Nuclear power in Australia has been a topic of debate since the 1930s. Australia has one nuclear reactor (OPAL) at Lucas Heights, New South Wales, which is only used to produce radionuclides for nuclear medicine, and does not produce electricity. Australia hosts 33% of the world's proven uranium deposits, and is currently the world's third largest producer of uranium after Kazakhstan and Canada. [1]
Australia's extensive low-cost coal and natural gas reserves have historically been used as strong arguments for avoiding nuclear power. [2] The Liberal Party has advocated for the development of nuclear power and nuclear industries in Australia since the 1950s. The Gorton government moved to establish the Jervis Bay Nuclear Power Plant in the late 1960s, but plans were abandoned after John Gorton was replaced as prime minister in 1971. An anti-nuclear movement developed in Australia in the 1970s, initially focusing on prohibiting nuclear weapons testing and limiting the development of uranium mining and export. The movement also challenged the environmental and economic costs of developing nuclear power and the possibility of fissile material being diverted into nuclear weapons production.[ citation needed ]
A resurgence of interest in nuclear power was prompted by Prime Minister John Howard in 2007 in response to the need to move to low-carbon methods of power generation in order to reduce the effects of global warming on Australia. In 2015, South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill initiated a Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission to investigate the state's future role in the nuclear fuel cycle. As of 2018 [update] there are three active uranium mines, Ranger in Northern Territory, Olympic Dam in South Australia, and Beverley with Four Mile in South Australia. The Royal Commission determined that there was no case for the introduction of nuclear power to the electricity grid in South Australia, but it did not consider its potential interstate. In its final report of May 2016, the Royal Commission recommended that prohibitions preventing the development of nuclear power plants nationally should be repealed.
In 2017, former prime minister Tony Abbott advocated for legislation to be changed to allow the construction of nuclear power plants in Australia. [3] The former Deputy Premier of New South Wales, John Barilaro, has also been urging for debate on the prospect of nuclear power in Australia, including the revisiting of Jervis Bay as a prospective site for a nuclear power plant. [4] [5] In November 2017, Senator Cory Bernardi presented the Nuclear Fuel Cycle (Facilitation) Bill 2017 in the Senate, with the intention of repealing existing prohibitions preventing the establishment of nuclear power in Australia. [6]
In total, three nuclear reactors have been built and operated in Australia over the course of history. All have been located at ANSTO (formely AAEC) headquarter site at Lucas Heights, New South Wales, and all have been research reactors that were not used for power (electric or thermal) generation. The first Australian nuclear reactor was the HIFAR reactor, which was operational 1958-2007, and the second Australian nuclear reactor was the MOATA reactor, which was operational 1961-1995 and became the first Australian reactor to be fully decommissioned in 2009, and the third Australian nuclear reactor is the OPAL reactor, which has been operational 2006-present. No other working (achieved criticality) nuclear reactors have existed in Australia, as of 2024.
In 1952, South Australian Premier Tom Playford expressed with confidence that the first location for a nuclear power station in Australia would be on the shores of Spencer Gulf. [7] In July of that year, it was announced more specifically that Backy Bay (later renamed Fitzgerald Bay), located between Whyalla and Port Augusta would be the site. [8] [9] The station was never constructed, though the region reemerged again in 2007 as a prospect for a nuclear power station during the Federal leadership of Prime Minister John Howard. [10]
In 1969, a 500 MW nuclear power station was proposed for the Jervis Bay Territory, 200 km south of Sydney. [11] A local opposition campaign began, and the South Coast Trades and Labour Council (covering workers in the region) announced that it would refuse to build the reactor. [12] Some environmental studies and site works were completed, and two rounds of tenders were called and evaluated, but in 1971 the Australian government decided not to proceed with the project, citing economic reasons. [11] [13]
In 1977–78, the Western Australian Government, under the leadership of Charles Court, announced plans for a nuclear power reactor near Perth. 1977 was seen as the year of mass mobilisation in WA, with 300 at the first anti-nuclear demonstration to 9,000 at the third protest in the inner city of Perth. Despite public protest, the WA Government selected a first site for a nuclear reactor in 1979 at Wilbinga, 70 kilometres north of Perth. Court predicted that at least another 20 nuclear power stations would be needed by the end of the century to meet rapidly growing power demand, but none of this came to pass. [14]
In 2007 it was reported that businessman Ron Walker, director of the company Australian Nuclear Energy had considered Portland as a possible location for a future nuclear power station. Glenelg Mayor Gilbert Wilson said that he thought it was unlikely that such a project would receive community support. He added that he believed any community in Victoria would oppose it, were it to be located in their area. [15] A concept to develop a 2,400 MW nuclear power station at Portland at a cost of $3 billion was previously raised and abandoned in the early 1980s. [16] In 1983, nuclear power development became prohibited under the Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Act 1983 in the state of Victoria and the law remains in place in 2020. Section 8 of the Act also prohibits uranium milling, enriching, fuel production, fuel reprocessing and waste storage. [17]
While a nuclear power station in South Australia's Upper Spencer Gulf region was discussed intermittently from 2007, no formal proposal to construct a plant was ever made.
