There's no need to replace one environmental hazard with another

Bob Carr is ignoring other answers when he suggests nuclear power as an option, writes Gavin Gilchrist, in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald June 7, 2005

Bob Carr wants a debate on the merits of nuclear power over our coal-based electricity system. He says burning coal produces too much carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, and that's causing dangerous shifts in the world's climate, so what about nuclear instead?

Let's have a debate over the NSW power system, but nuclear versus coal is the wrong energy debate. There's no need to replace one environmental hazard with another.

NSW has a host of options for an electricity system that will create jobs, cut energy bills and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For a start, is NSW really about to run out of generation capacity?

In the past few weeks we've all been victims of a classic scare campaign from the coal and power industries designed to panic politicians into committing to a multibillion-dollar coal-fired power station, and us into supporting them.

This last happened 25 years ago, when the power industry's reckless projections for power demand caused the construction of one $1.8billion power station too many.
That power station, Mount Piper, sat partly constructed for five years in the late 1980s, generating nothing but hundreds of millions of dollars of interest on debt. Now it's the possible site for another, $2 billion privately developed coal-fired power station.

It's highly questionable that a decision is needed immediately on a new power station. Challenge the demand growth predictions.
The Government says the debate should be about providing baseload electricity-generating capacity, the grunt in the system, which is then added to by smaller generators as demand rises and falls through the day.

Carr says: "You could have a wind farm across all of outback NSW that would kill every kookaburra, but it wouldn't provide the baseload power we need."

Why is baseload demand so high overnight when almost all of us are asleep and most factories and offices are idle? Answer: because we've traditionally priced off-peak power incredibly cheaply to keep the coal-fired power stations running. And because it's so cheap, much of the energy we use overnight is wasted.

Just look at all the lights left on in empty offices late into the night. At home, 12 per cent of household electricity is now wasted through stand-by power consumption - that's baseload energy used by our TVs, stereos, computers and VCRs when they're in stand-by mode but not turned on. Reduce the baseload waste and generating capacity is freed up for when we really need it.

Let's debate, too, how we can be more efficient through the aggressive adoption of new energy-efficient technologies at work and home. Are new home-owners happy their builders have handed them houses with a large number - often 20 or 30 - of low-voltage downlights in the kitchen and family rooms?
Low voltage does not mean low energy. Each of these fittings consumes about 65 watts, compared with 15 watts for a smart new-technology compact fluorescent downlight. These homeowners receive $1500 a quarter power bills and wonder why.

Let's debate the robust national economic modelling done two years ago showing that driving the adoption of more energy-efficient equipment in our homes and businesses would, after 12 years, create 9000 jobs, boost the economy by $1.8 billion and cut energy use and greenhouse emissions by 9 per cent. Isn't that a preferable economic outcome?

Let's debate what contribution wind power can make. Are investors seeking state planning approval for 800 megawatts of wind power misguided fools about to blow their money?

What about natural gas, a much cleaner fuel than coal? How is it Australia can sign long-term supply contracts for liquefied natural gas for power stations in China and Japan but not for the state of NSW?

So let's have a 100 per cent debate about all energy options. Make it open and public, a broad commission of inquiry. Let's have town hall meetings across NSW, in city and country.

Let's ask people what they want, rather than leaving it to bureaucrats in Treasury, the coal industry and the power industry to fluster our politicians into a decision we will only ever regret.

Nuclear or more coal? Neither, thanks.

Gavin Gilchrist runs Big Switch Projects, a sustainable energy company. His book, The Big Switch: Clean Energy for the 21st Century, was published in 1994 by Allen & Unwin.