Lawyer for Norther Land Council accused of ‘doctoring’ anthropologists’ report about proposed nuclear waste dump site
Indigenous land owners accuse lawyer of manipulating nuclear waste storage report June 4, 2014 – Jane Lee Legal Affairs Reporter for The Age A lawyer who was key to the Howard government’s plan to store nuclear waste on indigenous land has been accused of manipulating the legal process required to ensure its approval.
Traditional owners from four indigenous clans are challenging the Ngapa clan’s 2007 nomination of Muckaty Station for the dump site in the Federal Court in Melbourne. The owners, including Aboriginal elders, argue they did not consent to the nomination, were not consulted on the agreement reached and were misled on the government’s proposal for the nuclear storage site.
Ron Levy was then the chief legal counsel for the Northern Land Council, which was set up to help indigenous people in the Northern Territory acquire and manage traditional lands. Mr Levy will be called as a witness later in the five-week case before Justice Anthony North.
Ron Merkel, QC, for the traditional owers, told the court on Thursday that Mr Levy “personally edited” anthropologists’ views in a Council report which concluded that only the Ngapa Lauder clan owned the site. Mr Levy also wrote a new section in the final report, reflecting his view that the Land Commissioner could depart from judges’ previous decisions on land claims, “if relevant material was before the commissioner.”
Mr Merkel said that he did this “(so) that the Lauder Ngupas would be recognised by the Northern Land Council as the only traditional owners of the site so their consent could be secured.” The site nomination could then “jump a hurdle” of having to consult in more detail about about the plan with other clans, he said………..
Mr Merkel told the court on Tuesday that Mr Levy, who controlled the consultation process, also failed to tell the full Northern Land Council or traditional owners about the only up-front $200,000 payment given to traditional owners for the site nomination or the terms of their agreement.
But he later told the federal goverrnment that he had all traditional owners’ full consent.
Mr Merkel said there was no explanation for this “unless … Mr Levy had a plan from the outset about how to achieve the end result and he did”. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/indigenous-land-owners-accuse-lawyer-of-manipulating-nuclear-waste-storage-report-20140604-39jk8.html#ixzz33nhZjp26.
Tony Abbott informs the world that Climate Change will NOT be discussed at the G20
Climate change ‘off G20 agenda’, The Age June 5, 2014 Lisa Cox and Adam Morton Prime Minister Tony Abbott has downplayed the likelihood of climate change being discussed at a G20 leaders’ summit hosted by Australia, suggesting it does not fit the meeting’s economic focus.
Asked about pressure from the US and Europe for climate to be included on the agenda for the November meeting in Brisbane, Mr Abbott said there were other international meetings that were more appropriate for discussing the issue………
His comments followed US and Chinese leaders revealing new plans to tackle climate change.
A top Chinese climate adviser told a Beijing conference that the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gas would put a cap on emissions for the first time in its next five-year plan, starting in 2016………
US President Barack Obama announced he would regulate to cut emissions from power plants to 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 – considered the most significant step he has taken to tackle global warming.
Also this week, the European Union reported its emissions were 19 per cent lower than in 1990 and South Korea said it would tax coal imports and cut duty on alternative fuels from July.
Australia will become the first country to abolish a carbon pricing scheme if the Abbott government’s repeal legislation is passed by the incoming Senate. In its place it is proposing a ”direct action” scheme, which would involve the government paying some companies to cut emissions………
Greens leader Christine Milne said financing tackling climate change had to be on the G20 agenda. ”Our Prime Minister is so backward he doesn’t seem to understand the connection between climate change and economics.” http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-change-off-g20-agenda-20140604-39jdx.html
Time that Northern Territory’s Chief Minister Adam Giles came clean about nuclear wastes
GILES NEEDS TO COME CLEAN ON NUCLEAR DUMP STANCE http://territorylabor.com.au/giles-needs-to-come-clean-on-nuclear-dump-stance/ Gerry McCarthy , 4 June 2014 Local Member for Barkly, Gerry McCarthy, today called on the Chief Minister, Adam Giles, to stand alongside Territory Labor and other Territorians who do not want a nuclear waste dump in the Territory.“Territorians are adamant that they do not want a Nuclear Waste Dump at Muckaty Station,” Mr McCarthy said.
