I am pro-nuclear power but also a realist. We have a small population, limited capital and a skills shortage in this area. We can't move as fast or as cheap as countries with existing nuclear capabilities. We are facing a global problem and it makes more sense for us to export nuclear fuel to countries that can increase nuclear capacity much more cost effectively than try and build our own. Same reason we sell iron ore and import cars. The coalition didn't want to continue to subsidize foreign companies manufacturing vehicles in Australia. To be competitive in the global economy you have to play to your strengths.

We had to bring in Argentinian expertise to build our research reactor. If there was multi party support for increased nuclear R&D towards a small scale power generation plant and it wasn't to be at the expense of renewable investment or throw a lifeline to coal and gas then I would be in.

The coalition is serious about nuclear as a political strategy, not as a solution for climate change. They want to cut renewable investment and extend and even increase coal and gas consumption for the benefit of their mates. They hope to win back voters concerned the coalition isn't concerned about climate change (eg Teals) with a decisive strategy and want to paint the other parties as not serious about climate change because they won't consider nuclear.

Everyone concerned about the current situation has been forced to consider nuclear. The killer is the economics. Everyone who has looked into it knows the problems and the massive opportunity costs that would result. Massive state intervention forcing nuclear power on consumers, investors and taxpayers who don't want to pay for it goes against the principles of the Liberal Party and shows how much of a sellout Dutton and co have become.