES)
Both are influential players in the politics around energy.
Both are influential players A gigawatt of gas costs you...
Simon Holmes a Court A gigawatt of gas costs you...
Simon Holmes a Court backed teal independence
to win Coalition seats at the last election.
Nuclear energy has a place, but that place is not Australia.
The resources that we have in wind and solar are the best in the world. Nuclear energy has a place, but that place is not Australia.
The resources that we have in wind and solar are the best in the world.
To turn our back on that
and pursue a technology
where we do not have any advantage
is...is crazy.
David Collins is often cited by Peter Dutton as an energy expert.
He says what he learned in North America was a revelation.
I learned that nuclear is the only technology
I learned that nuclear that will deliver zero-carbon energy
for not just Australia but for the world.
If Australia fails to adopt nuclear energy, for not just Australia but for the world.
If Australia fails to adopt nuclear energy,
then we will not achieve zero carbon.
We can talk about renewables in a moment,
but renewables, batteries,
just the batteries alone would cost you trillions.
Multiple trillions. No. No, I don't...
I mean, show me your numbers because I don't think there's...
Absolutely... ..any science behind those numbers.
I'm happy to do that, but I'm just...
David Collins believes AEMO, the energy market operator,
has dramatically underestimated the cost of a renewable transition.
So, they've totally neglected those costs.
My spreadsheet said it was going to cost around $1.3 trillion.
My spreadsheet said it was going Absolutely.
But that's not including Absolutely.
But that's not including the batteries
that you would need for storage.
(APPLAUSE)
That estimate has become the Coalition mantra.
Engineer Dr David Hayden Collins That estimate has become the Coalition mantra.
Engineer Dr David Hayden Collins
says that, when the replacement of panels and turbines are factored in,
the cost is likely to be $1.3 trillion -
five times greater than AEMO's estimate.
It's not just AEMO's figures that have been attacked.
The Coalition has also slammed the CSIRO GenCost report
that found nuclear power could cost twice as much as renewables.
At GenCost they were looking purely at the generation.
At GenCost they were looking It's foolish.
Generation is only a tiny part of a renewables solution to the problem.
You have to consider energy storage.
You have to consider energy transmission.
The CSIRO rejects his analysis.
The GenCost report The CSIRO rejects his analysis.
The GenCost report is really accurate.
We pick the best figures, the most relevant figures to Australia,
whether that's for renewables, whether it's for nuclear,
whether it's for gas, whether it's for coal.
whether it's for gas, And we present the data
in an objective, considered way.
So, you stand by this report?
Absolutely 100% stand by the report
and the team behind the report.
The CSIRO's GenCost report also questioned
whether a single nuclear reactor could be built
before the last coal-fired plant was gone.
It looks like it will take at least 15 years to produce those reactors,
and really going to be hard to have them online before 2040.
and really going to be hard Mm, by which time, of course,
AEMO says our ageing fleet Mm, by which time, of course,
AEMO says our ageing fleet of coal-fired power stations
AEMO says our ageing fleet will have to close.
Yeah, it's going to be hard for nuclear to make a major contribution
to our path to net zero before 2040.
How are we going to fast-track nuclear reactors?
There is no shortage of political opponents
who will always point to an example of a project not going well
or they want to basically say
Australia does not have the capability.
Australia does not I'll let them run that argument.
When Australians have put their mind I'll let them run that argument.
When Australians have put their mind to things, they've gotten it done.
SIMON HOLMES A COURT: I think of all of humanity's achievements
SIMON HOLMES A COURT: I think in the last hundred years or so
nuclear energy in the last hundred years or so
nuclear energy is one of the standouts.
I think one day the nuclear sector might have a product
that fits the Australian market.
What's really clear
is that the nuclear sector does not have a product at the moment
that fits into what Australia needs right now.
To be quite honest, I think from the Liberal Party's point of view,
nuclear power is something to talk about but never to build.
Malcolm Turnbull had no interest in nuclear power, saw no point in it.
Scott Morrison was briefed about small modular reactors,
but decided it was electorally too risky.
Why is Peter Dutton embracing this policy now from opposition
Why is Peter Dutton embracing when it is, electorally,
a problematic policy, when it is, electorally,
a problematic policy, it's a challenging policy to sell?
a problematic policy, Well, there's no doubt
that the reason we are looking at a balanced energy mix,
including zero-emissions nuclear energy,
including zero-emissions is it's in the national interest.
The only way you can do it
is to learn the lessons from overseas
and to apply it in the Australian context.
And those lessons tell us
that, unless you have nuclear in the mix,
well, prices will keep going higher, you risk the lights going out
and you won't reach net zero.
The Coalition insists it's time for a full nuclear debate.
The Coalition insists it's time But, until it releases costings,
it's asking Australia to take it on trust.
If nuclear advocates can show me
that adding nuclear If nuclear advocates can show me
that adding nuclear to Australia's grid
would help us decarbonise faster and cheaper,
then I'll be in the trenches with them.
If they want Australians to embrace nuclear, they've got to do the work.
If they want Australians to embrace But that work hasn't been done.
(THEME MUSIC PLAYS)
Captions by Red Bee Media
Copyright Australian Broadcasting Corporation Captions by Red Bee Media
Copyright Australian Broadcasting Corporation