No “Nuke State” for South Australia – say Josephite SA Reconciliation Circle
Josephite SA Reconciliation Circle
Royal Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle
SUBMISSION TO ISSUES PAPERS 1 – 4
The Josephite SA Reconciliation Circle is a group of concerned citizens with a deep and
abiding interest in the health and well-being of Aboriginal peoples who have already been particularly impacted by the nuclear industry in Australia. We have seen great suffering in Aboriginal communities in the name of progress. The very fact that State funds are being invested in this Royal Commission is deeply disturbing.
We see investment in the nuclear cycle is a backward step and are alarmed by the prospect of
any form of nuclear proliferation. Like many in our community we are shocked that the South
Australian Government could consider going down the path under consideration by the Royal
Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle. We want to continue to be proud to be South
Australian, not ashamed. We do not want South Australia to become ‘The Nuke State’.
There is a need for continued social and economic development of South Australia. We
welcome positive change and development and are excited by the potential energy
opportunities for our State. Most recently, we have been buoyed by reports that renewables
expert Dr. Mark Diesendorf from the University of NSW has completed a report showing that
South Australia could be run on 100% renewable energy is just 15 years! There is a way
forward.
We offer the following responses to questions posed in the Issues Papers………
Ambivalence in Port Adelaide Enfield Council about trucking radioactive trash
Trucking nuclear material could clog LeFevre roads, Port Adelaide Enfield Council says, Kurtis Eichler, Portside Messenger August 19, 2015 TRUCKING nuclear material through the Lefevre Peninsula would add “significant” pressure to already clogged transport routes, Port Adelaide Enfield Council says.
Councillors voted last week to send a four-page submission to the State Government to be considered by its Royal Commission into nuclear energy.
Issues raised in the submission included transporting uranium from northern mining areas through Outer Harbor…….In February, contentious climate commentator Professor Ian Plimer pushed for a nuclear reactor in Port Adelaide, saying it would create jobs and make electricity cheaper.
The idea was rejected by Mr Johanson and Port Adelaide MP Susan Close. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenger/west-beaches/trucking-nuclear-material-could-clog-lefevre-roads-port-adelaide-enfield-council-says/story-fni9llx9-1227489550161
Nuclear stooge MP Rowan Ramsey touting radioactive trash dump for his electorate
Concern over radioactive storage, Port Lincoln Times, By Olivia Barnes Aug. 20, 2015, THE potential for a low to medium grade radioactive waste management facility in the Kimba and Buckleboo district has some local families concerned.
After an information session in April and a call for voluntary nominations from landholders, two families with properties to the north of Kimba expressed interest in volunteering land for the facility.
The project is still in its early planning stages but a number of residents and landowners who are strongly opposed to the idea of the facility being placed anywhere in the district have decided to act.
Among these families’ concerns are the potential health effects a storage facility could have as well as future property values and the impact it could have on grain prices in years to come.
Cameron and Toni Scott said after their neighbours told them they had expressed interest in volunteering land for the facility, they were immediately concerned.
“When the information session was held in April it was the middle of seeding and a lot of us couldn’t make it,” Mr Scott said.
“Our concern is this facility could be near our farms and homes and we don’t know what the consequences could be in the future.”
Mr Scott said his family’s concerns were that there was no precedent to compare the proposed facility to and so much was unknown. “We don’t know what it could do to the district’s reputation, what it could mean for our grain in the future, we don’t know what the outcomes will be for future generations,” he said…….
