Peter Dutton then also pretends nuclear is a financially viable alternative:

That is why our plan is 44% cheaper, and what gives this away is that Labor has never disputed those figures. OK? So Labor has never punched a hole in any of the assumptions in the frontier reporting, they have never suggested the 44% figure is wrong. It is in accordance pretty well with what the Americans have predicted as well. So there are two different ways of achieving an outcome here. One is we can meet our net zero targets by 2050, we can have a stable energy market and we can reduce prices, that is the Coalition offering. So prices will be cheaper under us. Labor’s offering is uncertainty, blackouts, brownouts and much higher electricity and gas prices, and that is not something we are going tolerate

I can hear Greg Jericho yelling “THAT IS BECAUSE THEIR MODELLING IS FOR 45% LESS POWER” which is a fact usually ignored when Dutton starts talking about nuclear.

The Coalition can not say power will be cheaper under their policies. The technology they are speaking about with small modular reactors is not in commercial use, because it is TOO EXPENSIVE to be financially viable.