Australia is going nuclear, or at least they are seriously talking about it. And no, not in the way that Iran truly wants to, but the way to which Iran only gives lip service. It is not weapons that have taken the fancy of politicians and scientists down under, but nuclear power.

In fact, if PM John Howard has his way, the first Australian nuclear power plant could be built within the next ten years. Further on, the PM's plan could lead to 25 new nuclear power plants being built on the doorstep of the nation's major towns and cities by 2050. These prospective plants, the government believes, could provide up to a third of Australia's electricity needs.

It all comes on the heels of an energy report released last week by Dr. Ziggy Switkowski, the man chosen by the government in June to study the viability of a domestic nuclear power industry.

Not surprisingly, the report has its critics. Because, while the world has long experience producing nuclear electricity, Australia has none. It has relied heavily on coal to meet its electrical generation needs up to this point and some fear the process of a creating a nuclear industry from scratch. According to Dr. Switkowski, however, their fears are overstated.

With increasing emphasis on reducing carbon emissions and the failure of Australia to sign the Kyoto Protocol, nuclear power is increasingly seen as a viable option among voters Down Under as they wrestle with their energy future.

"Our observation of modern nuclear reactors is that they are very impressive bits of technology, very safe, arguably safer than the alternative fossil fuel generators, and environmentally they don't constitute a hazard," Switkowski says.

"A typical nuclear power station," he said, "would probably produce as much waste as would maybe fill a bathroom in a small house."

But despite his efforts to quell community fears about the disposal of radioactive junk, the idea of a nuclear-powered Australia is no done deal. Labor party officials have rejected the report, eliminating any hopes of bipartisan support.

The result is a looming nuclear showdown. Not the mutual assured destruction kind, but the type that can only be settled at the ballot box.

Labor leader Kim Beazley predicts that the next federal election would be make or break for the fledgling industry.

"There is no question, at the next election there will be a referendum on nuclear power," he says.

The rest of the world can only look on at the spectacle of the struggle. After all, it decided that nuclear power is a viable alternative energy source about fifty years ago. In fact, some 440 reactors supply electricity in 31 countries.

Even the International Energy Agency has gone nuclear. For the first time in its history, the agency came out strongly in favor of the controversial power source in its widely read World Energy Outlook 2006, released earlier this month.

It urged the world to build more nuclear power plants to slow climate change and ultimately to increase energy security in a world where energy supplies are located in the world's most unstable places.

Nuclear power investment and energy conservation could cut consumption by 10% by 2030, the IEA said. That would be, according the report, the equivalent of China's use today. The report went on to say that carbon emissions would drop by 16%, the combined emissions of the United States and Canada.

"Nuclear power offers considerable advantages in terms of avoiding greenhouse-gas emissions and of energy security," the Paris-based IEA wrote in pushing its pro-nuclear agenda.

The executive director of the agency, Claude Mandil, says, "We don't see how we can avoid nuclear if we want a sustainable long-term future. Globally we consider that nuclear has to be part of the energy mix."

It is all, of course, a stunning reversal of fortune for an industry that has had to battle the specters of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, despite its overall record of safely in supplying 15% of the world's electricity.

It is all part of a nuclear revival that means not just a new energy path but an opportunity for investors. Areva (CIE.PA) of France is one of the biggest manufacturers of reactors in Europe, while Westinghouse and General Electric have strong positions in the U.S. markets.

Uranium producers, too, are part of the rising nuclear tide.

Regardless of how you choose to play this trend, it's definitely time to rethink your position on nuclear power.