DEAR News Of The Area,
AUSTRALIA’S inland waterways are insufficient for safe operation and cooling of Mr Dutton’s proposed nuclear reactors, according to a new report commissioned by Liberals Against Nuclear (Newcastle Herald, 9 April).
The report, by Professor Andrew Campbell of Triple Helix Consulting, compared available water resources at each of the Coalition’s proposed nuclear sites versus the anticipated water requirements of the planned nuclear reactors, to assess whether there would be sufficient available water from the 2030s to the 2110s.
Professor Campbell concludes that current water availability at the proposed nuclear sites is already insufficient for 6,930MW (50 percent) of the proposed nuclear generation capacity, and that a further 5,500MW (39.7 percent) of planned capacity will be constrained under the most likely climate change scenarios ahead.
He says that nuclear generation would need to be curtailed during hot, dry conditions, unless new cooling water sources were found by diverting water from other uses – industrial, agricultural, residential and environmental – or by increased use of desalination plants and pipelines at great expense.
Notably, a nuclear power station at Liddell in the Hunter Valley would need up to 39 gigalitres of new water volumes each year, and have major impacts on other water users, including agriculture, industry, urban residents and the environment.
This would be a serious problem for Hunter Valley communities, especially during droughts and heat waves, which are expected to be more severe over coming decades.
Campbell also notes that “at Loy Yang in Victoria, Mt Piper in NSW and Muja in Western Australia, existing water availability is already so constrained that new nuclear power stations of the capacities proposed would lack sufficient cooling water to provide reliable power now, let alone for 80 years into the future, even if the majority of existing irrigation water entitlements were acquired.”
In my opinion, this threat to our precious water supplies is an unacceptable risk, on top of all the other nuclear hazards, like routine radiation emissions, nuclear waste problems and the potential for serious accidents.
We must say “No” to Mr Dutton’s risky nuclear reactors.
Regards,
Kenneth HIGGS,
Raymond Terrace.
