On June 19 the Coalition announced their intention to build seven small modular nuclear reactors across the country as part of the transition away from fossil fuels.

The seven sites are Tarong and Callide in QLD, Liddle and Mount Piper in NSW, Loy Yang in VIC, Port Augusta in SA, and Muja in WA. These are all locations of current or former coal-fired power stations.

The Coalition estimates that the plants, which would be government owned, would be operational sometime between 2035 and 2037, but do not have an estimate of how much they will cost.

In a press conference, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton argued that “we have a vision for our country to deliver cleaner electricity, cheaper electricity and consistent electricity” and that his nuclear plan will “underpin a century of economic growth and jobs for the community.”

While the Coalition may be pleased with their new plan, it has been met with harsh criticism from experts and from the media.

Many of the people in the areas where plants are proposed do not want them built due to concerns about safety, and the management of nuclear waste.

Most experts believe that any nuclear expansion would take much longer to construct than the coalition predicts, with the CSIRO estimating that the first plant would not be operational until after 2040 and would cost twice as much as a renewable-only approach to emissions reduction.

The technology Dutton’s proposal relies on, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors or SMRs, is experimental and its viability is still up for debate.

SMRs are much smaller than traditional nuclear plants, allowing multiple reactors to be built on one site, but as a consequence are much less energy efficient. Only one currently exists, built by China, and no attempt to build them commercially has so far succeeded.

Five of the plants are proposed in states which ban nuclear energy by law, and there is currently a moratorium on nuclear in the federal senate. The Coalition have not explained how they will overcome this obstacle.

The proposal has been rejected by every state premier. In Queensland in particular the proposal is opposed by both major parties.

Queensland’s Labor Premier Steven Miles stated “Nuclear is not the future for Queensland”. The Liberal Opposition Leader David Crisafulli agreed, stating “We’ve been very clear that it’s not part of our plan”

The federal Labor government also opposes the policy, with Treasurer Jim Chalmers calling it “an uncosted nuclear fantasy” and Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek calling it “an excuse to extend the life of coal-fired power stations”

The Greens, who have always been opposed to nuclear energy, stated “Peter Dutton’s nuclear ‘plan’ is nothing more than a distraction from both major parties’ support for opening up new coal and gas mines”

Nevertheless, the policy does have support among many in the private sector, including the Minerals Council and the Business Council.

It also seems to have some support among the public. A resolve poll showed 41% of Australians support developing nuclear energy while 37% oppose and the remaining 22% unsure.

However, other polls show that support plummets when asked if they would support nuclear being developed in their area, and when given the choice, voters overwhelmingly prefer renewables to nuclear.

Support for nuclear is generally higher among conservatives, with Labor and Greens voters consistently opposing nuclear development.

This support among the private sector and conservatives, the natural constituents of the Liberals, suggests that Peter Dutton is attempting to shore up his base in preparation for next year’s election.

Dutton has said he is “happy for the next election to be a referendum on on energy and on nuclear”. Labor thinks there is no room for nuclear power in our energy transition. The Coalition now has to convince the Australian public that there is.