Another case of undergrad politics overruling clear-headed science

There's a bit of vitriol going around. In the not-so-long-term, Bowen will be cut loose by his own team.

It will be unfair because he is spruiking the team position. But count on it. When the change comes, as it inevitably will, Bowen will be left holding the baby that needs changing.

If what first comes to mind when you think nuclear is safety then consider this. The direct deaths from the Fukushima accident were less than a handful. The related deaths just over 2000.

Every two years there are that many deaths on Australian roads. We hardly blink an eye. Bear in mind that was older technology at the time and in the decades since then technology has improved dramatically.

Bowen can spew vitriol at Dutton if he wants. What would make him credible in his anti-nuclear crusade is if he were prepared to disparage Bob Hawke. In fact, Labor likes to skirt the issue of Hawke's commitment to nuclear being the most reliable and effective clean energy.

If Hawke were alive today, he would have to say that Dutton was a big thinker and radical to boot. And he'd say we need that. Hawke said nuclear power would be a win for the global environment and a win for Australia.

Hawke will go down in history as the best Labor prime minister. Does anyone seriously imagine that in the Labor party caucus nobody agrees with Hawke? How long can Labor continue to ignore the views of one of their great icons?

Even better would be Chris Bowen doing a speech to enlighten us as to why we should judge Bill Gates to be an idiot. (Disclaimer: I'm not a great fan of Gates, but I'm certain he is no dope).

Here's what Gates had to say last year:

"I am proud to be investing in a next generation nuclear power plant in Kemmerer and supporting the state of Wyoming as an energy leader in the US," Gates said. "TerraPower's Natrium reactor is an example of how energy innovation can create jobs and strengthen the American economy."

Internationally universities are looking to micro and small reactors to power their campus. There are small reactors in universities around the world. Pretend you're a potential student and check out the universities that are offering courses in the nuclear power field.

But Bowen stands firm in the face of these universities, he disagrees with Bob Hawke and Bill Gates. That's not a great spot for Labor to pitch camp and circle the wagons.

Labor likes to say "trust the science", but it doesn't want to on scientific developments in nuclear power distribution.

Here's what Dr Adi Paterson, who led the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation under governments of both persuasions, says: "I come to the nuclear debate as being the most rational choice for a low-carbon future, and for a reliable and low-cost electricity future for a democratic country."

Oh, the other much quoted exhortation from Labor is: "Don't be caught on the wrong side of history".

Bad luck for them. The nuclear cat is out of the bag. It is not going back.

They might be stuck in the past, still regarding the fearless anti-nuclear campaigner Helen Caldicott as being a guru. In fact, Caldicott and the Greens are examples par excellence of unsophisticated almost child-like political thinking. I'm-right-and-you're-wrong is the stuff of schoolyards.

Sure, there are occasions when it is a fair claim to make. But with the complexities around energy production, coupled with the ever-developing science, sticking with a "no" position just because you thought that years ago, makes you look pig ignorant.

What Caldicott and others should have argued for is better science. A blanket "no" just assumes there's no development, no change.

Just about the dumbest thing you can do is assume that over a medium to longer term things will stay as they are. Who needs to be told that change is inevitable?

If you answered "stupid people" you get the box of chocolates.

Caldicott and her anti-nuclear mates are, in a sense, responsible for the global warming they are so concerned about. If our scientists had been encouraged decades ago to bring nuclear technology to the forefront of their work, the technology today would be much further advanced than it already is.

Bowen is being forced to sprout Labor's narrow, short-term and puny-minded thinking. Hawke was right to say the jump to nuclear required big thinking.

Bowen says that we shouldn't go there because it will take too long. He needs to remember the old Chinese saying which roughly translates: "the long journey starts with one step of your foot".

Bowen, however, is focusing on the larger plants being developed. Small and micro reactors are much quicker. As more countries realise they've been missing the boat economies of scale and wider research benefits will kick in.

He also says its far too expensive. It is true that when you think of the great big old plants both time and expense are serious factors.

READ MORE:

In relation to cost, Bowen needs to reflect not only of the cost of going there, but on the cost of not going there.

We are paying the highest energy prices in the world. Renewables are not as cheap as promised. His ideas just aren't working.

One might think that after both Hiroshima and Fukushima, Japan would be the last to take on nuclear power. Not so. Clear-headed science rather than university glee club politics rules the roost. They have operating reactors and they are building more.

Bowen, the poor sod, is stuck trying to flog Labor's small-minded and short-term thinking. It can't last.