 | |
If we're serious about net zero, we need to lift nuclear prohibitionThe push for renewables is taking longer and costing more than planned. The federal government must remove the prohibition on nuclear if we are to achieve net zero. Nuclear must be part of the mix. |
In my latest article in the Canberra Times, I argue that it's time to lift the prohibition on nuclear:https://t.co/p0KHL7if5n
— Le Flâneur Politique (@FlaneurPolitiq) February 20, 2024
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Not even Chris Bowen can control the weather [Public Domain: Dust Storm, Texas, 1935] |
Rewiring the Nation won’t happen by rewriting history. Markets work best through light regulation and promoting competition. Government has a role to ensure important social outcomes where profits are scarce. But Labor’s energy transition is all about government control. Whether we agree with a government-led renewables future or not, one thing is clear: skills are not keeping up with demand. Australia is going it alone without nuclear, and Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s homemade recipe for an energy debacle is in full swing.
From The Spectator's "Unfiltered" newsletter:
Michael de Percy also offered a savage look at the energy future of Bowen’s Utopia, including all these lofty promises of ‘job creation’ that never seem to manifest in reality.
Bowen’s homemade recipe for an energy debacle
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) January 5, 2024
Rewiring the nation won’t happen by rewriting history.
Markets work best through light regulation and promoting competition.
Government has a role to ensure important social outcomes where profits are scarce. But Labor’s energy… pic.twitter.com/nc1s7rI5Dd
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| My paper at the Robert Menzies Institute's Annual Conference 2023 |
The video recording of my presentation is available below:
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Coastal Wind Farms [Photo: Unsplash CC0] |
When the first coastal wind farms were announced by Energy Minister Chris Bowen, I thought I was dreaming.
Australia has some of the best beaches in the world. People come to this country to see its unspoilt natural beauty. Despite a 42 per cent decline following the lockdowns, tourism remains Australia’s 14th-largest export industry. Along with education, it is one of the most sustainable industries that contributes to our standard of living.
Nobody wants to come to Australia to see rotting wind turbines at our beaches.
They can visit their own failed renewable energy white elephants at home. To make matters worse, our Energy Minister is pitching his vibe to elite activists while refusing to listen to ordinary Australians.
Groups of those aforementioned ordinary Australians are turning to social media in their thousands, particularly Facebook, to vent their frustration and to organise protests. These are farmers, fishers, tourism operators, tradies, surfers – everyday Australians. You might call them the forgotten people. They are slow to move but once motivated, they grow like a snowball.
Today they will gather in the surf near Port Stephens. The protest is called Paddle Out. Like many other groups who do not want to bear the cost of Mr Bowen’s fantasy, the people of Port Stephens have a Facebook group and theirs is a movement we should all support.
Here is my latest article in The Spectator Australia's Flat White, Coastal wind farms: this Sunday, the people say ‘no’ again.
Paddle Out protest against coastal wind farms!
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) October 29, 2023
Nobody wants to come to Australia to see rotting wind turbines at our beaches.
Today, Australians will gather in the surf near Port Stephens to protest against Bowen’s environment-ruining wind fantasy.https://t.co/xzY5O7uvzH
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| These are cooling towers, and that is steam, not pollution. |
Energy policy is clearly about choices. Mr Howard said in his book A Sense of Balance that it was a mistake to trade away an Australian Nuclear Industry in 1998, but the political realities at the time meant that Labor was opposed to Australia’s ability to develop life-saving medical products. Mr Howard did what needed to be done at the time. Unlike the proposed Voice, if the political will exists, the prohibition on nuclear can be amended by legislation. At the end of my presentation, I will show you a model I developed to understand how policies relating to networked technologies such as energy, transport, and telecommunications are impacted by choices made in the past. In effect, policies that follow certain patterns are like habits – they are easy to slip back into and difficult to change. But tonight, I want to make it clear that our energy future is a choice, and choosing our current policy to crash through or crash is a choice that will impact our prosperity and energy security for generations to come. To ensure I do not miss my key point in the time I have tonight, may I begin by urging that we choose wisely.
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| We've created our own energy crisis through green-left ideology |
Labor’s energy policy won’t reduce our energy bills by $275 in 2025. When questioned about this promise in 2021, Prime Minister Albanese replied, ‘I don’t think, I know. I know because we have done the modelling.’ The ABC’s ‘promise check’ tells us this election promise is ‘stalled’ while admitting that the energy price increases blamed on war in Ukraine evident by February 24, 2022 did not stop the Albanese government from repeating the promised $275 reduction until May 18, 2022. Renewables have been promoted as the panacea for reducing energy bills, but Australia is amid an energy crisis driven by the Albanese government’s ideological stance on renewables.
