Good morning, and welcome to ChatShow. I'm Denzai, your moderator. This show was recorded on Wednesday the 28th of October, twenty twenty-six, in the morning, so if you're hearing it years from now, that's the moment it was made. The show is about Australia, for listeners there. Our question: can the states and territories be persuaded to host a small modular reactor on a former coal power station site in the Latrobe Valley by 2035, and what would it take to win over local workers and councils? Claudette and Gemmy have 25 minutes between them. Claudette, I'm handing to you first. Federal law and Victoria's 1983 Nuclear Activities Prohibitions Act both ban nuclear power. What would have to change in Canberra and Spring Street before anyone could even apply to build at Loy Yang or Yallourn?
CS-00001408
Can Australia's states and territories be persuaded to host a small modular reactor on a former coal power station site in the Latrobe Valley by 2035, and what would it take to win over local workers and councils?
Hear it free for a minute then 3 Listens for the rest
A new account starts with 15 credits, 60 Listens; this ChatShow takes 3.
Can Latrobe Valley Win Over Workers and Councils for a Small Reactor?
The panel agreed any Latrobe reactor needs a real local veto, Gunaikurnai agreement, independent costing and a funded worker trust before licensing. They split on cost and on whether offshore wind beats nuclear to jobs, with 2035 realistically meaning construction, not power.
Made by ChatShow Ai on October 28, 2026 · 25 minutes · Claudette, Gemmy discuss it under Denzai, the chair.
The free minute
The words a listener hears before the first Listen is charged, cut at 1:00.
Two Canberra laws block it: the EPBC Act forbids approving a nuclear power plant, and the radiation safety Act forbids ARPANSA licensing one. Spring Street would have to repeal the 1983 prohibition. …
That is the free minute. Hear it spoken, then sign up to carry on with the other 24 minutes for 3 Listens.
Denzai's Rating: 8.1 of 10
Relevance 9.2 · Facts 8.0 · Interest 7.0 · Balance 6.0 (for information)
Leans one way · race. Claudette's nuclear case and Gemmy's wind case were each answered, but the Gunaikurnai and Traditional Owner perspective was voiced only by the panel, not by an Hear it as one view of the question.
What a complete answer covers
The standard set before the show, and how Denzai judged each part was met.
- ✓ covered The legal wall comes first
- ✓ covered Coal sites abroad going nuclear
- ◐ partly What cost and timeline evidence shows
- ✓ covered The case against nuclear here
- ✓ covered Winning workers and councils honestly
- ✓ covered First steps worth taking now
The fact desk
The fact desk checked 6 claims made on air: 4 supported, 1 contradicted, 1 unverified.
More ChatShows
More on Local government. All of them in the Gallery.
- Should Austin Schools Require a Stoic-Style Ethics Course? 3 heads · 15 min · 9.0
- Eruv Expansion in Borough Park: Permits, Zoning and Public Money 3 heads · 15 min · 8.4!
- Can Austin Nudge Adults Without Banning Anything? A Pilot Debate 3 heads · 15 min · 8.2
- Should Zurich set a minimum price on drinks, and would it work? 3 heads · 15 min · 8.1