Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
Bowen’s estimate claims that it could cost three hundred eighty-seven billion dollars to replace every Australian coal plant with nuclear SMRs. However, the Coalition has not yet proposed such a plan. O’Brien’s response was to cite the nuclear heavy Canadian province of Ontario as an example of a power grid that is much cleaner and cheaper than here.
However, the Ontario system runs on old, large-scale nuclear power technology that no one is proposing for Australia. It has a different cost profile, has been heavily subsidized and a new plant has not been completed for thirty years.
An honest comparison would involve looking at the cost of SMRs today and considering what it would cost to start an industry in Australia.
The Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), which has examined the evidence, concluded that this is near to impossible because of a lack of robust data. It says that there are only two known SMR in operation. One is in Russia on a barge, and another is in China. Both suffered serious cost overruns and delays that have become common with nuclear projects.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) there are more than eighty other SMR designs in development. Only some of these could be used for generating electricity. The IAEA says that their economic competitiveness is “still to be proven in practice”.
It will probably be years before that picture becomes any clearer. Ontario hopes to have an SMR online in 2028 and three more by the mid-2030s. O’Brien has mentioned a plan by TerraPower to build a demonstration SMR in Wyoming. It has a budget of about three billion eighty and six dollars for a plant with about one fourth of the capacity of an Australian coal power generator, and construction has been delayed. TerraPower hopes to have their SMR operating by late 2029.
While concerns about nuclear waste remain real, the world needs all available technology to get out of fossil fuels. However, the idea that Australia should wait for an unproven technology to arrive which it already has extraordinary clean energy resources at its disposal defies all logic.
Meanwhile, the world is in the grip of the hottest year in recorded history. The fire season has already begun in mid-September. The sea ice around Antarctica is at a record low. Credible bodies such as the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering now argue that Australia should be aiming to be net zero by 2035. By this date, if things go really well, there will only be a small handful of SMRs in operation.
The transition away from fossil fuels is definitely challenging. There are huge policy and social license issues that need to be dealt with so that the rollout of renewable energy can accelerate. Carbon emissions from transport, major industry and agriculture are not coming down.
Solutions are certainly available. Imagine what might be possible if all the political energy dedicated to the nuclear energy future went into developing those alternatives.