Australia to cop it most in Climate Change
Predictions Australia will be hardest hit by climate change http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-17/predictions-australia-will-be-hardest-hit-by-climate-change/4695718 A national conference on mining and coal seam gas in the Hunter Valley this weekend will hear the world is past the point of preventing climate change.
Community leaders and experts in energy policy, health and renewables are gathering for the three day forum in Kurri Kurri this weekend.
Ian Dunlop is a former senior Executive of Royal Dutch Shell and a former chair of the Australian Coal Association. He says the coal industry has known since the 1980′s climate concerns will limit its primacy.
He says the world has already left it too late to prevent the onset of major climate change, pointing to the ominous milestone reached in the last week that saw the atmospheric concentration for carbon dioxide surpassing levels not seen in millions of years. The conference will hear from community groups that have successfully opposed coal and CSG developments in NSW, Queensland and the United States.
Mr Dunlop, who’s now with the Association for the study of Peak Oil and Gas, says Australia will be one of the hardest hit by a rise in global temperatures.
“I mean this is what people don’t seam to get, you cannot continue to operate businesses of any kind in a world where the average temperature has gone up 4 degrees, it’s just not feasible for people to work in those conditions,” he said.
“We’re one of the driest continents on the earth and the effects on Australia will be more severe than elsewhere.”
Mr Dunlop says climate change will also have a negative impact on Australia’s agricultural industry.
“The much longer term problems of the sustainability of things like agriculture because if we keep on going where we’re going large parts of the country are either going to be moving back into deserts or alternatively they’ll end up subject to extreme flooding and conditions that aren’t particularly conducive to agriculture anyway,” he said.
Tony Abbott’s determination to destroy action on climate chnage
Liberals’ plan to dismantle carbon laws BY:GRAHAM LLOYD, ENVIRONMENT EDITOR The Australian May 18, 2013 TONY Abbott would prepare for a double-dissolution election within five months of taking office if parliament blocked the repeal of the carbon tax, under a 12-month action blueprint to transform the nation’s environmental laws….( subscribers only) http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/liberals-plan-to-dismantle-carbon-laws/story-fn59niix-1226645695162
Northern Territory uranium miners no longer to claim tax costs for offices in foreign countries
Mining miners for a little extra cash NT News, ALISON BEVEGE | May 15th, 2013 THE NT Government has moved to close two tax loopholes to gain an additional $10.6 million out of mining companies.
It’s the only revenue-raising move in this year’s savings-based Budget. Mineral production was forecast to be worth $2.7 billion in 2013-14 but mining royalties are expected to raise $113.3 million, for a recovery rate of 4.2 per cent.
The first new Budget measure is a cap on the amount mining companies can claim as a transfer price for a mineral set at 5.5 per cent of its value……
The second measure would put a cap on the amount corporations can claim on tax for administrative costs for a foreign head office. Mr Tollner said they had been claiming expenses as NT costs……. http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2013/05/15/320899_nt-business.html
Coalition parties anti-wind energy, hypocritical about renewabl eenergy
Coalition dances around renewables commitment – again REneweconomy, Giles Parkinson 18 May 13, Joe Hockey refuses to endorse support for renewable energy, saying he had only just received the Budget Papers. Meanwhile, Coalition politicians are said to have signed up to speak at an anti-wind rally outside Parliament House. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/coalition-dances-around-renewables-commitment-again-84662
Tony Abbott’s claims about scrapping carbon tax – need scrutiny
Fact check: will scrapping the carbon price lower electricity prices? Fact check: will scrapping the carbon price lower electricity prices? The Conversation, Dylan McConnell, 18 May 13, Tony Abbott has said he will scrap the carbon “tax”, leading to a fall in electricity prices.
In his budget reply speech he stated: We will abolish the carbon tax – because that’s the quickest way to reduce power prices and take the pressure off cost of living and job security.
