On Wednesday October 4th, the Greens screened their first anti-nuclear advertisement during the SBS 9:30pm news. Thanks to generous donations from the Australian public, the Greens were able to re-run the ad on SBS news again on 31 October. We also plan to run the advertisement online and on Pay-TV in March 2007.

TOTAL CAMPAIGN DONATIONS SO FAR: $14,815

This is a great start, but to keep the ad campaign running we need your support. We need to raise $5,000 each week to continue running the ad on television and online. Every time we screen the ad, more people will realise it's time to vote Green.

And more Greens in federal, state and local government means we can keep nuclear waste dumps and other nuclear hazards out of Australia. You can help simply by telling a friend about this site, helping to spread the word about these important issues.

Did you know, that Australians cannot insure their homes against a nuclear accident? Read more here.

Australia could soon be a major exporter of uranium, selling to countries such as India in contravention of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). We could also develop a uranium enrichment plant and a major nuclear waste dump, all under the false pretence of tackling climate change – and at the expense of investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency programs.

The nuclear industry is promoting itself as the answer to climate change, but what is the real story?

Nuclear power is the most complex and expensive method of boiling water ever devised. For reasons of cost and safety, nuclear construction is at a virtual standstill in the western world.

Nuclear power is the only energy source that carries the risk of radioactive contamination in the event of an accident or sabotage. It is also the only energy source that produces high-level radioactive wastes than need to be isolated from people and the environment for tens of thousands of years. Nuclear power programmes are directly linked to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction – in the US and UK, but also in China, North Korea and Iran.

In Australia, we don't use nuclear power for electricity, but we are one of the world's major suppliers of uranium. Uranium mining is highly energy and water intensive, and produces enormous volumes of finely powdered radioactive tailings waste.

Every stage of the nuclear fuel chain depends on cheap fossil fuels, from the uranium mines and enrichment plants to waste storage and decommissioning.

Far from being the solution to climate change, nuclear power is very much a part of the problem.

On average, for every tonne of yellow cake produced at a uranium mine more than 660 tonnes of radioactive rock must be processed and crushed.

To power a reactor for one year, on average you need 150 tonnes of yellowcake which equates to a 10,000 tonne pile of radioactive waste that must be managed for next 200 thousand years.

The Greens are strongly opposed to nuclear power because:

1. it's too dangerous
2. it's inextricably linked to nuclear weapons proliferation
3. it's too expensive
4. it unethically burdens future generations with dangerous nuclear waste
5. it is NOT a solution to climate change

Click here to read the Greens submission to the Uranium mining, processing and nuclear energy review

The Greens believe that nuclear energy is too slow to address climate change and is too expensive and too dangerous to be a viable source of energy for Australia, or the world. We also believe that exporting uranium to countries that have not signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation treaty (NPT) will increase the number of nuclear weapons in the world.

Our vision for Australia is one that invests heavily in both renewable energy and energy efficiency. Study after study has shown that the adoption of existing energy efficiency technologies could reduce Australia's electricity consumption by around 30 per cent. This would save businesses and household's money as well as helping to save the planet from climate change.

The Greens also believe that we need to invest in renewable energy generation rather than continuing to subsidise the fossil fuel industry. We believe it is time to change direction, and that it is the Government's role to show leadership. For a billion dollars we could install solar hot water systems on 1 million Australian roofs. We don't need new technology, and we don't need nuclear power, we just need some political leadership.

The main conclusion of the draft report is that between 2020 and 2050, Australia could develop 25 nuclear power stations to provide 30% of electricity needs, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by between 8-18% for a price as low as $40/MWh. An apparently glowing conclusion for proponents of nuclear power, yet closer examination reveals that the nuclear case is shaky.

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions

Apart from the inadequacy of an 8-18% reduction in emissions (relative to the business-as-usual increase), the report omits any assessment of alternative options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The cheaper, faster and safer options of energy demand management, energy efficiency and renewable energy are dismissed. Presenting the report, the Chair of the Taskforce, Ziggy Switkowski, acknowledged that the taskforce had no expertise in renewables. The draft report makes no mention of the numerous studies of options to achieve deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions without nuclear power, both globally and within Australia.

Nuclear power too slow to address climate change

The report confirms that nuclear power is too slow to address climate change because the first reactors most likely would not operate before 2020. Since it takes at least seven years before the energy used in the plant’s construction is effectively recouped, no nuclear plant will be reducing emissions until about 2027. Yet the Stern Review confirmed the widespread view of scientists that we have just 10-20 years to take serious action on global warming if we are to ultimately avoid dangerous climate change.

Financial cost of nuclear power

The report concludes that electricity could be produced for as little as $40/MWh but this figure assumes significant government subsidies in the form of low-interest loans. Australia also would need to invest in new electricity distribution capacity to handle large nuclear reactors. In addition, the report shows that the faster we develop nuclear power the more expensive it will be.

Waste and proliferation

The report also showed that the only profitable aspect of the nuclear fuel cycle for Australia is uranium mining, but uranium accounts for only half of one percent of Australia's mineral exports. The report fails to faithfully present the anti-nuclear arguments, particularly regarding costs, the ethical issues surrounding nuclear waste management and the risks of nuclear weapon proliferation and terrorism. The report concludes that uranium enrichment is not viable in Australia, however it wrongly asserts that enrichment would not create a proliferation risk.

The draft report highlights that a serious policy response to climate change starts with a mechanism to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions and aggressive promotion of energy efficiency, the cheapest and fastest way to reduce emissions, as well as maximising renewable energy sources. Until the government implements these measures it is clear that it is not serious about addressing climate change.

Read more on Senator Christine Milne’s web page.

There are many more ways you can help. Share this site with your friends, your family, and your colleagues. Blog about it. Talk about it. Think about it.

At the upcoming NSW state election send a strong message to the pro-nuclear parties by voting 1 for the Greens. Help us to Rescue the Senate from John Howard at next year's federal election by voting 1 for the Greens. And in the meantime, join your local Green group and get involved in grass roots campaigning.

Authorised by Juanita Wheeler, Ground Floor, Unit 4, Jacobs House, 8-10 Hobart Place. Canberra City ACT - Copyright © 2007 [Privacy Policy]