Mr McCarthy said Adam Giles needs to come clean to Territorians about where he stands on the issue.
“It has been alleged that Adam Giles is an ardent supporter of a having nuclear waste facility in the Territory,” Mr McCarthy said.
“By his silence it appears the Chief Minister does support the proposed nuclear waste dump at Muckaty. “Territory Labor and many Territorians are concerned about the risk of potentially dangerous nuclear waste that will be transported on our roads, rail and through our ports to reach the proposed facility.
“The Chief Minister needs to assure Territorians that he will not stand by and let the Federal Government turn the Territory into a nuclear waste dump.”
The Member for Barkly said representatives of traditional owners against a nuclear waste dump at Muckaty were in the High Court in Melbourne currently trying to end the 7 year struggle to establish the first purpose built nuclear waste dump facility in the Territory. The High Court hearings will collect evidence in Tennant Creek and Darwin later this month. Media contact: Cathryn Tilmouth 
0427 500 667
The collapse of uranium company Paladin’s share price
Why the Paladin Energy Share Price Fell Today What Happened to the Paladin Energy Share Price? Shares of Paladin Energy [ASX:PDN] fell by 3.95% on Wednesday, closing at 36.5 cents. This was the lowest closing price in nearly 10 years of trading! , Money Morning 5 June 14 Why Did This Happen to the Paladin Energy Share Price?
Paladin Energy Limited is a uranium production and exploration company with projects currently in Australia, Canada, and Africa. The Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia is its flagship project.
Since the Fukushima uranium plant meltdown in 2011, the uranium industry has never been the same. Following this event, the Japanese government turned off all of its 54 uranium power plants.
The uranium spot price is now trading at around US$28.25 per pound, a level not seen since April 2005. Certain estimates now place up to 60% of current annual global production with costs above the current spot price, which is unsustainable.
For years, Paladin experienced financing, production, and profitability issues. And last week it officially temporarily closed its Kayelekera mine in Malawi.
For this plant to restart operations, Paladin wants to see a uranium price between US$70–75 dollars per pound, which implies that the breakeven price for Kayelekera is significantly above the current spot price. Overall the share price is declining because of a poor uranium environment. Last week, Japan announced that it won’t restart any reactors during 2014 — something that uranium punters were betting on.
Dangerous structures at Fukushima – too radioactive for workers to fix
Japanese Journalist: Workers “very worried” about deformed 400 ft. structure falling on Fukushima reactor buildings and causing another crisis — Immediate repairs needed yet “can’t do anything” due to extreme radiation levels — Staff told to “constantly watch it” — One of site’s most dangerous places http://enenews.com/japan-journalist-workers-very-worried-about-deformed-400-ft-structure-falling-on-fukushima-reactor-buildings-needs-immediate-repair-yet-they-cant-do-anything-about-it-due-to-extr?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ENENews+%28Energy+News%29 3 June 14
Fukushima Voice, May 28, 2014: Mako Oshidori in Düsseldorf “The Hidden Truth about Fukushima” […] The lecture, given in Japanese [on March 8, 2014] and translated into English.
Mako Oshidori: I am actually a journalist with the highest attendance rate at the TEPCO press conference. […] in 2013 when the Japanese central government decided to begin to restart nuclear power plants, the government placed a watch on me […] a piece of paper was distributed with a list of names […] such as the former prime minister Naoto Kan […] A researcher who was given the list and told not to approach anybody on it was friendly with me and told me the list included my name. Soon after that a mysterious man began to follow me. […]
Deformed ‘Stack’ Near Units 1 & 2
- Oshidori: I would like to talk about the current status of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. This is a chimney called a “stack” […] one of the places that I consider the most dangerous. It is 120 m tall. In December 2013, it was discovered the highest radiation level, 25 Sv/h, at the bottom of the stack. […] humans cannot go near it. The problem gets worse. TEPCO discovered deformities on 4 sides at 60 of the 120 meter height […] Some are totally severed. Ordinarily, this should be immediately repaired, but the bottom of the stack is 25 Sv/h […] they can’t do anything about it. What TEPCO is doing about this is they have appointed workers to constantly watch it. […] Workers on site are very worried about whether it would fall onto the reactor buildings. If it ever fell on Unit 1 or 2, all the workers would have to evacuate […] and it could lead to a severe accident necessitating evacuation […]
Submissions to Renewable Energy Target Review listed for public scrutiny
Renewable Energy Target Review Submissions Published http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=4331 5 June 14, Submissions to Australia’s Renewable Energy Target review have begun to be listed for public scrutiny – and it’s looking like the review panel has a lot of reading ahead of it.
