Not a business plan. No pricing . No time frame . No water allocation. No state or community agreement. No waste management plan .
Dutton claims that nuclear power is cheaper. A vague 80 year plan with zero detail.
Who would sign up to such a deal ? Locked in to an 80 year deal in a time of rapid technological change . ln a time where South Australia has gone from zero renewables to 75% renewables in just 15 years . With relatively old technology . ln a time where California , the 5th largest economy in the world , gets more of its peak electricity from batteries than any other source . ln a time where Germany , a European industrial giant , is getting over 50% of its annual electricity from clean energy . ln a time where mature fully depreciated baseload coal is going broke because of competition from renewables .
This is despite no electricity provider entertaining the idea. The providers that already own the sites . They already have the connections. They would have the luxury of managing the changeover on their terms at their pace.
They are the professionals in the space . They know exactly what it takes to produce electricity in Australia.
They are the experts .
But none of them are going nuclear d. They are all converting their sites and their businesses to renewables . lncluding Engie that has nuclear overseas .
lt seems very strange that there are all these factless posts about nuclear power from anonymous people and none from the actual professionals in the space .
