Marian Wilkinson on Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plants

support according to polling. Today we have journalist Marian Wilkinson, with her investigation into the conservative charity group Figures driving the opposition leader's pivot to nuclear energy. Marion's whip smart reporting on the nuclear lobby only becomes more relevant every day we inch closer to the next federal election. Please enjoy Dutton's Nuclear power Plants, read by Marion Wilkinson, first published in The Monthly earlier this year. It's Monday, January sixth.

known for pushing fossil fuel clients. This was not the professor's natural milieure, but like many of the guests at the splendid Harbourside function Center that wintery evening, Hughes was there to win heartsome minds in the fight to save the planet. It was the opening night of the International Climate Conference, hosted by the Coalition for Conservation, an enterprising conservative charity with deep roots in the Liberal and National parties.

One of its aims is to reach out to environmentalists, renewable energy experts and climate scientists to garner support for Coalition members backing the goal of getting Australia to net

zero emissions. C four C, as it's known, had gathered an impressive lineup of speakers, including the man who led the successful Twin Pies one UN Climate Change Summitt in Glasgow, former UK Minister Sir Alec Sharma and his Excellency Abdullah Al Subusi, Ambassador for the United Arab Emirates, whose nation was set to host the UN Climate Summit in Dubai. But as the guests tucked into the opening night dinner,

one speaker sounded adjarring partisan note. Seaface's influential patron, Trevor Saint Baker, couldn't resist taking a swipe at the Albanese government's renewable energy policy. Saint Baker's intervention was telling the Queensland rich lister was close to Seaface's chairman, Larry Anthony, who was also a former National Party president. For years, Saint Baker had employed Anthony's lobby shop sas consulting back

when he was in the Colfard power business. Now Saint Baker was investing in the energy transition, electric vehicle charging and battery technology, but his passion project was nuclear energy and in particular the idea of introducing small modular nuclear reactors to Australia. While Saint Baker's presence was a surprise to some C four C supporters that night, his ideas

on nuclear energy were about to hit the zeitgeist. He and his partners in a small nuclear consultancy SMR Nuclear Technology, were riding the new wave of global enthusiasm for nuclear energy. Influential players from former Microsoft boss Bill Gates to ex UK Prime Minister Rushi Sunak were sprooking small and micromodular reactors as as a game changer that would help the

world reach net zero emissions by twenty fifty. In climate circles, it was dubbed the tech bro culture, as next generation nuclear attracted bullish headlines and billions in private investment and government grants. The four Sea Climate Conference was dotted with speakers enthusiastic about bringing nuclear power to Australia, few more so than the opposition's spokesman Ted O'Brien. The line up was a clear signal that the Sea four S charity

had pivoted towards its patron's pro nuclear position. More importantly, it reflected the big nuclear shift by Opposition leader Peter Dutton. In a headline making speech a few weeks earlier, Dutton had attacked what he called renewable zealotry, saying if the Shulmanisi government wanted to phase out coal and gas. The only feasible improven technology to back up renewable energy was next generation nuclear technologies. Specifically, Dutton pushed the idea of

small modular reactors SMRs and micromodular reactors mmrs. Dutton released more details on the opposition's coal to nuclear power plans, which he argued could deliver cheaper electricity and new jobs in regions where aging coal generators will be forced to close. The early plans bore a striking resemblance to a policy Trevesome Baker and SMR Nuclear Technology had been advocating for several years in evidence and submissions to federal and state

parliamentary committees, in think tank and in energy forums. These describe in voluminous detail how small modular nuclear reactors are less costly to build than big nuclear plants, safer and more flexible, allowing them to be cited at old coal plants already connected to the electricity grid. Just how influential Saint Baker and his partners have been in the opposition's

nuclear switch is unclear. O'Brien told me in an email that he was quote a long way down the road in assessing and promoting net zero nuclear energy before meeting these highly experienced gentlemen, and that he'd spoken to many experts. Smr's chairman Bob Pritchard told me that while some partners had talked to O'Brien, they had no formal role in Dutton's energy policy review. I wish we could say that we'd had a direct impact, he said, but we only

had an indirect effect. It's all been done by the relevant shadow ministers. But Pritchard conceded that Dutton's plan could be seen as quote remarkably similar to the company's position. Dutton's move to nuclear has been slammed by critics, including

