Malaysian MP disputes radiation opinion of Lynas’ Australian employee on rare earths
Fuziah belittles radiation expert’s analysis, Free Malaysia Today, K Pragalath, September 14, 2011 The Kuantan MP replies to criticisms by Lynas-hired Nick Tsurikov. PETALING JAYA: Kuantan MP Fuziah Salleh today shot back at radiation expert Nick Tsurikov, who has disputed statements she made recently regarding the dangers posed by the rare earth project in Gebeng, near Kuantan.
She criticised his analysis as “shallow” and questioned his standing as an independent expert, noting that he was hired by Lynas Corp, the Australian mining company that is setting up the Gebeng operations……
She also said Tsurikov, who is based in Australia, was unable to understand the seriousness of the situation….
Fuziah quoted reports alleging that Lynas was using China Standards GB9133-88 as a benchmark.“I mentioned that there are no rare earth refineries in operation outside China at the moment. Thus we do not have a benchmark. Neither do we have a best practice in rare earth refining.”
14 Comments »
Leave a comment
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 
I would hope that the rubbish with “Lynas-hired” thing stops at some point. If I’m, indeed, hired by Lynas – could someone offer an explanation that (a) the replies are posted very quickly – so obviously they are not checked or approved by anyone, and (b) how this corresponds with my clear statement that I will meet with anyone anywhere who would like to ask any relevant questions, with no pre-conditions of any kind? But whatever… If you’ll have the chance, could you please have a look on http://calytrix.biz/random, with a lot of Q&A things.
If you would like to have any additional information/clarification – please let me know.
Kind regards
Nick Tsurikov
LikeLike
I would hope that an expert hired by Lynas could be independent. And perhaps Mr Tsurikov is independent.
But with such a huge amount of money to be made by the Lynas company out of the rare earths business, it would be a brave employee indeed, who would come up with a report that is not palatable to Lynas.
LikeLike
Dear Christina, if you wish – I can send you my CV to have a look at (my address nick.tsurikov@gmail.com). There are no secrets whatsoever. Lynas is a relatively small part of what I do do. If they will need more of my assistance in the future – no problems, provided that I have the time. What annoys me personally is when the comments and conclusions are made on the basis of wrong assumptions, and that is what I was (and still am) trying to correct.
The main point is that there will be no more radiation ‘around’ the plant in Malaysia (in fact, much less, if any will be detectable at all), in comparison with most of heavy mineral sands mines/plants in Australia and elsewhere in the world. Not even mentioning all the other stuff with much higher or comparable levels of ‘enhancement’ of natural radioactivity in the ‘process’ – such as oil and gas, phosphate, geothermal energy, coal, etc etc…
Lastly, an example for your info of what I do – I am flying out today for two weeks to Central/West Africa, on the invitation from the government(s) – to assess the adequacy of the remediation of uranium sites. Independently…
Kind regards
Nick Tsurikov
LikeLike
Dear Christina,
Just we are absolutely clear on this about the heading of the article:
I NEVER WAS AND I AM NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF LYNAS.
I cannot say this enough times, but it still is “there”. Why people assume that ‘anti-Lynas’ group is doing it all at their free will and in their free time, but when one says that there are some errors in their argument – the person must be “Lynas-hired”, “Lynas employee”…? I wonder if the idea of an independent person trying to put things right in his free time crosses people’s minds at all. Or they are all wearing blinkers and if the facts do not fit the theory – the facts to be disposed of and some crazy theory is to be repeated over and over… Well… Worked in a certain country in 1930’s, I don’t think it works any more…
Rhetorical question…
I did see on several forums (about a month ago) numerous accusations that anti-Lynas people are a group hired and continuously funded by Chinese rare earth industry… I, of course, will not repeat this rubbish and do not think it’s true. But – what I keep wondering about: why everyone can accuse me of being ‘hired by someone’ and I am not accusing the other side of the same thing…? Does this show something about the character of people on the ‘other side’ of the debate…
Kind regards
Nick
LikeLike
OK, Nick
Well, are you involved in evaluating the radiation issue at the proposed Lynas rare earths plant in Malaysia? And if so, who does pay you?
