Power Up: Here’s why we need to confirm or debunk energy claims

• Nuance lost in nuclear debate as claims fly
• Misinformation runs rife in North American comparisons to our energy mix
• Cost of energy and electricity and important distinction

Ever since the Coalition decided to go all in with its nuclear push, there have been claims thrown around by both sides of the debate that often need a little digging around to confirm or debunk.

One recent claim was made by a letter to the AFR claiming that California has the greatest penetration of renewables but the highest cost of electricity in the US while Arizona has the country’s largest nuclear reactor complex and the cheapest electricity cost.

A potential basis for this letter might have come from a recent WalletHub article that ranked Arizona has the state with the 49th highest cost of energy.

Astute readers will immediately pick on some warning bells at this stage.

For starters, the US has 50 states, meaning that Arizona doesn’t have the cheapest energy costs, another state (New Mexico) does.

And if you think Power Up’s splitting hairs, note that it says cost of energy. Not electricity.

Drill deeper into WalletHub’s report and you will find that Arizona actually has the 22nd highest cost of electricity in the US with the average household spending US$152 per month on electricity.

California actually has a lower cost of electricity, ranking at 29th with an average household spend of US$145 per month.

Not really the biggest nuclear complex (anymore)

It gets worse if you do a little more research.

While Arizona used to have the largest nuclear reactor complex – the 4.2 gigawatt Palo Verde plant, it has been overtaken (just this year) by the 4.5GW Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia following the commissioning of its fourth reactor in April.

To top it off, the US Energy Information Administration noted that in 2023, Arizona’s total in-state electricity was generated mainly not from nuclear, but gas, which makes up 46% of its energy mix. Nuclear was next highest at 27%.

Arizona does have the lowest cost for natural gas, which might provide more than a hint of what actually lowers the cost of electricity in the state.

By comparison, renewable resources – including hydroelectric and small-scale solar, provided 54% of California’s in-state electricity generation with natural gas adding 39% and nuclear a comparatively small though admittedly still significant 7%.

Hawaii, the most expensive state for electricity, uses predominantly oil for its generation, with renewables providing 31%.

If one really wants to make a case for nuclear, perhaps they will be better off looking at the state of Illinois, which generates more electricity from nuclear energy than any other state. Incidentally, it ranks at 43rd on WalletHub’s comparison.

It must be said though that all the plants in Illinois date back at least to the 1980s if not older, meaning that you’re looking at the long-term advantage of nuclear energy rather than its ability to generate power cheaply in the short or medium terms.

For those interested, Utah, the cheapest on the list, relies on coal (46%) and natural gas (34%) with utility solar contributing 11%, which draws some interesting parallels to Australia.

Apples and oranges – or why we debunk claims

This brings us to Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s head scratcher of a claim, where he says that the Canadian state of Ontario gets cheap electricity because of nuclear.

Famously, he claims that because of nuclear, Ontarians pay only a quarter of the price that Australians pay for electricity.

The problem is that this is a case of comparing apples and oranges.

For starters, prices in the state are set by a government board and also benefit from a C$8bn annual subsidy, meaning that comparison is meaningless at best and downright deceptive at worst.

Rather electricity prices in Ontario should be compared with those in other Canadian states in order to have any level of objectivity. And the winner here is Quebec, which is almost entirely dependent on hydropower.

What this means is simple.

Just because someone makes a claim that sounds authoritative doesn’t automatically make it true.

It behoves us to examine the claim and determine just how much is fact, what’s fiction and how relevant it actually is to our situation.