For Western Australia’s Toro Energy uranium project, the outlook may be terminal
Nuclear not worth digging or dealing http://ccwa.org.au/blogs/nuclear-not-worth-digging-or-dealing#.UgWPQ9Jwo6I August 9th 2013 by Mia.Pepper Article published in the Kalgoorlie Miner 9th August 2013
At this week’s Diggers and Dealers, low commodity price and high production costs have been a focus of attention for the entire minerals sector. While, overall, Australia’s mining sector shows signs of resilience, there is one mineral whose outlook may be terminal.
There are five significant recent events that have occurred recently that send a clear message about the future of the uranium sector and the wider nuclear industry. The uranium price dropped to US$34.50lb. Energy Resources of Australia, the operator of the Ranger uranium mine in Kakadu, announced a $54 million loss. Perth –based uranium miner Paladin Energy failed to sell a stake in its Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia. French nuclear giant EDF announced its exit from nuclear power in the US and Duke Energy cancelled two proposed reactors in Florida.
These incidents are neither isolated nor unrelated – they are significant indicators about the health of nuclear industry. Continue reading
Japan’s government likely to approve releasing radioactive water into Pacific Ocean
The government’s expanded role will likely be led by the Ministry of Economics, Trade and Industry, or METI, which has been criticized for its close ties to TEPCO and the rest of the nuclear industry
Other aspects of the Fukushima plant’s decommissioning have also been dominated by other members of Japan’s collusive “nuclear village,” as the close-knit industry is called, including reactor makers and politically connected large construction companies.
Japanese government intervenes to shore up crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, The Globe and Mail, MARTIN FACKLER TOKYO — The New York Times News Service , Aug. 08 2013,“……….As the scope of the latest crisis became clearer Wednesday, Japan’s popular prime minister, Shinzo Abe, ordered his government to intervene in the cleanup of the plant – taking a more direct role than any government since the triple meltdowns in 2011 qualified Fukushima as the world’s second worst nuclear disaster after Chernobyl.
Abe, a staunch defender of the country’s nuclear program, appears to have calculated that he needed to intervene to rebuild public trust and salvage a pillar of his economic revival plan: the restarting of Japan’s many idled nuclear plants………Some experts suggested Wednesday that the government’s intervention may be the first step in attempts to win public acceptance for what they say is an increasing inevitability: the dumping into the ocean of some of the less contaminated of the huge amount of water being stored in hulking tanks that are overwhelming the plant.
At a news conference last week, Shunichi Tanaka, chairman of Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority, seemed to lay the groundwork, saying eventually “it will be necessary to discharge water,” a possible solution likely to raise concerns not only in Japan but in other Pacific Rim countries. Continue reading
Huge release of radioactive caesium in Fukushima discharge
Nuclear Expert: Water now at Fukushima plant has 3 times more cesium than Chernobyl’s total release — “That underscores the scale of this never-ending threat” http://enenews.com/nuclear-expert-water-now-at-fukushima-plant-has-3-times-more-cesium-than-chernobyl-released-that-underscores-the-scale-of-this-never-ending-threat
Title: A Fukushima fisherman’s tale: Radioactive water from the Daiichi plant is flowing into the ocean at a rate of 300 tons a day
Source: The Independent
Author: David McNeill
Date: August 7, 2013
Experts say the government’s admission shows that the crisis at the Daiichi complex is being managed, not solved.
“It is an emergency – has been since 11 March 2011 and will continue to be long into the future,” said Shaun Burnie, an independent nuclear consultant.
He says onsite contaminated water contains three times the caesium released from the 1986 Chernobyl accident – the world’s worst nuclear disaster. “That underscores the scale of this never-ending threat.”
See also: Senior Scientist: 100 times more strontium than cesium in water at Fukushima plant — “Strontium gets into your bones… it changes the equation for Japanese fisheries” — Not “too” concerned U.S. fish will be affected
Atomic bombing of Nagasaki – 9 August 1945
Nagasaki commemorates 68th anniversary of atomic bombing, Global Post 8 Aug 13 Nagasaki began marking the 68th anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing Friday, with Mayor Tomihisa Taue expected to urge the government later in the day to take leadership as the world’s only atomic bombed country and realize the quick elimination of nuclear weapons.