Federal Energy Minister Chris Bowen, as a nuclear fantasy. Energy experts, from former Chief Scientist Alan Finkel to the CSIRO point out that there are as yet no commercially operating small modular nuclear reactors in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom or Europe, and the only working plants are in Russia and China. While many climate scientists support nuclear power in countries with a long established nuclear generation industry, they

question its value in Australia. In the latest gencos report by CSIRO, comparing the prices of power generation, small modular nuclear reactors emerged as the highest cost technology compared to solar and wind by a large margin. The report also cites evidence from government regulators saying it would take around fifteen years to get a commercially biable small nuclear plant in Australia, ruling them out of any major role in getting the country to meet net zero by twenty fifty.

The Opposition disputes the CSIRO findings, with Dutton calling its report discredited. This, in turn a prompted CSIRO's head Dr Doug Hilton to publish an open letter in March the oppositions attack on his scientists. For science to be useful and for the challenges to be overcome, it requires the trust of the community, Hilton wrote, Maintaining trust requires scientists to act with integrity. Maintaining trust also requires our political leaders to resist the temptation to disparage science.

industrializing Australia, and trampling on the rights of farmers. Professor Hughes is watching the divisive nuclear debate unfold with dismay. A director of the Climate Council, Hughes has been a lead author with the UN's chief scientific advisory Panel, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and she now sits on the Federal Government's Climate Change Authority, advising on its emissions

reduction targets. In my opinion, she says, given the l of any economic rationale for nuclear one can only conclude that it's a distraction to allow the fossil fuel industry to keep operating with business as usual. Despite Dutton and O'Brien's bullish optimism, their nuclear pivot is a big political gamble. While a rash of polls suggest support for nuclear energy is growing in Australia, some also show that most Australians still don't want a reactor in their own region, let

alone a nuclear waste dump. Even Queensland's Liberal Party Premiere David Chris Afooli, has ruled out any plan to replace the state's old coll far power stations with small nuclear reactors, saying it can't happen without bipartisan support. The issue also threatens the fragile truce in the Liberal Party over climate change policy. The party's most vocal renewable energy advocate, former New South Wales Energy Minister Matt Keane, has launched a

stinging attack against the policy push. I'm not opposed to nuclear power, he tells me. I was state Energy minister for five years. If nuclear power was a viable pathway to met zero, I would have done it, but it did not stack up economically, environmentally or engineering wise. Keene was speaking shortly after he resigned his role as ambassador

for THEFOCE environmental charity. In his frank resignation letter, he told cfoc's chair Larry Anthony that he saw the advocacy for nuclear power quote as an attempt to delay and defer responsible and decisive action on climate change in a way that seems to drive up prices in New South Wales by delaying renewables. It was a bitter parting of the ways. Keen had been a strong supporter of seafoc's chief executive, Christina Talaco, a businesswoman with close ties to

the New South Wales Liberal Party. Keene's Liberal colleagues still serve as SEAFOCE ambassadors, including former New South Wales Premier Nick Griner and Howard Minister Philip Ruddock. Keene sees Anthony and Saint Baker as having an outside influence on the charity shift to a pro nuclear position. SAMT. Baker is a powerful business figure in Dutton's home state. He's long been a political donor to the Queensland LMP and to the state's Labor Party. His support for nuclear power is

no secret. Tlaco denied either some Baker or Anthony influenced the charity his position on nuclear energy. Our exploration of this technology was thorough and impartial, and our support for nuclear energy is not influenced by political agendas nor tied to financial backing from the nuclear industry, she told me by email, But she also said she didn't know her charity's chief patron was a director and major shareholder of SMR Nuclear Technology. I was not aware of Trevor's position

at this organization. She said, for well over a year, FOURC has played a critical role in supporting and promoting the coalition's push on nuclear energy. In early twenty twenty three, Tlaco joined Ted O'Brien on a nuclear fact binding trip to the United States and Canada. O'Brien's trip was funded in part by one of C foce's donors, which one he doesn't say. The group was briefed by corporate executives and government officials on a range of small and medium

modular nuclear reactor projects. O'Brien says to Laco returned from the trip convinced quote nuclear should be part of a balanced mix. Tallaco posted O'Brien's upbeat story about their briefings on the C four C website. None of the projects O'Brien wrote about was commercially operating. Indeed, one, a much anticipated small nuclear project in Idaho run by American company New Scale, collapsed months later because of major blowouts in costs.