LikeLike
Dear Christina,
The answer is quite obvious – from the TV3 clip in Malaysia, etc. Of course if a company (or an Aboriginal corporation, or a local council, or a government department) would like my advice on the content of a document, or help with monitoring, or evaluation of anything – I have to get some $$ for this, otherwise it will be quite silly on my part. [naturally, the ‘rate’ is higher for a company and lower for an Aboriginal organisation]
I do understand that there is a ‘fine line’ here. Yes, sure, I was involved in the evaluation of the documents – and quite possibly will be again as well. I never said I didn’t – and TV3 clip clearly says ‘Lynas radiation safety officer’ (which I was at the time of the interview). Plus, I’m quite sure if one searches through Lynas documents – there will be my name somewhere (on the cover of some and in some places inside in others).
What I’m trying to point out that no one pays me for the current arguments, for the time I spend on the website etc. In fact, I have to always ensure that I only quote and comment on the documents that are actually public – otherwise I may be in a bit of trouble I guess.
Plus, I am sure you are well aware of corporate structures in Australia and with one designated ‘spokesperson’ etc etc. If I would’ve been a Lynas “employee” or “Lynas-hired” for this type of argument – for how long do you think I’ll stay as such…? Plus, as Mrs F Salleh clearly wrote in her reply to me, she (of course) cannot discard completely the possibility that I’m paid for all this – but gave me a benefit of a doubt since I am ready to meet with anyone and discuss any ‘radiation’ issues, with no pre-conditions of any kind. I think that clearly illustrates that I’m not an “employee”…
Kind regards
nick
LikeLike
Nick, your background includes being a salesman for numerous optical medicine companies with some exposure to investment banking. How do these experiences provide the skills needed to launch an REE company?
LikeLike
Dear Vernie,
I think you’ve got some wires crossed, so to speak.
I am a chemical engineer in processing of rare and radioactive elements, specialising in radiation protection. I have never ever been a salesman for any companies at all – I have no idea what you are referring to – ‘numerous optical medicine companies’… No exposure to any investment banking ever anywhere in my life… I will be most curious to find out where you’ve got this information from, please let me know.
Plus I did not participate in launching any REE companies, I was just helping one to get their ‘management of radiation issues’ correctly – as I did for countless other companies and governments all over the world. Maybe I’ll continue helping them again, depending on how much available time I will have.
cheers, nick
LikeLike
Nick,
My apologies, I was incorrect. I mistakenly assumed you were Nick Curtis the CEO of Lynas when I began reading this thread. I found the information above at this link, https://simonthongwh.wordpress.com/2011/05/29/lynas-corp-ltd-big-boss-nicholas-curtis/ .
Again Nick, my apologies to you and if the information at the above link is not correct, perhaps Mr. Curtis should consider writing a letter to the author and have it removed asap.
LikeLike
No problem, Vernie
I thought you picked up something ‘different’. The main point that some weeks ago I have conclusively proven that the plant in Malaysia will be safe – and not a single person has managed to contradict me so far…
cheers, nick
LikeLike
OK – let’s all say that Lynas’ Malaysian rare eerths processing plant is safe. That still does not answer the question of why they think they can go ahead with it, with no plan for the long term disposal of the radioactive wastes.