Federal Member for Grey Rowan Ramsey is hoping the Kimba district doesn’t “wipe off” the opportunity for a radioactive waste management facility to be located somewhere in the area. http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story/3290460/concern-over-radioactive-storage/?cs=1500
Federal Member for Grey Rowan Ramsey will be holding an information session at the Kimba Hotel on Monday, August 24 at 8pm, similar to the one earlier this year
—
Concerted Uranium Research Europe (CURE) to examine internal uranium exposure
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a Third Nuclear Atrocity: the Corruption of Science, CounterPunch, by CHRIS BUSBY 19 AUG 15 “………Finally, someone is trying to get to the truth of the matter
In case you think this is all mad stuff, there does at last seem to be some measure of concern evolving in this area of internal radiation, though no one in The Lancet articles mentions it. The European Union radiation research organization MELODI has finally moved into action, led by the French radiation protection agency IRSN.
The matter was raised (by me) at the inaugural MELODI conference in Paris in 2011, but nothing seemed to develop. I said that there are likely to be dose estimation problems associated with internal exposure to nuclides which bind to DNA, and particularly Uranium; that this potentially falsified the Hiroshima risk model.
A hugely expensive European research project has now been proposed. It is CURE: Concerted Uranium Research Europe. In the report launching this development in March 2015 the authors wrote: a large scale integrated collaborative project will be proposed to improve the characterization of the biological and health effects associated with uranium internal contamination in Europe.
In the future, it might be envisaged to extend collaborations with other countries outside the European Union, to apply the proposed approach to other internal emitters and other exposure situations of internal contamination, and to open the reflections to other disciplines interested in the effects of internal contaminations by radionuclides.
In the future, Hiroshima should not be remembered not just for the destruction of its inhabitants, but also for being the flag for the epidemiological cover-up of the biggest public health scandal in human history, whose victims number hundreds of millions – in cancer deaths and miscarriages, infant deaths, loss of fertility and the introduction of genomic instability to all creatures on Earth.
Let us pray that it will not be allowed to sanction the final nuclear exchange, on the mistaken prediction that such an event will be winnable.http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/19/after-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-a-third-nuclear-atrocity-the-corruption-of-science/
This article was originally published by RT, and is reproduced by kind permission of the author.
Dr Chris Busby is the Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Riskand the author of Uranium and Health – The Health Effects of Exposure to Uranium and Uranium Weapons Fallout (Documents of the ECRR 2010 No 2, Brussels, 2010). For details and current CV see chrisbusbyexposed.org. For accounts of his work see greenaudit.org, llrc.org and nuclearjustice.org. http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/19/after-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-a-third-nuclear-atrocity-the-corruption-of-science/
Very little use made of “third-party appeal rights” in Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act
Review questions Coalition push to end ‘legal sabotage’ of resources projects, SMH August 19, 2015 Mark Kenny, Lisa Cox, Jane Lee An attempt by Tony Abbott to blame “legal sabotage” used by green groups to kill off large resource projects in the courts, at the cost of tens of thousands of jobs, is derived from dubious and exaggerated evidence, according to an independent review of environmental law.
An analysis of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act by progressive think tank the Australia Institute has found only a fraction of the roughly 5500 projects referred since the act’s inception in 2000 have been challenged using “third-party appeal rights”.
Elements of the yet-to-be-released study, obtained by Fairfax Media, reveal that of those projects referred to the environment minister for assessment under the act, about 1500 have been judged to require formal assessment, with just 12 refused federal environmental approval – nine of those because they were deemed “clearly unacceptable” even before being referred for formal assessment.
And of those 5500, only 27 have been the subject of third-party legal appeals.
“Third-party appeals to the Federal Court have only affected 0.4 per cent of all projects referred under the legislation,” the Australia Institute’s executive director, Ben Oquist, said………
the government plans to amend section 487 of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to remove the power of so-called “third parties”, such as environmental groups, from intervening in referrals from the minister under that act, via the courts.
Labor and the Greens said they would not support government’s proposal, meaning the government will need the crossbench if its plan is to pass the Senate……….http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/review-questions-coalition-push-to-end-legal-sabotage-of-resources-projects-20150818-gj1xp3.html
Sunshine Coast solar farm to start building before Christmas
Sunshine Coast closer to solar farm starting before Christmas, Brisbane Times, August 20, 2015 -Tony Moore The Sunshine Coast will beat a number of south-east Queensland councils to the solar energy punch by beginning to build its own 15-megawatt solar energy farm before Christmas 2015.