But will removing the carbon price really lower electricity prices, and if so, by how much?…….
wholesale costs only account for around 37% of retail electricity prices. Other major components of retail prices are transmission costs,
distribution costs (“poles and wires”), and retail costs (which include costs like the Renewable Energy Target).
Over the same period transmission costs went up 27%, distribution by 11% and retail costs by 17%. These components are independent of the carbon price, and account for the majority of hikes in retail electricity prices.
It’s worth remembering too that even without the carbon price, electricity prices are predicted to rise. Climate Change Authority
research suggests that without the carbon price, the rise would with be slightly smaller, with retail electricity prices just 6% lower. .http://theconversation.com/fact-check-will-scrapping-the-carbon-price-lower-electricity-prices-14408
Tony Abbott’s doubtful claim about axing Australia’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation
Clean energy head disputes Abbott’s ‘green savings’ BY:LAUREN WILSON, The Australian May 18, 2013 A ROW has erupted over whether the Coalition could save money by axing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, with the head of the green bank disputing Tony Abbott’s claims that about $400 million a year could be banked by abolishing the fund.
The opposition committed the Coalition, if elected in September, to scrapping the $10 billion CEFC, which provides commercial and concessional loans for companies investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency programs…..subscribers only http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/bank-head-disputes-abbotts-green-savings/story-e6frg9df-1226645636342
Australian Government’s mock “consultation” about opening Woomera to miners
Government’s “consultation” on mining in Woomera more like a ram raid Australian Greens nuclear policy spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam. 17 May 2013. The Federal Government made a mockery of public consultation by allowing three working days for initial submissions on opening up the Woomera Prohibited Area to miners, Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said today.
“On Wednesday 8 May Defence Minister Stephen Smith and resources Minister Gary Gray released the draft exposure of legislation to increase access to Woomera Prohibited Area to miners, and three working days later on 13 May the submission period closed. It’s not good enough,” said Senator Ludlam.
“Lawyers representing the Maralinga people, who in addition to being the Traditional Owners own approximately 40,000sqkm of freehold land in the area, advise that they have not been consulted on this legislation despite approaching the Defence Minister on the issue in July 2011.
“It is a relatively short amendment at nine pages but it is high-impact legislation. This area has an estimated 78 per cent of Australia’s known uranium reserves. The implications are massive.
“After years of review and the production of an 82 page report, we do not want to see a long process brought to an abrupt and shallow end.”
Australia’s old dead reactor and radioactive trash to make way for more nuclear development?
Australia should shut down Lucas Heights and stop making radioactive trash
Nuclear waste on the move in clean-up http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nuclear-waste-on-the-move-in-cleanup-20130515-2jmu5.html#ixzz2TV9sbj00 May 16, 2013 Heath Aston Radioactive waste and parts of Australia’s oldest nuclear reactor will be trucked out of Sydney under plans to clean up the Lucas Heights nuclear facility and develop a national hazardous-waste dump in the outback.
But residents in Sydney’s south are concerned at the prospect of having radioactive 
material transported past their homes.
They believe the dismantling and removal of the 1960s-era ”high-flux Australian reactor” and spent fuel rods is a bid to clear the way for further development at Lucas Heights and the production of more dangerous waste.
The plan to move the retired reactor, switched on by former prime minister Robert Menzies in 1958 and taken out of service in 2007, emerged in the budget papers.
The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, which manages Lucas Heights, has been given $28.7 million to prepare for the move. The four-year funding package will pay for ”pre-disposal conditioning of existing radioactive waste in preparation for long-term storage and disposal, and for the clean-up of buildings and infrastructure containing hazardous materials” at Lucas Heights.
Separately, the government has put $35.7 million into securing a site to become the nation’s repository for radioactive material. It will host waste from Lucas Heights and may provide the state government with a destination for contaminated soil from the former uranium smelter site at Hunters Hill.