In 2007, The Australian newspaper revealed that a location near Port Augusta in the Upper Spencer Gulf region of South Australia was being considered for a future nuclear power station. A company called Australian Nuclear Energy had been registered on 1 June 2006 with three prominent Australian businessmen as major shareholders: Robert Champion de Crespigny (former Chancellor of the University of Adelaide), Ron Walker (former Lord Mayor of Melbourne) and Hugh Morgan (former director of Western Mining Corporation). Prime Minister John Howard supported the formation of the company, describing it as a "great idea". [10]
Five days after the company was registered, the Federal Government established the Switkowski review into nuclear energy. The company examined the viability of building a 20-50 megawatt pilot station in the Upper Spencer Gulf area, at a cost of $70 million-$150 million, and had spoken to American company GE about supplying a nuclear reactor. [18]
South Australian Premier Mike Rann responded to news of the investigation by saying:
It won't be built in this state while I am the Premier or Labor is in power ... read my lips, no nuclear power station in South Australia. [18]
On 7 April 2011, former Australian politician Alexander Downer addressed the students of UCL's Adelaide campus, discussing nuclear power. A long term advocate for nuclear power, he told The Australian that the South Australian town of Whyalla (also on Upper Spencer Gulf) would be ideal for a nuclear power station to serve the interests of BHP, South Australia and the eastern states. He stated:
You could attach it to a desalination plant, so you could solve the problem of Olympic Dam and Roxby Downs ... The Upper Spencer Gulf cities, instead of using Murray River water, they could use desalinated water. And we would have a nuclear power station that would create power for the eastern states' grid. [19]
The Olympic Dam project was expected to use about 400 MWh of electricity per day if the proposed mine expansion went ahead. In 2011, the Olympic Dam mine expansion received State and Federal environmental approval, but in 2012, the BHP board decided not to proceed with the mine expansion as planned citing weakened economic conditions as the reason. [18]
In 2012 a first-of-a-kind study was undertaken in which a combination of solar and wind technology, proposed as a replacement for the ageing Northern coal power station, was comprehensively compared with a reference nuclear reactor. Assuming equal public confidence and an established regulatory framework, the nuclear energy option compared favourably on cost, reliability, commercial availability, plant lifetime and greenhouse gas abatement, among other criteria. [20]
In April 2016, Australia committed to purchasing French-designed Barracuda-class attack submarines with customised diesel propulsion systems, despite the existing French fleet being wholly nuclear-powered. On 15 September 2021, following the signing of a security partnership named AUKUS between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom, it was announced that Australia would develop nuclear-powered submarines, using US and British technology. [21] This sparked outrage in France which lost the contract for what was to become the most expensive defence acquisition in Australia's history. France withdrew their ambassadors in the US and Australia in protest of the deal. [22] The surprise termination of the agreement by Australia under the Morrison government was settled with a payment of €555 million from Australia to France. [23] Anthony Albanese stated that the failed agreement would cost Australia 3.4 billion dollars with "almost nothing to show for it". [23]
As uranium prices began rising from about 2003 onwards, proponents of nuclear power advocated it as a solution to global warming and the Australian Government began taking an interest. In late 2006 and early 2007, the Prime Minister, John Howard, made widely-reported statements in favour of nuclear power, on environmental grounds. [24] Faced with these proposals to examine nuclear power as a possible response to climate change, anti-nuclear campaigners and scientists in Australia claimed that nuclear power could not significantly substitute for other power sources, and that uranium mining itself could become a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. [25] [26]
In 2006, the Howard government commissioned the Switkowski report, an investigation into the merits of nuclear power in Australia. The report concluded that nuclear energy would be competitive with coal-fired power stations if carbon credit sanctions were imposed upon Australia. The industry would have been able to produce its first power station in 10 years and could have delivered 25 such stations by the year 2050, thereby supplying Australia with a third of its baseload power. [27]
Queensland introduced legislation to ban nuclear power development on 20 February 2007. [28] Tasmania attempted a ban on nuclear power facilities, [29] but later, did not pass the bill. [30] Both bills were formulated in response to the pro-nuclear position of John Howard, [31] in addition to the release of the Switkowski report. [32]
Anti-nuclear campaigns were given added impetus by public concern about the sites for possible reactors; fears exploited by anti-nuclear political parties in the lead-up to the national election in 2007. [33] [34] The Rudd Labor government was elected in November 2007 and was opposed to nuclear power for Australia. [35] [36] The anti-nuclear movement continues to be active in Australia, opposing the expansion of existing uranium mines, lobbying against the development of nuclear power in Australia, and criticising proposals for nuclear waste disposal sites. [37]
At the same time, a number of Australian politicians have argued that the development of nuclear power is in the country's best interests. Notably, on 13 June 2008, the New South Wales National Party’s annual state conference passed a resolution, proposed by delegates from Dubbo, supporting research into the development of a nuclear power industry, as well as the establishment of an international nuclear waste storage facility in Australia. The resolution was opposed by the delegates from New South Wales’ North Coast and by the party's state leader, Andrew Stoner. [38] [39]
In 2005, the Australian Government threatened to use its constitutional powers to take control of the approval process for new uranium mines from the then anti-nuclear Northern Territory Government. State governments controlled by the Australian Labor Party were blocking the development of new mines in their jurisdictions while the ALP's "No New Mines policy" was in force.