Here is my latest article in The Spectator Australia's Flat White, "Australia's ideologically-driven energy crisis".
Australia's energy crisis - where families and businesses are struggling to pay power bills which have nearly doubled - is entirely the creation of government ideology.
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) August 22, 2023
We don't have a resource crisis, we have a Parliament full of Kamikaze politicians.https://t.co/0LclAczkjz
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Dr Michael de Percy on Chris Bowen's energy policy with Alexandra Marshall, Spectator TV |
To watch the full interview, visit https://watch.adh.tv/videos/spectator-tv-australia-friday-26-may-2023 and start from 27:36.
YouTube highlights are available below:
Australia is treading towards an energy armageddon: Michael de Percy | Spectator TV
Nuclear power is the only feasible path to net zero: Michael de Percy | Spectator TV
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Coal Mine in the Hunter Valley, NSW, 2011. Photo: Max Phillips [CC BY 2.0] |
With cost-of-living pressures really
starting to hurt Australians, Labor’s green dream would be a complete nightmare
if it wasn’t for coal.
When then Treasurer Scott Morrison brought a lump of coal
into the House of Representatives, the
left-leaning media were quick to respond:
‘What a bunch of clowns, hamming
it up – while out in the real world an ominous and oppressive heat just won’t
let up’.
Fast forward to 2023 and Labor’s budget surplus has little
to do with sound economic management, and much
to do with unexpectedly high prices for exports of fossil fuels. And this
is despite Labor’s running mates, the Greens, doing
everything to demonise coal and gas.
In the real world, it takes more than just dreams to power
the nation.
Here is my latest article in The Spectator's Flat White, Labor's Coal-Fired Green Dream.
"Without coal there is no green dream."
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) May 24, 2023
Michael de Percy lays down another authoritative piece on energy policy, in which he analyses the enormous economic benefits the fossil fuel industry brings to Australia: https://t.co/cCdBMNQdpa
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| High Flux Australian Reactor (HIFAR), Lucas Heights, opened in 1958. |
Tomorrow I will present this work in progress for a paper for the Robert Menzies Institute's Third Annual Conference, 'The Menzies Ascendency: Implementing a Liberal Agenda and COnsolidating Gains, 1954-1961'.
The slides and abstract from my work-in-progress presentation are below.
Menzies embraced the atomic age rather more enthusiastically than many other Australians. He envisaged Australia’s substantial uranium and thorium reserves providing Australia with a source of clean, reliable, and affordable energy that would ultimately replace fossil fuels. But he also knew that “what is best advertised tends to be more popularly understood”. Despite the opening of a nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights in 1958 to “test materials for their suitability in use in future power reactors”, the purpose of Australia’s first nuclear reactor was gradually reduced to producing medical radioisotopes and conducting research. Menzies faced similar concerns about the safety of nuclear reactors, the propensity for conflating nuclear industries with nuclear weapons, and storing nuclear waste to those concerns political leaders face today. But with Australia’s strategic defence capabilities enhanced by nuclear-powered submarines through the AUKUS agreement, and the absence of a ‘Plan B’ for a carbon-neutral future, the unrealised potential of Australia’s atomic age has manifested into the very lack of skills Menzies was concerned about in 1962. The Lucas Heights facility was more than just a case of hubris, or “what are they doing here that can't be better done elsewhere?” It provided opportunities for training Australian scientists and sharing and transferring nuclear-related research and knowledge. At the same time, recently declassified documents suggest that Menzies aimed to develop Australia’s nuclear capability amid eleven years of atomic weapons tests conducted by Britain in Australia. While much has been written about “nuclear colonialism” following the Royal Commission into the tests, very little attention has been given to the unrealised potential of Australia’s nuclear industry envisaged during the atomic age. This paper, then, traces the development and subsequent stagnation of the nuclear industry in Australia, with a focus on Menzies’ legacy and its influence on energy and defence policy today.
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Nuclear Power Plant [CC0] |
If nuclear is not on the table, and Australia is to achieve a target of 82 per cent renewables energy generation by 2030, then what ideas are not ‘dumb’?