It will mean the Sunshine Coast Council will be Australia’s first council to own and use its own solar energy plant.
The Sunshine Coast plans to meet the cost of its own electricity once the plant is at full production, saving the council about $9 million over 30 years, Mayor Mark Jamieson said.
The Sunshine Coast is close to announcing the successful tender for the project………http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/sunshine-coast-closer-to-solar-farm-starting-before-christmas-20150819-gj3539.html
The corruption of science in the cause of promoting the nuclear industry
After Hiroshima and Nagasaki, a Third Nuclear Atrocity: the Corruption of Science, CounterPunch, by CHRIS BUSBY 19 AUG 15 On the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, articles are appearing everywhere discussing the historical, philosophical, scientific, public health and social meaning of this event (I almost wrote ‘war crime’).
The bombings can be extrapolated onward in time through the atmospheric testing fallout and Chernobyl, to the more recent contamination in Japan after Fukushima.
Today, the analysis of the health risks from the Japanese A-Bombs is being cleverly twisted to provide a rationale for the development of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not just some historical tableaux that we can weep crocodile tears over, and discuss as socio-historic phenomena.
They are here today, present as ghosts, in all the manipulations and devious calculations made by the international radiation risk agencies and nuclear-industry scientists giving results that continue to permit the release into the environment of the same deadly substances that emerged for the first time in 1945…………
The evidence from real studies of the offspring of the test veterans, and the soldiers and civilians exposed to Depleted Uranium, is that a nuclear war will be the end of life on earth as we know it.
The test veterans have a 10-fold excess risk of children with birth defects, 9-fold in the grandchildren. Although millions will be blasted away, the real outcome will be global sterility, cancer and malformation. All the Mad Max stuff but worse: Hollywood got it right.
Evidence and errors in the Hiroshima lifespan studies
If you find that there is a doubling of breast cancer or child leukemia in those living downwind of a nuclear power station, at an ‘estimated dose’ less than external background, the ICRP model tells you that the effect cannot be due to the releases from the power station because the dose is too low.
The epidemiologist Martin Tondel found in 2004 that there was a significant excess cancer risk in Northern Sweden after Chernobyl. He was told to shut up because what he found was impossible: In other words, the dose was too low.
The same in Belarus and Ukraine where my colleague Alexey Yablokov has collected together an enormous compilation of peer reviewed evidence of appalling effects. Most recently we see the Hiroshima-based denials in the case of thyroid cancer in Fukushima prefecture (see below)………..
all groups were exposed to residual radioactivity from the bombs. The US and ABCC denied (and still denies) this. There were internal exposures to all the groups whatever their external dose had been at the detonation. Continue reading
Global Islamic leaders call for a fossil-free world
Muslim countries and Islamic leadership can play a unique role in shaping the global climate accord that countries hope to sign in Paris in December.
Can an Islamic climate change declaration inspire 1.6B Muslims? Lisa Friedman, E&E reporter ClimateWire: Monday, August 17, 2015
Islamic leaders from around the globe tomorrow will unveil a declaration calling on the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims to embrace climate change action as part of their religious duty.
Activists gathering in Istanbul for the event said that just as Pope Francis declared climate change essential to the Catholic faith, they hope Islamic religious scholars can inspire Muslim communities to make the issue a priority.
“Islam is very strong on environmental protection,” said Wael Hmaidan, director of Climate Action Network International, who is helping to organize the declaration.
“From the Quran to the hadiths [sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad], it really says it is a human responsibility … that we are tasked with protecting creation and it is part of our duties as Muslims,” he said.
Leaders will be carrying that message when the Islamic Climate Change Declaration is formally unveiled at the conclusion of a two-day symposium organized by Islamic Relief Worldwide, the Islamic Foundation for Ecology and Environmental Sciences, and GreenFaith.
