1. The cost would be comparative or less than the $500B...

1. The cost would be comparative or less than the $500B renewable transition as indicated by CSIRO. Using CSIRO figures of $8B, the cost estimate would be in the $50-70B, far less than the $500B renewable transition.

2. The estimate build time for a C2N is considerably less than a green field site, 6-10 years is the estimate provided by the US energy department

3. This was already answered by Dutton. The waste will be stored alongside the waste from the upcoming nuclear submarines, likely within a defence facility

4. Which of the proposed sites sits on a tectonic plate? Which of the sites has been affected by a large enough tremor that it would cause any damage to the site? ( this is poor fear mongering)

5. Business plan will follow

6. Most of the indicated sites have access to water. New generation nuclear technology requires less water than legacy tech

7. This has already been covered by Dutton, through negotiation and where that fails the commonwealth has constitutional powers to do so.

8. As per above. The commonwealth government has constitutional ability to reclaim land, as they have done with multiple M1 highway projects

Dutton hasn’t provided an anti-renewables plan between now and then. Quite the opposite, both he and Littleproud clearly said in the press conference that this is a long term plan and renewables will still form part of that energy mix.

I urge you to stop using misinformation to form a position