Absent environmentalism or non-economic considerations (hello Jervis Bay) no nuclear power would ever be built in Australia. We have way too much cheap, conveniently located coal.
Think SaaS reoccurring revenue for waste disposal but we can take that waste, refine it and lease it again. Then earn more reoccurring revenue for its storage. Rinse and repeat. We could corner the market for Uranium.
Without environmentalist pressure, coal would be used indefinitely. And nuclear isn't being built or considered because the environmentalists won't support it.
Accordingly they can get positive credit for the first and negative for the second.
Both major parties (Labor and Liberal) have huge donors from coal-mining concerns, as well as union support from coal-miners who - in a startling display of unification with the capital class - also oppose it because it's not coal-mining.
The world will be building fusion reactors in 2050, or spacebeamed solar power or opening a portal to the Warp or something for limitless free energy, and Australian politicians will still be talking about how "we can't just give up on coal".
Progress in this field is going to come from the private sector in-spite of the government who are already trying to kill solar power projects.
It feels like a bit of a stretch, given the major sources of funds to the two largest political parties, and the various leaders of same who are consistently on record espousing the joy of coal and other fossil fuels while (weirdly) claiming wind turbines are ugly and (disingenuously) blaming grid outages on renewables.