This was despite getting almost one billion in US government support. New Scale's chief executive was blunt about the project's future prospects, telling Bloomberg, once you're on a dead horse, dismount quickly. That's where we are here. Neither O'Brien nor to laco's enthusiasm for next gen nuclear was dented by what happened

to New Scale, quite the reverse. Just weeks after the collapse, in November twenty twenty three, SEAFOURC funded a delegation of coalition MPs as well as to LACO, to attend the UN Climate Change Conference in Dubai cop twenty eight. O'Brien had been invited to address a meeting that the World Nuclear Association the Global Nuclear Lobby was hosting with the SEAFOURC.

At the summit, the SEAFOURC delegation included Liberal Senators Andrew Bragg and Dean Smith, the National Party's Senate leader Bridget McKenzie, Deputy Leader Peren Davy, and Shadow Trade Minister Kevin Hogan, as well as Larry Anthony. Unhailed the summit for being the first to recognize the importance of nuclear energy in

getting the world to net zero. Some twenty two countries, including the United States, France and Britain, signed up in Dubai to the goal of tripling global nuclear energy by twenty fifty. The goal was aspirational and its signatories comprised not much more than ten percent of the country's in attendance. This was not surprising, cost blowouts have plagued new nuclear plants and as one reason nuclear still makes up just

ten percent of global energy generation. But the Kop declaration was a triumph for the nuclear lobby, and O'Brien vowed the Coalition would sign up to the Nuclear Partnership if it was re elected. Tallaco posted a glowing account on Seafourc's website. Traditionally, cops have been dominated by ideological fervor, with an emphasis on the rapid phase out of fossil fuels. She wrote, However, this year brought a refreshing dose of

pragmatism to the table. But turning the heady nuclear promises in Dubai into a credible climate policy at home is proving a daunting challenge for the opposition. The first hurdle it faces is the law. Federal environment and nuclear safety laws effectively ban civilian nuclear power generation in Australia, Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland also have specific laws prohibiting it.

Overturning these laws has long been on the wish list of business lobbies such as the Minerals Council of Australia as well as the National Party and senior Liberals, but it remains politically fraught. O'Bryan admits there was no chance of it happening in this parliament given the ideological zealotry of Labour's all eggs in one basket approach to energy.

I do not see the current Parliament lifting the prohibition against zero emission's nuclear energy, he said, despite Australia being the only nation in the G twenty with such a blanket ban. Even Bob Pritchard from SMR Technology thinks overturning the laws will be tough, and he worries that if Dutton goes to an election pledging to change the laws and losers, it will put the nuclear industry in Australia back years. The opposition's immediate problem is the lack of

social license for nuclear power in Australia. A majority of us are still anxious that nuclear reactors and their waste are not safe to live with. O'Brien, with help from Sea four C and n other pro nuclear lobby groups, is working hard to turn this around. Barely a week goes by without an event with a panel of experts talking up nuclear energy's role in getting to net zero emissions.

Dutton and O'Brien are also brazenly using the Orcus Defense Agreement to bolster the case for civilian nuclear power reactors. Under ORCUS, Australia will get submarines powered by small nuclear reactors. As part of the agreement signed by the Albanese government, Australia is responsible for disposing of nuclear waste from the subs. That means Australia will be obliged to develop a responsible

nuclear waste system. The nuclear lobby hopes this will overcome popular resistance to a civilian nuclear waste dump in Australia. The argument goes like this, if we're willing to accept small nuclear reactors on our subs at sea, why won't we do it for nuclear reactors on land. It's one

