Page added on June 7, 2012
Australia will become a primary user of advanced nuclear technology, says University of Adelaide scientist Professor Barry Brook, if the country is serious about cutting carbon emissions.
Professor Brook, Director of Climate Science at the University of Adelaide’s Environment Institute, says Australia will eventually turn to nuclear power to meet our sustainable energy needs — and when we do, we will choose to focus on next-generation nuclear technology that provides major safety, waste, and cost benefits over conventional nuclear power.
Speaking on the eve of World Environment Day (5 June), Professor Brook says: “Coal, oil, and natural gas are the main cause of recent global warming, and these fossil fuels must be completely replaced with clean sustainable energy sources in the coming decades if serious climate change impacts are to be avoided.
“One particularly attractive sustainable nuclear technology for Australia is the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR). Although the scientific community has known about the benefits of IFR-type designs for many years, there are currently none in commercial operation because the energy utilities are typically too risk averse to ‘bet on’ new technologies. This is a wasted opportunity for Australia and for the rest of the world.
“Integral Fast Reactors are much more efficient at extracting energy from uranium, can use existing nuclear waste for fuel, produce far smaller volumes of waste that does not require long-term geological isolation, and can be operated at low cost and high reliability. They are also inherently safer than past nuclear reactors due to passive systems based on the laws of physics,” Professor Brook says.
“In order to re-start the nuclear power debate in Australia, it is best to have a solution that overcomes as many public objections as possible: safety, constraints on uranium supplies, long-lived waste, cost, and proliferation. The IFR technology offers a vast improvement in all of these areas.”
What are your thoughts about this?
7 Comments on "Australia to Go Nuclear by 2030"
BillT on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 1:09 pm
If they do a realistic study and actually present ALL of the facts, it will never happen. It would be the most expensive electric possible. Government subsidies, government insurance, construction costs, storage costs, maintenance, and fuel costs will kill the idea before it starts. Fukushima will guarantee that.
Kenz300 on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 2:20 pm
The disaster at Fukishima continues today with no end in sight. The taxpayers of Japan now own TEPCO and will be paying for the clean up of this nuclear nightmare FOREVER. It is time to transition to safe, clean alternative energy sources. Wind, solar, wave energy and geothermal are much better options.
Rick on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 3:20 pm
Australia to Go Nuclear by 2030 = stupid idea!
DC on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 8:47 pm
Whats wrong with solar omg? Sunny Australia would rather go with expensive complex and insanely risky nuclear, instead of wind and solar.
This will end well…
cephalotus on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 10:40 pm
They can have our nuclear waste for fuel.
For free!
—
How do you want to compete with solar power in the year 2030 with those complex reactor designs?
Even today at compareable investment and interest costs the solar power plant will already be paid of at the same time the nuclear power plant starts production.
BillT on Fri, 8th Jun 2012 3:27 am
And the solar panels will be breaking down and need replacement. Or doesn’t anything you use ever wear out, Ceph? Do you really think you can build anything and not have maintenance/replacements frequently? I agree that nuclear is stupid for the same and even more so because of the waste, but renewables are not going to replace oil either.
cephalotus on Fri, 8th Jun 2012 12:22 pm
A PV power plant will last +/- 30 years. It’s investment + interest costs are paid after 10 years, the maintanace costs for the remaining +/- 20 years of solar power production are around 1-2USct/kWh