There is a real risk of "catastrophic failure" if Australia adopts nuclear energy, a federal parliamentary inquiry has heard.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Ziggy Switkowski - who led a Howard government review into the power source - has drawn attention to the nuclear disasters of Chernobyl, Fukushima and Three Mile Island.
"After those events, the possibility of catastrophic failure within the nuclear system is non-negligible," he told the committee in Sydney on Thursday.
Issues also arise around managing nuclear waste and could be a cost burden on future generations for hundreds of years, Dr Switkowski said.
"Australia has even struggled to get traction to build a small low-level facility in central Australia."
Dr Switkowski - who heads NBN Co - presented a list of nuclear energy pros and cons to committee members.
Positives included nuclear being efficient and weather resilient with low greenhouse gas emissions, which Dr Switkowski compared to wind and solar.
He said the window for "large nuclear generation" had closed for Australia, with the emerging technology of small modular reactors the viable option on the table.
Small modular reactors are factory-produced and installed on-site.
He could see them being used in regional Australia to support mining sites and desalination plants.
Dr Switkowski also acknowledged how divisive nuclear is, which is reflected in public submissions to the inquiry.
Listing the potential negatives, Dr Switkowski said nuclear did not become cheaper with increased production, unlike wind and solar.
Nuclear projects are also so long-term they would cover at least five political cycles, he added.
Federal Labor doesn't support reversing the current moratorium against nuclear energy.
Dr Switkowski's review from more than a decade ago found Australia would need about 25 reactors to supply one-third of the nation's electricity supply by 2050.
But a lack of a coherent energy policy over that time means this window has closed.
Liberal committee chair Ted O'Brien said the inquiry had to answer three main questions, beginning with whether nuclear is feasible, suitable and palatable.
"To be feasible, it would have to stack up on economic, technological and capability grounds," he said.
"To be suitable, it would have to make sense on environmental, safety and security grounds. And to be palatable, there would have to be an appetite among the Australian people."
The committee heard from several government agencies on Thursday, including the Australian Energy Market Operator and the Australian Energy Regulator.
It will consider waste management, health and safety, environmental impacts, affordability and reliability, economic feasibility and workforce capability.
Australian Associated Press