O'Brien has been hammering on Sky News. You've got the Defense Minister saying that Australia will be able to manage the waste in spent fuel from nuclear reactors and the Energy Minister saying Australia will not be able to manage waste from nuclear reactors. O'Brien told Sky News, what message is Chris Bowen sending out to orcust partners in saying Australia has no idea how to manage nuclear technology. It's no coincidence. Dutton reportedly met with executives from Rolls Royce

to talk about nuclear power under ORCUS. The British company said it will supply the small nuclear reactors for Australia's nuclear submarines. Raw's Royce was also trying to rapidly develop small modular reactors for civilian nuclear power with the backing of millions of dollars in UK government grants. Veteran anti nuclear campaigner Dave Sweeney from the Australian Conservation Foundation sees ORCUS as the best leg up for the nuclear lobby

in Australia. For decades, despite years of lobbying from the mining sector and the pro nuclear advocates, there has been no success in gaining a social license for the technology in Australia, Sweeney tells me, But they see ORCUS as the thin end of the wedge, the way they will expand nuclear from a defense relationship to get domestic acceptance. In integration of nuclear technology and nuclear power in Australia, Sweeney is convinced Dutton's nuclear plans have little chance of success.

I think they will have their work cut out, he says, But there is no question this is a very serious, systematic and resourced attempt by the pro nuclear voices. Like many activists who spent years campaigning on climate change, Sweeney believes the overriding aim of Dutton's nuclear shift is political. It unites the technomodernist liberals with the renewable, reculcitrant nationals in one policy framework, he says, and it also continues business as usual. It's no challenge to the fossil fuel

interests to talk about nuclear. Uniting the coalition on climate and energy policy is certainly one aim of Dutton's nuclear pivot. Before the next election, Dutton and O'Brien need to finalize a policy that the joint party room can agree on. This will be very difficult, with the National Party rebels already questioning the coalition's commitment to net zero, backing nuclear power is one thing that has wide support in the

Federal National Party and among senior Liberals. As a result, nuclear power now looks like becoming central to the opposition's commitment to stick with net zero. Both the government and opposition know that Australia's transition to net zero is extremely difficult. Greg Combay, the outgoing chair of the government's Net Zero

Economy Agency, likened it to a post war reconstruction. Labour's plan relies heavily on making Australia's electricity system eighty two percent renewable by twenty thirty, using wind, solar batteries, and hydro electricity, including pumped hydro backed up by some gas and coal generation. Right now, renewables make up less than forty percent of energy generation that will have to more than double in just six years, and it all needs to be linked with a multi billion dollar roll out

of poles and wires. While Dutton calls Labour's plan reckless, he has yet to come up with a credible alternative to get to net zero. At the same time, Bowen and Albanizi have boxed him in putting into law Labour's plan to cut Australia's economy wide emissions by forty three percent by twenty thirty in order to get to net zero by twenty fifty. The Liberals are bound by their promises to support net zero, but at a recent business summit, Dutton signaled that his commitment to cleaner energy is to

pendent on going nuclear. We can meet our three national goals of cheaper, consistent and cleaner power, he said, but in our judgment, you can only do that with the right energy policy, and only if Australia becomes a latest generation nuclear powered nation. When the politicians came to Canberra in February, the drums were once again beating in the climate wars on the lawn in front of Parliament House.

The rally against reckless renewables was in full swing. The National Party's Barnaby Joyce was firing up the crowd of several hundred farmers and anti renewable activists, telling them you're the army, this is the start. Joyce's performance enraged Dr Matt Edwards, a prominent Australian solar scientist now working for a Darni solar owned by the giant Indian Power Company. Edwards was also the vice chair of Sea for C

but he clearly had enough. He belted out a stinging op ed for the Australian Financial Review, laying into Joyce and what he called quote the remnants of the coalition now taking an uninspired punt on nuclear, Edwards bluntly dismissed the opposition's plan to replace ailing coal plants with nuclear, saying quote, given high costs, long lead times and lack of investor appetite for nuclear, it's easy to cynically imagine that these plans might be used to justify extending the

life of fossil fuel generation while we wait for an atomic revolution that never comes. The fallout was a meet yet C four c's chairman and chief executive were furious. Doctor Edwards resigned from the C four C board. Just one more casualty in the latest round of the climate wars.