Dutton’s baseload nuclear plan shows he does not understand energy systems, Bowen says

Federal energy minister Chris Bowen has accused Coalition leader Peter Dutton and his fellow nuclear spruikers of failing to understand the changing dynamics of the Australian energy system.

Bowen’s remarks follow reports warning of potential blackouts and price spikes should the Coalition pursue its plan for extending the life of Australia’s ageing coal fleet while waiting for nuclear to be built, and comes a day after Dutton refused to reveal his nuclear costings in what was supposed to be a keynote speech in Sydney.

Instead, Dutton continued his attack on Labor’s reliance on wind and solar, saying it would result in the lights going out, soaring prices, and a stalled economy.

The focus of the debate seems to revolve around the construct of baseload power, which the Australian Energy Market Operator said this week, and big utilities agree, is being made redundant by the emerging dominance of wind and solar, and rooftop PV in particular, backed up by storage and other flexible generation.

Most in the energy industry argue that nuclear, which relies on being “always on” and has limited ability to ramp up and down, simply doesn’t fit into a grid with a majority wind and solar. The nuclear industry itself admits as much.

Dutton on Monday said renewables and nuclear could co-exist, but the four grids he cited – Arizona, France, Finland and Ontario – have no more than 18 per cent renewable share. Australia is at 40 per cent, going on 50 per cent with already committed projects, and is aiming for 82 per cent by 2030.

“The thing about Peter Dutton’s plan is again he doesn’t understand that what we need for a system which is net zero and predominantly renewable with peaking and firming,” Bowen said in an interview on Radio National breakfast.

“Coal is not suitable for peaking and firming, because once you turn a coal‑fired power station on, you’re not turning it off, and guess what, same as nuclear.

“Whereas gas can be turned on and off to support the energy system when we do need more energy, it can be turned on or off at two minutes’ notice, so when a gas‑fired power station is not turned on, it is zero emissions.

“Coal and nuclear can’t be turned on and off, and when coal is on it is emitting even if we don’t need the energy. It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the energy system.”

Dutton and conservative voices have said that Bowen’s 82 per cent renewables target is impossible to meet, and will destroy industry. They argue that no grid can survive on such a high level of renewables, despite South Australia already doing so, and the market operator also convinced it can and will be done.

“Getting to 82 per cent renewables is no small thing, it’s a big change for the country,” Bowen said.

“But it’s also got to be supported by a well‑detailed plan to back it by new storage, batteries primarily, but also pumped hydro. That’s happening, and we have policies in place to do that, and that is rolling out; we’re seeing a big increase in storage.”

The Clean Energy Regulator on Tuesday released a report which showed that 7 GW of new wind and solar, including 4 GW of large scale renewables, should be committed this year, an improvement on previous years although still short of the level required.

Former NSW Coalition energy minister and now chair of the Climate Change Authority Matt Kean was also critical of Dutton’s assertions that nuclear makes a good bedfellow for renewables.

“I think the advice from the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator is very different,” he told ABC TV’s 7.30 program.

“We know that nuclear technology is not flexible to work with renewables, so therefore it isn’t the best technology to support renewables.

“We also know that it will take a long time to build nuclear capacity. Australia doesn’t have a nuclear industry. We don’t have the workforce that’s ever done this before, and the best example to look to is what’s happening in the UK, another democracy that’s currently building a nuclear power plant.”

He pointed to the Hinckley C reactor that has been delayed more than a decade, and where costs have blown out to more than $A86 billion as an example.

“AEMO and the CSIRO have said clearly that the cheapest way to replace our existing capacity is renewables that are backed up by firming technologies,” Kean said.

“We’ll take the advice of the experts. We’re not going to get into ideology. This should be about evidence, science, engineering and economics.”