Cr Kathy Duff … pleased that Tarong is being considered as a nuclear site (Photo: Maggie O’Shannessy)

June 19, 2024

Mayor Kathy Duff told Wednesday’s Council meeting she was pleased the South Burnett was being considered as a nuclear power generation site.

She had shared this during a series of media interviews which she took part in during a short absence from the Council Chambers.

“We are pleased that we are being considered because there are concerns about the rollout of renewables,” Mayor Duff said.

“It would tick some boxes for us (because) of the potential loss of jobs at Tarong.

“Apparently nuclear has about the same amount of jobs, or more.”

However, she said she would still have to talk to the community, councillors and the council team before making a final decision about actually supporting the option.


6 Responses to "Nuclear ‘Would Tick Some Boxes’"

  1. Looking forward to the unbiased community consultation the Mayor will lead on this idea.

    Designing, operating and maintaining any form of energy generation are not skills usually found in local government representatives.

    I feel for community members who live close to Tarong and the Nanango and Maidenwell areas, now knowing the mayor is willing to consider disposing nuclear waste within their backyard, if this idea got up.

    Would they have to move and who pays, because they are living too close for their safety to this form of electricity generation?

    Looking at a transmission tower or a wind and solar farm is a very different discussion to contemplating whether you want to live nearby to toxic waste being buried in your backyard.

    Without committed funding to expanding water storage in the South Burnett, this idea cannot be genuinely explored.

    I do hope the leadership of the South Burnett Council is able to demonstrate neutrality in the face of a deliberate political kite-flying exercise.

    This idea is not our region’s fight, or to be divided further over.

    The outcome for someone ill is always more promising when a farmer doesn’t sub in for a surgeon!

  2. Nice to have some political backbone. Good on you Kathy, Colin, David and Peter.

    Anti neucs, have you never had an X-ray ct- scan, ultrasound or radioactive iodine for thyroid treatment. I’ve had them all. Not short on birthdays and still breathing.

    No, my eyes don’t glow green at night, nor lightning burst out of my nostrils.

    Wake up Australia. It’s all about vested interests and control.

    Utter hypocrisy, destroy the planet, bulldoze rainforest to save the planet, a mass of wind turbines.

    Where does the steel come from for endless transmission towers, where does the copper come from for cables? Haven’t noticed any growing on my fruit trees so must assume it is dug out of the ground, but horror of horrors, can’t dig up uranium or gas or oil.

    Wake up Australia. Ask the hard questions, do the research.

    God has given us a beautiful country with a wealth of resources to be wisely used.

    Nuclear is part of the mix, renewables also have their place.

    Snowy one has been around for a long time. Snowy two is the disaster of the century.

  3. Bruce, let’s not overlook the fact that the same people who gave us the disaster of Snowy Hydro 2.0 are the same people who now propose we should go nuclear..

    Nor should we overlook the LNP’s announcement today (Thursday) that apart from over-riding the States to get these nuclear plants built, they’re also willing to do it regardless of what local communities around these plants think.

  4. The public statements on both sides of the energy debate – “renewables” and nuclear – sound half-baked. It doesn’t sound very convincing when both parties spout unrealistic scenarios, failing to count and reveal the true costs, risks and rewards of their favoured approach.

    It sounds like this issue is the hill both sides are going to die on at the next election and any rational debate is unlikely… well they are politicians, after all.

    Some better research, assessment and presentation would be more likely to inform and convince the public in my opinion.

  5. Given our Olympic athletes are going to Paris where 75% of electricity is produced by nuclear facilities, will our athletes be given hazmat suits and Geiger counters for safety while competing? Will our MPs travelling on government money to France, USA, China and South Korea be given the same safety equipment as our athletes?

  6. No, but they would have to wear hazmat gear and carry geiger counters if they were visiting Fukushima or Chernobyl.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.