Discover PlayDecide. Download games, prepare, play. GET STARTED

Nuclear Power In Australia

Choose your language

PlayDecide games may be available in multiple languages

Play the game

Download, prepare, discuss & collect results.

SIGN INRegister

Welcome to the game Decide, where you will explore the complex and critical topic of nuclear power in Australia.

Author / translator James

Welcome to the game Decide, where you will explore the complex and critical topic of nuclear power in Australia.

Australia stands at a crossroads regarding its energy future. Despite having the world's largest known uranium reserves, Australia has not yet embraced nuclear power for electricity generation. This decision is influenced by various factors, including environmental concerns, economic considerations, and public opinion.

As players, you will delve into the multifaceted debate surrounding nuclear power. You'll examine its potential to provide a reliable and low-carbon energy source, addressing climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Conversely, you'll also consider the challenges, such as nuclear waste management, safety risks, and the significant initial costs associated with building nuclear plants.

Through this game, you will navigate through real-world scenarios, make critical decisions, and weigh the pros and cons of nuclear power. Your choices will reflect the diverse perspectives and complexities of this important issue, shaping the future of energy in Australia.

Prepare to engage, debate, and decide as you step into the role of policymakers, environmentalists, engineers, and citizens, all striving to determine the best path forward for Australia’s energy landscape.

Created 8 August 2024
Last edited 19 October 2024
Topics Energy, Politics, Technology

Policy positions

Policy position 1

Support the construction and operation of many SMRs and large scale nuclear power plants across the country. These central power stations would cover most of Australia's electricity needs.

Policy position 2

Support the construction and operation of some nuclear power plants across Australia to contribute a small amount of electricity. Most of Australia's electricity generation should come from other sources.

Policy position 3

Reverse the ban on nuclear energy, but don't build anything. This opens the door to SMRs when the technology matures or to a private company if they see a business case for nuclear power.

Policy position 4

Maintain the ban on nuclear energy. Increasing energy supply is best achieved through other means.

Story cards

Thumbnail

I am a researcher. I think most of my colleges agree that we have the technology to produce low carbon intensive electricity. All of this debate about future technology is pointless because solar cells are getting so cheap that we can generate as much clean energy as we want. The market will decide that solar energy is the future, it has no competition.

Solar Is The Only Real Option
Thumbnail

I have thought a fair amount about what we should be doing to reduce our carbon footprint, after all I try to design spaces that use very little energy. It is clear to me that in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, I am mainly talking about coal in Australia, we need to reduce our consumption of energy. There currently exists many ways to do this: passive housing, insulation, grass rooftops, natural ventilation, solar hot water and triple-glazed windows.

Reduction Of Demand Is The Most Important Factor In The Energy Transition For Architect
Thumbnail

These pie in the sky renewable dreams are going to cost the Australian public an arm and a leg. One side of politics is trying to scare us into abandoning net zero, without nuclear we won't get to net zero! The last 3% of electricity will cost us billions and billions to decarbonise, and we'll be spending all of it on Chinese solar and batteries that will only last 15 years.

We're not going to spend billions on renewables

I was just a baby when they dropped the nuclear bomb over in Emu Field. Once I was diagnosed with cancer, I swore I would fight against anything nuclear. My people have got poor eyesight, epilepsy, all of that is because of radiation. I'm going to die because of a tumour in my kidneys. We still eat the bush tucker that's out there where the fallout probably landed. People need to know about this and how to government poisoned us, we were not informed of the impacts on our bodies, that information should have been in traditional language.

Fighting anything nuclear
Thumbnail

I think nuclear is like, an older technology. I mean, I have nothing against it, and it would have been good if we built it 50 years ago. But now we have solar and wind and stuff like that which is just cleaner and better, right? I know solar is basically free electricity once you install it so unless nuclear is cheaper than that, I don't think I would support it.

There's probably better alternatives
Thumbnail

I live in a place that might get a nuclear power plant soon. My dad thinks it's a great idea because it will bring jobs and help our economy. He says that nuclear power is reliable and will keep our lights on even when the sun isn't shining or the wind isn't blowing.
But my mom is worried. She heard about the risks of radiation and accidents, and she's scared about what could happen to our environment and our health. She also worries about how the nuclear waste will be handled and if it will be safe for future generations.
In school, we learned about climate change and how we need to find ways to reduce carbon emissions. My teacher said that nuclear power doesn't produce carbon dioxide like coal and gas do, so it could help fight global warming. But we also learned about renewable energy, like solar and wind power, which are getting cheaper and better all the time.
I hope the adults make the right decision because kids like me will have to face the consequences for a long time.

