The Baseload

Our planet is undeniably getting warmer, and it’s crucial that we take meaningful steps to address the consequences. While left-wing governments advocate for 100% reliance on renewable energy as the ultimate solution, this approach alone will not secure a sustainable future for our grandchildren. On the other hand, our right-wing governments seem hesitant to champion modern solutions such as advanced coal-fired power plants or nuclear energy, both of which will provide reliable baseload.

Australia’s survival depends on having reliable baseload electricity generation—not as an economic luxury, but as an essential infrastructure. Baseload energy refers to power generation systems that operate continuously throughout the year, ensuring stable and dependable output to meet the nation’s needs.

China, Russia, USA, the UK, and most European countries have a secured baseload.  But, Australia, well we missed the turn and  took the yellow-brick road.

Renewable energy has fatal limitations. 

***

Hydro is my favourite renewable energy source. The concept is simple: build a dam on elevated terrain, fill it with water, and channel it down a chute with enough force to spin turbine blades. The result? Electricity. Hydro works exceptionally well in regions like Canada, Alaska, or Greenland. One of the most notable projects in Australia was the Snowy Mountains Hydro Scheme of the 1950s, However, its reliability faltered during drought years. To address this issue, a new Hydro project is underway nearby, using the same principles—only this time, the chute will be built underground, making it longer and deeper, requiring less water. The catch? It's immensely expensive, with costs running out of control.

Wind has been a renewable option for mor than sixty years, but it comes with a major drawback—it relies on wind. Far too often, when passing a wind farm, you'll notice the turbines standing idle. And still turbines mean no electricity I being generated.

Solar is also effective, to an extent. At our previous home, we installed 18 solar panels on the roof, and they worked brilliantly—when the sun was shining. But they were useless at night or during cloudy days.

Some might argue that a few days in the dark is a small price to pay for achieving zero emissions. Fair enough, but let’s pause and consider the consequences of having no reliable baseload energy:

• Banks would shut down. Our economy grinds to a halt. You won't get paid, not will creditors. Australia's credit rating will fall, and your house and credit card repayments will rise.
• Factories that rely on continuous operations—like those with furnaces or process control systems—would shut down. Restarting these operations costs a fortune, and the uncertainty could force remaining Australian factories offshore. This would lead to higher prices, lower wages, and a weakened Australian dollar, possibly dropping below fifty cents. Australia’s reputation as "the lucky country" would be replaced by economic turmoil.
• Exports, especially minerals to key partners like China, would be jeopardized. Unreliable supply chains simply won’t be tolerated. Imports would also be disrupted—shipping would stall at ports, and air freight could cease altogether.
• Health providers would stall, Hospitals would delay non-emergency procedures. Dental clinics would be paralysed. Imagine needing a root canal and being told to wait a week or two.
• Electric vehicles (EVs) wouldn’t charge, public transport would grind to a halt, and even your home comforts—Wi-Fi, TV, and gaming consoles—would be out of reach.

This isn’t some distant dystopian future—it’s a real possibility within the next 20 years if we don’t invest in an electricity network that cane provide reliable baseload power systems.

So, what can we do about it?

1. Plan the phased decommissioning of inefficient coal-fired power stations.
2. Replace some with efficient coal-fired power plants, similar to those currently being built in China.
3. Build three nuclear power plants—one each for Melbourne, Sydney, and Brisbane—simultaneously. Contrary to exaggerated claims, these won’t cost $600 billion each. If built concurrently, $200 billion would more than cover all three - unless we spend ten years consulting the local bird, plant and indigenous pressure groups.

Note: I’m not an expert, however I think I have at least some insight. I worked in the nuclear power generation industry in Canada from 1985 to 1987. During that time, I was managed the manufacturing operations of a large heavy engineering boilermaking business, the largest in Canada. This plant manufactured the boilers and superheater components. While my experience was decades ago, I consider my insights remain relevant today.