Nuclear Power for Australia?

Australia has one of the worlds largest supplies ofThe vast majority of Australian would have the
Uranium. It is therefore ironic that Australia hasview of "not in my back yard". Whilst most
not taken advantage of this resource to producewouldn't care if a power plant in the middle of the
power. Australia only has one nuclear reactor anddesert a couple of thousand of kilometers away,
this is mainly for scientific use/research not thethe lack of water and transmission costs for
production of power. This is because Australia alsomake this an unrealistic option. With a power plant
has huge cheaply access coal reserves. Australiain their back yard there is the higher risk of
therefore has numerous coal plants for theradiation from the transport of nuclear waste to a
production of power, the majority of powerholding facility (likely to be somewhere in the
production coming from this source. Being a dryoutback). Although Australian could easily have a
continent currently in the grip of a record droughtnucealr waste facility with no threat to people due
the options for hydro power is limited and largelyto extreme isolation and geological stablity in the
already exploited.outback, the problem lies in transporting the stuff
The problem with being so reliant on coal is thethere. Road and Rail transport are both subject to
amount of CO2 and other gases produced thatregular accidents. A heavy vehicle carrying waste
are contributing to global warming. Australia whichcould result in a mini-chernobyl with nuclear waste
continues to has a growing economy andentering the environment from such an accident
population has increasing power demands likepossibly endangering a large area and having long
most of the world. Australia which has not signterm consequences.
the Kyoto agreement (rightly so as Kyoto is aSuch waste from a nuclear power plant would
mere band aid measure and will not seriouslyalso give Australia the potential to immediately
change our environmental problems).make nuclear weapons in a very short space of
Thus the Australian prime minister, John Howard,time. Australia is already recognised has having
is pushing Australians to consider the nuclearthe technological know how to produce the
option to meet future power needs as nuclearrequire missle and warhead technology. Such an
power plants don't emit CO2 or other greenhouseoutcome would be very worrying for our
gases. However there are a number of problemsneighbours and lessen our argument against
with this option.nations such as North Korea having nuclear
Firstly nuclear power is more expensive power.weapons.
Australians already complain about the size ofLikewise such nuclear power plants would be a
their power bills (an average family in Brisbanemagnet for terrorists and the like.
spends about $500-$800 a quarter or over $2000The final nail in the coffin for the prime ministers
a year). This is particularly felt most by thoseidea is that the states have made it clear they
who rely on air conditioning to counter Australia'shave no interest in nuclear power. Such a battle
hot climate. They are not willing to accept moreover energy would be over the very survival of
expensive options.states and their rights. If the states lost such a
Secondly although there are thousands of nuclearbattle the point of having individual state
power plants operating without incident andparliments would be mute, they would be useless
although it happened on the other side of theoverhangs from federation with the Federal
world Australians are well aware of the Chernobylgovernment in fact taking over all government in
disaster and the shocking consequences thatAustralia should such an eventually occur. Some
continue to be felt. Australia although a largewould argue this process of the destruction of
continent is essentially like a giant island with a beltthe state government is already well underway,
of green extending only a few hundred kilometerswith the federal government grabbing ever more
inland from the sea with the rest being in a vastpower, but further on this is for another article.
desert or near desert condition for much of theWhilst nuclear power presents a vison of
time. Australia couldn't afford to have any sectiongreenhouse gase free energy production it doesn't
of this 'green' band destroyed or a no go zone,present a realistic future for Australia. Australia
such a result would have a greater impact inhas other options to explore, both wind and solar,
event of a disaster than in other 'normal'possibly geothermal and even the real future for
countries. It has already been made clear fora cleaner world - H2 - Hydrogen power. Perhaps
nuclear power to be a option is must be near aputting research and money into this field will
water source and near to power users to cutproduce better and more politically acceptable
down on transmission costs.results.