Nuclear energy is the ‘only’ form of zero-emission 24/7 baseload power: Ted O’Brien



Shadow Energy Minister Ted O’Brien discusses the Coalition’s plan to develop nuclear energy if elected.

“Right now, under the Albanese government, we are looking at 90 per cent of our 24/7 baseload power exiting the grid over the next ten years,” Mr O’Brien told Sky New Australia.

“If you look at mainland Australia, there is only one form of clean energy that provides 24/7 baseload power, and that is zero-emission Nuclear energy.”

source

45 thoughts on “Nuclear energy is the ‘only’ form of zero-emission 24/7 baseload power: Ted O’Brien”

  1. Poor Matt Canavan and Poor dead King coal…. 😂😂😂
    Mind you the LNP had 9 years of doing nothing so all of a sudden they go for NUCLEAR

    Whose going to run the Nuclear stations and pay foe them THE GUBBERMENT? 😂😂

    Reply
  2. Its Alright for You TOM YOU Obviously Never LEAVE the City and SEE The DAMAGE to our Beautiful Countryside. It MAKES ME FURIOUS. YOU Don't Have To live With it. And WHERE are All these Poisonous Panels Going to GO??. LEAK Deadly Pollutants INTO our Water Table??? People like YOU are the Problem .

    Reply
  3. There isn't actually any crisis. I can't tell you how many times this has been debunked as just a money-making scam by the elites. Therefore, no need to reinvent the wheel. Hydrocarbons are fine. No need for nuclear, no need to change anything except in the usual progress of technology.
    Changes are going to be massively expensive for tax-payers, which only result in the poorest being hit the hardest.

    Reply
  4. why does no one seem to put any value on our landscape and maintaining the beauty of mother earth, there was a furore when a mining company damaged a cave out in the desert that few ever see, now we have the destruction of thousands of square kilometres of our country side, covered in wind mills and panels and that seems okay. not okay with me. bring on nuclear. get rid of bowen.

    Reply
  5. No country has run itself on reneweables whatsoever so why could the most inept Minister ever make it work ? Pray tell chris Bowen. Tom honestly you should keep your mouth shut as you have no idea on how an electricity grid works.

    Reply
  6. i still dont understand this, what's the point of transitioning if we export millions of tonnes of coal to other countries for $$$$. The whole climate change thing is BS. so much waste of money.

    Reply
  7. The argument in favour of renewables without a substantial baseload built into the system is just not workable and those who claim that it is should provide the evidence which Labor has not done. Further the costing done by the CSIRO is not suitable for any intelligent assessment of the system viability simply because the revenue versus cost part is missing which means that no one knows whether the electricity prices are going to be withing acceptable market levels once the infrastructure is built. The other major flaw is that costs a missing, depreciation of capital cost assets is not included, the time-value of money is missing, the determination of a commercially or other discount rate is not available and worst of all, there is no 'what-if' testing on constituent parts of the net revenue and cost line items to determine not only economic viability but also financial risk as a function of cost/revenue estimation errors. In my view the GenCost report is substandard and totally inadequate for the purpose it is intended. In short that costing should have been done using NPV, IRR methods with concatenated calculation periods, salvage value determination incorporating recycling and environmental restoration costs, and strong what if testing, projected revenue based proper professionally done market segmentation, what testing and consideration of the interconnect arrangements in terms of electricity spot price fluctuation and the effect on the consumer price.

    The costing is incomplete and it could have been done much better and more competently in line with best practice economic viability assessment of projects.
    In the private sector the GenCost method would not be accepted or even deemed remotely satisfactory for economic decision making.

    Reply
  8. The thing that annoys me the most about these message

    The climate change bs
    Those trying to explain BASIC PHYSICS to the idiots

    The amount of idiotic oxymornonic cretins saying ohh this bad and waste unga bunga scary glowing rock ….