Emily's Perspective
Thumbnail

From a policy perspective, it's a matter of policy for the government. We understand nuclear power, and how to control the reaction but I'm not an economist, and I can't build a grid. It's a complicated issue. I understand that there's a lot of emotion. But I can say that if we do have nuclear power here in Australia I am confident that it will be regulated as safely as possible by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency.

Mark, a nuclear scientist
Thumbnail

Hello, I'm Peter. I worked as an engineer for 35 years, and I've seen a lot of changes in how we produce and use energy. When I started my career, coal was king, and we didn't think much about the environment. But now, things are different. Climate change is a real threat, and we need to find cleaner ways to power our lives.
I've always believed in the potential of nuclear power. It's a reliable and powerful source of energy that doesn't emit carbon dioxide. Countries like France and Sweden have used nuclear power safely for decades, and they've managed to reduce their carbon footprints significantly.
But I understand the concerns people have. Accidents like Chernobyl and Fukushima were terrible, and they show what can go wrong if we're not careful. We need the highest safety standards and strict regulations to make sure nothing like that happens here.
We need to reduce our carbon emissions, and nuclear power can help us do that.

Peter, retiree
Thumbnail

I moved over here from France and one of the biggest cultural differences I’ve noticed is how apprehensive people are about nuclear power. No one really has such strong opinions in France. And, can I say, we have a much lower carbon footprint per person than you do here in Australia. I would say that that is in large part due to nuclear energy. I have no idea about the physics side of it. But I would say that the fact that energy company is owned by the government is a good thing in terms of keeping electricity to a price that is affordable.

Ambre, a French national
Thumbnail

As a mother and an environmental activist, I'm deeply concerned about the kind of world we're leaving for our children. Climate change is already having severe impacts, and we need to act now to protect our planet.
Safety is my biggest concern. The thought of a nuclear accident terrifies me. The disasters at Chernobyl and Fukushima show that even with advanced technology, things can go wrong. I worry about the long-term health effects of radiation and the potential for catastrophic accidents.
Then there's the issue of nuclear waste. It remains hazardous for thousands of years, and we still don't have a foolproof way to deal with it. Storing it safely for such a long time is a huge responsibility, and any failure could have devastating consequences for the environment and future generations.
I'm also concerned about the high costs and long construction times for nuclear plants. Investing in nuclear power could divert resources away from developing renewable energy sources like solar and wind, which are getting cheaper and more efficient all the time.

Aisha, mother of two.
Thumbnail

I'm all for nuclear power, it sounds like a great idea.
The cost of running the farm, which requires a lot of power is just getting too high. We need a reliable and affordable energy supply to keep our farms running and our produce competitive.
Nuclear power could provide a steady and reliable energy source that doesn't fluctuate with the weather. And if we had nuclear, I wouldn't need to have all those lines running through my property.
Sure, there's risks, but I also think we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket. Renewables like solar and wind have a lot of potential, especially in sunny and windy areas like ours. Some of my neighbours have installed solar panels and are pretty happy with the results. But we can't rely on them so we should definitely go down the nuclear path.

Jasbeer, farmer
Thumbnail

I think it would have been good to build nuclear power like 20 years ago. But now we have better options. It's kind of ironic that the environmental movement cost us so many greenhouse gas emissions by fighting against nuclear power. You know, if we had just followed France and Sweden and built nuclear we would already have a clean grid.

I heard that Japan had super bad regulations and that's why Fukushima happened. Europe has better regulations, but they are shutting down their power stations anyway. It doesn't make any sense. But yeah, here nuclear power costs too much so it wouldn't work.

Garreth, Student.

INFO CARDSISSUE CARDS

Timing

From start to finish a nuclear power station will take at least a decade. Initial investment will take a long time to see a return. During this time will we be contributing further to the release of greenhouse gas emissions?

Cost

Training a workforce of nuclear scientists and building nuclear power stations costs money. Is this cost justified?

