Australia doesn’t need nukes: International Energy Agency boss
Financial Review
May 10, 2024
Paris | Australia does not need to join the global nuclear energy renaissance, and should focus on its advantages in renewable energy, the head of the International Energy Agency says.
In an interview with AFR Weekend in Paris, Fatih Birol, one of the world’s most influential energy officials, challenged the Coalition’s plan to make nuclear power a centrepiece of Australian energy policy.
International Energy Agency executive director Fatih Birol.
“When I look around the world, nuclear is making a strong comeback. I have been a proponent of nuclear for many years,” he said.
“But if there is a country that has a lot of resources from other sources, such as solar and wind, I wouldn’t see nuclear as a priority option. I’m talking about Australia now.”
The IEA supported France, Britain and Japan making a renewed push on nuclear, Dr Birol said. But the time frame for starting a nuclear industry from scratch, as Australia would have to, was too long. “For Australia, we have other priorities to push,” he said.
He said this also applied to small modular reactors, which are less costly to build but are not yet commercially proven.
“If we get these small, modular reactors technologically and economically competitive by the mid-2030s, it would be good news,” he said.
But for Australia, “you’ve seen a lot of untapped potential in solar and wind – in Australia I would put the priority on those technologies”.
Dr Birol said he was aware that energy security and the clean-energy transition was a hotly contested issue in Australia.
“In Australia you have a lot of discussions on those things. I hope the discussions can be made more factual, less emotional and political,” he said.
Dr Birol, who has led the IEA since 2015, has turned the Paris-based agency into a major champion of the energy transition and the net zero agenda.
But he takes a pragmatic approach. He supports the use of gas as a transition fuel, and he regrets the failure of companies and countries to turn carbon capture and storage (CCS) into a viable technology.
“One of the techniques Australia pushed, not just Australia but many countries, but didn’t get the result that they hoped for, is carbon capture and storage,” he said.
“For me it is a very vital technology, but the story of carbon capture and storage is a story of disappointment. It’s such a pity.”
He said the big energy companies could have done more to push the CCS technology forward. But because they had not done so, it was hard to believe their claims that they can hit their climate targets using CCS.
“I don’t buy it. We have not done much, and therefore the cost is still very high, and the technology is not there, to make it affordable for the rest of the world,” he said.
“Still, I have hope that one day there’ll be enough push in that direction. But it is still far, far, far behind what we should be doing.”
Gas ‘for some time’
Speaking before Resources Minister Madeleine King backed the production and use of gas into the 2050s, Dr Birol said gas was an important transition fuel.
“We can use gas for some time to come,” he said. “It does not have as many emissions as coal. But it is not completely innocent. We should not see gas as a destination.”
Dr Birol voiced concerned that the politics of climate change was getting more difficult, and many people were alienated by the potential cost and disruption of the energy transition.
“We want this clean-energy transition happening for the people, not despite the people. Without having their support for what we are doing for them, it really doesn’t make any sense,” he said.
“Some governments’ clean-energy transition programs put a disproportionate burden on the shoulders of the low- and middle-income groups. The policies should be better designed, and those groups should be better protected.”
Forum
Pages: 1
Australia Does Not Need Nuclear Energy (Read 477 times)
