< Back

Democrats Denounce Nuclear Debate As Diversion
June 7th 2005

NSW Democrats MLC, Dr. Arthur Chesterfield-Evans has called Bob Carr's 'nuclear debate' a diversion from the real issue of NSW current energy use, and a device to force the NSW public to support privately funded coal-fired power stations.

"Why are we having a debate about coal or uranium? This just forces people to choose between one dirty power and another dirty power, when we should really be talking about getting a better result from our very limited resources, " said Dr. Chesterfield-Evans.

Dr. Chesterfield-Evans feels that a debate about nuclear power would just divide the public and destroy an important opportunity to have an open debate on long-term energy.

"Nuclear is not a short-term solution by any definition, so why is it being promoted? It would take ten years or more to make it legal, find a site, build it, test it and start producing power, and that's assuming that everyone is on side. There are smarter and more realistic options that won't provoke this kind of division in the community, " he said.

A long time advocate of demand management and energy efficiency, Dr. Chesterfield-Evans believes that significant gains on energy efficiency and greenhouse gases can only be made through working 'smarter' to reduce energy use, and not through accommodating an indefinite growth in energy demand.

"A real debate would allow much more than coal or nuclear to be publicly discussed, and I believe that it will show that the best option is to work on reducing our demand for energy. That is the only way that we can move over to renewable sources like solar and wind. Bob Carr has signed off on a discussion paper[1] that shows we can reduce our energy use by 30% in 4 years, using available technology. Why isn't that on the table for debate?" he concluded.

[1] Towards a National Framework for Energy Efficiency *Issues and challenges, © Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Working Group November 2003, p.6