Loading...
Loading...
Browse all stories on DeepNewz
VisitWhich energy plan will prove more cost-effective in Australia by 2034?
Nuclear plan more cost-effective • 25%
Renewable strategy more cost-effective • 25%
Both equally cost-effective • 25%
Inconclusive • 25%
Official government reports or independent energy analysis reports
Australia's Coalition Unveils A$331 Billion Nuclear Plan Led by Peter Dutton, Claims A$264 Billion Savings Over Labor's Renewables
Dec 14, 2024, 09:02 PM
Australia's opposition Coalition, led by Peter Dutton, has unveiled a nuclear energy policy projected to cost A$331 billion ($211 billion) over a decade. Dutton claims this plan will be A$264 billion cheaper than the current Labor government's renewable energy strategy. Energy Minister Chris Bowen has criticized the proposal, labeling it as the 'most expensive form of energy' and asserting that it would burn more carbon and disrupt the economy. Despite Dutton's assertions, energy analysts have expressed skepticism about the plan's cost-effectiveness and feasibility, noting potential hurdles in construction timelines and a lack of bipartisan support. The Coalition's proposal aims to construct seven nuclear power plants, with some sources estimating the construction costs at A$140 billion, potentially saving an additional A$20 billion compared to earlier estimates. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has dismissed the idea of lifting the nuclear energy moratorium, attributing high electricity prices to global factors such as the Ukraine War.
View original story
Costs are roughly equal • 25%
Data inconclusive • 25%
Nuclear cheaper than renewables • 25%
Nuclear more expensive than renewables • 25%
Other changes • 25%
Maintain current policy • 25%
Increase renewable targets • 25%
Adopt nuclear elements • 25%
Plan fully implemented • 25%
Plan partially implemented • 25%
Plan abandoned • 25%
Plan significantly altered • 25%
Majority oppose nuclear • 25%
Majority support nuclear • 25%
Insufficient data • 25%
Evenly split opinion • 25%
Less than 95% clean power • 25%
Achieved 95% clean power • 25%
Achieved 100% clean power • 25%
Policy revised again • 25%
No significant progress • 25%
Ahead of schedule • 25%
On schedule • 25%
Behind schedule • 25%
Majority oppose nuclear • 25%
Majority support nuclear • 25%
No clear majority • 25%
Opinion evenly split • 25%
No • 50%
Yes • 50%
Yes • 50%
No • 50%
Majority support nuclear energy • 25%
Inconclusive • 25%
Evenly split • 25%
Majority oppose nuclear energy • 25%