In April 2007, the Labor Party, under the new leadership of Kevin Rudd, voted at their national conference to abandon the policy. The vote was only won by a narrow margin of 205 to 190, and resulted in a large amount of internal criticism. Ministers Peter Garrett and Anthony Albanese remained outspokenly opposed to the decision due to the unresolved problems of nuclear waste storage and nuclear weapons proliferation.
The John Howard-led Coalition government went to the November 2007 federal election with a pro-nuclear power platform. The Labor Party won the election, and maintained its opposition to nuclear power in Australia. [40] [41]
Nuclear debate in Australia increased after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011. [42] Some protesters[ who? ] demanded a halt to uranium mining and nuclear power generation in their country and throughout the world. [43]
During the Labor-led Rudd-Gillard government, the party's opposition to nuclear power was upheld, while conversely, Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson demonstrated his support for the uranium mining sector. Ferguson retired in 2013 and was replaced by Gary Gray who subsequently indicated support for future nuclear industrial development in Australia. At a South Australian mining and energy sector conference, he stated "I am optimistic that we will get (power) generation issues attended to and that it will be done in a timely fashion". [44]
In 2013, the Liberal Party, led by Tony Abbott, resumed power and reopened discussions about the future of nuclear energy generation in Australia. Since Abbott's appointment, former Prime Minister John Howard, former Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, and several members of the Abbott government have openly advocated for the consideration of nuclear power development, including then-Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. [45]
In November 2013, University of Adelaide Professor of Climatology Tom Wigley co-authored an open letter calling for an expansion of nuclear energy as a tool against climate change. [46] Further calls for the consideration of nuclear power came from academics, [47] [48] Australian media [49] [50] and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering. [51]
In 2014, the federal government released an energy green paper which articulated the potential for Australia in modern nuclear capacity, including small modular reactors, Generation IV reactor technologies and the role of thorium as nuclear fuel, [52] though industry minister Ian MacFarlane opined that "there is no need to have a debate in regard to nuclear energy in Australia but we should focus on the opportunities that nuclear energy presents in other countries and build our uranium industry to take advantage of that." [53] In contrast, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop declared support for nuclear energy, saying "It's an obvious conclusion that if you want to bring down your greenhouse gas emissions dramatically you have to embrace a form of low or zero-emissions energy and that's nuclear, the only known 24/7 baseload power supply with zero emissions." [54] The call for sensible discussion was publicly welcomed by economists and at least one member of the federal opposition. [55] The CEO of Origin Energy spoke in support of the prospect [56] and Business SA demanded the lifting of federal prohibitions so that debate on specific designs could proceed. [57]
In the lead-up to the 2014 South Australian state election, Business SA proposed the establishment of a nuclear industry to enhance the state's economic growth. [58]
In December 2014, Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott told the ABC that he was open to considering a proposal for a nuclear power project for Australia should one be made. He said that proponents of such a project should not expect to receive a government subsidy and that "if it's going to happen, it's going to happen because it's economically feasible." He also described nuclear energy as "the one absolutely proven way of generating emissions-free baseload power." [59]
In January 2015 an open letter [60] was addressed to environmental organisations and signed by seventy-five [61] distinguished climate science experts, including twenty-seven Australian-based academics, endorsing the findings of a peer-reviewed article which quantified the potential climate and biodiversity benefits of nuclear energy. [62]
In February 2015 South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill announced that a Royal Commission would be held to investigate South Australia's future role in the nuclear fuel cycle. Kevin Scarce, former Governor of South Australia, retired Rear Admiral of the Royal Australian Navy and current Chancellor of the University of Adelaide, was appointed Commissioner. A final report of the commission's findings was published in May 2016 which recommended that several existing legislative constraints be repealed.
