Australia likely to go nuclear: experts

Australia will probably have to go nuclear to tackle climate change, engineers and
scientists say.
They say nuclear power is the only reliable, proven source of electricity with a
minimal carbon footprint.
They're tipping 15 per cent of the country's electricity will come from nuclear
reactors by 2050.
And the first plant could swing into action just 10 years after approval is given.
The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, which represents
more than 700 experts, has issued a report calling for nuclear power to be
considered.
The problem with coal and gas-fired power is that it emits carbon pollution, which
causes climate change.
But renewable energy, often touted as the solution, is either not baseload power or
not proven, according to the report's lead author John Burgess.
"We need power that runs for 24 hours a day, as opposed to just when the sun shines
or the wind blows," Dr Burgess told AAP.
"(Nuclear power) is an existing technology which is operating quite safely."
Dr Burgess said public hostility to nuclear power could fade as concerns about
climate change grew.
The report said Australia was well-placed to go nuclear because of an abundance both
of uranium reserves and remote sites for dumping waste.
There are more than 440 nuclear power reactors in the world, in 31 countries.
The report said Australia would probably have a "generation 3 plus" style of nuclear
reactor, which is safer and more fuel-efficient than current plants.
A plant would produce between two and 10 cubic metres of waste a year, a small
amount compared to some other technologies, the report said.
But the Australian Conservation Foundation was not having a bar of the engineers'
nuclear push.
"It's completely unrealistic of them, they're on a hiding to nothing," said the
Foundation's nuclear-free campaigner David Noonan.
He said Australians did not want nuclear power or nuclear waste.
Renewable energy was the way to tackle climate change, and it could be a cheap,
baseload source of power, Mr Noonan said.
And he said if Australia opted for nuclear power, it could send a message to other
countries that nuclear weapons would also be developed.
The federal government opposes domestic nuclear power.
Energy minister Martin Ferguson reiterated the message when questioned on the
Academy's report on Friday.
"It is the government's view that nuclear power is not needed as part of Australia's
energy mix given our country's abundance and diversity of low-cost renewable energy
sources," he said.
"The government has a clear policy of prohibiting the development of an Australian
nuclear power industry."
The Academy's report, which looked at the best ways for Australia to generate
electricity in a climate-friendly way, said a technological revolution was needed.
Emissions trading was a good start but would not do enough to encourage low-emission
technologies. It said $6 billion should be spent by 2020 on researching greener
electricity generation.
New technologies must be deployed on a massive scale, and there should be
"relentless" work on energy efficiency programs, the report said.