Here is my latest article in The Spectator's Flat White, Where’s our energy Plan B, Chris Bowen?
"When asked for an example of countries with high levels of renewables generation that did not have high electricity prices, Mr Bowen said he did not ‘accept the premise of the question’."
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) May 14, 2023
Australia has no energy policy Plan B, writes Michael de Percy: https://t.co/yFRQaYquDZ
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| "First Ministers" - the bizarrely elitist term for members of the informal National Cabinet |
My paper below has been accepted for presentation at the 2023 Public Policy Network Conference at the Museum of Australian Democracy on Wednesday 12th April. The abstract and slides for my paper are set out below.
The Albanese government has achieved an apparent policy consensus among Australia’s ‘first ministers’ in the quasi-institution known as the National Cabinet. But behind the public-facing consensus lies vicious party in-fighting that threatens to undermine the legitimacy of Australia’s political party leaders. A unique feature of political leadership is the need for leaders to keep their party base onside while also representing the interests of their constituents and their political party colleagues. Prioritising one group over another requires careful consideration for a leader to achieve their desired policy outcomes without losing support for their leadership. The National Cabinet has been used as a public relations vehicle by the Albanese government where premiers who are alone in their disagreement are spotlighted for negative public discourse. At the same time, the legitimacy of political leaders who support policy areas where consensus exists in the National Cabinet (such as The Voice and energy policy) is threatened by industry lobby groups, political party members, and power brokers within political parties. This paper, then, considers the impact of the National Cabinet on political leadership. The paper considers two case studies, The Voice and energy policy, to examine the power plays that influence the policy positions adopted by political leaders. It then considers the democratic deficit created by political leaders who stray from their party’s platform and how this influences a leader’s legitimacy within the party structure. The paper argues that the National Cabinet, now a regular feature of Australian politics, has allowed greater concentration of power in the prime minister’s leadership. The paper addresses the question: Has the National Cabinet weakened the ability of state and territory leaders to represent their parties’ bases, making it easier for ideology-based federal policy to gain public support?
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| The Slippery Slope to Socialism |
Here is my latest article in The Spectator's Flat White, The Slippery Slope to Socialism:
In our current geopolitical situation, we find ourselves in a situation that is the antithesis of the Anzac spirit.
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) December 29, 2022
Australia is on the slippery (and deadly) slope to #socialism.https://t.co/PbGXvewMBs
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Power Lines at Canada's Darlington Nuclear Plant [Photo: Milan Ilnyckyj CC BY-NC-SA 2.0] |
Here is my latest article in The Spectator's Flat White, Rewire the Nation or go nuclear?
Despite #Labor pundits’ claims to the contrary, a clear choice is emerging between Rewiring the Nation and #nuclear when it comes to reducing carbon emissions. Whoever wins the social licence to operate holds the key to Australia’s future energy security.https://t.co/DT4Dz9Tglr
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) November 14, 2022
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| "Greenflation" is one of the many uncertainties in Australia's energy future [CC0] |
Here are the notes from my presentation on nuclear energy at the Goulburn Soldiers Club on 3rd November 2022.
The presentation focused on the policy aspects of nuclear and addressed the following issues:
Below is a list of supporting materials for my presentation at the Goulburn Soldiers Club, 3rd November 2022.
Supporting materials:
Allen, L. (2022, 3 October). Bill introduced to remove nuclear energy ban in Australia. Small Caps.
Australian Nuclear Association (2022). Teaming with Canada for Australia’s Nuclear Energy Future: Report on a recent trip by the speakers to USA and Canada.
Australian Electricity Market Operator (2022). Data Dashboard.
Davasse, G. and Merle, C. (2022, 3 Jun). Greenflation, the new normal? Natixis Corporate and Investment Banking.
De Percy, M.A. (2021). Models of Government-Business Relations: Industry Policy Preferences versus Pragmatism in Andrew Podger, Michael de Percy, and Sam Vincent (Eds.) Politics, Policy and Public Administration in Theory and Practice: Essays in honour of Professor John Wanna. Canberra: ANU Press.
De Percy, M.A. (2021). Policy Legacies from Early Australian Telecommunications: A Private Sector Perspective. Journal of Telecommunications and the Digital Economy, 9 (3).
De Percy, M.A. (2022). Institutional exhaustion and foreign aid in the time of COVID-19. In Jakupec, V., Kelly, M., and de Percy, M.A. (Eds.) COVID-19 and Foreign Aid: Nationalism and Global Development in a New World Order. London: Routledge.