Nuclear Waste

Does a permanent solution to nuclear waste storage need to be considered before adding additional waste? Would you volunteer to have nuclear waste stored in your electorate?

Integration with wind and solar

Electricity demand changes hour to hour and season to season. Should Nuclear power be integrated with coal and wind? Combining nuclear with variable renewable power means that nuclear won't be running all the time.

Climate Change

Climate change is melting ice that's high on mountains, raising sea levels and threatening to make hundreds of Australian species extinct. Low carbon energy sources available in Australia include geothermal, hydropower, nuclear, solar and wind. Should we consider one these energy sources or a mix? What is the cost of delaying a decision?

Security

Nuclear waste needs to be securely stored so that it is not stolen by bad actors. Stealing nuclear waste and spreading it around a populated area might not cause as much damage as a nuclear bomb but it could cost the country dearly.

Job Creation

Building and operating nuclear power plants can create high-skilled jobs and boost local economies.

Public Perception

Public fear, opposition and negative perceptions can hinder policy decisions and project approvals.

Energy Independence

Utilising Australia's uranium resources means we would not have to rely on other countries for our energy supply.

Technological Innovation

Advances in nuclear technology, such as small modular reactors offer safer and more flexible options.

Water Use

Nuclear power plants require significant amounts of water for cooling, which can strain local water resources, especially in drought prone areas.

Indigenous Land Rights

Uranium mining projects have in the past caused contention as they have been on Indigenous lands, raising concerns about land rights and environmental justice.

Land Use

Consider the amount of land that needs to be managed for different types of electricity.

Ownership

Nuclear power plants will be in the hands of large corporations or the government, in contrast to solar which can be owned by individuals for a low cost.

Risk Tolerance

No option is without risk. How much risk are you willing to take? How are you calculating risk?

Uranium for nuclear power vs nuclear weapons

Uranium needs slight enrichment in centrifuges for power, but these can be adapted for weapon use. Only highly enriched uranium can make bombs. The International Atomic Energy Agency monitors declared sites for nuclear power generation to reduce risks, though hidden bombs remain a concern. North Korea builds nuclear weapons without reactors, showing nuclear power isn't essential for atomic weapons.

Death rate from accidents and air pollution per terawatt-hour of electricity production

Measured globally, the safest source of electricity, as measured in terms of the number of deaths from accidents and air pollution per terawatt hour (TWh) of electricity produced, is solar, followed by nuclear.
Number = death rate per TWh: Coal - 24.6, Oil - 18.4, Biomass - 4.6, Natural Gas - 2.8, Hydropower - 1.3, Wind - 0.04, Nuclear - 0.03, Solar - 0.02
Note for scale: The Northern territory produced 5 TWh of electricity in 2023

How long does it take to build a nuclear reactor

The CSIRO estimated in their 2023-24 GenCost report estimates a total development time of 15 years, stating that nuclear power could be in operation in Australia no sooner than 2040.
The Barakah nuclear power plant was the UAE's first nuclear power station, completed in 2021, and having a total development time of 13 years. Plant Vogtle, in the US was completed in 2023 after 19 years of development.

Combining nuclear with variable renewable power

renewables and nuclear need a dispatchable energy source like hydro, batteries, or Thermal Energy Storage to match electricity generation with demand minute by minute. Australia would also need electricity production capacity when nuclear power is refuelling and during unplanned outages.

Levelised cost of electricity (LCOE)

LCOE is the total unit costs a generator must recover to meet all costs including return on investment. The CSIRO's GenCost reports the LCOE of various forms of electricity in 2023 as follows: Large Scale Nuclear: $150-250/MWh, SMR: $390-640/MWh, Black coal: $110-210/MWh, Photo voltaic (PV) solar and onshore wind with transmission and storage costs: $95-$150/MWh, PV solar without transmission and storage costs: $50-$85/MWh

Grid connections in renewable and nuclear conditions

Nuclear power requires no major grid upgrades, while renewables need minimal investment below 50% contribution. At 90%, more transmission and storage are needed, with these costs included in the LCOE card. For 100% renewables, estimates vary, with costs ranging from half to double current electricity prices.

Job transition in Germany

Germany's was the world's largest producer of lignite, a type of coal. Lignite mines provided thousands of jobs in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia. The federal government committed the equivalent of AUD $25bn to retrain employees and remediate mine sites. As the area phases out coal in 2030, the successful this transition remains to be seen.

