13 Realising Australias uranium potential was emphasised in the 2006 Stern Report which suggested that nuclear capacity be doubled by 2055 as a CO 2 abatement measure 8 Similar sentiments are expressed by the Intergovernmental P anel on Climate Change IPCC which says the life cycle GHG emissions per kWh from nuclear power plants are comparable to most renewables 9 Uranium can fuel the reliable provision of affordable baseload energy Its high energy density requires proportionally less input per unit of output than alternate energy sources Negative community attitudes towards uranium appear to be shifting This is especially the case where uranium is a better known part of the socioeconomic landscape such as in South Australia In a South Australian poll released in 2014 55 per cent of respondents said they supported uranium mining A further 195 per cent were neutral and only 255 per cent of respondents were opposed to the uranium industry 10 Despite these views only 148 per cent of respondents thought the community in general had a positive attitude to uranium mining The actual level of support for uranium mining far exceeds public expectations 675 per cent of South Australians either supported 48 per cent nuclear power or were neutral 195 per cent toward nuclear power Almost twothirds 629 per cent believed nuclear power was an important contributor or an alternative to be considered in the current debate about climate change Survey results from the NEA demonstrate that individuals in countries that have nuclear power are more likely to think that the advantages of nuclear energy outweigh the risks than individuals living in countries that do not have nuclear power 11 Similarly individuals who think that nuclear power can be safely operated are more likely to live in countries that have nuclear power In essence the uranium challenge is to build on the sectors record of performance to ensure that the regulatory reform needed for the industry to capture its full growth potential occurs In addition to the typical challenges o f a cyclical commodity market the uranium industry faces a regulatory burden based upon now outdated Cold W ar considerations W ithin Australia the production and export of uranium is highly restricted At the Commonwealth level at least fve Acts of P arliament govern uranium Atomic Energy Act Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act Nuclear Nonproliferation Safeguards Act Environment Protection and Biodiversity Act Environment Protection Alligator Rivers Region Act These laws are in addition to laws that govern business more generally Some of these laws to be sure relate to the unique characteristics of uranium yet it is clear that uranium remains over regulated In addition state laws and regulations regulate and even prohibit uranium exploration and mining Victoria prohibits both uranium mining and prospecting New South W ales and Queensland prohibit uranium mining South Australia the Northern T erritory and W estern Australia retain supportive policy frameworks although the W estern Australian Labor opposition remains opposed to uranium This sort of policy inconsistency is not conducive to attracting foreign investment At the very least policy i n c o n s i s t e n c y m u s t place upward pressure on the c o s t o f c a p i t a l f o r Australian uranium investment Regulatory issues that need addressing include P olicy inconsistency across different Australian jurisdic t i o n s in order to attract competitive capital for the development of new mines Australia needs policy consistency across the various state jurisdictions conveying long term policy stability to potential investors and uranium customers Duplication of regulation in order to streamline project approvals without compromising environmental standards Australia needs to frst remove the discriminatory treatment of uranium projects under the EPB C Act and second allow projects to be assessed and approved under a OneStop Shop process T ransport restrictions within some jurisdictions in order to ensure Australian