De Percy, M.A. and Batainah, H.S. (2021). Identifying historical policy regimes in the Canadian and Australian communications industries using a model of path dependent, punctuated equilibrium, Policy Studies, 42 (1), pp. 42-59. DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2019.1581161.
Madsen, A. and de Percy, M.A. (2020) Telecommunications Infrastructure in Australia. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 55 (2), pp. 218-238. DOI: 10.1002/ajs4.121.
De Percy, M.A. and Poljak, J. (2022, 5 May). Energy security: Embracing technological neutrality. The Interpreter. The Lowy Institute.
De Percy, M.A. (2022, 19 October). Old habits die hard: Labor’s uncosted infrastructure. The Spectator Australia.
De Percy, M.A. (2022, 1 November). Victorian Labor: Waste and Rorts.
De Percy, M.A. (2022). What are the possibilities for hydrogen? Presentation at the CILT World Congress, Hyatt Regency Perth, 25th October.
Dubner, S.J. (2022, 22 September). Nuclear power isn't perfect. Is it good enough? Freakonomics Radio [Podcast].
GE Gas Power (2022). Cutting Carbon [Podcast].
International Atomic Energy Agency (2022). Nuclear Explained [Podcast].
Keefer, C. (2022). Decouple [Podcast].
Natural Resources Canada (2022). Uranium and nuclear power facts.
Platt, G. (2018, 27 February). 'Baseload' power and what it means for the future of renewables. CSIRO. ECOS, Iss. 240.
Poljak, J. (2022, 11 May). Hydrogen versus LNG: Choices for Europe. Illuminem.
Poljak, J. (2022). keynumbers.
Shakil, I. (2022, 26 October). Canada commits C$970 million to new nuclear power technology. Reuters.
Shepherd, A.F. (2007). Stumbling towards nation-building: impediments to progress. In John Butcher (Ed.) Australia Under Construction: Nation building past, present and future. Canberra: ANU E Press.
Tomago Aluminium (2022). Tomago Keeps The Lights On Across The State.
Victorian Energy Policy Centre (2022). Australian NEM Data Dashboard.
WSJ Podcasts (2022). Is nuclear poised for a comeback? The Journal [Podcast].
World Nuclear Association (2022). Chernobyl Accident 1986.
World Nuclear Association (2022). Fukushima Daiichi Accident.
World Nuclear Association (2022). Nuclear Power in Canada.
World Nuclear Association (2022). Three Mile Island Accident.
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Daniel Andrews' How to Vote card, 2014 [CC0] |
Here is my latest article in The Spectator's Flat White, Victorian Labor: Waste and rorts.
Are you ready for another round, Victoria?
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) October 31, 2022
Daniel Andrews promises to bring more rorts and more waste to an already debt-laden state.https://t.co/a4nDec8gQb
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Speaking at the CILT International Congress, 25th October 2022. |
Here are the notes from my presentation with John Poljak from keynumbers to the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport's International Conference 2022 at the Grand Ballroom of the Hyatt Regency, Perth, WA. The conference was held over the period 23-26 October 2022.
The presentation focused on the policy aspects of hydrogen and addressed the following issues:
 |
| Speaking at the CILT World Congress in Perth, 25th October 2022. |
 |
| Rosco McGlashan OAM (left) wth Dr Michael de Percy (right) |
I said to Rosco, "I'll be your reserve driver!"
To which Rosco replied, "Nah, Mate, you'd probably trash it!"
What a legend! Godspeed, Rosco!
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Rewiring Nation Chaos? [CC0] |
Here is my latest article in The Spectator's Flat White, Old Habits Die Hard: Labor's Uncosted Infrastructure.
Old habits die hard for #Labor with their nightmarish Rewiring the Nation program appearing as just one of many pending economic headaches.https://t.co/eBNSrubnqy
— The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) October 18, 2022
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Rewiring the Nation? [CC0] |
Cost-recovery is one way of ensuring major infrastructure investments do not impact the national budget’s surplus or deficit. But history proves this approach to investing in important infrastructure produces outcomes that are too slow, too costly, and ultimately unwieldy. Here’s why.
Networked infrastructure is a peculiar beast that is difficult to change once the physical assets are deployed over the countryside. Roads, telecommunications, and electricity grids are all subjected to physical limitations that are not readily changed. Property rights, planning rules, and habits that evolve around the use of networked infrastructure all contribute to legacies that hinder the adoption of newer technologies.