In June 2016 Australia joined the Generation IV International Forum. [63]
In June 2017, former Prime Minister Tony Abbott acknowledged fellow former Prime Minister Bob Hawke's support for expanding the nuclear industry in Australia and asserted that the "Australian Labor government under Premier Jay Weatherill would like to develop new industries to supplement the uranium mine at Roxby Downs. Why not have a nuclear submarine servicing facility in that state – and the industries that would inevitably spin-off?" [64]
In November 2017, Senator Cory Bernardi presented the Nuclear Fuel Cycle (Facilitation) Bill in the Senate. The bill is intended to repeal prohibitions preventing the future establishment of nuclear power in Australia and the further processing of uranium and spent nuclear fuel. [6] It is the sixth-oldest bill still currently before the Senate as of 10 October 2019. [65]
In 2019, the Federal Government held an inquiry into nuclear power. It recommended that the ban be removed for advanced nuclear reactors.
On 6 June 2019 the state of New South Wales began an inquiry on the Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Repeal Bill 2019.
On 14 August 2019 the state of Victoria launched an inquiry into Australia's nuclear prohibition.
In September 2021, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States signed an agreement that would allow for the sharing of nuclear propulsion technology between the three countries to assist Australia in acquiring nuclear-powered submarines. [66]
In 2023, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton began advocating for the introduction of nuclear power in Australia; particularly, small modular reactors, which he claimed could be placed on the sites of decommissioned coal-fired power stations. [67]
On 19 June 2024, Peter Dutton announced his policy for the rollout of nuclear power in Australia. His plan called for the construction of reactors on the sites of retiring coal-fired power stations, including at Tarong, Callide, Liddell, Mount Piper, Port Augusta, Loy Yang and Muja, with the first two plants coming online between 2035 and 2037. It was noted that the proposed sites in Western Australia and South Australia will only be suitable for small modular reactors, with the other sites apparently being suitable for either small or larger-scale plants. Dutton also proposed that the Australian Government would be responsible for funding the construction of the reactors, and thereafter, would assume full ownership once they entered operation. [68]
One of the arguments often made by opponents of nuclear power in Australia is the problem of managing long-lived and hazardous radioactive waste, including, but not limited to, spent nuclear fuel.
A case has been made[ when? ] for Australia to centralise the management of its nuclear waste, which is currently held in temporary storage facilities at various locations around the country.
In response to the Northern Land Council's withdrawal of a section of Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory as a potential nuclear waste facility for Australian domestically-produced nuclear waste in 2014, [69] it was articulated that the process had suffered from a lack of recognition of the limited hazard posed by existing waste, which is currently stored at over one hundred sites in cities and industrial areas. [70] Furthermore, an open tender process for volunteered sites has attracted interest from pastoralists. [71] Site nominations closed on 5 May 2015, in a process endorsed by Federal MP Rowan Ramsay. Ramsay supports the establishment of a waste storage facility in South Australia, and has said:
Having been to France, Sweden and Finland and looked at their low level repositories I'd be more than happy to have one on my farm. [72]
On 29 April 2015 Josh Frydenberg MP, the Minister for Resources, Energy and Northern Australia, announced the shortlisting of Wallerberdina Station near Barndioota in South Australia's Flinders Ranges as a possible site. [73] This site was ruled out in 2019, however two sites near Kimba are still possibilities as of the end of 2019. [74]
The Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 prohibits certain nuclear actions specified in s.22A unless a federal approval is obtained. It specifically prohibits nuclear power generation in s.140A (an amendment insisted upon by the Australian Democrats). The Act states that the Minister must not approve an action consisting of or involving the construction or operation of a nuclear fuel fabrication plant, or a nuclear power station, or an enrichment plant, or a reprocessing facility. [75]
As of 2018, Australia has one operating nuclear reactor, the open-pool Australian lightwater reactor research reactor at Lucas Heights which supplies the vast majority of Australia's nuclear medicine. It replaced the High Flux Australian Reactor which operated from 1958 to 2007 at the same site, around a similar time to the MOATA reactor. [76] These are the only three nuclear reactors to have been used in Australia. None of them has been used to generate electricity.
Additional nuclear industrial prohibitions exist under state legislation in South Australia and Victoria.
