In order to have an informed debate over nuclear reactors, it’s necessary to have all the facts from both sides of the argument, writes Chris Simpson.

WHO WOULD HAVE thought that nuclear energy would be back on the agenda in 2024? And what drives this renewed interest in nuclear energy?

To explain this, we need to consider at least three factors. First, Australian households are grappling with soaring energy prices and a more general affordability crisis, and this is in large part due to Western countries having lost access to cheap oil and gas from Russia.

Second, we are witnessing an increase in climate change-induced severe weather events and it is no longer controversial to suggest that it’s time for the world to wean itself off fossil fuel.

The third reason is party political competition and the search for a campaign message that appeals to two groups of voters, namely voters wanting to see action to ease cost of living pressures, and voters wanting decisive action on climate change.

It may be tempting to see investment in nuclear energy as a no-brainer and as offering a win-win-win scenario. After all, those proposing the construction of new nuclear reactors will point to the prospect of lower energy bills, decisive action on climate change and job creation. However, as I will explain in more detail below, this would be naïve and to forget several important lessons we learned during the construction of the Open-pool Australian lightwater reactor in Lucas Heights, Sydney.

These lessons are of vital importance now that politicians who claim to be committed to evidence-based policy have started to make spurious claims about the pros and cons of nuclear energy and small modular reactors.

Before going into more detail and describing the more specific lessons we should heed, it may be useful to describe my role in the construction of the Lucas Heights nuclear plant.

I was contacted in September 2003 by an engineer asking if was I interested in the role of mechanical works supervisor for the new nuclear reactor to be built at Lucas Heights. The client was the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) with John Holland, Downer Engineering EDI (JHEDI), in partnership with the Argentinian company INVAP, which was engaged in the project.

This was an offer too good to refuse and within a month, I signed the confidentiality agreement at Lucas Heights and commenced reviewing detailed drawings and designs.    

To offer a little background, I had completed my fitting and machining apprenticeship in Sydney at a time when state governments offered young people valuable skills and knowledge that would underpin their careers. I went on and worked for large and small organisations and built a business in Sydney providing construction services leading up to the Sydney Olympics in September 2000. The confidentiality agreement for the opening ceremony paled into insignificance as I reviewed the detailed engineering drawings now before me at Lucas Heights.

My initial role was to install the reactor pool (RP), service pool (SP) and neutron shutters (NS). I soon realised we were dealing with exacting tolerances where we needed those with exceptional trade skills. I contacted an associate who had completed his apprenticeship with the same government organisation as I. The attention to detail we had learned as young apprentices had paid off, as he had started his own successful construction and maintenance services business.  

With the approval of our project director, we engaged this small group of what I refer to as technicians (tradespeople who are exemplary) and commenced with four in November 2003. They would go on to peak with manpower of over 30 to complete the construction contract.

It’s important to point out we didn’t always get it right; however, it was important to work together with truth, transparency and integrity and admit when we got it wrong.

I was later promoted to building works supervisor when embedding RP, SP and NS in high-density concrete. The reactor became operational in November 2006 and was inaugurated in April 2007. It is the largest investment that Australia has ever made in a single scientific and technological project.

A report from INVAP in 2016 advised:

‘Besides providing Australia and other countries with radioisotopes, the OPAL reactor… offers silicon irradiation services to the microelectronic industry. The reactor has provided quite efficient services and… has become one of the most reliable and available in its kind worldwide. [It has been] fully operational 307 days a year.’

I didn’t remain on the project for the warranty work, commissioning, post-commissioning and documentation work that continued for a long time after the project was advised as “complete”. However, I would go on to be engaged by Downer EDI at Caltex and BP in Brisbane my new hometown. The takeaway for me was we had worked collaboratively on an internationally renowned project of national significance while employing locally. We had found solutions in an industry many of us were new to.

If we are to have a debate around the construction of nuclear power plants, whether we aim to build one or seven, it is essential we get all the evidence on the table in the first instance. We must lead with appropriate and timely pre-feasibility / project management studies and plans that will include environmental impact statements (EIS), risk assessments, quality guidelines and the myriad of criteria, both national and international guidelines that must be a part of the informed judgement process.  

Truth matters and while it is essential we look for common ground, we must expect there will be differences of opinion. Our sole focus must be to be guided by the evidence and prior knowledge to achieve a better Australia for all Australians and to contribute to a better world by respecting and preserving the planet for future generations.