27 June 2024
Topics: Zero emissions nuclear energy
Stephen Cenatiempo
Time to replace retiring coal fired power plants and any delays in rolling out renewables will likely lead to higher costs and interrupted grid supply. There’s a lot to unpack there Shadow Energy Minister Ted O’Brien is with us. Ted, good to speak to you again.
Ted O’Brien
Likewise Steve.
Stephen Cenatiempo
This AEMO mob don’t seem to have a… I mean the inconsistencies that every statement they come out with. I saw a tweet from David Pocock this morning saying that AEMO are now saying that 80% of our energy will be supplied by rooftop solar by 2050 which flies in the face of these rollouts of these large scale solar farms and I have no problem with rooftop solar. I think it’s a great idea, but it’s not going to fire industry.
Ted O’Brien
Yeah, look, so Stephen, the way this thing works. The market operator puts out this, they call it an Integrated System Plan, and a lot of commentators will say “oh so the experts have now spoken, this is the way we have to run our energy”. But the way it in fact works, they’ve got no choice but to accept government targets. So they’ve been lumped with this 82% renewables target by 2030 that everyone knows is unachievable and suddenly they’ve got to make it work and now they say that they want 98% renewables on the grid by 2050. This is Anthony Albanese’s plan and the Prime Minister confirmed that to the public. This is his plan. It’s not going to work. It is not fully costed. That’s been confirmed. It is pushing out 90% of our baseload power within 10 years. That’s now been confirmed. That is Labor policy because the ISP is bringing forward the closure of those baseload power stations before their owners, the plant owners. To do that, you can go out screaming on the street, say “oh my lord everything’s closing down, quick get more renewables on the grid”. Renewables have a role to play, an important one, but we should not be having a weather dependent grid entirely. That’s what Labor’s doing. Lights will go out and prices will keep soaring.
Stephen Cenatiempo
Yeah. But there’s a couple of issues I want to. I mean firstly, I find it strange that AEMO has made this comment because my understanding is that they don’t actually take nuclear into account because at this point it is illegal so it can’t actually be part of the energy mix as it stands.
Ted O’Brien
Correct.
Stephen Cenatiempo
The other issue is though, is that the policy that you guys put forward says okay, seven nuclear power plants and I think most people are starting to come around to that now but that’s not going to be enough to replace the baseload power that we’re losing. So, what else happens in the meantime?
Ted O’Brien
Our plan is, in the meantime we need more gas and so, do we need renewables? Sure, sure we do, but the idea that you’re going to have a variable technology like renewables, again weather dependent, taking over a base load 24/7 power force is engineering lunacy and the economics are through the roof. It’s crazy stuff, it’s over $1 trillion in their plan, right. Now, for us, our position. One, you should not close those baseload power stations prematurely. You just shouldn’t. That’s Labor’s plan. It was confirmed in this document from the market operator. Number two, as you have zero emissions nuclear energy coming into the grid for the base load power, you are going to have that gap in the middle. So coal needs to exit and then nuclear comes in, well, what do you do? The answer there is gas. Which is why we’ve been really critical over the last two years that the Albanese government is suffocating the supply of gas in the country and the market operator, actually going back to them, they were out there less than two weeks ago saying that this very winter we look like we’re going to run out of gas. Which is why they’re now running around the countryside telling companies please down tools, don’t produce as much, because we need to save gas otherwise it’s gonna go out in households.
Stephen Cenatiempo
Ted, why are we giving up on coal altogether, though, because new technology coal fired power stations are a hell of a lot cleaner than Liddell or Bayswater or Loy Yang or Callide or any of these existing coal fired power stations. Why have we given up on that given that we have an abundant resource, with the, we’re still going to keep exporting coal we can’t afford not to, but not going to use it ourselves moving forward.
Ted O’Brien
Yeah, so certainly, just on the last point we absolutely should be continuing to export coal and you know that the left of Australian politics will say “oh well that you know is a bad thing to do”. There are more reasons, there are strategic reasons. There are countries to whom we export, their lights would go out if they did not have our coal and if you want to improve emissions for as part of our global commitment, our coal is cleaner than other people’s coal so we should be exporting it. And then as for ourselves the beauty of coal as you know, is it provides that 24/7 baseline power. It underpins the whole thing for us right, and so the way that I look at this is, we’ve got to make sure that these coal plants as they exist, they’re not closed prematurely. So, you know, the asset is there, well let’s use it. The cheapest way of …
Stephen Cenatiempo
… Yeah I understand that and I agree with that and that…
Ted O’Brien
… question, like going to your thing there. Okay, so, when those coal plants though, do exit the grid, so when they, you know the owners say “well alright, look I mean the asset’s old we got to close this thing down”, then it’s a question of, okay what should we replace it with? And then it becomes a question between coal or zero emissions nuclear energy. The reason why of those two, we opt for nuclear is that it’s zero emission. So alright, well we’re committed to net zero electricity grid by 2050. You can have either coal or you can have nuclear. Well…
Stephen Cenatiempo
Why not both?
Ted O’Brien
… zero emissions. Well, you don’t need both because if you can have one and you end up being able to get more capability in one type of technology, as historically we have with coal, right? We had an enormous rollout of coal plants and the more you roll to deploy these plants over time, the cheaper it becomes, because you just get better at it, right? So you get a whole bunch of capability and the more you do over time, the more the costs come down. So you got to make a choice and it also means on nuclear, so therefore on the threshold question, go nuclear and not coal to replace the asset, but then even with nuclear, you know, we shouldn’t be looking at multiple designs being deployed across Australia. We’ve got to choose one modern larger plant type and one small modular reactor type. So again, to become specialised, it’s where the French have done it, the Canadians have done it, the South Koreans have done it. That’s how they sort of get their cost down. The likes of the UK and the US learning historically how they’ve done nuclear, especially the US, they’ve chosen lots of different designs. So they’ve never really been able to get the cost down by focusing and I think it’s just sort of economics rules that’s come from business backgrounds, so the same sort of stuff you do commercially when you’re looking at rolling out assets. You got to choose your technologies and then develop capability and deploy multiple units to get the prices down.
Stephen Cenatiempo
Ted good to talk to you again, thanks for your time.
Ted O’Brien
Likewise mate. Thanks.