CSIRO chief warns against ‘disparaging science’ after Peter Dutton criticises nuclear energy costings

Australia’s science agency, CSIRO, has rejected Peter Dutton’s claim its estimates of the cost of renewables are unreliable.

CSIRO chief executive, Douglas Hilton, has warned that maintaining trust “requires our political leaders to resist the temptation to disparage science”, rejecting Dutton’s comments about its GenCost report.

But the opposition leader has doubled down, repeating his incorrect claim on Friday that the report does not properly cost renewables and transmission required to integrate them into the grid.

On Tuesday, Dutton claimed the annual CSIRO report that had included estimates of costs for small modular reactors – which are not yet available commercially – was “discredited” because it “doesn’t take into account some of the transmission costs, the costs around subsidies for the renewables”.

Despite Dutton’s claim, the most recent GenCost report does include the cost of integrating renewables such as solar and wind into the electricity grid. That is, it includes the cost of building new transmission lines and energy storage such as batteries.

On Friday Hilton said that he would “staunchly defend our scientists and our organisation against unfounded criticism”.

“The GenCost report is updated each year and provides the very best estimates for the cost of future new-build electricity generation in Australia,” he said in a statement.

“The report is carefully produced, its methodology is clearly articulated, our scientists are open and responsive to feedback, and as is the case for all creditable science, the report is updated regularly as new data comes to hand.

“The GenCost report can be trusted by all our elected representatives, irrespective of whether they are advocating for electricity generation by renewables, coal, gas or nuclear energy.”

The most recent GenCost report estimates a theoretical small modular reactor built in 2030 would cost $382 to $636 per megawatt hour. It says this is much more expensive than solar and wind, which it puts at between $91 and $130 per MWh even once integration costs are included.

Hilton said that “science is crucial to providing the data and models that allow society to tackle profound challenges … like the Covid-19 pandemic, transition to net zero, keeping Australian industry productive and sustainable, and protecting our unique biodiversity”.

skip past newsletter promotion

Sign up to Afternoon Update

Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

after newsletter promotion

“For science to be useful and for challenges to be overcome it requires the trust of the community.

“Maintaining trust requires scientists to act with integrity. Maintaining trust also requires our political leaders to resist the temptation to disparage science.”

Hilton insisted that “CSIRO’s scientists and engineers can be relied on by the community to work creatively, assiduously and with integrity”.

On Friday Dutton doubled down on the comments, despite the rebuke, telling Channel Nine his point was “we need to compare apples with apples”.

“And at the moment that report … doesn’t take into consideration all of the costs around renewables,” he claimed, repeating his original error.

“I’m strongly in favour of renewables, but we need to keep the lights on and we need to keep power prices down.

“And the fact that most other developed countries are adopting … zero-emissions latest generation nuclear technology means that we could get greener power, we could get cheaper power, but also reliable power as well,” he said, without evidence.

“All I’m saying is, let’s have a fair comparison. Instead of a skewed one. And that’s why I was critical of that particular report, not of the CSIRO in general. And I think it was a fair point to make.”

The Coalition is yet to produce a costed energy policy, despite arguing to lift Australia’s ban on nuclear energy and suggesting it will nominate six potential sites for nuclear reactors.

On Tuesday the shadow energy minister, Ted O’Brien, told ABC 7:30 “our view is we should not be closing our coal-fired power stations prematurely” – comments that were seized on as an indication the Coalition will prolong their life, worsening greenhouse gas emissions.

The climate change and energy minister, Chris Bowen, has repeatedly rebuffed Dutton’s nuclear push, citing cost – including an estimate from the energy department that replacing fossil fuels with nuclear could cost $387bn.

Bowen has accused the Coalition of using “the rightwing playbook of 2023 – populism, polarisation and post-truth politics” in making false claims about the potential for nuclear power in Australia.