I would sooner believe real nuclear experts with many years practical experience such as Dr Adi Patterson on the benefits and practicality of nuclear energy than this load of lefty BS that seems to be singing from a Labor song sheet. The fact is there is no other major developed nation that is putting all its eggs in one unreliable intermittent "renewables" energy basket and nations such as France with around 70% nuclear energy is a major exporter of energy to other Euro countries such as Germany who tried the "renewables" experiment and found it to be a great disaster.
Nuclear provides reliable, clean, 24/7 energy for up to 80 years - wind and solar, when they are not catching fire or destroyed by storms, have a life span of around 20 years then they have to be disposed of (creating more huge problems) and replaced so they can go on killing millions of birds and bats and marine life while encroaching on arable farmland and native forests home to koalas and other threatened species.
Great plan, Bowen, Albo and co.

China;

Over the past decade China has added 37 nuclear reactors.

China's government has set a goal of selling 30 nuclear reactors to Belt and Road partners by 2030.

Certainly sounds like stagnation to me.

Go and read this.

https://joannenova.com.au/2025/03/tech-giants-quietly-drop-renewables-and-sign-pledge-to-triple-nuclear-power/

David

Two east European countries and a Canadian province have signed memoranda of uderstanding for SMRs. Meanwhile development is proceeding fast, Rolls Royce for example has 600 people working on their version with the UK likely to sign on for several units. Meanwhile Russia, Egypt, UK, India, China, Hungary, Czech Republic and Bangladesh are building or modifying gigawawatt plus units.

When Australia sees SMRs getting built fast at an affordable cost we'll join the bandwagon. Smelters need steady power for days in overcast, calm weather. We need to see this this early on.

The anti-nuclear hack authors of this vacuous and misleading puff piece appear even more clapped out than Australia's coal fired power stations.

Go back a few years and it was commonly believed (by technically inept morons like the authors, unfortunately all too common) that wind and solar would take over the grid so fast that the existing generating infrastructure could be left unmaintained. What happened was that wind and solar have proved to be a very expensive and unreliable failure. Like perpetual motion advocates, the moronic anti-nuke hack authors will argue that wind and solar are the real deal and just need a few tweaks. And yes, those supply issues and price hikes are all the fault of coal fired generation aren't they?

I wouldn't be reading any moronic arguments were it not for the renewable energy con, driven by massive subsidies courtesy of the taxpayer, and some of that money no doubt funds anti-nuclear propaganda. People involved in this impoverishing and environment destroying renewable energy con are national traitors in my opinion.

Remember the French? They built enough nuclear power generation from scratch in fifteen years from the mid 1970s to power their electrical grid one and a half times over. Why couldn't Australia do the same half a century later? Why are the authors blind to this fact as well as the fact that the cheapest dispatchable low carbon power comes from nuclear generation?

Who are those people who wrote that article?
How about some truth Please.
Misinformation:
The following figure, with the added title “FUKISHIMA RADIATION HAS CONTAMINATED THE ENTIRE PACIFIC OCEAN AND ITS ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE!” was repeated over and over again on the web by various “green” groups. https://onewomanjourney.com.au/2025/02/27/the-effect-of-false-fear-of-low-dose-radiation-fake-graph-of-fukushima/

A First Nations man told me recently that Australia spends less than 5% on fire management and 95% paying for the damage afterwards. He wanted to know why we had it so backwards.

We are spending billions of dollars to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide when we produce electricity. Yet, fire releases far more carbon dioxide and has the potential to become much worse. If we stay on our current pathway, we will destroy the ability of our land to be a carbon sink https://onewomanjourney.com.au/2023/11/29/australia-is-almost-carbon-neutral-but-could-go-backwards-very-fast/

From Argentina (25) China (28) plus other countries such as Bangaladesh, Brazil, Egypt, India, Iran, Japan, Korea and Ukraine, there are 62 Small Nuclear reactors under construction as at 4 DAYS AGO.
https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/CountryStatistics/CountryStatisticsLandingPage.aspx