An area at Muckaty, 800 kilometres south of Darwin, is the government’s preferred site after it struck an agreement with the Northern Land Council. But development of the semi-arid claypan site is bogged down in a legal challenge by some traditional owners. The budget papers do not identify Muckaty specifically, but a spokesman for Resources and Energy Minister Gary Gray said Muckaty, 100 kilometres north of Tennant Creek, remained the only location under consideration.
Within four years a facility that could centralise waste from Lucas Heights, and 100 or so other industrial and medical waste facilities, would be ready for construction. An ANSTO spokesman confirmed the plan to move the reactor and waste. The load will include fuel rods due to arrive in Botany Bay for transportation back to Lucas Heights after they were reprocessed at a nuclear facility in France.
Local resident groups who supported a previous plan to encase the reactor in concrete will meet ANSTO management in Engadine in the next few days.
Uranium price could stagnate at low levels, for years
Now here’s an unusual item from the Australian business pages. Instead of the usual big talking up of the future for Australia’s uranium companies, – darned if one investment writer hasn’t told it like IT IS!
Uranium on the nose, The Motley Fool By Mike King - May 16, 2013 More than 26 months after the nuclear accident at Fukushima, Japan, the nuclear industry is still feeling the effects with depressed uranium prices and cost pressures that are squeezing margins……
The price for uranium has fallen 40% since Fukushima to US$40 a pound, as Japan suspended its fleet of nuclear plants, while Germany…
….. the uranium price could stagnate at current levels for many years, much like it did after previous nuclear incidents. Japan may not restart its reactors, preferring instead to seek other energy alternatives, and reactors currently under construction could still be cancelled or postponed.
That is not good news for ASX listed uranium miners Paladin, Energy Resources of Australia (ASX: ERA), Toro Energy (ASX: TOE) or Deep Yellow Limited (ASX: DYL). http://www.fool.com.au/2013/05/16/uranium-on-the-nose/
Australia’s pharmaceutical benefits, Internet rights, at risk in secretive TPP negotiations
Audio The secret trade deal that could let multinationals sue states ’ http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/trade-talks/4689004 RN Breakfast Presented by Fran Kelly 14 May 2013 Cathy Van Extel The latest round of negotiations for the controversial Trans Pacific Partnership starts today in Lima, Peru. The TPP is a multinational trade deal involving 12 countries, including the US and Australia, and if finalised it will account for 40 per cent of the global economy. Cathy Van Extel reports that the 
outcome of the Australian federal election is likely to have a big impact on the terms of the deal. The latest round of negotiations for the controversial Trans Pacific Partnership is kicking off in the Peruvian capital of Lima today.
The TPP is a multinational trade deal involving 12 countries including the US and Australia. If finalised it’ll account for 40 per cent of the global economy.
The trade talks are heavily shrouded in secrecy—and critics are concerned the TPP will benefit multinational corporations at the expense of existing labour and social protections.
The US has been pushing for an agreement by October this year and the Australian federal election is likely to have a big impact on the terms of the major trade deal. The wide ranging trade deal has been under negotiation since 2010 behind closed doors, and that’s a worry for critics like Jane Kelsey, professor of law from the University of Auckland and an activist academic.
She says it’s being rushed through with no public scrutiny.There’s going to be a huge amount of political pressure brought to bear on the negotiators in this round because they have set an informal deadline for signing a deal, or at least something, at the APEC leaders’ meeting in Bali in October,’ Professor Kelsey says. ‘However, the negotiations are still stuck on a number of key points and so there will be quite a bit of public posturing and quite a lot of pressure behind the scenes.’ Read more »
97% of scientific opinion supports human-caused global warming: no real “debate” on the science
Not much climate change doubt, science says : http://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/not-much-climate-change-doubt-science-says-20130515-2jmup.html#ixzz2TV6hLn4F Peter Hannam Carbon economy editor, 16 May 13,
Having doubts over climate change and the role of humans? You’re unlikely to find many scientists who share your uncertainty. That is the finding of a University of Queensland-led study that surveyed the abstracts of almost 12,000 scientific papers from 1991-2011 and claims to be the largest peer-reviewed study of its kind. Of those who a stated a position on the evidence for global warming, 97.1 per cent endorsed the view that humans are to blame. Just 1.9 per cent rejected the view.