In addition to emphasizing the Quran’s teachings on environmental protection and the role that Islam can play in addressing climate change, it is expected to call on wealthy countries to “drastically” reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help vulnerable nations grapple with climate impacts.
A call for a fossil fuel-free world
Farm organisations angry at Abbott plan to restrict legal action against resource projects
Farm groups furious at Coalition move to restrict environmental challenges, Guardian, Lenore Taylor, 19 Aug 15 Farm organisations horrified they will be swept up in changes to environmental laws that aim to stop green groups taking legal action against resource projects Angry farm organisations have learned they will be caught by changes to federal environmental laws aimed at stopping “environmental saboteurs” using the courts to delay big projects, but agriculture minister Barnaby Joyce says some individual farmers may not.
After the surprise announcement of major changes to federal environmental law on Tuesday, the Abbott government spent much of Wednesday making conflicting statements about which part of the laws it intended to abolish.
But by the day’s end it confirmed it would try to repeal all of section 487 of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act – contrary to an answer given by the responsible minister, attorney general George Brandis, just hours earlier, and contrary to confidential speaking notes mailed to all MPs that morning.
The clarification horrified farm groups because many farm organisations will also be denied standing to challenge federal environmental approvals in the court and this could stymie several planned challenges to federal approval of the controversial $1.2bnShenhua Watermark coalmine on the fertile Liverpool Plains in NSW.
Any person wanting to mount a challenge would have to prove they had been directly and personally adversely affected……
The government insists the changes to the law will stop only what it calls environmental “vigilantists” and “vandals” and not farm groups.
According to Joyce the Shenhua mine is a “far different proposition” from the Adani mine because it is located on a fertile farming plain.
According to lawyers expert in the operations of the EPBC Act, the amendments proposed by the government would leave both environmental and farm groups bogged in lengthy and expensive legal proceedings to decide whether or not they had the “standing” to take legal action, and will mean many of them wouldn’t.
The proposed amendment, to be introduced on Thursday, appears likely to be defeated in the Senate. Labor and the Greens have said they would not support it. Independent Queensland senator Glenn Lazarus and Palmer United party senator Dio Wang are also unlikely to vote for it and independent Nick Xenophon has said he is “very wary”…….. http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/aug/19/farm-groups-fear-coalition-move-to-restrict-environment-challenges
Abbott’s plan to change environmental law puts Great Barrier Reef at risk
Great Barrier Reef and other icons at risk from proposed law change: green groups August 19, 2015 Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald The Abbott government’s proposed change to a key environmental protection law is an anti-democratic move that could put Australia’s famous natural heritage sites at risk, green groups say.
Eight leading non-profit environmental organisations gathered in Sydney on Wednesday to oppose the federal government’s plan to abolish section 487 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.
The move, which may struggle to win sufficient votes to get through the Senate, would limit legal challenges to major projects to those parties directly affected……….
Wilderness Society convener James Johnson said the EPBC ACT had been set up by the Howard government in 1999 after the Australian Law Reform Commission found individuals should not require a special test to begin proceedings on environmental matters.
“Those are the areas and issues deserving the highest levels of protection,” Mr Johnson said. “It’s wrong to represent to the Australian people that we have laws to protect matters of national environmental significance on the one hand, and to take away the very right to ensure those laws are followed with the other.”
Paul Oosting, acting national director of GetUp!, said the move was an action of a “desperate government”.
“They’ve had a controversial few weeks and now they’ve launched this attack on Australia’s key environmental laws, putting in jeopardy our precious places like the Great Barrier Reef, to distract from a government that’s not performing well,” he said.: http://www.theage.com.au/environment/great-barrier-reef-and-other-icons-at-risk-from-proposed-law-change-green-groups-20150819-gj2h49.html#ixzz3jJGos0sl
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 