At the time of writing, more than 150 submissions areavailable for perusal by the public. It’s not a complete archive – the Secretariat will to progressively upload further submissions over the coming weeks. Submission that have been marked as confidential will not be published on the site.
Some of the submissions have already caused raised eyebrows. According to WA Today, the RET would include gas-fired power under a controversial proposal by the Victorian government.
The RET review has been somewhat of a circus from the outset; with serious concerns raised about the suitability of some of the review panel and claims the exercise will result in a “biased and predetermined outcome” – and not one particularly favourable in terms of renewable energy uptake.
Solar Citizens recently stated the review a “stitch-up designed to cut renewable energy and support the Coalition’s mates in big power companies.”
It was also recently revealed ACIL Allen – described by Greens senator Scott Ludlum as “analysts for the coal industry” – won the sole government contract to advise the RET review despite cheaper proposals from competing firms.
According to a recent report published by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the only parties to benefit from abolishing or gutting of Australia’s Renewable Energy Target would be fossil fuel based power generators – to the tune of 6 – 12 billion dollars extra revenue by 2020. As a result, households would pay up to $142 a year more for power by 2020, billions would be lost in renewables investment and thousands of jobs in the renewables sector would evaporate.
Mechanisms within Australia’s Renewable Energy Target support the purchase of solar power systems; reducing the up-front costs in some cases by thousands of dollars.
Northern Land Council bars journalist from visiting Muckaty – planned nuclear waste dump site
There is a very important wider issue in all this – irrespective of my visit – “If the radioactive waste facility goes ahead, will journalists and indigenous rights advocates like me be able to have access to freely visit it and report on any issues associated with its operation?”
Northern Land Council puts out ‘Not Welcome’ mat for site visit at Muckaty. #wasteontrial http://songlines.org.au/2014/06/04/northern-land-council-puts-out-not-welcome-mat-for-site-visit-at-muckaty-wasteontrial/ June 4, 2014 by Bruce Reyburn One of the hallmarks of an open democracy is the ability of the media and human rights advocates to go freely to contested places where they can report on what they see and learn in the process.
As I have just found, this is not the case in one part of Australia.In keeping with the tight provisions of the Australian government legislation for a radioactive waste facility, a site on “Muckaty” was ‘volunteered’ by one small ‘local descent group’ (or part thereof) of Warlmanpa people in return for a few million dollars – and then nominated to the Australian government by the Northern Land Council. All done by the book, according to the NLC.
Other Warlmanpa at Muckaty objected to this process – hence the present Federal Court case presently underway in Melbourne, thence Tennant Creek, Darwin, Melbourne.
The Northern Land Council is a respondent in this Federal Court case, along with the Commonwealth of Australia.
Under the Aboriginal Land Rights (NT) Act a permit is required to enter onto Aboriginal land (as defined by that Act).
Issuing permits is a function of the relevant Aboriginal Land Council to process permit applications.
Soon after I decided to blow the budget and travel to Tennant Creek to see old friends and listen to Warlmanpa people’s evidence in their Federal Court case, I realised that the Federal Court would travel to Muckaty to view the site nominated for the Australian government’s radioactive waste facility. This proposed radioactive waste facility site is on Aboriginal Land gained by a traditional Aboriginal land claim under that Act, and has a pastoral lease “Muckaty” over it. Muckaty is in that part of the Northern Territory covered by the Northern Land Council.
Therefore I would need a permit to visit Muckaty and the proposed site if I got the opportunity, either as part of the court case or separately during my short visit, with Warlmanpa people who might want me to help tell their story to the wider world.
Accordingly, I made an application to the Northern Land Council, nominating a couple of different dates and mentioning that I aimed to write about these matters on myhttp://www.songlines.org.au blog.
