The Noisy Trunk

You try wrtitng with these feet…

Dutton's nuclear deception - Case study Canada

Dutton drag into nuke2

The #MSM are priming us for #PeterDutton, ACTUALLY, possibly, maybe, telling us about his #Nuclear fantasy plans. Ok, we'll wait.

One of his and flange whacker #TedOBrien's mantra's, and indeed goggle eyes #DavidLittleproud today, is the 80 year (now they are dropping in 60 year) LIFESPAN of the nukes.

Let's look into what Dutton and the #MSM DON'T tell us: A case study…

Point Lepreau (Canada): A Reality Check on Nuclear Longevity

Peter Dutton and the Liberal Party are touting the idea that nuclear plants can last 60 to 80 years, but the reality is far less rosy. Let’s look at the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station in New Brunswick, Canada, as a real-world example to debunk these claims.

Built in 1983, the plant was budgeted at $466 million CAD (1974 dollars). However, costs ballooned to $1.4 billion CAD by completion, a staggering 300% overrun.

Read that again - THREE HUNDRED PERCENT BLOWOUT

Adjusted for today’s dollars, this amounts to an overrun from $4.07 billion AUD to $5.2 billion CAD —an eye-watering example of budget blowouts in nuclear construction.

Despite claims of longevity, the plant required a major shutdown for refurbishment after just 25 years, starting in 2008. The refurbishment cost an additional about 9.83 billion AUD. in today’s dollars) — more than double the original construction cost.

Read that again, "more than double the original construction cost." after only 25 years.

Even after refurbishment, the plant can power about 500,000 homes, not exactly the transformative solution for energy demand Dutton claims nuclear power would bring.

The Liberal Myth of Longevity

This example shows that nuclear plants aren’t the "build once, forget forever" solution being sold. Point Lepreau didn’t last 60 or 80 years—it needed a massive overhaul in less than half that time. Add to this the astronomical costs of construction, delays, and refurbishment, and nuclear becomes a financial black hole for taxpayers.

The Question for Peter Dutton

If a 25-year-old plant requires billions in refurbishment, how exactly does he plan to make nuclear affordable and long-lasting in Australia? And if it costs billions to serve just 500,000 homes, how does this solve Australia’s energy crisis?

Nuclear may sound like a silver bullet in political speeches, but the reality is as clear as Point Lepreau: it’s costly, short-lived, and far from a panacea for modern energy challenges.

Peter Dutton is a dreamer. #DuttonDreams