The report’s lead author, John Cook, a fellow at the University of Queensland’s Global Change Institute and founder of the website skepticalscience.com, said the scientific consensus was overwhelming, growing and had been around since the early 1990s.
He said that while the number of papers rejecting the consensus was “vanishingly small”, his research suggested the public was under the impression the debate was split 50-50. Read more »
Antinuclear’s take on Australia’s Federal Budget
Today’s special – a swathe of items about the Budget.
People are analysing the Budget all over the place. Christina Milne of The Greens is scathing 
about how the Labor government has backed down on its clean energy commitments.
Still – the Australian Renewable Energy Agency survives, and solar and wind power are going to keep growing. Heaven help us if Tony Abbot gets in in September and tries to wreck renewable energy and climate change action. We may well look back on this Budget as something quite good.
The uranium lobby will be squealing, as new rules tighten, to stop the rorts on tax exempt exploration. But they keep all their other $billion perks.
Nuclear agencies continue to gobble up their $millions. The old dead, but still dirty High Flux has costly cleanups indefinitely, the live OPAL nuclear reactor continues to cost. Then there’s the radioactive waste dump planning.
And there are the Counsellors in India and China being funded – their job sounds very like marketing for Australia’s uranium industry.
Uranium mining: Budget slightly dents the government handouts to this industry
The mining industry has had a royal run from the Australian government. Up until this latest Federal Budget uranium mining companies could deduct the full cost of exploration immediately, or even 150 per cent of the cost of exploration in some cases. Tax breaks on exploration and equipment cost taxpayers more than $1 billion per year.
Now – mining companies will cry poor, as the new budget contains measures to tighten the rules on exploration deductions for miners. Companies will now only be able to deduct genuine exploration spending, rather than writing off the acquisition of a company that acquired mining rights and spent money on exploration. But hey, the Government is sacking more than 100 staff from the federal environment department, staff who help assess mining proposals
But don’t let’s feel too sorry for the uranium, or indeed, any mining corporations. For example BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto pay tax on their fuel, but the government gives nearly all of it back through the Fuel Tax Credits program. Fears the diesel fuel rebates could be targeted again proved unfounded, with no direct changes to the 32 cent rebate.
As Charles Berge wrote (in Sydney Morning Herald May 11, 2010) “And then there are direct government services. Geoscience Australia’s annual budget is $130 million, much of which goes to providing free data and services to the mining industry. The CSIRO and various government research centres chip in another $130 million per year in benefits to the industry. And for the research the miners have to do themselves, they get $160 million back per year in the form of research and development tax concessions.
A billion or two for fuel, … a billion for free pollution and a couple of hundred million for subsidised science . . . pretty soon we’re talking real money.
And that’s before we’ve even begun to talk about government-provided roads, rail, ports, electricity networks and other infrastructure.
Mining is different from most other industries because it directly accesses publicly owned, non-renewable resources. It is appropriate that it pay for this privileged access, over and above its fair share of company tax. In light of the $4 billion to $5 billion in benefits the mining industry receives each year from the Australian taxpayer, the government’s proposed resource rent tax starts to look modest (and anyway, uranium mining was exempt from that tax)…..
So don’t be snowed by the big miners’ shrieks about sovereign risk driving them out of Australia. The biggest risk is that we continue to subsidise mining operations that aren’t paying a fair return for their use of public resources and taxpayer dollars.”
Nuclear and Uranium Related Expenses in Australia’s Federal Budget 2013
Nuke Dump – $35.7m over 4 years National Radioactive Waste Management — securing a site and First Stage business case to “secure suitable volunteer site” and undertake initial scoping and design work, establish a Regional Consultative Committee and First State business case. (p253 bp2)-
Counsellor in New Delhi - $3.1m over 4 years to continue posting a Resources, Energy and Tourism Counsellor in New Delhi – is this to do with Uranium??
