• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
  • Podcast
  • Archives

Atomic Insights

Atomic energy technology, politics, and perceptions from a nuclear energy insider who served as a US nuclear submarine engineer officer

Draft Australian energy review fails to convince nuclear critics (I am shocked, shocked, I tell you)

November 25, 2006 By Rod Adams

Monsters and Critics published an article on November 25, 2006 titled Draft nuclear report fails to convince. I am not surprised. There are plenty of critics of nuclear power that have invested too much of their careers in opposition to the technology – the chance of them changing their mind is essentially nil. It does not matter what facts are introduced or how much “education” pro-nuclear activists perform.

Here is an example of the attitudes that we face in some arguments:

“While ever I’m premier, there will not be nuclear power stations in New South Wales,” said Morris Iemma, premier of Australia’s most populous state leading the criticism of the taskforce’s findings. “We have legislation in place that bans them, and we’re not changing that at all,” he said to ABC national radio.

As I have pointed out on a number of occasions (do a search of this blog for “smoking gun”) there are strong economic reasons why the coal industry and its supporters will continue fighting nuclear power – its success reduces the demand for their product and increases the possibility that the environmental standards associated with burning coal will be tightened. Pay careful attention to quotes like the following and try to read between the lines.

Dr Mark Diesendorf, Director of the Sustainability Centre at the University of New South Wales, called the inquiry’s report “biased” and contended that renewable energy would be able to provide clean, baseload power to Australian consumers by 2050.

“The study that my colleagues and I did show that we could have half of our electricity produced from renewable sources by the same period of time, without nuclear power, without even so-called ‘clean coal’,” said Dr Diesendorf to The World Today radio program.

“…setting up this whole thing as a debate between coal and nuclear is a really false premise. With energy efficiency and renewable energy, we could halve our greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 and we could go on from there.

Like several other Australian states, New South Wales has a large and profitable coal mining industry. According to a March 2003 report on the NSW Department of Primary Industries Minerals web site the coal industry employes more than 10,000 people, brings in more than $4.8 Billion in export revenue, and supplies more than 90% of the electricity in the state.

It is no surprise at all for a director of a center at a state supported university to have a somewhat biased view of such a major industry, and it is no surprise at all that Dr. Diesendorf does not openly state that he is a fossil fuel supporter. It is much more acceptable for him to call his center a “Sustainability Centre” and to advocate energy efficiency. (There is an interesting list of clients of the Sustainability Centre at the University of New South Wales posted at Clients & Collaborators)

I initially interpreted Dr. Diesendorf’s statement as implicit support for the status quo of nearly complete dependence on coal – wind and solar power are diversions that CANNOT possibly supply reliable, abundant power that meets consumer demands.

However, after reading more about NSW and the work of the Sustainability Centre, it might also be possible to interpret the stated position as one that favors increased production and use of natural gas to displace some of the coal burning – it is somewhat cleaner and it is produced and distributed by a number of the clients and collaborators of the Centre.

It is also much more lucrative for the purveyors of natural gas if it does not have to compete against emissions free nuclear power plants operating on low cost, indigenously produced uranium fuel. Since NSW has laws in place that prohibit uranium mining and even exploration, its businesses could not compete as potential suppliers for those plants.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

About Rod Adams

Rod Adams is an atomic energy expert with small nuclear plant operating and design experience, now serving as a Managing Partner at Nucleation Capital, an emerging climate-focused fund. Rod, a former submarine Engineer Officer and founder of Adams Atomic Engines, Inc., one of the earliest advanced nuclear ventures, has engaged in technical, strategic, political, historic and financial discussion and analysis of the nuclear industry, its technology and policies for several decades. He is the founder of Atomic Insights and host and producer of The Atomic Show Podcast.

Please click here to subscribe to the Atomic Show RSS feed.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. bestonnet says

    November 27, 2006 at 1:30 AM

    The unreliability of wind would probably make the slowly responding coal power plants less than optimal for backing them up while faster responding gas fired plants can respond faster to the wind going away.
    It could well be that the plan of the fossil fuel industry is to have coal baseload with gas backing up the wind that is used to keep nuclear from getting rid of the fossil fuel industry.

Primary Sidebar

Categories

Join Rod’s pronuclear network

Join Rod's pronuclear network by completing this form. Let us know what your specific interests are.

Recent Comments

  • Gordon Mcdowell on Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked
  • Greg White on Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked
  • Gerrit Bruhaug on Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked
  • Eino on Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked
  • David on Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked

Follow Atomic Insights

The Atomic Show

Atomic Insights

Recent Posts

Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked

Nuclear energy growth prospects and secure uranium supplies

Nucleation Capital’s Earth Day in Atherton

Atomic Show #296 – Julia Pyke, Director of Finance Sizewell C

Solar’s dirty secrets: How solar power hurts people and the planet

  • Home
  • About Atomic Insights
  • Atomic Show
  • Contact
  • Links

Search Atomic Insights

Archives

Copyright © 2022 · Atomic Insights

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy