When it comes to energy policy, Australia is in the confused pot.
Because now ideology has taken hold of the energy debate. Newsletter writer today wrote that nuclear policy does not make sense in Australia if it sits with renewables to power our electricity. That’s because nuclear involves a vast amount of capex and fixed costs which does little sense if utilisation is not 100pc as it sits with renewables which investments have already been made.
Nuclear does not make sense in Australia- I know people don’t like wind turbines near their communities but no one wants nuclear plants near their community either. Wind turbines is just unsightly but nuclear reactor is hazardous to health and well being.
Hence the Coalition’s energy policy is flawed. Differentiation for the sake of it to drive ideology will cost our nation dearly, just as AUKUS did. Ideological driven policies of the LNP cost huge money to be paid by generations. They run the risk of being white elephants as their utility does not stack up in any cost benefit analyses. Furthermore the true costs of it all will and can remain unknown for some time to come.
Without being funded by taxpayers money, the nuclear policy will not fly, so even if it does result in lower energy prices for consumers, they are indirectly funding it - no different really from providing subsidy to consumers on their energy bills. No different really from earning dividends on a stock that provides only capital losses.
Unfortunately politics devoid of commercial reasoning but only on political reasoning is poor decision for the country. Just like LNP’s doling out free $800mil Jobkeeper money to Qantas and ALP doling out grants to critical minerals grants which include Gina Rineharts Arafura. Why can’t these be extended as loans to be subsequently repaid or convertible into share securities to be held by eg Future Fund?
