Acting Prime Minister Richard Marles told parliament on Tuesday that the government would not sign an agreement the UK and US governments announced overnight.
“For Australia, pursuing a path of nuclear energy would represent pursuing the single-most expensive electricity option on the planet,” Mr Marles said.
“Because we do not have a civil nuclear industry, this agreement does not apply to us.”
The shift in Australia’s involvement in the agreement comes amid growing political sensitivity between Labor and Coalition over Opposition leader Peter Dutton’s promise to develop a domestic nuclear power industry.
Labor, led by Energy and Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen, who is attending the UN climate summit in Baku, is vehemently opposed to the technology, saying it would mean coal power emissions would continue for longer — until the nuclear option became viable a decade or more from now.
[…]
The Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) accused the government of abandoning international partners because of Labor’s “outdated thinking” that “continues to prioritise politics over progress”.
[…]
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek described nuclear power as an “energy fantasy” that would take 20 years and add $1,200 to household electricity bills while “keeping coal in our system for much longer”.
“And because of that [it] will add 1.7 billion tonnes of extra carbon dioxide pollution to our atmosphere,” she said.
“So we have a real choice — a slow, risky expensive transition to nuclear, or a fast certain transition to renewables that is already happening under us.”
Read more.
