July 17, 2024
Claims that nuclear power uses “substantially more water” than coal-fired power have been labelled as “scaremongering dripping with hypocrisy” by the LNP.
Federal Agriculture Minister Murray Watt, who has been speaking at the Global Food Forum in Brisbane this week, told Sky News on Wednesday there was a real question about where the extra water required for nuclear power generation would come from.
“(The question is) whether some of that water is going to need to be taken off farmers and what farmers are going to have to pay for their water if there is a competing use for that water,” Minister Watt said.
“Obviously, a number of the coal-fired power stations that are looking at closure in the next handful of years would be giving up their water rights.
“(Opposition Leader) Peter Dutton and (National Party Leader David) Littleproud are talking about having nuclear power in place for 80 years.
“We are in a drying climate in much of Australia, so I think there are some really serious concerns about where this water supply is going to come from to power these nuclear reactors and to cool their radioactive cores, and what that’s going to mean for farmers.”
Mr Littleproud responded to Minister Watt by saying the Coalition had made it clear when announcing the proposed locations that their individual capacity “would be limited by the existing coal plants existing water entitlements, so nothing was taken from agriculture or communities”.
“The Labor government’s all renewables approach which firms their renewables with hydrogen requires more water and is already taking water from farmers and towns in central Queensland,” he said.
“Labor’s cancellation of nearly $7 billion of vital dam projects and changing the Murray Darling Basin Plan to buy back an extra 450 gigalitres demonstrates the Albanese government’s hypocrisy and contempt for agriculture.
“For him to talk about water security after this Labor Government changed the Murray Darling Basin Plan to include water buybacks as well as scrapping several new dam projects is hypocrisy of the highest order.”
Related articles:
- Towns ‘Already Back Nuclear’
- Mayor To Consult Community
- ‘Biggest Investment’ In South Burnett
- Nuclear ‘Would Tick Some Boxes’
- No Plans For Nuclear: LNP
- Boyce Welcomes Nuke Plan
- Reaction To Nuclear Plan
- ACTU Launches Campaign
- Tarong Named As Nuclear Site
- MP Labels Powerlines Claim ‘Myth’
- Nuclear? Wait A Bit Longer: MP
- Nuclear Too Expensive: CSIRO
- Nuclear Sites Still Under Wraps
- Nuclear? No Worries, Says MP
- MP Supports Local Nuke Discussion
- Rally Against ‘Reckless Renewables’
- MP Calls For Renewables ‘Pause’
- Nats Target ‘Reckless Renewables’
- Replace Coal With Nuclear: MP
Wait … so “existing water entitlements” will be used? Didn’t the South Burnett council spend a couple of million dollars over the past couple of years on water studies? I thought the council was keen to take over the Boondooma Dam water rights when Tarong closed down to boost local agriculture and maybe even fix up Nanango’s awful water. I guess those plans have now evaporated.
I think Mr Littleproud has overlooked just how much more water nuclear power plants consume than coal-fired power plants, which is 20% to 80% more according to this paper: https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Water-NP-2xA4-2018.pdf
Right now Tarong has such a big allocation that our Council is limited to what’s left – and if a nuclear plant uses this excess water to meet its needs there will be precious little left for residents and probably zilch for irrigators (so bye! bye! farms)
Honestly, I think we deserve better from our Federal MP … much better.