Interview with Gary Adshead, 6PR Perth - Friday 13 December 2024

Topics: Nuclear costings 

 

E&OE   

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

All right. Well, the figures have been released. What does it mean? What does it mean for Western Australia? There's some interesting omissions from this Frontier Economics report around WA. So let's bring in Angus Taylor, the Shadow Treasurer, joins me on the line. Thanks very much for your time.

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Good to be with you, Gary. Thank you for having me.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Okay, well, you know, having looked at the Frontier Economics report, there's nothing in there about the costings for WA in terms of this whole nuclear policy, why not?

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, because as is usually the case, the core modelling is always done on the NEM. But we have also had advice from Frontier Economics that the same principles will apply to the SWIS, of course, which covers Western Australia and there is nothing fundamentally different about the SWIS that would make the result any different and there would be, as you know, a plan for one of the generators to be in Western Australia and that will help to get us to where we need to go and bring the emissions down, but most importantly, help to make sure we've got a lower cost pathway to deliver electricity bills that Australians can afford and that's what's desperately needed right now. What the modelling tells us is that this approach, including nuclear in the mix, as part of a broader mix that includes renewables and gas and coal for as long as it's needed, delivers us a very substantial reduction in costs, a 44% reduction in costs, in fact and that's what Australians need right now, a pathway forward that gets us to where we need to go, that is visionary, that's realisable, but most importantly, is affordable and that's what a 44% reduction is. It's affordable.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Okay, so just on that, can I ask, look, here's the bit that doesn't make sense to me. You know, I'm probably doing this on behalf of listeners, so just, just bear with me, but, but you're talking about being $331 billion with a mix of nuclear, gas and renewables. What doesn't make sense is that you're saying that Labor's policy, Labor's plan would be $600 billion without nuclear.

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Correct.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Now, nuclear is expensive. You must admit that. How can you possibly do it for $240-50 billion less with nuclear?

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Because a renewables-only strategy is way more expensive and the reason for this is pretty simple, really. Number one: wind and solar only work part of the time, so you've got to build a lot more. You've got to over build it. You've also got to build more transmission because it's intermittent power, it's not permanent power and you've got to build backup and storage, which is enormously expensive, particularly for big base load users, heavy manufacturing users, data centres. Nuclear avoids all of that. You don't have to build the transmission, you don't have to build the same amount of storage, and you don't have to over build the capacity. So the overall system cost is much lower, and this is why all around the world now we're seeing the big data centre operators, for instance, saying we've got to go nuclear with 24/7 requirements. We have 24/7 requirements. We need 24/7 power to meet that and that's why nuclear as part of the mix – it's not the whole solution – but as part of the mix is so important. That part of the mix, traditionally, for us, right across Australia, has been met by coal and it's true that renewables and gas can provide some of the requirements we need, but the underlying base load power makes … if it includes nuclear, makes the whole system cost much lower and that's the key point.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

So can you breakdown of the $331 billion, how much of that is nuclear? Beginning, I take it in, I mean, obviously there's got to be a lot of work done up to it but beginning in 2036?

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Yeah. So the capital spend on nuclear across the entire plan, which is the 50 years, is about $120 billion. That's the CapEx, a portion of which, of course, is in WA and the rest of it is on the east coast. So it's a mix and this is the whole point. You know, energy systems need balance. That's how you get affordability, that's how you get reliability, and it's also how you get emissions down over time. Chris Bowen and Labor have decided to go for an unbalanced approach. They don't like anything other than renewables. It's clear. You know, they're sort of pretending they're having this Come to Jesus moment on gas, but, well, look, let's be serious. They haven't been serious about gas, Gary. I mean, that's a realisation that what they're doing now doesn't work, but they haven't got serious about gas at all. They ditched all the plans we had on getting gas moving, and we haven't seen it moving, and the price of gas has gone up enormously as a result. So Labor hasn't been serious about that, and they clearly haven't been serious about nuclear, and they haven't been serious about keeping coal in until we've got replacement and that's why we're ending up in a situation where their policies haven't worked.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

I mean, I'll just say that only yesterday, you know, the WA Labor Government signed off on another 50 years of the North West Shelf Gas Project. That shocked the greenies and the conservation movement so you're saying they're not serious about it. That's a pretty significant commitment.

