Howard Determined to Make Nuclear Energy an Election Issue in Australia

Australian Prime Minister John Howard seems determined to make nuclear energy an election issue in his country:

A ROBUST election-year debate over nuclear power is assured after John Howard backed its role in meeting Australia's future energy needs.

Releasing the final report of his nuclear energy taskforce - chaired by Ziggy Switkowski - the Prime Minister attacked Labor for being locked into the past, and said he was confident he could win over a sceptical public to the merits of nuclear power.

"If we are interested in the future, if we are looking into the future and not looking back over our shoulders to the past, we have to factor in nuclear power as part of the solution," Mr Howard told reporters at Kirribilli today.

While nuclear energy was not a "silver bullet" to meeting the nation's energy needs, Mr Howard said it would be "nationally indolent" of him to put it forward.

"A nation like Australia with all our uranium reserves, and given our power needs and the fact that they will double between now and 2050, we would be crazy in the extreme if we didn't allow for the development of nuclear power,'' he said.

For more on that nation's debate about nuclear energy, click here, here and here. For a look at how his position plays out politically, visit The View from Benambra.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Electricity, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Australia

Comments

Anonymous said…

Going nuclear is our only real option:

http://australiasfirstpresident.blogspot.com/2006_10_01_archive.html

January 7, 2007 at 6:51 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog