Opposition Leader at Loggerheads with CSIRO Over Exact Cost of Nuclear Energy

The research body claims renewable energy is still cheaper than nuclear, Coalition Leader Peter Dutton disputes this.

Leader of the Opposition Peter Dutton is seen during a Q&A at the Australian Financial Review Business Summit, in Sydney, Australia on March 12, 2024. AAP Image/Bianca De Marchi

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has doubled down on his criticism of the CSIRO research that claims nuclear power is more expensive than solar and wind.

According to the draft GenCost report—which was released in December 2023 by the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO)—renewable energy emerged as the cheapest source of energy production compared to nuclear.

But Mr. Dutton refuted the findings, saying the report was “not a genuine piece of work” as it didn’t take into account the cost of transmission infrastructure and subsidies for renewables.

“It’s a discredited report, let’s be clear about it,” he told reporters on March 13. “It’s not relied on.”

“When you look at it like-for-like, what 19 of the G20 countries have done, why does it stack up for those countries but not for Australia?”

Mr. Dutton, who recently pledged that the Coalition would incentivise communities to adopt nuclear power, also took aim at the independence of the report.

“I would look at the independent, verifiable evidence and that all points to us having a transition to a zero-emission, latest technology nuclear where we can firm up renewable in this system,” he said, adding that this would help Australia attain cleaner, cheaper and reliable energy.

CSIRO CEO Defends Report

In a rare move, CSIRO Chief Executive Douglas Hilton publicly spoke out against Mr. Dutton’s remark, saying the GenCost report “can be trusted by all our elected representatives.”

“I will staunchly defend our scientists and our organisation against unfounded criticism,” he said in a statement on March 15.

“No matter the challenge we are tackling, CSIRO’s scientists and engineers can be relied on by the community to work creatively, assiduously and with integrity.”

When asked about the issue on the same day, Mr. Dutton said there’s “nothing disparaging” about the comments he made.

“My point is that we need to compare apples with apples,” he told the Today show on March 15.

“At the moment, that report that was released, it doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables. I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep our prices down.”

He added, “We’re going to see more blackouts under this government, and we’re going to see the cost of your electricity bill continue to go through the roof.”

“All I’m saying is let’s have a fair comparison, instead of a skewed one.”

He said he was critical of the CSIRO’s report in particular, not the organisation in general.

Debate Surrounds CSIRO’s Figures

On its website, the CSIRO said while its report didn’t take into account any potential externalities such as bird strikes at wind farms or site remediation, it did include the additional storage and transmission costs of renewables.

It said that the levelised costs of electricity (LCEO) wind and solar were $112 (US$73.58) per megawatt hour on average in 2023, decreasing to $82 (US$53.87) per megawatt hour in 2030.

In contrast, nuclear small modular reactor (SMR) costings were estimated to come in at an average of $509 (US$334) per megawatt hour in 2023, decreasing to $282 (US$185) in 2030.

The LCOE is a simple metric for comparing the cost of different technologies. It combines capital costs with running costs such as operating, maintenance and fuel, in units that help to compare technologies side by side.

“This projection shows nuclear SMR capital costs are almost half from today, but still well above the projected costs for wind and solar,” the CSIRO said.

Expert Says CSIRO Downplays Renewable Costs

Graham Young, the executive director of the Australian Institute for Progress, has said the CSIRO had downplayed the costs of the storage and back-up for renewables.

“No one I know in the industry can make sense of their costs, particularly when it comes to nuclear,” he argued in an opinion article for The Epoch Times.

Mr. Young said the report “treats the hydro Snowy 2.0 and the network as sunk costs out to 2030, so they come up with ludicrously low figures for the Levelled Cost of Electricity (LCOE) of renewables.”

“To properly back up wind and solar for periods of low wind and sun, you need a lot of cables to connect one part of the country to another, plus a lot of generating capacity that will sit idle most of the time, as well as storage,” he wrote.

“Even then, you also need fossil fuel electricity generation on standby because the cost of backing up a renewable grid rises exponentially, the closer you get to using renewables for 100 percent of the backup. This makes the cost of 100 percent renewable backup astronomical.”

A report into energy production by Net Zero Australia has predicted that the capital cost to meet net zero would be $9 billion by 2050, and $1.5 trillion by the end of 2030.

This is still significantly higher than the estimated cost of adding nuclear energy to the mix, which would be $387 billion, as said by Labor Energy Minister Chris Bowen.