Antinuclear

The best nuclear waste action: Lucas Heights interim storage plus Independent Inquiry

The government’s newly-announced “Sydney solution” is not ideal but, if coupled with an independent inquiry, it is sensible.

Interim storage at Lucas Heights could be the spur for a genuine and credible independent inquiry into how best to manage our radioactive waste.

Proactive debate could cool radioactive waste http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/proactive-debate-could-cool-radioactive-waste/story-e6frezz0-1226355138854 Ian Lowe The Daily Telegraph May 15, 2012  ALL nuclear activities generate radioactive waste. As a younger man I worked on the physical problems of nuclear fuel and for more than 40 years I have watched the technical problems of waste management and deepening community concern.

Australia generates radioactive waste. If you include the massive amounts of radioactive tailings produced by uranium mining, the volume is staggering. The proposed Roxby Downs expansion will, if it goes ahead, create a vast toxic legacy and pollute a huge area.

If you ignore uranium mining, the volume of radioactive waste is more modest but the threat posed by the material is not. It remains hazardous to people and the environment for thousands of years.

Recently the federal government announced some of Australia’s long-lived radioactive waste currently being treated in Europe would return to Australia in a few years.

This waste was to go to a proposed dump in the Northern Territory, but
is now set to be stored at Lucas Heights. At first glance it may seem
strange to store this nasty waste in our largest city. We are a large
country and much of our land is sparsely populated. In the old
tradition of “Sydney or the bush”, wouldn’t it be better to load the
stuff on to trucks or trains and take it to the outback?

This is exactly what successive federal governments have tried and
failed to do for two decades.

Australia’s approach to radioactive waste management has been driven
by the search for a vulnerable postcode rather than informed by a
credible process.

It has been drafted by bureaucrats who have little concern for the
election cycle, but driven by politicians who have little concern for
anything else – a dangerous combination, as the waste lasts longer
than any politician’s promise.

The Howard government gave itself powers to override all legislation
that might frustrate the establishment of a remote nuclear dump and
exempted it from complying with key environment and indigenous
obligations.

But these efforts failed because of a sustained campaign by
traditional Aboriginal land owners and the wider community.

In 2007 the glowing radioactive baton was passed to ALP Resource
Minister Martin Ferguson. He has continued the Howard government
approach but in a different place, promoting a waste dump on contested
Aboriginal land in the Northern Territory.

Dumping our longest-lived industrial waste on the land of some of the
nation’s most marginalised people is not an acceptable approach in the
21st century. In their haste to deal with the residue of divided
atoms, successive federal governments have succeeded only in dividing
communities and opinions.

A centralised remote dump for Australia’s radioactive waste is one way
to manage this material. But it is not the only way and arguably it is
not the best way.

A remote facility brings its own problems, such as transport and
security, and raises questions of whether free, prior and informed
consent has been gained from the affected local community.

The government’s newly-announced “Sydney solution” is not ideal but, if coupled with an independent inquiry, it is sensible.

ANSTO has secure tenure of its Lucas Heights site, with patrolled
perimeters and a constant police presence. The site has Australia’s
highest concentration of nuclear expertise. ANSTO officers have
repeatedly assured Parliament they can manage the material.

Interim storage at Lucas Heights could be the spur for a genuine and credible independent inquiry into how best to manage our radioactive waste. It offers the chance to be a much needed circuit breaker for us
to do things differently and better.

A comprehensive and credible public inquiry will not take the heat out
of the waste, but it is our best chance to take the heat out of the
debate. It can bring the diverse range of stakeholders out of the
trenches and to the table. Sydneysiders and all Australians, current
and future, deserve no less.

May 16, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, wastes