The objects of the Nuclear Waste Storage Facility (Prohibition) Act 2000 are "to protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of South Australia and to protect the environment in which they live by prohibiting the establishment of certain nuclear waste storage facilities in this State." As such, the Act prohibits the:
The objects of the Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Act 1983 are:
to protect the health, welfare and safety of the people of Victoria and to limit deterioration of the environment in which they dwell by prohibiting the establishment of nuclear activities and by regulating the possession of certain nuclear materials, in a manner consistent with and conducive to assisting the Commonwealth of Australia in meeting its international nuclear non-proliferation objectives.
As such, the Act prohibits the construction or operation of a nuclear reactor as well as exploration:
In the 2010 book Why vs. Why: Nuclear Power [79] Barry Brook and Ian Lowe discuss and articulate the debate about nuclear power. Brook argues that there are various reasons why people should say "yes" to nuclear power, and these reasons include: [79]
Lowe argues that there are various reasons why people should say "no" to nuclear power: [79]
In 2015, both authors were appointed to the Expert Advisory Committee of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission in South Australia.
Our insatiable hunger for fossil fuels has to be tempered going forward and the only alternative for base load grid power, that's the power you need 24/7, other than coal, is nuclear power. [81]
One minister who is not only competent but also does have convictions. He is the Resources Minister and often is quoted as supporting the further development of Australia's uranium industry. There is no doubt he also is a supporter of nuclear power in Australia.
Support for nuclear power is usually associated with conservatism. Support for nuclear power has grown rapidly in recent years, especially among conservatives, due to its potential to assist Australia's emissions reduction targets, which have bipartisan support. Australia's emissions reduction targets involve net zero emissions by 2050.
The Coalition, a centre-right alliance that consists of the Liberal Party (the more conservative of the two major parties) and the National Party (its junior Coalition partner that supports agrarianism), supports introducing nuclear power. The party's support for nuclear power has grown over the years. Since the election of Peter Dutton as Liberal leader and Opposition Leader, the party has promised to build nuclear power plants in Australia if elected, [126] with the proposed nuclear reactors to be generating electricity by 2035 (for small modular reactors) or 2037 (for larger reactors). [127]
The Coalition's proposal has been backed by many Australians, particularly those who already supported nuclear power, but it has been criticised by opponents of nuclear power, such as members of the centre-left Labor Party and the left-wing Greens party.
Supporters claim that nuclear power is a cheaper and reliable source of energy and note that it is zero-emissions technology used in several other countries with major economies, [128] and that Australia should also use nuclear technology. [129] Others have also pointed out that Australia will in the future receive nuclear-powered submarines from the United States and the United Kingdom under the AUKUS agreement. Nuclear power has also long been backed by right-wing minor parties.
Opponents claim that the technology is costly to build and maintain and that nuclear power would not be available in Australia for decades. Labor and Greens politicians oppose nuclear power, as do some power companies with private investors. [130] Others have even claimed that Dutton's plans for nuclear power are implausible. [131] Possibly due to nuclear power's popularity among younger people, Labor politicians have used memes to attack the Coalition's nuclear policy, most notably memes depicting fish and koalas with three eyes, in reference to the three-eyed-fish in The Simpsons . [132]
If elected at the next federal election, a Coalition government plans to build seven nuclear power plants at former coal power plants. They would be located in Blackmans Flat and Muswellbrook in New South Wales, Traralgon in Victoria, Mount Murchison and Tarong in Queensland, Muja in Western Australia and Port Augusta in South Australia. [133]
While the federal Coalition is actively pro-nuclear, the state branches are less vocal about it. The Tasmanian branch is not as optimistic as other state branches, as Tasmania's electricity mix already includes a large amount of renewable energy, namely solar and wind power, as well as hydroelectricity. [134] [135]
Nuclear power has long been backed by parliamentary right-wing minor parties such as Pauline Hanson's One Nation, [136] the Libertarian Party [137] the United Australia Party [138]
Extra-parliamentary parties such as the Australian Citizens Party [139] also back nuclear power, while the Fusion Party supports research into fusion power. [140] Additionally, the Australian Conservatives and the Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy Australia supported nuclear power during their existences.
Opposition to the development of nuclear power in Australia originated in the 1970s. The Australian anti-nuclear movement initially lobbied for bans on nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific and on uranium mining in Australia. Dr Helen Caldicott, a pediatrician from Melbourne emerged as a leading voice of the movement as she conducted public talks and informed politicians and trade unions of the health risks of exposure to ionizing radiation.