When I did not get a reply back I sent an email to the NLC asking about the progress of my permit application. Copies of that correspondence are included below My application does not appear to have been referred to the traditional owners of Muckaty, but the NLC legal section.
On the basis of that I have been effectively blocked from visiting the proposed radioactive waste site…..
The main question in my mind is this – “Is the decision of the Northern Land Council to deny me access to visit the proposed radioactive waste site a decision which:
(a) truly reflects the wishes of the traditional owners of Muckaty, in whose name the Northern Land Council operates or
(b) was it a decision based on other than normal considerations and
(c) if it was not normal practice, was the decision in keeping with the relevant legislation regarding the role of the NLC in processing permits?”
There is a very important wider issue in all this – irrespective of my visit – “If the radioactive waste facility goes ahead, will journalists and indigenous rights advocates like me be able to have access to freely visit it and report on any issues associated with its operation?”
Australia’s Panel to Review Renewable Energy target – close ties with polluting industries!
(VIDEO) Alleged conflict of interest in energy review panel Australian Broadcasting Corporation Lateline Broadcast: 04/06/2014 Reporter: Kerry Brewster The expert panel which is deciding how much renewable energy Australia should produce is defending itself against claims of conflict of interest because an economist on the panel is using work he did for the oil and gas industry to argue the case for scrapping the renewable target.
Transcript
TONY JONES, PRESENTER: The expert panel which is deciding how much renewable energy Australia will continue to produce is defending itself against claims of conflict of interest. Solar advocates say economist Brian Fisher should step down from the Government’s review of the Renewable Energy Target. They say he previously did work for the oil and gas industry and that’s being used to argue the case for scrapping the Renewable Energy Target. This exclusive report from Kerry Brewster.
KERRY BREWSTER, REPORTER: For 14 years, the oil and gas industry has lobbied for the 20 per cent Renewable Energy Target, or RET, to be dumped.
DAVID BYERS, AUST. PETROLEUM PRODUCTION & EXPLORATION ASSN: We would like to see the Renewable Energy Target removed.
KERRY BREWSTER: Now a Government-appointed panel is reviewing the target. And it hasn’t ruled out scrapping it altogether, a move that the renewable energy industry says would halt billions of dollars in new solar and wind projects and potentially bankrupt some large companies……..
KERRY BREWSTER: The modelling used to argue for the target to be scrapped is two-year-old work from BAEconomics, headed by economist Dr Brian Fisher. Dr Fisher is one of the four experts tasked by the Prime Minister to decide the target’s future.
Solar advocates are calling this a serious conflict of interest. They point to the fact the same modelling was rejected by the last RET review conducted 18 months ago by the Climate Change Authority.
JOHN GRIMES, AUSTRALIAN SOLAR COUNCIL: He’s been an active player, providing advice that’s been absolutely one-sided in the past, advice that’s still being used. Brian Fisher should step down from his position on this review committee……..
In the complex world of modelling, Bloomberg New Energy says it’s crucial to reflect not just the cost of renewables, but also the benefits. Its submission includes what it says APPEA’s modelling doesn’t: the ability of solar and wind to drive down the wholesale price of electricity when the sun shines and the wind blows.
KOBAD BHAVNAGRI, BLOOMBERG NEW ENERGY: That’s essential, really. You have to look at both the costs and the benefits of the scheme. Just like when you’re going to buy a house you look at the cost of buying a house versus the benefits of not having to pay rent anymore. It’s quite easy to highlight the costs and completely ignore the benefits.
MILES GEORGE, INFIGEN: In that modelling that was done for APPEA two years ago, there was no attempt to identify or model the wholesale price reduction that’s associated with renewable energy.
KERRY BREWSTER: Wind energy company Infigen says APPEA’s modelling doesn’t stand up to scrutiny……….http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2014/s4018998.htm
India on the brink of a reneweable energy revolution
India’s energy future: Australian coal or renewable revolution? The Conversation, Craig Froome Global Change Institute – Clean Energy Program Manager at University of Queensland 4 June 14, “……….Renewable revolution? India’s renewable energy ambitions are driven both by the need to reduce carbon emissions and by falling renewableenergy prices (relative to increasing coal prices).