ANSTO = $38.7m for decommissioning High Flux Nuclear Reactor and $8.1 m for increasing costs of running OPAL Nuclear Reactor (nuclear fuel and electricity) Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation — additional funding for decommissioning and nuclear waste management activities
ARPANSA = $ 7.8 m over four years Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency — improving Australia’s capacity to deliver effective radiation protection and nuclear safety to enhance capacity to issue new licences and undertake compliance, upgrade Yallambie and to address workplace health and safety issues. 5.1 m to be recovered through revising licencing fees and testing fees.
Rum Jungle radioactive decontamination funds = 1.5 this year.
More detail on these nuclear-related expenses in the Budget: Read more »
Australia’s Budget – a mixed result for clean energy – but Abbott’s agenda would be worse
Budget 2013-14 And Renewable Energy http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3739, 15 May 13, Australia’s Clean Energy Council has expressed disappointment in last night’s Budget, stating more than $600 million of funding for clean energy projects has been put in jeopardy.
While acknowledging a tough set of financial circumstances for the country and ambitious new projects such as the NDIS requiring funding, the CEC says chopping and changing clean energy program funding unsettles investors.
A deferral of $370 million in funding to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) over three years from 2014-15 is causing some concern as the CEC says the process for returning that funding to ARENA’s budget beyond 2020 is unclear.
$260 million of funding for energy efficiency programs and large-scale solar was also cut; the latter being $160 million of unallocated solar flagships funding which was to go to the ill-fated Solar Dawn project.
However, it wasn’t all bad news. The Clean Technology Programs did not receive rumoured cuts and $58 million of unspent funds in 2012-13 has been reallocated to 2017-18. $160 million of funding has been brought forward to 2014-15 to provide earlier access to funds for industry.
Greens leader Christine Milne was particularly scathing of the Budget. In an email with the subject line of “weaker, dumber, meaner”; Ms. Milne said the Government’s cuts to renewable energy funding constituted “back-flipping on their commitments to the Clean Energy package made with the Greens”. Ms. Milne also said “This budget is bad but Tony Abbott’s extreme agenda would go even further.”
For potential buyers of small scale rooftop solar arrays, their was neither bad or good news in the Budget – it’s business as usual.
On a somewhat related topic, carbon capture copped it in the cuts; with $662 million of uncommitted funds for the controversial Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships program being returned.
A full round-up of Budget 2013-14 winners and losers (renewable energy related and otherwise) can be viewed on ABC News.
This month
For international news, go to nuclear-news
SEARCH for particular names or topics at the SEARCH BOX at very bottom of this sidebar
http://www.cleanenergymap.gov.au/ Clean Energy Future – Australian Government
- AUDIO Miners falling short on Indigenous consultation: Oxfam http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-17/miners-falling-short-on-indigenous-consultation/4696040
- and this Nuclear future unclear for Lucas Heights. http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2013/05/16/3760616.htm?
Youtube: From Fukushima to New York: Continuing Dangers of Nuclear PowerAnti nuclear action below: - more info at Action Australia « Antinuclear and at Event details « Antinuclear
EVENTS -
- Now - until June 2 – Melbourne PROTEST! ARCHIVES FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE www.lib.unimelb.edu.au/collections/archives/exhibitions/protest/index.html
-
May 25 – Tennant Creek, Northern Territory March and Music for Muckaty NO NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP- Six years on and still strong! http://www.facebook.com/events/326459734149343/
- July 24-26 - Brisbane - Clean Energy Week
Australia’s anti nuclear hero – Dr Helen Caldicott
As I write this, Dr Helen Caldicott is in Korea, keeping a commitment to lecture there, despite the tense political/military situation. In recent weeks, she has lectured in USA ,and Canada, following the landmark symposium “The Medical and Ecological Consequences of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident” http://www.totalwebcasting.com/view/?id=hcf# which she organised in New York in March. Christina MacphersonHelen Caldicott MD The single most articulate and passionate advocate of citizen action to remedy the nuclear and environmental crises, Dr Helen Caldicott, has devoted the last 38 years to an international campaign to educate the public about the medical hazards of the nuclear age and the necessary changes in human behavior to stop environmental destruction.