Western Australia has a significant share of the Australia's uranium reserves, but between 2002 and 2008, a statewide ban on uranium mining was in force. The ban was lifted when the Liberal Party was voted into power in the state and, as of 2010, many companies are exploring for uranium in Western Australia. One of the industry's major players, the mining company BHP Billiton, planned to develop the Yeelirrie uranium project in a 17 billion dollar project. [150] Two other projects in Western Australia are further advanced then BHP's Yeelirrie, these being the Lake Way uranium project, which is pursued by Toro Energy, and the Lake Maitland uranium project, pursued by Mega Uranium. [151] [152] [153] But it is unlikely that any new projects will enter active development until the market improves. As of 2013 uranium prices are very low. [154]
As of late 2010, there were calls for Australians to debate whether the nation should adopt nuclear power as part of its energy mix. Nuclear power is seen to be "a divisive issue that can arouse deep passions among those for and against". [155]
Following the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear emergency in Japan, where three nuclear reactors were damaged by explosions, Ian Lowe sees the nuclear power option as being risky and unworkable for Australia. Lowe says nuclear power is too expensive, with insurmountable problems associated with waste disposal and weapons proliferation. It is also not a fast enough response to address climate change. Lowe advocates renewable energy which is "quicker, less expensive and less dangerous than nuclear". [156]
Nuclear reactors are banned in Queensland [157] and Tasmania. [158] Uranium mining was previously prohibited in New South Wales under the Uranium Prohibition Act of 1986, however in 2012 Premier Barry O'Farrell amended the legislation to allow prospecting and mining of uranium in that State. [159]
In December 2011, the sale of uranium to India was a contentious issue. MPs clashed over the issue and protesters were marched from Sydney's convention centre before Prime Minister Julia Gillard's motion to remove a party ban on uranium sales to India was narrowly supported 206 votes to 185. Long-time anti-nuclear campaigner Peter Garrett MP spoke against the motion. [160]
More than 400 people joined a "Lizard's Revenge march" to the Olympic Dam site in July 2012. The anti-nuclear activists, including Elder Kevin Buzzacott, protested against the mine expansion and the uranium industry. They say the company and the government have put short-term economic gain ahead of environmental and health concerns. Organiser Nectaria Calan said police harassed protesters, demanding identification and controlling access to and from their campsite. [161]
In March 2012, hundreds of anti-nuclear demonstrators converged on the Australian headquarters of global mining giants BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. The 500-strong march through southern Melbourne called for an end to uranium mining in Australia, and included speeches and performances by representatives of the expatriate Japanese community as well as Australia's Indigenous communities, who are concerned about the effects of uranium mining near tribal lands. There were also events in Sydney. [162]
A site within Muckaty Station was being considered for Australia's low-level and intermediate-level radioactive waste storage and disposal facility. The plan was subject to a Federal Court challenge. [163] The nomination of Muckaty was withdrawn in June 2014. [69]
Historically, many prospective Australian uranium mines have been constrained by active antinuclear opposition, but state governments have now approved mine development in Western Australia and Queensland. But it is unlikely that any new projects will enter active development until the market improves. As of 2013 uranium prices are very low. Cameco placed the Kintyre project on hold until market prices improve and Paladin has stated that its project proposals (Bigrlyi, Angela/Pamela, Manyingee, Oobagooma, and Valhalla/Skal) need higher uranium market prices before they can proceed. Toro wants to take the Wiluna proposal to the development phase, but has not been successful in attracting equity investors. When market prices go up again, so that mine development is justified, most projects would need at least five years to proceed to production. [154]
As of 2015, nuclear power remains opposed by a number of not-for-profit and environmental organizations, political parties and their members, renewable energy advocates, and anti-nuclear campaigners. There are several prominent Australians who have publicly expressed anti-nuclear views:
This article needs to be updated.(May 2024) |
A McNair Gallup poll on the construction of nuclear power stations in Australia was carried out in 1979. The same poll was conducted again 28 years later in 2007 on 1,000 randomly selected people throughout Australia. A new poll was asked in 2009 which marked the first time that more people support nuclear power than oppose it, although the support for nuclear power was still not an outright majority. Respondents were asked the following question:
1979 | 2007 | 2009 | |
---|---|---|---|
Favour | 34% | 41% | 49% |
Oppose | 56% | 53% | 43% |
Don't know | 10% | 6% | 8% |
The 1979 poll was conducted soon after the Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2) nuclear power plant accident located near Pennsylvania USA where a sequence of events lead to the partial meltdown of the TMI-2 reactor core. [176]
Opposition to the construction of nuclear power stations in the 2007 poll was strongest amongst females, Greens supporters and Australians aged 18–29 and 40–49. [177]
TOTAL | ALP | Coalition | Greens | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Favour | 41% | 30% | 59% | 22% |
Oppose | 53% | 66% | 34% | 78% |
Don't know | 6% | 4% | 7% | 0% |
The McNair Gallup Poll showed a significant difference in opinion between ALP, Coalition and Green supporters, and moderate differences by gender. Men were more likely to favour the construction of nuclear power stations (55%), with twice as many males in favour of the construction of nuclear power stations in Australia than women. 41% of men were more likely to oppose the construction of nuclear power stations in Australia. In contrast, 65% of women were more likely to oppose the construction of nuclear power stations in Australia, while 28% favour the construction of nuclear power stations.
