Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan is off in the never-never, but our power bills and emissions pledge are not | Lenore Taylor

I often do not agree with Mattal Canaavan on matters related to global heating. But when the Senator The nuclear plan described the coalition “political reform” last yearI think he was speaking the truth.

For 15 years of exhausting The coalition is trying to pay the attention of the audience who votes, more aware of the climate crisis, than its inability to obtain the reliable climate and energy policy after skeptics of the climate and nothing for violations somewhat in its ranks (including Sinator Quinzland).

Petter Datton’s nuclear policy is the latest repetition, as the “discussion” is framing as one between a different technological means to reach the same goal of net zero emissions by 2050, and those that criticize nuclear energy as “renewable energy sources only” that deeply refuse to consider a reliable solution.

But even under alliance accounts, nuclear energy cannot come over a decade, so this also framing easily jumps in the next ten years; The contract in which the Dateon government may actually take office, and also a decade, voters today will still need to pay energy bills and require reliable energy supplies, and when the world must reduce emissions to avoid the most catastrophic effects of heating.

After creating a nuclear policy at all for some time now, the coalition can be very aggressive when anyone indicates short -term shortcomings.

The goal of this week was the authority of climate change, which found that the coalition plan-to slow the start of renewable energy and keep the energy stations that operate with the enlightened coal even after 2040 when the nuclear reactors funded by taxpayers become available-become available- A significant increase in carbon dioxide emissions in AustraliaMore than 2 billion tons.

It is really clear, that continuing to burn coal will lead to more emissions, and certainly it was not a strange appreciation, and is based on alliance modeling, and in the queue on a large scale With estimates from energy experts At New South Wales University.

But the coalition chose not to address it, but rather He shot the Messenger; In this case, the independent authority and its president, former liberal minister in New South Wales Matt Kane. She said that the authority has become a “doll from Anthony Albaniz and [energy minister] Chris Bowne.

Dutton’s claim that energy prices will be 44 % cheaper in the short term under its plan, as it is not supported, and it is also lower than all competing assessments of what may cost him, not or not or not in the long run, if it is finally built.

Experts say Dutton’s comments about the costs of the near -term It is clear that he does not know what he is talking about.

The opposition leader routinely cited modeling from the border economy, which has been competing, which found that nuclear energy will reduce the costs of the long -term energy system by 44 %. Danny Price, Managing Director of Frontire, confirms that his work did not expect home energy bills or electricity prices, and that the near -term cuts in the costs of the system have not been determined.

Then there are deep concerns, From the Australian energy market operatorAmong other things, about how the coal -working aging system has assembled it in the ten years or more during which nuclear energy was developed.

Canavan’s criticism of his party’s policy was presented in the context of his argument that none of the main party was introduced to the challenges of maintaining the operation of the energy system while reaching zero by 2050.

I do not agree there. Australia has just started getting rid of decades of climatic wars to achieve a necessary and long -delay energy transmission. The eastern coast network is now about 43 % of renewable energy. The lights remain on. Investment is increasing.

Damyan Nix, CEO of AGL last week, said: “Each of the time and cost will not allow a nuclear procedure on time … The question now is about continuing and completing this as soon as possible.”

If Daton wants to discuss nuclear weapons as a long -term option, this is a good thing, but it is not a substitute for knowing the meaning of his plan here and now, for the salad bills, emissions, and promises we made on the international stage. That is, if it is actually a dangerous policy instead of another tactic to delay.