Decisions made in earlier times result in limitations to what is possible or feasible when we try to build new roads, upgrade the existing copper network, or, indeed, upgrade the electricity grid.
Based on my research into transport and telecommunications infrastructure in various countries over the last 17 years, there are two clear obstacles to upgrading and improving existing networked technologies.
First, the rights of way established by earlier iterations of the network are difficult to change. This means that farms, factories, houses, and other physical assets that restricted or evolved around pre-existing infrastructure create legacies relating to property rights or otherwise that increase the cost of deploying new infrastructure where compensation to meet the requirement for ‘just terms’ (in Australia) for the purposes of compulsorily acquiring property necessary for infrastructural deployment.
Second, the political situation created by attempting to compulsorily acquire property and then to determine the ‘just terms’ for doing so (and the amount of compensation) becomes embroiled in the bureaucracy of environmental impact assessments, ‘not in my back yard’ rhetoric (NIMBYism), and other matters that are at best explained as ‘political’ and at worst as attempts to thwart progress.
Federal governments have long grappled with methods to deploy infrastructure in ways where the cost is not reflected in the budget surplus or (as per recently) deficit, but rather as an investment. To do so, the cost-recovery method was deployed in Labor’s original plan for the NBN and is about to be adopted for the necessary upgrade to the electricity grid as part of Labor’s commitment to renewables and emissions targets.
The cost-recovery model effectively places the value of the future asset against the ongoing liability on the balance sheet (pending the recovery of the cost through future revenues from the asset). It doesn’t take a genius to work out why proper accrual accounting has been in place for the private sector since 1936 but was only implemented (under much protestation) by the Commonwealth in 1999.
Accounting ideas aside, the trouble is that the Albanese Government’s model for ‘fixing’ the problems in our electricity network is reminiscent of the Rudd Government’s attempt to fix the broadband network.
The cost-recovery model shifts the emphasis away from more-expensive regional areas and uses a system of cross-subsidisation where revenues from high-density areas are used to offset higher costs in the bush. In theory, the process is rational, but in practice, it puts the focus on low-priority areas to generate revenues that will later justify the cost of servicing regional and remote areas.
The emphasis on electric vehicles and the assumption that the electricity network will be able to cope with some 20 million motor vehicles being recharged means there is much to be done.
The Albanese Government is betting on renewables to deliver reduced carbon emissions alongside upgrades to the electricity network using the cost recovery model.
But the cost recovery model, if adopted to upgrade the electricity grid, will likely fail to deliver in the same way that the NBN cost recovery model failed (and continues to fail) to deliver in regional and remote areas.
Cost recovery has effectively become a term for covering up the costs of deploying networked technologies to the regional and remote areas of Australia while providing the latest technologies to the cities.
Labor’s cost-recovery model has become old and tired and helps to hide rather than address the problems of improving networked infrastructure in regional and remote regions. In the meantime, Australians are being asked to relive the inefficacy of the NBN that promised so much but continues to fail to deliver in terms of real outcomes for many Australians.
If we accept that investing in the national electricity network is necessary and costly, then we should also accept that some parts of Australia will cost more than others to service. But Labor’s model will prioritise the urban areas at the expense of remote and regional Australia.
Regrettably, if Labor’s emissions targets are relying on the cost-recovery model to deliver an upgraded electricity network, then we are once again in for a long, expensive journey.
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Australia's only nuclear reactor is at Lucas Heights near Sydney [Public Domain] |
A robust nuclear energy industry must be on the table if Australia is to continue to prosper.
Our energy industry is struggling to deliver clean electricity and there will always be times when the wind doesn’t blow, or the sun doesn’t shine. We have one third of the world’s uranium reserves yet none of it is used by Australia.
The reluctance to exploit a national advantage for our own purposes is of a bygone era.
The greatest challenge in securing Australia’s energy future is the cost. Carbon capture technology is expensive, unreliable, and, at present, a pipe dream. So too is the potential of hydrogen if its production is to rely on fossil fuels or renewable energy sources.
Current methods of producing hydrogen are inherently inefficient. While hydrogen as an energy source produces less carbon emissions, the emissions to produce it outweigh the emissions created during its production when using available sources.
