Bowen and Albozo are lying again. What a shocker.

Surely the key point is that if nuclear is not economically viable then there is no reason to ban it. I have not heard a retort to this.

To Boffin
You are right - if it is not economically viable then logically there should be no reason to ban it. The problem is that the pro-nuclear lobby is seeking government funding for nuclear power - governments do not have to demonstrate a technology is economically viable.
It highlights a major problem with neo-liberalism. There is an acceptable path to the market - government funds the r & d private enterprise picks it and the profits that go with it up. We have seen this with pharmaceuticals, transport, energy and so on. (It also applies to many renewables) Therefore what tends to happen an ideological case is made for a particular technology, government underwrites it and then that technology is pursued. Governments are not particularly good at long term thinking about the implications of adopting a particular set of technologies. The market is more cautious but if governments subsidise a particular initiative then they may just about be prepared to take the risk.
So we do need to think carefully about the long term implications of going down the rabbit holes of these many new ideas that people lobby for.

"So we do need to think carefully about the long term implications of going down the rabbit holes of these many new ideas that people lobby for."

Well they jumped into the renewable energy fiasco without any consideration as to whether it would work and how much it would cost. With nuclear there is ample real world evidence of it being a low cost, safe and viable source of dispatchable low carbon energy.

There is no complexity or problem with nuclear power, just con artist renewable energy spivs sending Australia into the abyss and a Labor party infested with pathologically anti-nuclear supporters.