Antinuclear

South Australia as radioactive trash dump our best nuclear bet – Kevin Scarce

Nuclear power option years away: royal commissioner Kevin Scarce http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/nuclear-power-option-years-away-royal-commissioner-kevin-scarce/story-e6frgczx-1227556819827?sv=631d9f761d476c7a142e1be7add844b1
OCTOBER 5, 2015 Michael Owen SA Bureau Chief Adelaide There is a decade of regulatory and legislative change required before any real work can begin on establishing a nuclear energy ­industry in Australia, royal commissioner Kevin Scarce says.

Those changes would ­require federal and state bipartisanship, meaning tangible economic benefits of expanding nuclear activity would not be ­apparent until at least 2030. We need to be realistic about what the opportunities will be,” Mr Scarce, a former South Australia governor, told The Australian. “If we do decide to participate (in the nuclear cycle), you’d want to grow some jobs, some ­expertise, and grow the technical know-how to go into other elements of ­nuclear — it has to have some economic benefits, and part of this royal commission is to look 10-15 years into the future and see what else is being developed to see if there is a need for nuclear in our power-generation mix.”

The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission was established by Labor Premier Jay Weatherill to look at South Australia’s ­involve­ment in the mining, enrichment, energy and storage ­phases in the life cycle of nuclear fuel, given the state has one of the world’s biggest uranium deposits and has been involved in uranium production for more than 25 years.

Mr Weatherill’s government is grappling with the worst unemployment rate of any state amid the decline of manufacturing. The Premier is keen to explore the economic benefits of a deeper ­involvement in the nuclear ­sector.

Mr Scarce said it might be that, given Australia’s energy ­demand was decreasing, coupled with an abundance of renewables, ­nuclear generators were not necessary. This would leave a ­nuclear waste dump as the most likely source of economic benefit.

Mr Scarce said it was “absolutely” the case that there was a decade of bipartisan legislative and regulatory change that had to occur before any nuclear industry could be up and running. “One should not think that if we turn the switch on at the end of this royal commission after the government has had a look at it that benefits will be delivered within the decade — they won’t be,” he said.

“In order to provide the investment certainty that would be ­required, because of the length and cost of this industry, if you don’t have bipartisan support at both the state and federal level, an industry will not go anywhere.”

Mr Scarce said the state opposition had been very supportive, as had the government, which ­established the inquiry. However, there could be major hurdles under any future federal Labor government. A ­decision to change the ALP national platform opposing a ­nuclear industry has been delayed until after the release of the commission’s report, due on May 6.

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has said there was no need for Australia to pursue nuclear energy because of the nation’s large coal and gas ­reserves, ­although he said nuclear energy would help cut carbon pollution.

Mr Scarce, who has visited several countries on fact-finding missions this year, will begin 30 days of public hearings until December.

October 4, 2015 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016