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

I’m talking about Federal Labor here.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Yeah, okay. All right. But you know …

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Let's be clear, because they're not always the same thing. I mean, I've worked, as I think you'd know, over in WA for many years in the mining industry and I know both sides of politics have always been very supportive of resources in WA. They’ve had to be because that's so important to the state, and they should be. But the Federal Labor Party hasn't had that same sympathy. Some of the local members might have but I can tell you, the Party hasn't, and we've seen that with Tanya Plibersek, you know, rejecting really important projects for this country. There's been no excitement about opening up the Northern Territory for gas from this government. They've made life hard, and we've seen that elsewhere around Australia from the Federal Government. So you need balance in energy systems. You need the full range of fuels. Why would we exclude nuclear when we know it can bring the cost down, when we know peer countries around the world are moving to more nuclear, not less, when we know the big data centres, big heavy industry users of energy are shifting to nuclear in a very, very rapid, at a very rapid pace. Why would we exclude it? Only Chris Bowen could say a completely unbalanced grid is the way to go, but that's how he thinks, and we're paying a high price for it.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Just the … and are we talking here in terms of this Frontier Economics modelling small nuclear reactors only?

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

It's a mix. It's a mix in WA that is, that is what's proposed. Yes.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

And even though you accept that they're commercially, they're not really a thing at the moment. I mean, the small nuclear reactor technology is not at that stage.

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

That’s not quite, right. Every nuclear submarine is using small modular reactors, you know, by [inaudible] in a port connected them to the grid that’s small modular reactors.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Don't, don't do that.

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Yeah, so, but the key point here is the pace at which this is moving around the world and I've had the opportunity to speak to a number of the companies that are in this area. It is moving very, very fast, and it has to, we don't have an alternative but to include this as part of the mix in the grid. Other countries have come to that conclusion, well ahead of us, the UK, the US, Canada, and we're seeing the results of having nuclear in your system. I mean, if you look at the electricity prices in places like Canada, in parts of the US, you've seen prices down at 18 cents where there's a big nuclear presence. We're not getting prices like that now in Australia and so we think it can be part of a good economic solution. This modelling lays it out, and it says, you avoid that massive over-build you would otherwise have. That's how you save the costs and ultimately, they're costs that have to be paid by Australians and that's the important point here.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

All right, last question for you, because I know you got a busy day. This is obviously, you know, off into the future, quite a long way into the future. How do people, how do people sort of work out who to trust on this one, because you won't start to see the results, as I said, you know, the first one coming online at 2036 at the earliest. We don't know about cost blowouts. We don't know about delays. Who do we trust?

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Well, you know, let's look at the track record. I was Energy Minister for a number of years, as you know, in the time I was Energy Minister emissions came down, prices came down. Since Chris Bowen has been Energy Minister, emissions have gone up and prices have gone up. I mean, that's the track record. I've been involved in this sector, both in the private sector, and more recently, of course, in Parliament and government, for many, many years. I know you need balance in an energy system. It's only Chris Bowen that seems to think otherwise, and I think he just can't be trusted. He promised everyone a $275 reduction in their electricity bills. That hasn't been delivered.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Well, they gave them $350 credits (laughs).

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

(Laughs) Well that's not a reduction on your electricity bill. That's a government … that's a handout, which is paid for by taxpayers. He's taking with one hand and giving with the other. I mean, that’s extraordinary. I mean, whatever the merit of that, that is not a reduction in the underlying electricity bill and so he hasn't delivered, and he can't because he's just got it wrong, and he will continue to get it wrong because he's on an ideological crusade which lacks the pragmatism we're taking. Yep, we've got to reduce emissions, but most importantly, we've got to find a low-cost way to do that. 44% reduction is what this is all about in the cost of electricity for Australians, and that will include Western Australia.

 

GARY ADSHEAD:

Angus Taylor, I really appreciate your time.

 

ANGUS TAYLOR:

Good to be with you. Gary.

 

ENDS.