The fight to fix Australia’s climate-cult-driven electricity mess is on thanks to Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plan released this week.

Family First backs nuclear power because what is being rolled out does not work and it is hurting family budgets through high electricity prices which in turn are driving inflation and cost of living up.

Memes of two-headed fish and three-eyed koalas are being pumped out by Labor politicians who are acting more like juvenile student politicians than participants in a serious debate about energy.

Even supposedly serious journalists are writing the nuclear power plan off as a fantasy that is too expensive.

The mantra the renewables are cheap is just that a mantra.

Work released last July shows the bill to 2060 for decarbonising Australia’s economy is an eye-watering $9 trillion. To meet 2030 targets we’re up for $1.5 trillion.

These are not figures “plucked from the air” as the Sydney Morning Herald’s David Crowe today accused Dutton of doing.

This is analysis by Net Zero Australia, whose report says is a partnership between the

University of Melbourne, the University of Queensland, Princeton University, and management consultancy Nous Group.

Even if the CSIRO’s anti-nuclear biased modelling on costings for seven power plants comes in at $60 billion.

As former Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson keeps saying, we can’t get good policy from a bad debate.

There is no country in the world which runs an advanced economy on windmills and solar panels.

Battery technology to firm renewables at the scale needed to power a city or industry has not been invented.

Yet Australia is rushing to renewables thanks to both sides signing up to net zero without doing a proper economic or engineering analysis.

Former BHP chairman Don Argus said the taxpayer “subsidies that we’ve given out so far on just wind and solar are mind boggling”.

“The costs of transitioning from an established electricity system (are) huge and those big-bang approaches have never worked. It is time that people paused and demanded that we do some comparative analysis to understand what these costs are.”

This is exactly what Family First has been saying for the past two years.

Finally, a debate which has the potential to set Australia free from the economically damaging path it is on is underway.

The only feasible way to get to net zero is through coal-to-gas-to-nuclear.

As Jo Nova points out, coal power could save the trees we are killing to transition to net zero.

This is unnecessary environmental destruction and trampling of farmers’ property rights when clearing bush to build 10,000 kilometres of new transmission lines to dispersed windmills and solar factories could be avoided with nuclear plants placed on old-coal-fired power station sights.

On top of the environmental cost, renewables are not cheap nor are they reliable.

This week’s opening of the nuclear debate is an opportunity to free Australia from policy driven by illogical climate alarmism.

It can set the nation on a path to prosperity which cannot be achieved by the negative vision

That the green-left has reacted in such an unhinged manner at the prospect of a zero emissions source of energy that can still allow for a free and prosperous nation is proof their agenda is not about reducing emissions.