LikeLike
Dear Christina,
In my personal opinion – the plant did not ‘go ahead’ yet, it is waiting for the ‘pre-operational license’. The long term waste management plan exists, and (as Lynas said) it was submitted to the government in July – and, as per IAEA recommendations, it is up to Malaysian government to make it public. My guess (only a guess, of course) is that this plan and other documents are currently being considered – if it is all OK and complies with best practice, the license will be given; if there is a need for any improvement – the document(s) will be send back for re-working…
One of the important things is that the volumes of the waste were overstated in the media by about 4-5 times and concentrations of radioactivity in it are expected to be comparable to what we all have around us – some fertilisers at the back of a Bunnings store, some ceramic tiles and in mineral sands concentrates (millions of tons of which are moved around Australia every year). In fact, in accordance with international guidelines, the concentrations of radioactivity in the waste are such that the material can be considered for a conditional exemption from any ‘radiation’ regulations and classified as ‘non-radioactive’ all together… That what is wrong here – everything is radioactive, but it is wrong to assume that is all the same thing… It is like saying that nuclear waste and waste from the production of rare earths/phosphate/mineral sands/coal/oil and gas – is all the same thing…
It is obviously completely different from uranium mining – where uranium is extracted as a ‘target element’ and things like radium and thorium are left behind. In all other ‘mining’ thorium and uranium are just ‘unwanted’ impurities…
greetings from Vienna, nick
LikeLike
As I understand it, the Lynas plant is already over 60% built. They had the nerve to do this before getting the necessary approvals.
I’m not convinced about the benign status of the radioactive wastes. China and the USA have both seen fit to shut down such plants due to radioactive polltuion. (Of course, it is well known that China has a very bad historic record in matters of radioactive waste).
Finally – why won’t Lynas process the rare earths in Australia? If it’s so OK, what’s their problem?
LikeLike
Dear Christina,
I honestly cannot comment on ‘non-radiation’ things. However – the ‘due process’, as I understand, has been followed ‘to the letter’: all the documents, including ‘radiation impact assessment’ were submitted to the government in 2007 (or 2008), approved – and Lynas has obtained a ‘construction’ license (or whatever it is called). Now it is simply a next stage – ‘pre-operational license’: to see if it is all working, run some concentrate through the plant, see if the concentrations of different things and possible doses to workers are as predicted; then – it is ‘operational license’. The process is actually more onerous than we would’ve had here.
A note on China and USA – their ‘raw material’ is different and contains much more ‘radioactivity’.
As to ‘why Malaysia’… The question has been answered officially, so – from my personal perspective/guess:
a) plant needs a lot of water… where it is going to come from…? I do not think it is a good idea to have another desalination plant built…
b) plant needs a lot of chemicals… all will have to come from somewhere – and the stuff is really dangerous, like acids etc. So, there would be a lot (and I mean a lot) of trucks going from Fremantle (or wherever) to Laverton. What some people in Fremantle do not realise that there will be much more stuff transported through their ‘suburbs’ – and, in case of a traffic accident, sulphuric acid would be much more dangerous than Lynas wet paste (sealed in plastic bags that are put inside containers and is not even classified as a ‘dangeros good’).
c) plant needs a lot of qualified workforce and ‘support services’ – where all the people will be coming from? Check what Laverton looks like on Google Earth – there will be a need to build a brand new town about four-five times the size of Laverton, with schools, movie theaters, shops etc – to entice people to actually go there. And, in the answer to the obvious question, “people can go on fly-in-fly-out’: Brand new airport with much longer and better airstrip will be needed and Lynas will have to purchase and maintain at least three-four large jets; and it does not solve the problem – because a large camp site will need to be built as well, and I doubt very much that people like kitchen hands/cleaners can be hired locally, at least not in numbers that will be needed.
Now, look at Kuantan:
a) water – no problems
b) chemicals – no problems as well, a major ‘hub’ (Singapore) is practically a ‘stone throw’ away
c) people – there is a lot of qualified people. (my personal observation is that people in Malaysia are in general more educated and the work ethics is also a bit higher than “she’ll be right, mate” attitude that I see in Australia more and more often – which is actually a major worry…).
I hope the above provides some answers, please let me know if you would like any additional information on anything.
cheers, nick
LikeLike