Currently India has four renewable energy schemes. They are:
- Renewable Mix Target (Electricity)
- Renewable Capacity Target
- Renewable Portfolio Standard (PAT Scheme)
- Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission
The Renewable Mix Target sets a target of 15% of India’s total electricity generation by 2020. This target ignores large-scale hydroelectricity, but with renewable energy generation currently at 12% India is in a good starting position.
The Renewable Capacity Target is a target for installed capacity. Set in 2012, it aims for 41.3 gigawatts of installed renewable capacity by 2017, increasing to 72.4 gigawatts by 2022. As of March 31 India has 29.5 gigawatts installed capacity. The capacity target also sets ambitions for individual technologies 4 to 20 gigawatts of solar capacity, and 20.2 gigawatts to 27.3 gigawatts of wind energy by 2017 and 2022. Solar and wind currently stand at 2.2 and 20.2 gigawatts respectively.
The portfolio standard is a cap-and-trade scheme, due to end in 2015. Current estimates suggest the scheme has had the desired effect, and rules for continuing the scheme are being considered.
Finally, the solar mission is a solar-specific program to increase grid-based generation to 20 gigawatts by 2020, funded by a national feed-in tariff. More than 80 solar manufacturers are now establishing in India in anticipation for the roll out……..http://theconversation.com/indias-energy-future-australian-coal-or-renewable-revolution-26569
Coalition Ministers say that Moree solar energy plant funding is assured
Moree solar on track for Commonwealth funding http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-04/moree-solar-on-track/5500668 By Tim Lamacraft 4 Jun 2014,The Federal Coalition is confident the Moree Solar Farm will secure Commonwealth funding despite plans to axe its finance source.
The Government is looking to axe the Australian Renewable Energy Association, which has expressed interest in providing finance to the Moree Solar Farm, a joint initiative of Pacific Hydro and Fotowatio.
The two companies are nervous that tens-of-millions of dollars in funding is in jeopardy.
But Federal Parkes MP Mark Coulton recently met with Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane on the issue.
He says the Moree Solar Farm is on track to meet Commonwealth funding approvals.
“I’ve been reassured by the Minister and his Department that there’s nothing with this project that’s ringing alarm bells and they’re very happy with it the way it is,” he said.
“Certainly the Moree Solar Farm has no reason at this stage to be fearful that the ARENA funding wont be there.”
It’s not yet clear when the Coalition will approach the Senate in an attempt to repeal the Arena Act, but projects that do not already have agreements in place will not be funded.
Muckaty nuclear waste case highlights financial irregularities in the project
Financial irregularities in Muckaty compo http://localtoday.com.au/get-local/local-news/137684-financial-irregularities-in-muckaty-compo.html By AAP 03/06/14 There were financial irregularities in the compensation package for indigenous people who face a nuclear waste dump on their land, a court has heard. A $200,000 up-front payment to a narrow group of indigenous families was not part of the package that was negotiated, lawyer Ron Merkel QC told the Federal Court on Tuesday.
Mr Merkel pointed to letters and meeting minutes which showed the Northern Land Council’s (NLC) 2007 discussions with the Commonwealth, in which it secured use of the remote land near Tennant Creek as a radioactive waste management facility.Negotiations ultimately arrived at a package of $9 million to be held in a charitable trust, $2 million for a road on Aboriginal land and $1 million, over five years, for scholarships.
“There was no mention of a $200,000 payment, which was the only payment to go directly into pockets,” Mr Merkel said.
“It was the only money to be paid up-front.”
A $200,000 payment was made to a narrow group of indigenous families who, Mr Merkel said, did not represent all traditional owners of the land.
The court was also told the same group was cited in letters in which the NLC sought to reassure the federal government it had obtained informed consent from all traditional landowners.
The case is being heard by Justice Anthony North, who also sought to confirm whether Mr Merkel’s clients were opposed to “the dump or the deal”. “My clients are not trying to get a penny of this,” Mr Merkel said. “They were never given the right to consent or not to consent and if they were included, as they should have been, then the NLC would not have got consent (of all traditional land owners) at all.”
Highlighting process flaws was the only legal avenue to challenge the project, Mr Merkel said, and his clients did not want it to proceed.