A 2014 independent survey, commissioned by SACOME, of 1,214 South Australians revealed a distinct trend in the community towards supporting consideration of nuclear energy. [178]
TOTAL | Female | Male | 18–34 | 35–50 | 51–65 | 65+ | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Support | 48.0% | 44.5% | 64.4% | 52.3% | 53.8% | 52.3% | 59.8% |
Neutral | 19.5% | 26.2% | 16.9% | 22.9% | 20.6% | 21.6% | 21.8% |
Total Oppose | 32.6% | 29.3% | 18.6% | 24.7% | 25.6% | 26.0% | 18.4% |
The proportion of neutral respondents was at around 20-25% in all categories, with qualitative feedback largely indicating conditional support given the satisfactory addressing of concerns, or a requirement for further information. Positive responses outnumbered the negative, most dramatically men and the elderly, with less dramatic support from women.
A Morgan poll in September 2019 found support for Australian nuclear power had attained a narrow majority, with 51% in favour when reduction of carbon emissions was cited. This was an increase of 16 percentage points from July 2011. [179]
A February 2024 poll published by the Sydney Morning Herald found that 36% supported Nuclear power in Australia, 27% were open to it, 23% were opposed and 15% were Undecided. [180]
An April 2024 Essential Research poll found that 52% supported Australia developing nuclear power plants, 31% opposed and 17% unsure. [181] [182]
Nuclear power is the use of nuclear reactions to produce electricity. Nuclear power can be obtained from nuclear fission, nuclear decay and nuclear fusion reactions. Presently, the vast majority of electricity from nuclear power is produced by nuclear fission of uranium and plutonium in nuclear power plants. Nuclear decay processes are used in niche applications such as radioisotope thermoelectric generators in some space probes such as Voyager 2. Reactors producing controlled fusion power have been operated since 1958, but have yet to generate net power and are not expected to be commercially available in the near future.
A nuclear power plant (NPP), also known as a nuclear power station (NPS), nuclear generating station (NGS) or atomic power station (APS) is a thermal power station in which the heat source is a nuclear reactor. As is typical of thermal power stations, heat is used to generate steam that drives a steam turbine connected to a generator that produces electricity. As of September 2023, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that there were 410 nuclear power reactors in operation in 32 countries around the world, and 57 nuclear power reactors under construction.
State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom, also known as Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation,, or Rosatom State Corporation, is a Russian state corporation headquartered in Moscow that specializes in nuclear energy, nuclear non-energy goods and high-tech products. It was established in 2007 and comprises more than 350 enterprises, including scientific research organizations, a nuclear weapons complex, and the world's only nuclear icebreaker fleet.
The anti-nuclear movement is a social movement that opposes various nuclear technologies. Some direct action groups, environmental movements, and professional organisations have identified themselves with the movement at the local, national, or international level. Major anti-nuclear groups include Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Peace Action, Seneca Women's Encampment for a Future of Peace and Justice and the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. The initial objective of the movement was nuclear disarmament, though since the late 1960s opposition has included the use of nuclear power. Many anti-nuclear groups oppose both nuclear power and nuclear weapons. The formation of green parties in the 1970s and 1980s was often a direct result of anti-nuclear politics.
In the United States, nuclear power is provided by 94 commercial reactors with a net capacity of 97 gigawatts (GW), with 63 pressurized water reactors and 31 boiling water reactors. In 2019, they produced a total of 809.41 terawatt-hours of electricity, which accounted for 20% of the nation's total electric energy generation. In 2018, nuclear comprised nearly 50 percent of US emission-free energy generation.
As of 2024, Finland has five operating nuclear reactors in two power plants, all located on the shores of the Baltic Sea. Nuclear power provided about 35% of the country's electricity generation in 2022. The first research nuclear reactor in Finland was commissioned in 1962 and the first commercial reactor started operation in 1977. The fifth reactor started operation in April 2023.
Thomas Richard Kenyon is a former Australian politician who represented the South Australian House of Assembly seat of Newland for the Labor Party from the 2006 election until his defeat in 2018. Kenyon left the Labor Party in 2021 to found the Family First Party.
Nuclear power construction costs have varied significantly across the world and over time. Large and rapid increases in costs occurred during the 1970s, especially in the United States. Recent cost trends in countries such as Japan and Korea have been very different, including periods of stability and decline in construction costs.
