CSIRO price estimates for nuclear power have ‘come back down to earth’
Centre for Independent Studies Energy Program Director Aidan Morrison discusses the price estimates from CSIRO regarding …
source
February 25, 2026
Headlines
"Harmony in Every Heartbeat
Centre for Independent Studies Energy Program Director Aidan Morrison discusses the price estimates from CSIRO regarding …
source
The CSIRO have admitted they know absolutely NOTHING about Nuclear Power. Are they the right people to ask to do a GenCost report on Nuclear Power? OF COURSE NOT!
The cost of decommissioning the renewable infrastructure is not included either. But the cost of decommissioning a power plant IS included in the costing.
Coal and gas (upto 80% of our baseload power) are the reasons your power bills are high. Don't believe these quacks
And here to make sense of it all is a senseless used car salesman from a Lobby firm for the LNP 🤣
CSIRO BOM THE ONLY THING THEY PROJECT ARE F%&KEN LIES
I am not stupid. – I have already refused to apply for the job of Safety Manager at Lucas Heights. – Nuclear power sites – 'We should address issues as they arise, AND NOT on the basis of what might happen' – LNP safety culture ?
The only thing Albo can manage is Xi's appendage in his back side and he's addicted.
The only way to compare is to have both options rigorously explained in Bankable Feasibility Studies which, by definition, include every cost from inception, through construction and operations, and ending in decommissioning. A paper or a study here and there is good for nothing but toilet paper.
CSIRO has unmasked itself – its yet another in the long list of once trusted – now NOT trusted – institutions that has been absorbed into the woke matrix.
Diversify, coal gas wind solar lithium hydrogen.
Please LOOK UP Copenhagen Atomics – Why Thorium will be a Game-Changer in Energy …..modern Nuclear plants is a must for australia.
lol so the best they can come up with is that nuclear is twice as expensive only if its lifetime is half what it actually is. Wouldn't that make it the same price, which will inevitably will come down.
Capital loves nuclear. massive gifts from the public purse to build, big, centralized generation thats able to captured to milk money.
there is resiliance in small, distributed, connected but independent generation and storage.
Molten salt thorium reactors for heat and power look promising though. fail safe tech
US , Canada,UK including oil rich Sudia Arabia are going nuclear.
In Aust it's about lifting the ban , so at least a discussion can be had.
No nuclear power for Australia, too much expensive waste to get rid of. Just trying to make money for people who sell the technology.
Such a bad idea
What did green Victorians use before candles? Electricity ⚡️
the greens had banned nuclear energy jacinta allan and john pesutto are useless lets hope dutton will build it all nuclear will create jobs
No one is talking about nuclear waste, where is it going and cost to store it.
It shows again that the intelligence level of what's coming out of the uni's is what where seeing with very short sited incites to Nuke on show. You reap what you sow
What is the Cost of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Station ?.
One Trillion Dollars ?
Two Trillion Dollars ?
Five Trillion Dollars ?.
Factually 40 Years Later, Chernobyl Continues to Cost!.
Australia would be better Solving the Geothermal Energy Problem and convert coal power watch this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psyCWvavYt0&list=WL&index=1
The CSIRO parrots 🦜 anything the government of the day spins.
It's SKY. That's all one needs to know. They will always be promoting the Gina LNP. And a few lies here and there always helps.
Desperado oz
Surley labor pollies must have a financial interest in renewables
One only now needs sensible, intelligent politicians and they are like Hens teeth's in the Labor Party.
Is the CSIRO even relevant these days ? What do they do ? What have they achieved ? How much does it cost to run them ? And what do we get for the money ? Seems like theyre all about pleasing people and not about science.
The CSIRO have no credibility they are a shadow of what they once were. Now a political wing of the left.😊
Seriously this rubbish has to stop. I’m absolutely astounded that the CSIRO put a piss poor effort into their research. Then again those who cannot get a job in the real world need to do something. Just Google the number of new Nuclear power stations in the last 10 years “About 60 reactors are under construction across the world. A further 110 are planned”
Bugger me. That’s amazing. Then again as Keating aptly put it “Australia is the arse end of the world”
Bowen is telling the rest of the world they are stupid. Keating was right.