The Commonwealth and the NLC are yet to make opening submissions.
Forty witnesses will be called for the hearings being held in Melbourne, Muckaty Station, Tennant Creek and Darwin.
Wildfire danger to USA’s nuclear wastes
U.S. nuclear waste facing wildfire risk THE HINDU, NARAYAN LAKSHMAN , 5 June 14, A New Mexico facility containing 3,706 cubic meters of toxic radiological materials may be on the precipice of a serious incendiary event after the U.S. Department of Energy confirmed that it would fail to meet a deadline to remove drums of nuclear waste from the wildfire-prone area owing to safety concerns.
Although the DoE initially planned to move the “transuranic waste,” from the federal Los Alamos National Laboratory to a Texas facility by June 30, shipments out of the facility were said to have been “put on hold due to concerns about the chemical stability of the mixture in the containers.”
The deteriorating conditions of nuclear waste storage at the facility in recent years were further exacerbated in 2011 by wildfires near the nuclear-weapons laboratory, and the state government of New Mexico ordered the site to complete transfer of the material to other locations “before this year’s wildfire season reaches its peak,” the Nuclear Threat Initiative group noted.
However, apparently one Los Alamos drum of transuranic waste, comprising “tools, rags and other debris contaminated with radioisotopes such as plutonium from U.S. nuclear labs,” may have been responsible for a radiological leak at a repository near Carlsbad, New Mexico, on February 14……. http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/world/us-nuclear-waste-facing-wildfire-risk/article6083055.ece
Aboriginal art exhibition “Flow of Voices” highlights environment and history
Aboriginal elders paint pre-mine tragedy GINA FAIRLEY Visual Arts Hub, 3 JUNE, 2014
A new exhibition from remote mining country provides a ‘prequel’ tale that goes back to colonial frontier massacres Jacky Green’s potent pictures of the environmental impact of the Macarthur River Mine’s (MRM) on the remote Gulf Country of Borroloola recently offered a powerful example of the way art tells an important contemporary story.
But the region, which sits just below the Gulf of Carpentaria in the Northern Territory, has an equally charged story of land and dispossession from colonial times which is now the subject of a matching exhibition Flow of Voices 2: Stewart Hoosan and Nancy McDinny……….in this unrecognised frontier war about one-sixth of the population lost their lives in lawless massacres and violence (600 men, women and children in official records),’ said Cross Arts Projects director Jo Holder.
‘Nancy McDinny and Stewart Hoosan insist that the settlement of Australia wasn’t a simple story of Aboriginal people acquiescing to the occupation of their land, but one of resistance where many people fought back against violence, sexual abuse and dispossession’, Holder added in a statement.
‘When they were powerful old people, didn’t know how to speak English but used to talk in language, saying, “We not going to give away our land. This is our land. It belong here. This is our history, our story and our dreaming”,’ said McDinny.
The old people who set up Waralungku art centre – including McDinny, Hoosan and the late Ginger Riley (from Ngukkur) – wanted to make history paintings to account for their peoples’ agency and overwhelming belief in their just claim on their land. Renowned for their colour and realism, ‘many paintings from the Gulf are unique conceptual and analytic documents about history and contemporary issues,’ explained Holder………The partner exhibitions ‘argue for proper consultation, environmental monitoring, restoration and community benefit in exchange for resource extraction. Without proper respect for people and country racial hierarchies and “imperial” attitudes persist,’ said gallery director Jo Holder.
Green’s work captures that sentiment: ‘I want to show people what is happening to our country and to Aboriginal people. No one is listening to us. What we want. How we want to live. What we want in the future for our children. It’s for these reasons that I started to paint. I want government to listen to Aboriginal people. I want people in the cities to know what’s happening to us and our country.’
The artists and Waralungku Arts are proud to announce their plan to found a Yanyuwa, Garrwa, Marra and Gudanji People’s Keeping Place and Knowledge Centre at Borroloola.
Flow of Voices 2:
Cross Art Projects, Kings Cross
22 May – 28 June 2, 2014
www.crossarts.com.au
www.waralungku.com http://visual.artshub.com.au/news-article/news/visual-arts/aboriginal-elders-paint-pre-mine-tragedy-244014
1 This month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
– go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
Antinuclear 