Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Concern that the Nuclear Royal Commission is really about a radioactive trash import business

MARK PARNELL: Giving one week is a ludicrous short time frame. 

WASTES-1NATALIE WHITING: The Premier, Jay Weatherill, has said he thinks it would be more likely that the commission recommend the establishment of a waste dump rather than power station.

Craig Wilkins from Conservation SA says that’s concerning.

CRAIG WILKINS: The only real market gap in the nuclear cycle is around receiving the world’s top nuclear waste. Certainly nuclear power and nuclear enrichment are just not feasible in the short term in our state. So that’s a big conversation. So I suppose part of our concern is that this inquiry is a bit of a Trojan horse for that agenda.

NATALIE WHITING: He says it has been difficult getting a submission up in the time frame

AUDIO Nuclear Royal Commission moves forward in SA MARK COLVIN: A royal commission is the biggest, most thorough, but often most expensive way Australia has of investigating an issue.  ABC Radio P.M. 

But in South Australia, just a week after the surprise announcement that of a royal commission into developing a nuclear industry, submissions on what the terms of reference should be are already closing. There’s been some criticism of that short time frame.

The royal commission will investigate expanding the nuclear industry in South Australia, including the possibility of setting up a waste dump or a power station.

In Adelaide, Natalie Whiting.

NATALIE WHITING: South Australia is launching the nation’s first ever royal commission into developing a nuclear industry in the state. The inquiry will look at everything from mining, to enrichment, waste storage and power generation.

One of the first steps is establishing the terms of reference.

The state’s Greens Party has made a submission with more than 40 suggestions.

The party’s parliamentary leader, Mark Parnell, says it needs to be as broad as possible.

MARK PARNELL: What’s important is for the inquiry to look into things that have gone wrong in the past before it tries to entrench South Australia even further into the nuclear cycle. It will need to look at things like the fact that South Australian uranium was at the heart of the nuclear reactors at Fukushima that have caused so much problems in that country and in fact in terms of pollution of the Pacific Ocean.

NATALIE WHITING: Submissions on the terms of reference close today, just a week after the announcement of the inquiry.

MARK PARNELL: Giving one week is a ludicrous short time frame.

NATALIE WHITING: The State Government says a further three week consultation will be held after a set of draft terms are drawn up.

The chief executive of Business SA, Nigel McBride, says he isn’t concerned by the short initial timeframe……….

The former chair of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, Dr Ziggy Switkowski, says a nuclear waste dump could earn the state billions in revenue………
NATALIE WHITING: The Premier, Jay Weatherill, has said he thinks it would be more likely that the commission recommend the establishment of a waste dump rather than power station.

Craig Wilkins from Conservation SA says that’s concerning.

CRAIG WILKINS: The only real market gap in the nuclear cycle is around receiving the world’s top nuclear waste. Certainly nuclear power and nuclear enrichment are just not feasible in the short term in our state. So that’s a big conversation. So I suppose part of our concern is that this inquiry is a bit of a Trojan horse for that agenda.

NATALIE WHITING: He says it has been difficult getting a submission up in the time frame…….http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4181007.htm

February 18, 2015 - Posted by | politics, South Australia, wastes

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

« Previous | Next »