Scaling up wind and solar systems to produce hydrogen is effectively betting on the success of future innovations, as is betting on carbon capture to enable hydrogen to replace coal or natural gas. In many ways, and based on current capabilities, hydrogen is a circular argument that provides the smoke and mirrors to ensure we continue to rely on fossil fuels to produce electricity into the future.
Further, storing energy from renewables is expensive, difficult to dispatch (deliver on demand), and unlikely to support large-scale dispatchable energy demands. We either have dispatchable energy or dispatchable lifestyles (we move to the energy source).
Our reliance on road transport is such that electric vehicles will come to dominate our logistics future. The electricity must come from somewhere, and with present levels of demand already an issue, future demand is likely to soar.
A shift to nuclear energy requires major cultural and philosophical change. We must accept that relying on coal or gas to generate electricity does not reduce carbon emissions, nor do renewables sufficiently scale up to meet demand.
Nuclear power is the only existing technology that provides clean energy capable of meeting the demands of the future. And we have an abundance of the raw materials to make nuclear power a reality.
Making such statements in Australia has traditionally been shunned. But as the geopolitical situation has changed significantly, it is time to reconsider what should otherwise be abundantly clear.
Norway provides an example of a so-called green approach that ensures Norwegians rest easy in their use of renewables, particularly hydropower, in meeting domestic demand. At the same time, Norway has major oil and gas reserves that it exports almost exclusively.
There is no moral victory in the climate wars whereby generating domestic electricity using sustainable sources offsets the export of fossil fuels. Australia is in a similar situation in that it exports uranium, backed by unenforceable bilateral arrangements (including with Russia and China) to ensure only the use of uranium for peaceful purposes, while relying on coal domestically.
A switch to nuclear energy would at least give those who continue to look to Norway as the model for Australia’s future some credibility.
As coal has supported Australia’s prosperity in the past, uranium could support Australia’s prosperity into the future. This national advantage should be exploited to address our future energy needs. It will also help to reduce carbon emissions in a tangible, low-cost way.
While initial investment in nuclear power generation may be high, the running costs are relatively low. With coal-fired electricity generation already on the nose and causing diplomatic problems despite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, nuclear provides a solution that does not rely on an imminent technological breakthrough – it is here already.
Australia either invests in a stop-gap measure such as gas-fired electricity, or it invests in nuclear power generation.
In line with developing a nuclear energy industry, Australia’s research sector needs to redouble its efforts on the national Science and Research Priorities. Transport and energy are key parts of our strategic future, but these cannot be restricted to certain technologies.
A nuclear industry is a credible solution to Australia’s energy challenges. Nuclear power provides an abundantly scalable and clean way to meet Australia’s energy demands while reducing carbon emissions. But removing the cultural and philosophical barriers is a necessary first step.
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
 |
| Hydrogen Fuel Station Sign [Source: Bexim CC BY-SA 4.0] |
On 7th December 2021, I was invited to join John Poljak of keynumbers to discuss some of the issues around hydrogen fuel and its potential impacts on transport and logistics. There is quite a buzz about hydrogen as a clean and abundant fuel to help to reduce carbon emissions.
But for the general transport enthusiast, there is not much information available. John and I were invited to the Annual General Meeting of the Victorian Chapter of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILTA) to address some of the 'known knowns' and 'known unknowns' of hydrogen and its policy implications.
John has developed a wonderful discussion tool he calls "Key Numbers" to allow groups to brainstorm and spitball various "what if" scenarios by drawing on relevant data, or the key numbers' of various scenarios.
John has some twenty years of experience in the offshore energy industry and really knows what he is talking about, especially when it comes to the statistics and presenting these in a digestible way for lay audiences. He is the brains behind the operation of keynumbers and did all of the legwork for our presentation.
We used keynumbers in our presentation to the ACT Chapter of CILTA via MS Teams at the Department of Infrastructure in Canberra on 11th October 2021 entitled Road Pricing and Electric Vehicles: Where to from here? John demonstrated how various fuel efficiencies compared with the Victorian and NSW governments' decisions to adopt a 2.5 cents per kilometre charge for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles compared with the fuel excise which is currently set at 43.3 cents per litre as at August 2021.
A video recording of the presentation is below:
The slides we used for the presentation are below. If the recording of the session is available, I will add it to this post at a later date.
Dr Michael de Percy is the Canberra Press Gallery Correspondent for The Spectator Australia.
THE POLITICAL FLÂNEUR
Donate
