[Based on this draft, which is 529 words, trying reduce to 200 words, SMH requirements. Got it to exactly 200]
LETTER to Sydney Morning Herald. letters@smh.com.au
In his recent tirade, Paul Keating attacks Dutton’s nuclear plans mostly with an avalanche of ad hominem -- “charlatan”, “denialist, “fantasist”, "opportunist"....
Ad hominem aside, his “facts” are wrong.
Nuclear is “the most dangerous...”. Wrong. According to IPCC and UNSCEAR, nuclear is the safest source of power.
Nuclear is “... the most expensive”. Wrong. The U.S. Department of Energy lists Nuclear as amongst the cheapest of electricity generating technologies.
Nuclear is “backward”. Wrong. Fourth Generation reactors use the “waste” from previous generations.
Keating is shamefully intemperate and adds nothing to the debate.
I’m Australian, based in Hong Kong for over thirty years. We live close to DaYa Bay Nuclear Station where we get a third of our power. We have no fear of it. We like its clean, reliable, safe energy. Result: carbon emissions per capita just 26% of Australia’s.*
I support the Dutton plan. It is farsighted, unlike Keating’s intemperate ramblings. In 70 years, when we are all three gone, our grandchildren will thank us.
What we need today is not the spleen of a Keating, but the unification of a Hawke. Someone who understands we need to talk about this together for the sake of the nation.
Yours,
Peter Forsythe
Siena One
Discovery Bay
Hong Kong
+852 9308 0799
* HK 4 Tonnes per capita per year, vs Australia 15 Tonnes per capita per year
The case for Nuclear
