Inquiry into Nuclear Power Generation in Australia

Policy Engagement Overview

InfluenceMap’s analysis of responses to the House Select Committee on Nuclear Energy’s Inquiry into nuclear power generation in Australia reveals that overall engagement on the inquiry was negative, with support for nuclear power generation commonly coupled with advocacy promoting a continued role for fossil fuels in the energy mix. This negative advocacy was concentrated among several industry associations from the metals and mining sector. In contrast, there was also engagement from the renewable energy and the automobiles sectors opposed to nuclear power generation in Australia while also clearly supporting a renewables-dominated energy system.

Out of the 18 responses (including both written submissions and statements made in public hearings), six responses (33%) supported a continued role for fossil fuels in the energy mix while five responses (28%) advocated for the transition to renewable energy and against the consideration of nuclear power generation in Australia. In addition, seven responses (39%) included either no clear position or a mix of positive and negative positions on the energy mix, generally promoting a technology-neutral approach to the energy transition that includes support for a range of low-emission technologies.

Overall, there did not appear to be support for nuclear power generation in Australia from the corporate responses to the inquiry. Of the 12 respondents included in InfluenceMap’s database, five expressed support for the consideration of nuclear power generation in Australia (Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia (CME), Minerals Council of Australia (MCA), Business Council of Australia, South Australian Chamber of Mines and Energy and Rolls-Royce). On the other hand, three entities were not in favor or opposed a nuclear roll-out (Clean Energy Council, Smart Energy Council and Tesla), while a further four entities expressed concerns about its economic and technical feasibility (Australian Aluminum Council, Australian Energy Council, Ai Group and Squadron Energy).

Policy Engagement Trends

• Support for nuclear power generation coupled with advocacy promoting a continued role for fossil fuels in the energy mix came from the metals and mining sector. For example, both the Minerals Council of Australia and South Australian Chamber of Mines and Energy used their statements to emphasize the need for a longer timeframe for coal to stay in Australia’s energy mix to allow the switchover to renewables and fossil gas. Likewise, the Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia (CME) appeared to support further investment in fossil gas to firm renewable generation. The Australian Energy Council appeared to support a continued role of fossil gas as part of a technology-neutral approach to the energy transition in both its written response and statements made in the public hearing while Squadron Energy promoted the replacement of coal with the “lowest-cost solution we have today,” which appears to include fossil gas for firming renewables while the Business Council of Australia advocated for a technology-neutral approach to the energy transition.

• In contrast, renewable energy associations the Clean Energy Council and the Smart Energy Council as well as Tesla explicitly advocated for the transition to renewable energy while not supporting nuclear power generation in Australia. The Australian Energy Council, Ai Group and Australian Aluminium Council highlighted economic and technological challenges around the development of nuclear power generation in Australia, while supporting a continued role for fossil gas with carbon capture in the energy mix.