Add articles to your saved list and come back to them any time.<\/p>\n
A nuclear energy developer championed by the Coalition has canned its most advanced project in the United States, raising questions over the viability of the technology in Australia.<\/p>\n
NuScale Power, which was developing small modular reactors at a US government-owned site in Idaho with plans to sell electricity to suppliers across the regional network by 2029, on Thursday said it had abandoned the project due to a lack of customer sign-ups.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The federal opposition is proposing nuclear as a solution to Australia\u2019s urgent need for new energy generation.<\/span>Credit: <\/span>AP<\/cite><\/p>\n The federal opposition, which wants Australia to overturn its longstanding ban on nuclear energy, claims small modular reactors \u2013 the next generation of nuclear power plants \u2013 are the only viable backup for renewable energy as the country transitions away from fossil fuels.<\/p>\n But Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen said NuScale\u2019s announcement was further proof that small modular reactors were not viable for Australia.<\/p>\n \u201cThe opposition\u2019s only energy policy is small modular reactors,\u201d Bowen said. \u201cToday, the most advanced prototype in the US has been cancelled. The [opposition\u2019s] plan for energy security is just more hot air from Peter Dutton.\u201d<\/p>\n NuScale\u2019s small modular reactor design was the first to be approved by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission in January. It was awarded more than $US1 billion ($1.56 billion) in government funding to support its development.<\/p>\n The company said in 2021 it would supply power from its small modular reactor plant for $US58 a megawatt hour. Since then, that figure has more than doubled to $US89 a megawatt hour.<\/p>\n Mason Baker, the chief executive of NuScale\u2019s government-owned partner, Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, said it was working with the company and the US Department of Energy to wind down the project.<\/p>\n \u201cThis decision is very disappointing given the years of pioneering hard work put into the [project],\u201d Baker said.<\/p>\n Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has said small modular reactors could easily replace Australia\u2019s coal-fired power plants.<\/p>\n \u201cAustralians must consider new nuclear technologies as part of the energy mix,\u201d he said in July. \u201cNew nuclear technologies can be plugged into existing grids and work immediately.\u201d<\/p>\n Opposition climate change and energy spokesman Ted O\u2019Brien said in May that NuScale\u2019s designs offered \u201cexceptional flexibility\u201d and would allow a \u201csimple expansion\u201d for Australia\u2019s energy grid.<\/p>\n \u201cNorth America has done the maths. It has mapped its course to a net-zero future, and it\u2019s one that sensibly includes next-generation, zero-emissions nuclear energy.\u201d<\/p>\n But recent Energy Department modelling found more than 70 small modular reactors, which are forecast to generate 300 megawatts each, would be needed to replace all of Australia\u2019s coal plants at an estimated cost of $387 billion.<\/p>\n O\u2019Brien said on Thursday that Bowen had applied \u201cfaulty logic\u201d to NuScale\u2019s announcement and if he applied the same test to renewables, they too would be considered a failure.<\/p>\n \u201cIs Bowen arguing that wind power is dead because the world\u2019s leading supplier, Siemens, is seeking a \u20ac15 billion government bailout, or the days of solar are over because plans for the world\u2019s largest solar plant, Sun Cable, have run into trouble,\u201d O\u2019Brien said.<\/p>\n \u201cIf Australia is serious about reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 while keeping the lights on and getting prices down, we cannot afford to take any option off the table.\u201d<\/p>\n