Fuel for thought
Katharine Murphy
The Age
The options available to meet Australia's energy needs
IN THE last years of his government, John Howard was edging the country towards nuclear energy. Kevin Rudd's victory last year shut that debate down.
Since the election, senior Labor figures have publicly ruled out nuclear as an option to reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, instead focusing on boosting gas and renewables and providing significant support for commercialising "clean" coal.
But pragmatists within the cabinet are operating on the reasonable assumption that nuclear will be back - possibly sooner than we think given the magnitude of the climate-change challenge and given that, for all its faults, nuclear plants provide reliable baseload energy and do not emit carbon dioxide.
The harsh reality is that Australia, like other countries that have either built a nuclear industry in recent years or increased the share of nuclear in their energy mix, may in the end have no choice.
So, despite the Federal Government's public utterances of "never ever" on nuclear energy, it is worth noting that, behind the scenes, interesting preparatory moves are afoot.
Despite running on a no-nukes platform prior to the poll, the Labor Government quietly took the decision after the election to remain within the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, an initiative of the United States with the unequivocal aim of boosting the fortunes of nuclear power around the world.
Australia could have apologised to the Americans and pulled out. It did not.
The Government is also moving ahead with John Howard's Uranium Industry Framework, a plan that will significantly expand uranium mining and exports.
And the Government will build a nuclear waste dump, most likely in the Northern Territory, despite suggesting to voters during the election that it would be built somewhere else or, preferably, not at all.
On nuclear, it is very much a case of watch this space.
IN THE last years of his government, John Howard was edging the country towards nuclear energy. Kevin Rudd's victory last year shut that debate down.
Since the election, senior Labor figures have publicly ruled out nuclear as an option to reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, instead focusing on boosting gas and renewables and providing significant support for commercialising "clean" coal.
But pragmatists within the cabinet are operating on the reasonable assumption that nuclear will be back - possibly sooner than we think given the magnitude of the climate-change challenge and given that, for all its faults, nuclear plants provide reliable baseload energy and do not emit carbon dioxide.
The harsh reality is that Australia, like other countries that have either built a nuclear industry in recent years or increased the share of nuclear in their energy mix, may in the end have no choice.
So, despite the Federal Government's public utterances of "never ever" on nuclear energy, it is worth noting that, behind the scenes, interesting preparatory moves are afoot.
Despite running on a no-nukes platform prior to the poll, the Labor Government quietly took the decision after the election to remain within the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, an initiative of the United States with the unequivocal aim of boosting the fortunes of nuclear power around the world.
Australia could have apologised to the Americans and pulled out. It did not.
The Government is also moving ahead with John Howard's Uranium Industry Framework, a plan that will significantly expand uranium mining and exports.
And the Government will build a nuclear waste dump, most likely in the Northern Territory, despite suggesting to voters during the election that it would be built somewhere else or, preferably, not at all.
On nuclear, it is very much a case of watch this space.