In his peace declaration at the memorial event, at which representatives of 44 countries will attend, Taue plans to criticize Tokyo’s recent failure to sign an international statement rejecting any use of nuclear weapons as well as its deal with India to restart talks on nuclear energy cooperation.
Nuclear-armed India is set to send a representative to the event for the first time, while all five nuclear powers — Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — that are signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty are set to be represented, along with de facto nuclear power Israel that is not a signatory, according to the city office.
U.S. Ambassador to Japan John Roos who became the first U.S. ambassador to attend Hiroshima’s memorial ceremony in 2010, is to attend the Nagasaki ceremony for the second time.
Taue is also expected to call on the United States and Russia to drastically reduce their nuclear arsenals while urging the Japanese government to enact its three non-nuclear principles of not producing, possessing or allowing nuclear weapons on Japanese territory into law and provide better support for aging atomic bomb survivors……. http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/kyodo-news-
King Island shows the way towards 100% renewable energy
“The way these technologies are being used and integrated is world-leading and another example of the clever solutions to real-world problems that have been developed in Tasmania and can be exported globally.”
100% renewables: The King Island example, Business Spectator Laurie Guevara-Stone 9 Aug 13, Halfway between Tasmania and mainland Australia, in the heart of the Bass Strait, is rugged, windswept King Island. With a population of just under 2,000 and an area of just over 400 square miles, tiny King Island is becoming a big leader in electricity generation, demonstrating that a high-renewables future is possible.
King Island, and especially greater Tasmania, face many challenges due to climate change including water availability, flooding of coastal settlements, a rise of bushfires, and decreased agriculture and aquaculture industries. Although Australia’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions is small – and Tasmania’s even smaller, largely due to singificant amounts of hydro – the island has a goal of reducing carbon emissions by 60 per cent from 1990 levels by 2050.
Tasmania is on track to meet that target, thanks in part to lessons learned and the success at King Island. King Island is providing a significant demonstration of the potential opportunities for Tasmania through its King Island Renewable Energy Integration Project (KIREIP). Initiated by the government-owned electricity provider,Hydro Tasmania, KIREIP’s goal is to not only reduce dependence on fossil fuels, but also to help constrain power prices on the island. Continue reading
Australia’s world-leading initiatives on climate policy
Australia is part of a growing number of key regions and countries acting to reduce their GHG emissions—including the EU, United States, and China. As Australia gears up for its federal election later this year, the country has the opportunity to set a powerful example for other nations by moving forward with ambitious mitigation strategies and making efforts to strengthen them. As Australia has learned from other countries’ experiences in setting up market mechanisms for carbon reduction, the international community should continue to keep an eye on the Australian experience, track its performance, and build on its successes.
3 Key Initiatives From Australia’s Climate Change Policy Http://Insights.Wri.Org/News/2013/08/3-Key-Initiatives-Australia%E2%80%99s-Climate-Change-Policy#Sthash.ORj7bvdO.Dpuf by Olivia Kember and Thomas Damassa on August 8, 2013 This piece was co-written with Jenna Blumenthal, an intern with WRI’s Climate and Energy Program. Australia is a major nation to watch when it comes to curbing climate change. The country made an international commitment to reduce its GHG emissions by 5 to 25 percent from 2000 levels by 2020. How Australia achieves these reductions can provide lessons on how other countries around the world can pursue their own climate change mitigation plans. WRI’s Open Climate Network and Australia’s The Climate Institute (TCI) recently analyzed Australia’s climate change plan, which includes a mix of policies to reduce emissions (check out the working paper here). We found that three initiatives stand out in terms of their potential to significantly reduce GHG emissions: a carbon pricing mechanism, a Renewable Energy Target (RET), and the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI).