Born in Melbourne, Australia in 1938, Dr Caldicott received her medical degree from the University of Adelaide Medical School in 1961. She founded the Cystic Fibrosis Clinic at the Adelaide Children’s Hospital in 1975 and subsequently was an instructor in pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and on the staff of the Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Boston, Mass., until 1980 when she resigned to work full time on the prevention of nuclear war.
In 1971, Dr Caldicott played a major role in Australia’s opposition to French atmospheric nuclear testing in the Pacific; in 1975 she worked with the Australian trade unions to educate their members about the medical dangers of the nuclear fuel cycle, with particular reference to uranium mining.
While living in the United States from 1977 to 1986, she co-founded thePhysicians for Social Responsibility, an organization of 23,000 doctors committed to educating their colleagues about the dangers of nuclear power, nuclear weapons and nuclear war. On trips abroad she helped start similar medical organizations in many other countries. The international umbrella group (International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War) won theNobel Peace Prize in 1985. She also founded the Women’s Action for Nuclear Disarmament (WAND) in the US in 1980….
IN the United States in 1995, Dr Caldicott lectured at the New School for Social Research on the Media, Global Politics and the Environment, hosting a weekly radio talk show on WBAI (Pacifica), and becoming the Founding President of the STAR (Standing for Truth About Radiation) Foundation.
Dr Caldicott has received many prizes and awards for her work, including theLannan Foundation’s 2003 Prize for Cultural Freedom and 21 honorary doctoral degrees, and she was personally nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize byLinus Pauling – himself a Nobel Laureate. The Smithsonian has named Dr Caldicott as one of the most influential women of the 20th Century. She has written for numerous publications and has authored seven books, Nuclear Madness, Missile Envy, If You Love This Planet: A Plan to Heal the Earth(1992, W.W. Norton) and A Desperate Passion: An Autobiography (1996,W.W. Norton; published as A Passionate Life in Australia by Random House), The New Nuclear Danger: George Bush’s Military Industrial Complex (2001, The New Press in the US, UK and UK; Scribe Publishing in Australia and New Zealand; Lemniscaat Publishers in The Netherlands; andHugendubel Verlag in Germany), Nuclear Power is Not the Answer (2006,The New Press in the US, UK and UK; Melbourne University Press in Australia) and War In Heaven (March 2007). Dr. Caldicott’s most recent book is the revised and updated If You Love This Planet (March 2009) updated 2012 as Loving This Planet
She also has been the subject of several films, including Eight Minutes to Midnight, nominated for an Academy Award in 1981, If You Love This Planet, which won the Academy Award for best documentary in 1982, andHelen’s War: portrait of a dissident, recipient of the Australian Film Institute Awards for Best Direction (Documentary) 2004, and the Sydney Film FestivalDendy Award for Best Documentary in 2004.
Dr Caldicott currently divides her time between Australia and the US where she lectures widely. She founded the US-based Nuclear Policy Research Institute (NPRI), which evolved into Beyond Nuclear. Currently, Dr Caldicott is President of The Helen Caldicott Foundation/NuclearFreePlanet.org, an educational outreach project that informs people of the dangers of nuclear power and weapons. The mission of the Foundation is education to action, and the promotion of a nuclear energy and weapons free, renewable energy powered, world….. http://www.helencaldicott.com/about/
Few speakers can match Dr. Caldicott’s ability to simultaneously educate, entertain and ignite an audience. Senator Edward Kennedy has called her “one of the most eloquent voices on earth” and actress Meryl Streep says “Helen Caldicott has been my inspiration to speak out”. http://ifyoulovethisplanet.org/dl/caldicott_bio.pdf