Nuclear power is the fifth-largest source of electricity in India after coal, hydro, solar and wind. As of November 2023, India has 23 nuclear reactors in operation in 8 nuclear power plants, with a total installed capacity of 8,180 MW. Nuclear power produced a total of 48 TWh in 2023, contributing around 3% of total power generation in India. 11 more reactors are under construction with a combined generation capacity of 8,700 MW.
The anti-nuclear movement in the United States consists of more than 80 anti-nuclear groups that oppose nuclear power, nuclear weapons, and/or uranium mining. These have included the Abalone Alliance, Clamshell Alliance, Committee for Nuclear Responsibility, Nevada Desert Experience, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Plowshares Movement, United Steelworkers of America (USWA) District 31, Women Strike for Peace, Nukewatch, and Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. Some fringe aspects of the anti-nuclear movement have delayed construction or halted commitments to build some new nuclear plants, and have pressured the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to enforce and strengthen the safety regulations for nuclear power plants. Most groups in the movement focus on nuclear weapons.
Nuclear weapons testing, uranium mining and export, and nuclear power have often been the subject of public debate in Australia, and the anti-nuclear movement in Australia has a long history. Its origins date back to the 1972–1973 debate over French nuclear testing in the Pacific and the 1976–1977 debate about uranium mining in Australia.
Nuclear power in the European Union accounted for approximately 26% of total electricity production in 2019 and nearly half of low-carbon energy production across the EU.
The nuclear power debate is a long-running controversy about the risks and benefits of using nuclear reactors to generate electricity for civilian purposes. The debate about nuclear power peaked during the 1970s and 1980s, as more and more reactors were built and came online, and "reached an intensity unprecedented in the history of technology controversies" in some countries. In the 2010s, with growing public awareness about climate change and the critical role that carbon dioxide and methane emissions plays in causing the heating of the Earth's atmosphere, there was a resurgence in the intensity of the nuclear power debate.
Ukraine operates four nuclear power plants with 15 reactors located in Volhynia and South Ukraine. The total installed nuclear power capacity is over 13 GWe, ranking 7th in the world in 2020. Energoatom, a Ukrainian state enterprise, operates all four active nuclear power stations in Ukraine. In 2019, nuclear power supplied over 20% of Ukraine's energy.
Thorium-based nuclear power generation is fueled primarily by the nuclear fission of the isotope uranium-233 produced from the fertile element thorium. A thorium fuel cycle can offer several potential advantages over a uranium fuel cycle—including the much greater abundance of thorium found on Earth, superior physical and nuclear fuel properties, and reduced nuclear waste production. One advantage of thorium fuel is its low weaponization potential. It is difficult to weaponize the uranium-233 that is bred in the reactor. Plutonium-239 is produced at much lower levels and can be consumed in thorium reactors.
Benjamin "Ben" Heard is a South Australian environmental consultant and an advocate for nuclear power in Australia, through his directorship of environmental NGO, Bright New World.
The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission is a Royal Commission into South Australia's future role in the nuclear fuel cycle. It commenced on 19 March 2015 and delivered its final report to the Government of South Australia on 6 May 2016. The Commissioner was former Governor of South Australia, Kevin Scarce, a retired Royal Australian Navy Rear-Admiral and chancellor of the University of Adelaide. The Commission concluded that nuclear power was unlikely to be economically feasible in Australia for the foreseeable future. However, it identified an economic opportunity in the establishment of a deep geological storage facility and the receipt of spent nuclear fuel from prospective international clients.
David Noonan is an Australian environmentalist and member of the anti-nuclear movement in Australia. Noonan is a former anti-nuclear campaigner for the Australian Conservation Foundation, and has been a prominent spokesperson during campaigns against the expansion of uranium mining in Australia and against the establishment of nuclear waste storage facilities. He has a science degree and a Masters in Environmental Studies.
The nuclear industry in South Australia is focused on uranium mining, milling and the export of uranium oxide concentrate for use in the production of nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants. The state is home to the world's largest known single deposit of uranium, which is worked by BHP at the Olympic Dam mine.
Dr Ian Duncan is a businessman active in the Australian resources sector. He is a past president of operations at the Olympic Dam mine in South Australia under Western Mining Corporation. He was Chairman of the London-based Uranium Institute in 1995-1996. From the 1990s to the present, Duncan has advocated for nuclear industrial development in Australia, specifically the development of facilities to store and dispose of nuclear waste and the legalization and development of nuclear power plants for the generation of electricity. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Technology, Science and Engineering (ATSE), the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM), and Engineers Australia.
{{cite news}}
: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link){{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link){{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)Support for nuclear energy (trend) - Q. To what extent do you support or oppose Australia developing nuclear power plants for the generation of electricity?