1) The Carbon Pricing Mechanism
The carbon pricing mechanism is the primary instrument for meeting Australia’s emissions reduction goals. Established by the federal Clean Energy Act 2011, the carbon price is applied to roughly 60 percent of the country’s emissions. Set as a fixed fee per metric ton for the first few years of operation (around $A 23-25), the mechanism will shortly transform into a cap-and-trade system linked to the European Union emissions trading scheme (ETS) and, to a lesser extent, the Kyoto Clean Development Mechanism. The government recently advanced the date of this transition from 2015 to 2014;experts do not expect this to have a material impact on Australia’s ability to achieve its target. Government revenue from selling carbon permits will be invested in clean energy and low-carbon technologies. Revenue from the carbon pricing mechanism will also be provided as compensation to households for possible increases in the cost of goods and services as a result of the carbon price.
It is widely expected that the price on carbon permits in Australia will be influenced by permit prices in the larger European market, and hence, by policy developments in the EU rather than in Australia. This is likely to affect the degree to which emissions reductions are achieved in Australia. For example, low prices in the EU trading scheme could encourage polluters in Australia to purchase EU permits instead of reducing their emissions domestically. On the other hand, if the Australian government were to aim higher than the minimum 5 percent target, it can do this without affecting the permit price. Given that international permit prices are projected to remain fairly low for the rest of the decade, Australia could achieve the top of its current target range for very little extra cost.
2) The Renewable Energy Target
The federally mandated Renewable Energy Target is the principal driver of investment in renewable energy in Australia. The Large-Scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET) requires utilties to generate 41,000 gigawatt hours (GWh) from renewable sources by 2020. The Small-Scale Renewable Energy Scheme (SRES) targets households and is expected to account for at least 4,000 GWh by 2020. The RET has mobilized $A 18 billion in renewable energy investments since 2001. It contributed to an additional 3.5 percent of renewable electricity generation in 2011, and projections show that the RET could help renewables gain more than 20 percent of the market share. Government estimates indicate that the RET is likely to reduce annual emissions by nearly 30 Mt CO₂e, which would be equivalent to 6 percent of net emissions in 2020 under the 5 percent target and 7 percent under the 25 percent target. Continue reading
9 August International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples
UNDRIP, CANZUS, and indigenous rights. OUP Blog, By Katherine Smits and Stephen Winter, 8 August 13“…..In marking International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples on the 9th of August, we should reflect critically upon the significance of international indigenous politics. To illustrate, if we consider the sacred text of international indigeneity, – See more at: http://blog.oup.com/2013/08/undrip-canzus-world-day-indigenous-people-rights/#sthash.9dnMT1Dr.dpuf the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, questions remain as to whether this document is worth the energy expended upon it. –
Of course, one can exaggerate UNDRIP’s limitations, but these are particularly apparent in the so-called ‘CANZUS’ group of Anglo-settler democracies (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States). These states all voted against the Declaration in 2007 and then subsequently endorsed it, Australia in 2009 and the rest in 2010. Each of those endorsements emphasized that UNDRIP is an aspirational document that would inspire but not change the legal, economic, social, or political circumstance of indigenous peoples.
It comes as no surprise then to find that the UNDRIP and other international statements on the subject — not to mention days of celebration — have not substantially influenced the agendas of indigenous politics in the settler states. Rather, the political claims of indigenous peoples and state responses to them are shaped by particular politics, histories, and institutions.
In Australia, for example, the federal government’s response to the abuse and neglect of children in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities has dominated indigenous politics since 2007. The conservative government of John Howard introduced the Northern Territory Intervention, sending armed forces into indigenous communities as part of an ‘Emergency Response.’ This highly controversial policy has been continued in only slightly modified form under Labor. Critics claim that the policy denies the autonomy of indigenous Australians and constitutes an attempt, in the guise of protecting human rights, to re-enforce federal control over Aboriginal land in the wake of the 1992 Mabo decision……..
In light of those thoughts, the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples and similar events serve a salutary hortatory purpose by reminding us of the moral values and principles that underlie indigenous political claims. However, in terms of politics that matter to people, they fall into the political category of ‘nice to have’ but inessential. – : http://blog.oup.com/2013/08/undrip-canzus-world-day-indigenous-people-rights/#sthash.9dnMT1Dr.dpuf
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 