    Basic searches of the Internet will show

    Nuclear is reliable
    We can get lftr and other reactors up in less than a decade

    We solved the 'waste' issue decades ago

    And don't soo oooh chernoble
    WE ARE NOT SOVIET RUSSIA
    WE ARE NOT GOING TO BLATANTLY BREAK SAFETY PROCEDURES
    WE ARE NOT GOING TO UNDER FUND SAFETY MEASURES
    WE ARE NOT GOING TO TURN ON SOMETHING WE WERE TOLD NOT TOO

    FFS WAKE UP PEOPLE

    Reply
  9. As of June 2023, there were 57 nuclear reactors under construction worldwide. China ranked first with 21 units. It was followed by India, with eight reactors under construction at the time

    Reply
  10. Ted your talking through your ass
    The liberal party was so internally divided that you guys were unable to make a coherent decision it wasn’t because you guys were “researching”

    Reply
  11. If it's not dispatchable, it's worthless. The amount of storage required to make wind and solar dispatchable should preclude them from ever being considered as alternatives for coal, gas or nuclear.

    Reply
  12. Just love all this passion with nuclear power, we should have been here 20 years ago instead of spending billions on solar, wind and 4 hour batteries, we would have had at least 2 or 3 running by now, but lets not live in the past and move forward with nuclear and not let the noisy minority pull the wool over the silent majority with there negative ideas, we have the worlds largest reserve of uranium but we don't even have a industry to value add and turn it into fuel rods for the worlds reactors.

    Reply
  13. I hate politicians on both sides, its all about votes. When it comes to essential services, the general public do not understand so ALL politics need to be put aside for the best for the country and leave it too engineers who know this stuff. I know the grid, labour BS will not work in the next 100 years…its a dream. they will see us in the dark, broke and depending on handouts. The Eraring extension which i knew had to happen is just an example of their short sighted policies. We actually need to build new coal fired power now (followed by nuclear) to avoid price hikes no one can afford and power outages/load shedding no one wants….

    Reply
  14. The only reason bozo Bowen and Elma Fudd albo are pushing renewables so hard is because a while back they personally invested in renewables and now they want their shares and dividen returns and the bigger the establishment of this toxic renewables and EV's, the bigger their share investments grow. They do not give a rats arse about the environment.

    Reply
  15. 6:15 – if you look at countries like the USA, China, UK, etc, they have A LOT of nuclear reactors, and yet their reactors produce something like 15% to 30% of their electricity generation. These guys a talking like if we plonk down one SMR, we will be 100% renewable. They also talk about it taking ~10 years to build and commission. Yes, that is for ONE, so unless you are going to build 50+ SMRs at the same time, in 10 years, we will have one SMR that can produce 300MW, which is about 1/7th the capacity of one of Australia's current large coal or gas plants. SO, WE NEED TO PULL OUR FINGERS OUT AND GET A MOVE ON!!!

    Reply
  16. How simple minded and I will repeat simple minded are these people that tell Ted Obrien well Korea is a lot smaller than Australia and we have much more land for wind and solar and this is the mentality of our government we will just keep building wind and solar farms all over the country and until we succeed in 100% renewables, oh my god what intelligent people we have. The scare mongering of labour and the climate alarmists running ads about the locations of future nuclear plants like Bribie Island, the obvious place for these stations are where old coal and gas have been which means no transmission lines criss- crossing our beautiful land and this is the people we are dealing with, NO IDEA.

    Reply
  17. Little Tom, doing his best impersonation of Sarah Ferguson by constantly interrupting the person being interviewed. The sooner he starts at the ABC the better. Australia clearly needs nuclear 🇦🇺

    Reply
  18. There is NO Climate Emergency.
    It’s a scam.
    Politicians of every Party need to understand that as the truth and accept that.

    What we are actually facing is an
    Energy Emergency.

    Given that, the best direction forward is to keep the existing coal powered electricity stations open for as long as possible
    and
    start building new coal power stations ASAP.

    Are you so ignorant that you don’t understand that an increase in Co2 is wonderful for our earth?
    To consider Co2 as Pollution is one of the greatest injustices to our earth ever.
    Shame on those who are so ignorant about basic science yet are making ridiculous energy policy decisions to solve a “problem” that is actually a blessing.

    Reply
  19. What I am saying, we would have had a nuclear generation industry and the number of plants required would have been equal to demand and all generating 24/7 hail or shine.

    Reply

Leave a Comment