Nuclear Energy

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS (Black—Leader of the Opposition) (14:11): My question is to the Deputy Premier. Is the state government considering incorporating nuclear power into their energy policy? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain.

Leave granted.

The Hon. D.J. SPEIRS: The government has signed a letter of cooperation with California in relation to clean energy. Seventeen per cent of California's zero carbon electricity comes from the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant.

The Hon. S.E. CLOSE (Port Adelaide—Deputy Premier, Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Minister for Climate, Environment and Water, Minister for Workforce and Population Strategy) (14:12): I am happy to answer this question. I could simply answer it by saying no, because that's well known to the opposition and to South Australia, but I am happy to expand a little on that. The Premier has articulated in this chamber very well and clearly the serious economic problems associated with any concept that nuclear power could form a serious part of South Australia's electricity production in the future. While there is much talk of small nuclear reactors, they in fact operate nowhere in the world in a commercial sense, and what we have seen in nuclear power stations that have been built recently is that they are immensely expensive, they blow their budget and take decades to build. That is for jurisdictions that already have nuclear power and have a familiarity with how to generate nuclear power.

So while there is no ideological objection, at least from myself and the Premier and from our party—although there will be a variety of views, including here, that there is no economic rationale for incorporating nuclear power into our electricity network—where nuclear works is where there is very intense demand. That means high population and very high industrialisation.

In China, a nuclear power station, close to where there are large manufacturing and industrial precincts, can make sense. In South Australia, there is no room for it, no need for it. I can't help but think that the continual discussion—not necessarily by the Leader of the Opposition, who I believe fully appreciates the importance of climate change and of action—by some people in politics who continue to want to talk about nuclear power is not because they genuinely think that nuclear power is a serious option in South Australia and Australia, but that they don't want to talk about renewable electricity and they don't want to talk about climate change.

As I have mentioned, this is, in my view, beyond an ideological debate at this point. It may come as a surprise to some people given my very green history and, in fact, environmentally, my very green present, that I am not opposed ideologically to nuclear power. I was when I was younger. I was very involved in the environment movement, and I was one of the many people who protested against the idea of nuclear power being anything to do with the future of electricity in the world.

As I have understood climate change and the very serious threats that it poses and also, as we have seen, the increased capacity to undertake nuclear power in a safe way, I have let go of that ideological opposition. But if you test it on pure economics for South Australia and for Australia, it doesn't stack up. For that reason, as I suspect members know very well, it does not form a part of electricity production in South Australia's future.