Do You Think Nuclear is the Answer
Global Warming is now an election issue and a very crucial one. We are at a crossroads in finding solutions and are faced with a fundamental choice between nuclear and renewable energy that will affect the lives of generations to come. The current government wants to build nuclear reactors along the east coast because of the availability of water.

The MNC Nuclear Free Alliance, an alliance of concerned citizens along the mid-north-coast, ask you to take a few moments to read and reflect before you cast your vote in the Federal election.

We ask you to consider the following claims and counter-claims and decide what you think is true, then continue over the page to see what action can be taken if you, like us, believe the current government’s promotion of the nuclear industry is leading us in the wrong direction. The facts have NOT changed and we believe the so-called debate about nuclear is distracting our focus from the real – renewable energy -  solution that must begin without delay [Information sources on p2].
Current Government & Nuclear Industry’s Claims Green Organisations’ Counter Claims
We need nuclear power to combat climate change.

True or false?
We do not need nuclear power. The government’s support of the nuclear industry undermines real solutions to climate change by discouraging investment in renewable energy systems.
Nuclear power will reduce our CO2 emissions as drastically and urgently as necessary (i.e. by 2030).
True or false?
Nuclear power would reduce very little CO2 and too late  - only 3% less than coal power in the first 10 years of operation with existing reactors and no nuclear reactors could be completed before 2020.
Nuclear power will be cost competitive with coal power.

True or false?
The cost is at least 4x more than coal power and it could only function with massive taxpayer subsidies because the capital & construction costs are so high, also decommissioning & waste storage costs need to be included. [“Generation IV” reactors would be even more expensive than any built so far].
Nuclear power must be in ‘the mix’ because renewable energy technologies can’t supply all of our electricity needs.

True or false?
A mix of decentralized energy systems provided by solar, wind, wave, geothermal and biomass energy, + effective energy conservation would supply all our power needs (including ‘baseload’ [24hr a day]). Renewable energy’s contribution to worldwide energy is, in fact, already greater than nuclear’s.
Nuclear power is safe. People living near reactors need not fear a meltdown because the risk ’is so incredibly low’….if it did occur, few people would die.

True or false?
Nuclear power gambles with our lives. With 440 operational nuclear power stations worldwide, the probability of a worst-case scenario nuclear incident within 40 years is calculated at 40%. Chernobyl warns us to expect thousands of fatalities & continued contamination. [“Gen IV” reactors are an unknown quantity with different but major safety issues].
Nuclear waste can be safely transported and stored in underground repositories.

True or false?
Leakage is inevitable. Guarantees cannot be given. Worldwide (after 50 years of operation) not one safe, secure way of disposing of highly radioactive nuclear waste has been found. The only known way to prevent the buildup of deadly waste is to stop producing it. [“Gen IV” reactors do not solve these safety issues]
We can ensure that countries use the uranium we export only for peaceful purposes.

True or false?
Countries that have developed nuclear bombs in recent decades began with a civil nuclear program. Mining and exporting uranium is a danger to us and risks nuclear weapons proliferation. Depleted uranium used in the USA’s weapons in the Gulf and Iraq has horrific results.