Nuclear agencies say it’s too early to know what infrastructure is needed to support submarine program

Rex Patrick says it’s ‘beyond comprehension’ Australia could build a nuclear-powered fleet without a domestic industry to support it

Nuclear agencies say it is too early to speculate what legislative and infrastructure changes need to be made to support a nuclear-submarine project.

A senate economics committee inquiry into naval shipbuilding has been running for two years, but a public hearing on Friday was the first since the federal government announced its intention to acquire at least eight nuclear-powered submarines.

Independent senator Rex Patrick called the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency and the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation to appear. The agencies were quizzed over what nuclear infrastructure and industry would be needed to support the project, and what laws would need to be changed – however, they took most of those questions on notice.

Ansto did confirm it was consulted in March about the plan to buy nuclear-powered submarines, about six months ahead of September’s surprise announcement.

“Initial conversations started in March and we had a number of consultations between then and the announcement,” chief executive officer Shaun Jenkinson said.

Arpansa chief executive officer Carl-Magnus Larsson said his agency was briefed on the plan at the end of June or beginning of July.

The prime minister, Scott Morrison, has said there are no plans to develop a civil nuclear industry to support building submarines. He and defence say the nuclear reactors – which will be procured from the United States or the United Kingdom as part of the Aukus agreement – will not need refuelling, and therefore a domestic industry is not necessary.

Ahead of the inquiry, Patrick said: “It’s just unimaginable, it’s beyond comprehension that someone could suggest we’d be operating a nuclear operator in a submarine in a hands-off manner.

“I also want to understand what safety regime they understand to be necessary for this to be carried out,” he added.

Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull said having nuclear submarines without an industry to support them would be “more plug and pray” than “plug and play”.

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute defence analyst Marcus Hellyer said Australia may not need nuclear power plants or facilities to enrich uranium, “but we’ll still need to perform maintenance and repair on the submarine, including the reactor”.

“You can’t have an effective military capability if you need to return it to the US any time there is a defect,” he said.

Patrick has pointed out that there are no countries with nuclear submarines that do not have a domestic nuclear industry.

“Either way there would be nuclear reactors sitting on hard-stands at Osborne and moored in the Port River,” he said.

“Acquiring, operating and maintaining a nuclear submarine fleet without a domestic nuclear power industry is a challenge that must not be underestimated.”

Labor senator Kim Carr said there would have to be “extensive onshore facilities” to train people in case there’s an emergency, or a malfunction.

“I’d be interested to know how this can be done without the development of the various sustainment industries.”

“We’d need to have intensive training of all personnel to understand the linkages between the reactor and all the other bits of the boat,” he said.

“You can’t just drop it in. It’s not like a battery in a mobile phone, everything’s connected to everything else.”

Australia has a nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights in Sydney for research and nuclear medicine. Australia also has about a third of the world’s uranium resources, and is working to establish a national radioactive waste management facility. Federal legislation bans the production of nuclear power, as do various state laws.

Ansto has said it will work with the US and the UK “to intensively examine the requirements that underpin nuclear stewardship”, and Morrison has said their nuclear science capabilities will be needed.

A Defence spokesperson said Australia, through Aukus, had “committed to working … over the next 18 months to determine the optimal pathway to deliver a nuclear-powered submarine capability for Australia”.

“Australia will leverage technology, capability and design expertise from the UK and US and will also evaluate a variety of considerations, including but not limited to: submarine design, construction, safety, operation, maintenance, disposal, regulation, training, environmental protection, installations and infrastructure, industrial base capacity, workforce, and force structure,” they said.

Shortly after announcing that plans to buy 12 diesel-electric submarines from France would be ditched in favour of the Aukus deal, Morrison was asked to respond to Turnbull’s comments, and those of other nuclear experts, that a supporting industry would be needed.

“We may be speaking about different things here and there’s terms that are thrown about here,” he said.

Contributor

Tory Shepherd

The GuardianTramp

Related Content

Article image
Essential poll: majority of Australians back Aukus submarine pact, but fear it will inflame tensions with China
Coalition has 13-point lead over Labor on voter trust to handle national security, while ALP has 13-point lead on managing climate crisis

Katharine Murphy Political editor

27, Sep, 2021 @9:26 PM

Article image
Australia nuclear submarine deal: Aukus defence pact with US and UK means $90bn contract with France will be scrapped
Scott Morrison says nuclear-powered submarines will be built in Adelaide under the Aukus framework announced with Joe Biden and Boris Johnson

Katharine Murphy and Daniel Hurst

16, Sep, 2021 @1:41 AM

Article image
What are nuclear-powered submarines, anyway? A guide to Australia’s looming military addition
How do they work? What are the pros and cons? We break down the technology in the defence deal with the US and UK

Royce Kurmelovs

16, Sep, 2021 @6:53 AM

Article image
If Scott Morrison is framing the election around fear, national security may not be the slam dunk he's banking on | Peter Lewis
For conservative governments on the skids, defence is usually the best form of attack. But Australians are hardly gunning for a showdown with China

Peter Lewis

28, Sep, 2021 @1:11 AM

Article image
Australia considered buying nuclear submarines from France before ditching deal, Peter Dutton says
Defence minister says French version ‘not superior’ to US/UK one, whose reactor lasts for life of submarine

Tory Shepherd

17, Sep, 2021 @6:54 AM

Article image
Game-changer or irresponsible? The known unknowns on Australia’s nuclear submarine deal
Analysis: Stay tuned as we battle the notoriously secret defence establishment to work out what we are getting and when, and maybe why and whether it’s worth it

Tory Shepherd

17, Sep, 2021 @8:35 AM

Article image
‘That fella down under’: Joe Biden forgets Scott Morrison’s name during historic pact announcement
US president calls Australian prime minister ‘that fella down under’ at press conference for new trilateral security partnership

Justine Landis-Hanley

16, Sep, 2021 @4:14 AM

Article image
Timeline: how Australia’s submarines have evolved from world war one to Aukus
Scott Morrison has announced a deal with the US for nuclear submarines. Here’s a timeline of Australia’s vessels since 1914

Royce Kurmelovs

16, Sep, 2021 @7:56 AM

Article image
Under the radar: the Australian intelligence chief in the shadows of the Aukus deal
Andrew Shearer’s unreported meeting in April with Joe Biden’s top Indo-Pacific adviser may have been the clincher for the Aukus security agreement

Daniel Hurst Foreign affairs and defence correspondent

24, Oct, 2021 @4:30 PM

Article image
China issues submarine warning; Queensland passes voluntary assisted dying laws – as it happened
Paul Keating slams submarine deal, warning of US-China tensions. This blog is now closed

Justine Landis-Hanley, Matilda Boseley (and) Caitlin Cassidy (earlier)

16, Sep, 2021 @8:49 AM