The rot has to stop 🇦🇺
The CSIRO has lied to us about climate change so it is no surprise they are lying about the price of nuclear. CSIRO is funded by the government so they will provide them with their green agenda which is precisely what Albanese and Bowen want. They go woke and we the people go broke. Sack this government or pay a huge price.
Yeah looking at Snowy Hydro it's alot better.
With a life span longer that a Big windmill ….
Nuclear won't enter the equation in any practical way. The pathway to renewables is sound and needs to focus on expanding. The nuclear red herring is merely a political spoiler to bring chaos and confusion by people who fundamentally don't believe in climate change and are trying, by any means, to get elected, grab what they can and pretend everything is ok. This is as obvious as it is obscenely ignorant. Mr Dutton is the leader of the obscenely ignorant.
Modeling is the biggest scam word .climate is all modeling no facts spend billions on a guess .china are not as dumb as our media
When it comes to climate change statistics & agenda’s, now days scientists will always find the right answer for who is paying for the research.
China built a new state of the art 1400 MW Thorium Molten Salt Reactor in 5 years for $8.5 Billion dollars, it has been online for over a year now with a second reactor of this type to be finished in the next year.
Qld Premier Steve Myles wants to build a pumped hydro power station with a starting price of $18 Billion dollars and a fraction of the energy output & this could take 10 years.
It took very little research for me to realise with all its benefits that nuclear energy is the only way to go forward.
I very much doubt any of these numbers include disposing of the waste and decommissioning, which are huge expenses in the life cycle of nuclear power.
The waste is highly dangerous for many thousands of years, has anyone built a structure that can last that long? These days we're lucky if a new apartment block lasts 20 years.
Tanya Plibersek said on 23/05 that the cost of nuclear was 5X renewables. She must have some secret data sources.
Hows snowy hydro 2.0 going 😂
Could have built 4 SMR for same money
And there saying nuclear is expensive
How can anything from a non renewable resource be "sustainable?"
CSIRO prefers the Snowy 2 scheme. No matter how many times the borer gets stuck and no matter the billions wasted.
You do not build 1 nuclear plant you build smaller cheaper ones for Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne Adelaide and Perth. Darwin is too small so run it off a gas powered plant for when solar and wind do not produce enough power. Tasmania has to small of population also so it would be better with a gas plant and wind. They would always have wind down there. All the nuclear plants would be near the coast so never a chance of a meltdown as there is always access to water and Australia is extremely stable from earthquakes.
Have a lok at the price of Hinkley point c 41 billion and not finished, on going cost's of storage is not cheap either.
CSIRO has invested our money in solar. It has a reason to champion renewables. It is not the government scientific agency that deals with nuclear energy.
When one corrects the flaws in the Gencost report it is an absolute fact that Nuclear on a whole of life basis is 50% of the cost of renewables. On a per kw cost basis it may be more expensive but it is generating 100% of the time whereas renewables are only able to achieve generation on average 26% of the time.
They had to change sooner or later, because the numbers coming in from overseas was making them look like a bunch of idiots
We have shitloads of coal.
Did they do a cost analysis inregards to security and clean up if the reactor is targeted by foreign adversaries of domestic threats? I like centralised reliable cheap power, but at what costs?
What is there to even talk about.
France which is about 70% nuclear produces electricity at half the cost of their German neighbours who went all out with renewables
The French also power a quarter of the entire European power grid.
All those countries who told the world they. didn't want nuclear but they're connected to the grid.
CSIRO…one minute they're saying renewables will cost ONE TRILLION DOLLARS, and now they're saying that nuclear is going to be too expensive?? Albo must be paying them a fortune!
The difference is one unit of nuclear generation infrastructure equivalent renwables would require at least 4 to 5 units of infrastructure once you factor 24*7 availability. And that's not including the 25000km of transmission wires. (Noting that's 40% of the bill already)
6 – 9 billion U.S. for a reactor. The CSIRO is full of sh$t. Clearly sold out and just lie.
Considering solar has to be replaced every 20 years and nuclear 80 years, and solar you have to build transmission lines and batteries, comparing the two over 80 years makes solar 2x more expensive.