By Jim Hayes

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has finally announced some detail of the Liberal and National parties’ nuclear energy plan, which includes the building of 7 power plants. An attempt to legitimise this by connecting it to the creation of jobs and opportunities for an Australia gripped by a cost-of-living crisis has Already begun, and the Murdoch controlled media is pushing this and manufacturing public opinion.

It won’t be smooth sailing. There are already signs of division within the Coalition. An indicator of this is having some publicly promising that power stations will only be built on a location with the consent of the local community, while others, led by Nationals leader David Littleproud, insisting that this is not so. He says that a Coalition government will make the hard decisions.

There is a good chance the rift will widen with the growth of community opposition.

Another problem is that there are laws against nuclear power in most states. It means cooperation must be found to remove these laws, or else ride roughshod over state governments by finding a way to remove the power of the states to have legislation on this matter.

Conservation organisations, unions, and peace activists have reacted quickly. Thousands have already signed petitions opposing a shift to this dangerous, dirty, and expensive form of energy generation.

The Dutton plan is a dangerous distraction from real action on climate change, which requires stepping up carbon emissions reduction right now, instead of backing off for the next 20 years. A major purpose of the Dutton plan is to continue reliance on dirty fossil fuels.

Nor is there any clear indication about what sort of technology will be used. The reality is that Australia does not have the capability to safely produce power.

The nuclear option is being sold as zero emissions one. What is left out is the generation of radioactive waste, which means pending, money on building storage facilities and the pollution that goes along with it.

It happens that the ambition of the United States to station nuclear powered submarines and ships on Australian soil will require maintenance facilities, and this means somewhere to dump their spent nuclear fuel. It’s no secret that the Coalition has previously raised the prospect of Australia becoming an international dumping ground for nuclear fuel.

Opposition to nuclear power is bound to bring together several movements. In addition to that fighting to end fossil fuels, there are those against nuclear weapons and war, and those striving to asset Australia’s sovereignty and pulling out of taxic relationships like AUKUS and other military packs with the United States and its partner Great Britain. It will bring in those campaigning for reprioritising the spending of tax dollars on the real needs of the Australian community.