This week, the Coalition unveiled their shadow budget, which includes a proposal to introduce nuclear energy into Australia’s energy mix. This plan has ignited widespread debate, with many communities expressing concerns about the potential risks nuclear power poses

The proposal to establish nuclear reactors across the country raises serious questions about public health, environmental sustainability, and Indigenous rights. This article explores the implications for nurses and midwives, emphasizing that nuclear energy is not the ‘clean’ solution it is often claimed to be.

Understanding the proposal 

The Coalition has proposed the development of seven nuclear reactor sites, including Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and larger nuclear plants, to produce energy for Australia by 2035-2037. These sites are planned for New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, and Western Australia. While on paper, it appears that this is a measure to drive down Australia’s carbon emissions, recent evidence from major researchers, scientists, engineers and public health advocacy groups highlight that nuclear energy is dangerous, risky, wasteful, and will take too long and cost too much to be implemented in Australia as a sincere response to climate change. We discuss these concerns below.

Health and safety risks 

Australia has maintained a legislative ban on nuclear power, introduced by the Howard Government in 1998, due to the health risks posed to the community. Studies have shown that residents living within 30km of nuclear plants have higher risks of being diagnosed with thyroid cancer and leukemia. Furthermore, nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima have resulted in catastrophic health and environmental consequences. The explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant resulted in 28 deaths within the immediate months after the event, however the total death could reach 4,000 deaths. Though modern reactor technology is much safer than the Chernobyl reactors, the technology is not immune to disaster. The Fukushima nuclear disaster was linked to a 9.0-magnitude earthquake, which led to a 15-metre tsunami. The tsunamic caused flooding at the plant, which sparked the disaster.

Nurses were among those impacted by the Fukushima disaster. A nurse recalled:

“It was really tough both for the staff who evacuated and for the staff who stayed. The nuclear power plant accident was constantly on the news, and that made people more and more nervous… every day there were more and more staff that couldn’t come in to work… I was in charge of a ward, so I’d end up thinking to myself, ‘Not again. How am I going to share out the work?’”

Researchers have identified that the events have led to observable health effects such as abnormal fetal brain development and increased risk of cancer.

Impact on First Nations Australians 

First Nations Australians have historically disproportionately experienced the adverse impacts of nuclear technology development. Weapons testing between 1952 and 1963 and uranium mining on ancestral lands have resulted in severe environmental, cultural, and health consequences for First Nations communities. The proposed nuclear waste dumps further exacerbate these issues, undermining Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination. Many First Nations communities advocate instead for renewable energy projects that offer a more sustainable pathway for economic development. 

Economic viability 

The costs associated with nuclear power are exorbitant compared to renewable energy sources such as wind and solar. The estimated cost for the capital works of the nuclear plants stands at a staggering $120 billion, with total system costs potentially reaching a staggering $600 billion according to various economic reports. The GenCost 2023-24 Report found nuclear is one of the most expensive energy options available to us.

Time constraints

Nuclear power plants require significant construction time, often exceeding 15 years before becoming operational. A nuclear project in the United Kingdom, will have taken 25 years to construct before it is finally operational. This timeline presents challenges in meeting Australia’s critical energy transition targets and climate commitments.

Water usage

Additionally, nuclear reactors demand substantial quantities of fresh water for cooling, placing immense strain on local water resources. Some models have seen that just one medium nuclear power plant could use up to 50 million litres a day!

Advocating for Renewable Energy 

As nurses and midwives, we have a unique opportunity to advocate for a healthier, more environmentally friendly energy source. Climate scientists and many First Nations communities are supportive of renewable energy sources like wind and solar. Renewables are not only more cost-effective but also offer more immediate job opportunities and regional development, without introducing the health and environmental risks that are associated with nuclear power. By supporting renewable energy projects, we can help mitigate the health impacts of Climate Change, whilst also ensuring that the healthcare needs of all communities are met. 

The proposed nuclear energy scheme in Australia presents considerable limitations compared to renewable energy alternatives. It is crucial for healthcare professionals, particularly nurses and midwives, to stand in solidarity with First Nations Australians and advocate against nuclear technology development. By prioritising renewable energy investments, we can contribute to a sustainable and healthier future for all Australians.