Australia news live: Dutton claims Coalition plan for nuclear energy will be 44% cheaper than Labor’s renewables-focused alternative

Asked about power prices in the near term, Peter Dutton said “we’ll have more to say about our energy policy in relation to the near-term”.

He didn’t outline a near-term plan, but instead criticised the government, arguing:

The government has ramped up electricity prices after promising to reduce by $275 and people now playing $1000 more than what Labor had promised.

Dutton says Australia has ‘no hope of reaching net zero by 2050 without nuclear’

A reporter notes that the politics of nuclear are divisive – what can Australians expect in the next term?

Peter Dutton argues that Australia is at a “crossroad” because “if you look at every other comparable economy around the world, they have adopted or signed up to the use of nuclear energy”.

He argues there is “no hope of reaching net zero by 2050 without nuclear in the system firming up renewables”.

I think Australians are smarter than what the prime minister credits and Australians are well read, they understand what is happening internationally …

He touts the 44% figure again, claiming the Coalition’s nuclear policy would “bring prices down by 44% compared to Labor’s cost”.

Dutton makes election pitch on energy prices

Taking questions, Peter Dutton is making an election pitch on energy – arguing a Labor government would lead to higher energy prices. He told the press:

What I would say to every Australian is at the next election people can vote for higher electricity prices under Anthony Albanese or they can vote for the system where we won’t have blackouts, will have consistency of power, but importantly for families right now, will have cheaper cost electricity.

Earlier this morning, Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce was unable to promise that power prices would go down over the next term under a Coalition government, under this policy.

Coalition claims its nuclear policy would lead to 44% reduction in power prices

The shadow treasurer Angus Taylor claimed the Coalition’s nuclear plan would lead to a “44% reduction in the cost of energy for Australian consumers” – he did not qualify this but we assume he means in comparison to modelling of future power prices under a different plan, rather than a reduction on current costs.

The shadow climate change and energy minister, Ted O’Brien, is also touting the 44% figure, and said:

Frontier Economics has now crunched the numbers and shown that it is 44% cheaper to get to net zero through a balanced energy mix when you have nuclear in that mix. This is a direct impact on families and businesses right across the country.

O’Brien claimed that the renewables and nuclear pathway is 37% cheaper than a renewables-only pathway.

Littleproud pitches nuclear policy to regional Australia

The Nationals leader David Littleproud is next to speak, and he claims that “there is no country the size of Australia’s industrial scale that has gone down the path of renewables only”.

He pitches the Coalition’s nuclear policy to those in regional Australia, saying that teals in the city “want us to go down an accelerated path of renewables”.

Understand the burden you are asking us to bear. There is another way to achieve it.

Peter Dutton has just raised the Ontario example – which our team has already fact checked in the past:

Peter Dutton says bipartisan nuclear support possible post-Albanese leadership

Peter Dutton about to hold press conference in Brisbane on nuclear costings

The opposition leader Peter Dutton is about to address the media in Brisbane, where he is expected to outline the Coalition’s long-awaited nuclear energy costings.

We’ll bring you all the key points and claims here on the blog – and stay tuned as Adam Morton and Peter Hannam will be providing fact checks for us throughout the day.

The Frontier Economics report unpacking the costings is also due to be released around now. Our Canberra team will be looking at this and bringing us the latest.

Labor’s Patrick Gorman says Coalition forgot WA in nuclear modelling

The Labor MP for Perth, Patrick Gorman, has taken aim at the Coalition for apparently not including Western Australia in its nuclear modelling.

As reported by the Australian, the modelling does not include Western Australia, which is earmarked for a nuclear option under the Coalition plan.

Gorman wrote in a post to X:

How loose has Peter Dutton been with his nuclear reactor costings? So loose he forgot an *entire* state. ‘The modelling did not include Western Australia.’ The arrogance is astounding.

Climate Council accuses Coalition of ‘cooking the books’ on nuclear costings

The Climate Council has labelled the Coalition’s nuclear modelling as “misleading” and leaving out “big ticket items like the costs of dealing with radioactive waste”. It has accused the Coalition of “cooking the books” with their nuclear costings in four ways:

1) Ignoring the costs of keeping our ageing coal-fired generators operating for longer, which would cost a bomb in constant maintenance and fault repairs, and produce far more climate pollution.

2) Failing to account for Australia’s growing electricity needs, producing up to 45% less power than our current plan by 2050. The Australian Electricity Market Operator expects power generation to double by 2050, and assuming any less is inaccurate.

3) Underestimating the cost and timeline of building nuclear reactors, which international experience has shown cost on average 2.2 times more to build than their initial estimate, and take at least 15 years for construction alone.

4) Excluding significant and certain costs from their estimates, including the costs of managing highly radioactive nuclear waste.