Nuclear power is the use of nuclear reactions that release energy to generate heat, which most frequently is then used in steam turbines to produce electricity in a nuclear power station. Australia currently has no nuclear facilities generating electricity. Australia's extensive, low-cost coal and natural gas reserves have historically been used as strong arguments for avoiding nuclear power. Proponents argue that nuclear energy is now safe and emits much less carbon emissions than coal plants. Opponents argue that recent nuclear disasters in Japan prove that nuclear power is far from safe.
Statistics are shown for this demographic
Local Government Area
State Electorate
Response rates from 6.8k Sydney voters.
50% Yes |
50% No |
42% Yes |
38% No |
6% Yes, temporarily while we increase investment into cleaner renewable alternatives |
11% No, we should invest in cleaner alternatives such as wind, hydroelectric, thorium, and geothermal |
1% Yes, as long as there is no public subsidy |
|
1% Yes, and nationalise the industry |
|
0% Yes, but with public subsidy |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 6.8k Sydney voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 6.8k Sydney voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Sydney voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@927GNLF3yrs3Y
Yes, specifically low pressure high temperature thorium reactors.
@9ZMNRBG6 days6D
Yes, but the focus should be on cleaner alternative and it should be used and prepared for in case of electricity shortages
@9ZLYK7F1wk1W
Nuclear energy should be explored if it it allows us to meet our economic and environmental objectives. It should only be subsidised if the use of it uniquely saves the government money elsewhere or aligns with Australia's long-term national interests.
@9WV5Y6Z4wks4W
Federal government question. We should focus on safe renewable energy sources like hydroelectric, thorium, geothermal, wind, soalr, and water powered energy. Only yes -if it's safe
@9JR2TMZ10mos10MO
yes and no. Its fast, efficient and helps with environmental and medical and all sorts of studies. But the uranium used in it can effect the health of humans. If we are able to work with it in affordable cost and between our safety measures we should more than happy to be continuing with its work
@9J4S9JL10mos10MO
Government have no control on solar provider prices. In any circumstances the buy back price should be less than 5 year. Should fine to solar provider those are charging more than the market. Every solar quote must approved by authority. I have never received subsidy as advertised. No any service provider provide any details of subsidy. Government should put the commossion.
@9G7PW521yr1Y
Yes, whilst nuclear energy has its negatives, it is also very useful and when used properly it is beneficial for society.
@9FFQK5S1yr1Y
yes but as a backup for cleaner alternatives, we should prioritise and transition to clean energy renewables first
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Nuclear Energy” news articles, updated frequently.
Join in on the most popular conversations.