Nuclear Energy Density

Uranium is incredibly energy dense. A chicken egg sized amount of uranium produces enough energy for the average person's entire life worth of energy (235000 kWh). This is the same amount of energy that is produced from 88 tones of coal. However, spent uranium needs to be kept separate from the environment because its radiation can cause DNA mutations.

Australia's capacity for expanding hydro power

One competitor to nuclear power is hydro power, which is dispatchable. Pumped hydro energy storage (PHES), in which water is pumped uphill to later be run through a turbine to produce electricity, is the cheapest way to store a huge amount of power. For example, Tasmania can run on 100% hydro power during a year of average rainfall. Across Australia 22 000 potential PHES sites have been identified, each with over 1 GWh of storage.

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

The Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering concluded in their 2024 report that SMRs could, in theory, provide baseload power or provide dispatchable power in a high renewables grid. However, there are no SMRs running in any OECD country. Project costs and performance can only be accurately demonstrated once a full-scale prototype is built. Several prototypes could be built in OECD countries by the mid 2030s.

Radioactive emissions from power production

The fly ash produced from burning coal contains around 100 times more radiation than the steam produced at nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy. Coal contains trace amounts of uranium and thorium that, when burned, are released into the atmosphere. However, in both cases the radiation levels are low and there is a greater health risk posed by smog and acid rain from coal power plants.

Uranium mining

Uranium generates $812 million in export earnings in the 2022-2023 financial year. This represents less than 1% of Australia's total goods and services exports during that year. In 2016 the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency found that Australian uranium workers are exposed to an additional radiation dose of 1 mSv per year, which is half as much as an Australian domestic airline pilot.

Water use of nuclear power

About two fifths of freshwater in the US is used to cool nuclear power plants. The water requirements of nuclear power plants are similar to the water requirements of coal power plants.

Maintenance

Nuclear power plants in America operated at full capacity more than 92% of the time in 2022. They need to be refuelled every 1.5 to 2 years

Nuclear waste lifecycle

Depleted uranium forms plutonium, requiring storage for hundreds of thousands of years. In the US, it remains at nuclear reactor sites, awaiting permanent storage. In France and Japan, plutonium from spent uranium is extracted and reused as MOX fuel, which powers 10% of France’s electricity and is used in multiple Japanese reactors. Spent MOX fuel is stored similarly to spent uranium.

How long will the world's uranium supply last?

We are highly confident that there is 4.6 million tons of uranium in the ground around the world. There is likely to be another 3.2 million tons, but more measurements need to be made to confirm this. In total, if the world uses uranium at the same rate as it does now, we will run out of uranium in around 130 years.

Lucas Heights waste

The nuclear waste from Australia's only nuclear reactor, the Lucas Heights reactor, is being stored temporarily on site after a deal to permanently store the waste in South Australia fell through.

What happened in 2011 in Fukushima?

The Fukushima power plant was shut down shortly before it was flooded. Some of the emergency diesel generators cooling the reactor core stopped working because of the flooding. Approximately 100 people received radiation doses over 100 mSv. 2 workers received doses over 600 mSv. 100 mSv is about the same amount of radiation from 4 PET scans. One plant worker died due to lung cancer from radiation, diagnosed in 2016.

Regulation From The International Atomic Energy Agency

The International Atomic Energy Agency promotes the safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technologies, including nuclear energy. This agency inspects the world's declared nuclear facilities. This represents another safety mechanism beyond the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency.

Average Greenhouse Gas Emissions Per Gigawatt-Hour Of Electricity

Per gigawatt-hour of electricity produced over the lifetime of a power plant, solar produces between 8-53 tons of CO2 equivalents, hydro power produces 24 tons, Wind 11 tons and Nuclear 6 tons. Solar varies by the technology and location.

Thorium Research

In the future, thorium might be a commercially viable fuel source for nuclear reactors. There are currently only research reactors that use thorium. Thorium is more abundant than uranium and there are claims that there is much less waste produced from this type of reactor. Significant testing, and associated costs would be required to confirm thorium's advantages.

Discover PlayDecide. Download games, prepare, play. GET STARTED

Register to download vote results of this PlayDecide game.Register