Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It wasn't a pleasant surprise for Blue Mountains residents and our Lithgow neighbours to learn that the coalition has selected their city as the site for a nuclear reactor. It defies logic that anyone would contemplate a nuclear reactor on the doorstep of the greater Blue Mountains World Heritage area. There was no consultation with the people of Lithgow, let alone their neighbours. In the vacuum of silence that the opposition have left on their 23rd energy policy—what will be built, how many will be built, how much it will cost, when it'll be ready, how much power it would provide—I'm going to offer some facts.

All the experts say nuclear energy is a bad idea for Australia. It's too slow and too expensive. Like international assessments, the CSIRO has found that the cheapest electricity comes from a grid that draws 90 per cent of its power from renewables, and it's close to half the cost of large nuclear reactors. We know that nuclear plays a role in some countries, but those countries all have an existing, mature nuclear industry and they have something else in common: poor renewable resources. Nuclear will never stack up in Australia because we have the world's best renewable resources, and we need to replace retiring coal urgently. We don't have time to wait another decade or more to bring new sources of energy into the grid.

Under their own optimistic scenario, the Liberals say they won't get their first nuclear reactor up and running until 2035-2037, risking 13 years of rolling blackouts as they abandon reliable renewables. And, if they did hit their 2037 target, it would be the fastest nuclear rollout in the world.

The waste is another problem. Unlike opposition claims about a can of Coke, it's actually about that much for every person the nuclear reactor is creating power for each year. So that's thousands of cans of Coke each year to be disposed of and, on average, around 30 tonnes of used fuel a year.

Let's just call this what it is: a clumsy attempt to slow down investment in renewables and undermine confidence in the energy transformation that is already underway. It's a policy that will stick people with higher energy costs for longer, and risk reliability. Australia's already halfway to meeting our 2030 emissions reduction target, with about 25 per cent more renewable energy in the national grid right now. We've doubled the approval of renewable projects, and coal and gas project approvals have fallen to a quarter of what they were. So this is what's actually happening in the real world, and it shows that the energy transition is underway. It's real, it's already happening and that's the way we make energy cheaper and greener.

Like so many people affected by Hawkesbury-Nepean flooding, whether it's Emu Plains, Ebenezer, Windsor or Wilberforce, I want to see tangible changes that make the valley a safer place to live. I'm now seeing the state and federal governments doing more to tackle flood mitigation and preparation than at any time in my 15 years in the community.

First, there's the release of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River flood study, the most comprehensive flood study done in New South Wales, reinforcing that we have one of the highest flood risks in the country. It's there for everyone to use, and the detailed data will be used in planning by Hawkesbury and Penrith councils and other levels of government, including in the work on the first regional disaster adaptation plan that's been developed for the valley.

Then there's the $94.7 million investment in the SES which Premier Chris Minns joined me in the Hawkesbury to discuss. It's the largest ongoing commitment in the SES's history to help prepare for floods that can be far worse than what we've experienced in the last few years. It'll buy new equipment, support training and volunteer recruitment and improve public information and warnings.

Then there are the roads upgrades. Federal funding, which has helped the state identify and problem-solve more than a hundred road weaknesses, is aimed at improving drainage, lifting local roads and increasing culverts so roads stay open for longer during an evacuation. These are really tangible steps that are being taken.

Together the state and federal governments are building the new Richmond Bridge, which will be around 10 metres higher than the existing one and will be able to withstand a one-in-20-years flood, and we're improving evacuation routes via the Driftway. There's more to do, like the Pitt Town evacuation route, and it will take time, but it's happening under Labor.

House adjourned at 20:00

See this speech in context