I attended a Zoom AGM of the Australian Conservation Foundation yesterday. Around 60 on the Zoom.
I was first a member of the ACF in 1969 in Canberra, just three years after it was founded. I still remember going to meetings at a shed in the Corroboree Park, in those early days. I haven’t been financial for most of the time since, but recently rejoined.
At the end of the formal stuff, confirming the Minutes and so on, there were questions. I let them all go by, mostly they were about membership and how the ACF is doing financially. At the end, and with seeming noone else asking a question, I put in mine. Which was about Nuclear. (wrinkling of ACF attendees’ noses).
Pointing out that I lived in Hong Kong, where we get a majority of our electricity from nuclear power, that I’ve visited the Daya Bay Nuclear Power station (and it’s great!), and that we also have 20kW of solar on our roof, my question was: given that the Australian population had shown itself to be in favour of Australia developing nuclear, would the ACF now have another look at it? I knew the policy of the ACF on nuclear, which is very negative. But should it/would it, have another look?
The chair, Liana Downey, tossed the question to someone whose name I didn’t catch, who answered along the lines of something that I’d summarise as “how to say you’re against nuclear, without saying you’re against nuclear”. Because he did say he was not “ideologically opposed to nuclear”, whereas it became apparent that he was. And that he associated pro nuclear with the cretins of the Liberal (ie conservative) party.
A sum of his points:
1. Big nuclear power stations like France, Canada, etc... not good for Australia. And this is the conclusion of all major energy and science bodies in Australia.
2. Australia would only consider Small Modular Reactors: but they are failing, eg the one in Utah.
3. Too long to install.
4. California and France nuclear stations now having problems, lack of water, etc.
5. Australia would keep on using nuclear energy: via fission! Using the fission of the sun for solar power! Heh.
6. Thus: renewables forever, for Oz.
I didn’t get any chance to reply to those points, as it was not a discussion format, rather a Q and then an A, that that’s it. You’re cut off. I understood this, and so I simply noted that answer.
I’m not sure that it’s even worth trying to change any mindset in the ACF. Then again, they do have an impact on the broader consciousness about energy related issues, including nuclear. Still, there’s now a majority of Australians that are in favour of developing nuclear power in Australia, whatever the ACF thinks.
ADDED: I’m not going to go through the points above by the AGM guy talking anti-nuke, save to say that re the first point: it’s not at all clear to me why a standard large-scale nuclear power station as made by France or Canada (or even China?!), should be out of bounds for Australia. For the rest, there’s my “Case for nuclear power”.
