Nationals senator Matt Canavan has doubled down on concerns about the Coalition’s nuclear power plan, saying attempting to run a modern economy through nuclear or renewable power was “equally unachievable” after a video showed him claiming his colleagues are “not serious” about the idea.
In a podcast interview from August uncovered by the ABC, Canavan said the Coalition was backing nuclear power “because it fixes a political issue for us”.
In further comments to Guardian Australia, the Queensland senator claimed political leaders in Australia on all sides of the debate were making energy policy decisions “based on focus groups” and said nuclear wouldn’t help fix looming warnings of blackouts due to energy grid shortfalls.
“The nuclear policy we’re talking about can’t respond to those gaps, because it’s 10 or more years away. Labor wants hydrogen and batteries and stuff that won’t fly,” Canavan claimed.
“We better hope we can power our energy system on prayers.”
The ABC on Friday afternoon reported on a podcast Canavan had conducted with the National Conservative Institute of Australia. Asked about energy needs of nickel processing plants, Canavan answered: “Nuclear is not going to cut it.”
“I mean, we’re as guilty of this too. We’re not serious. Like, we’re latching on to nuclear,” he said.
“I fully support getting rid of the ban [on nuclear energy], we’ve got a bill in the Senate to get rid of it. We should build some nuclear power stations. They’ll help, they’ll help our system. But we’re latching on to it as a silver bullet, as a panacea, because it fixes a political issue for us, that it’s low-emission and it’s reliable. But it ain’t the cheapest form of power.”
The YouTube video of the podcast had just over 100 views as of early Friday afternoon.
Contacted for comment on Friday, Canavan stood by his statements, and expanded further on his reservations about nuclear energy, as well as renewables. He was again strongly critical of the net zero emissions by 2050 pledge, which both the Labor government and opposition leader, Peter Dutton, have committed to.
“I’ve been saying for years, a net zero energy approach is not serious. You can’t run a modern economy based on net zero emissions. Our attempt to do so via nuclear, and Labor via renewables, are equally unachievable,” Canavan told Guardian Australia.
Canavan, an ardent backer of Australia’s resources system, said Australia should build more coal-fired power stations instead.
“I’m not against renewables, or at least some of them, but we need coal and gas. Nuclear is fine too … It’s a modern complex world and we need modern solutions,” he said.
“I’m not saying we should be 100% coal, or not build nuclear, or not invest in renewable. But the balance has shifted so far away from investing in reliable power.”
Asked about his podcast comments that nuclear was a “political” fix, Canavan claimed that energy policy in Australia was being decided by political leaders based on electoral concerns.
“The most important piece of data isn’t whether it keep the lights on, it’s what do people think about it,” he said disapprovingly.
“We shouldn’t build a complex electricity system based on focus groups. The focus group approach to our energy system is leading to constant warnings of blackouts … All sides of politics are deciding their energy based on focus group, not a real world analysis of impact.”
Canavan went on to claim “hardly anyone in leadership is telling the truth about energy” in terms of potential for blackouts.
Asked if Dutton was telling the truth in that respect, Canavan responded: “nobody is.”
In a Friday morning press conference, the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, claimed the Coalition’s nuclear policy had been left in a “shambles” after conflicting messages about what impact it would have on power prices. Dutton and the shadow treasurer, Angus Taylor, said this week that nuclear energy would bring down electricity bills by 44% – a claim not directly supported by CSIRO modelling released last week.
“Peter Dutton’s been out there saying that they had a costing of consumers and how they would benefit. There’s nothing in this costing to indicate that that is the case. Nothing. And it was backed up by the shadow treasurer. They’re just making things up,” Albanese said.
“What we know is that nuclear does not add up because it’s too costly, it takes too long and it will not deliver the energy security that Australia needs.”
