Australia is one of the few large developed countries with no nuclear power, and one of the few that bans it. Here’s how nuclear power works, why it’s banned here, and why the debate keeps coming back.
Nuclear power stations generate electricity using nuclear fission, which splits atoms of uranium to release heat. That heat produces steam, which drives turbines, much like a coal power station.
Nuclear power produces almost no greenhouse gas emissions while operating, and can run around the clock regardless of the weather. About 30 countries use it, and it provides roughly 10% of the world’s electricity.
Australia’s ban
Australia has significant uranium reserves and is one of the world’s largest uranium exporters. But it has never had a nuclear power station.
Nuclear power was effectively banned by federal laws passed in 1998, and several states also have their own bans. Australia does operate a small research reactor at Lucas Heights in Sydney, which produces medical isotopes.
Under the AUKUS agreement, Australia will operate nuclear-powered submarines, which has raised questions about building nuclear skills and managing nuclear waste.
The Coalition’s plan
At the 2025 federal election, the Liberal and National parties proposed lifting the ban and building seven government-owned nuclear power stations on the sites of old coal power stations.
The Coalition lost the election heavily, but supporters of nuclear power have continued to argue for lifting the ban.
The arguments for
Supporters say nuclear power would provide reliable, zero-emissions electricity to replace coal, reducing the need for large amounts of wind, solar, batteries and new transmission lines. They point to countries such as France, Canada and South Korea, which rely heavily on nuclear power.
They also argue smaller modular reactors, a newer design being developed overseas, could be built more cheaply and quickly.
The arguments against
Opponents argue nuclear power would be too expensive and too slow for Australia. Large nuclear projects in the U.S. and Europe have run years late and billions of dollars over budget.
CSIRO’s annual GenCost report, which compares the costs of different power sources, has estimated nuclear power would cost more than renewables with storage, and that the first plant couldn’t be running until the late 2030s or later. Supporters of nuclear power dispute some of its assumptions.
Small modular reactors are not yet operating commercially in Western countries, so their costs are uncertain.
Other concerns include safe long-term storage of radioactive waste, public opposition to plants near communities, and the risk of accidents, such as Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011.
The debate is likely to continue as coal power stations close and Australia looks for ways to keep its power supply reliable.
