Nuclear reprocessing no solution to radioactive waste: still needs final repositary
EU paints challenging picture of Europe’s nuclear future, Energy 
Post. February 2,
2016 by Sonja van Renssen “……….Limited prospects for recycling nuclear fuel
France is the only country in Europe that is still working towards a fully closed fuel cycle with fast neutron reactors and advanced reprocessing technology. Other countries use open cycles.
France will be the only country to operate reprocessing facilities after 2018 (when those in the UK are shut down). The partially closed cycle that technology currently permits “is not expected to give a major reduction of the final disposal solution footprint in comparison to an open cycle”.
The future of recycled nuclear fuel is limited by the lack of fast-breeder reactors, more safety requirements, a higher risk of proliferation, lower competitiveness, and the fact that it still requires a final waste depository……. http://www.energypost.eu/exclusive-eu-paints-challenging-picture-europes-nuclear-future/
South Australia’s Port Augusta at the crossroads: clean renewable energy, or dirty nuclear?
Port Augusta now has the opportunity to be part of Australia’s move into 21st Century clean energy. The 
DP Energy project for a renewable energy park with wind and solar is up for consideration and public consultation.
What’s the betting that the snake oil salesmen of the nuclear lobby will be exerting pressure against this exciting new venture.
Remember – renewable energy projects can be up and runnning with a year ot two. Compare that with nuclear power’s record of literally decades to have operational. And even that’s in countries where nuclear power plant is permitted by law – which is not the case in Australia.
Readers of this site may be aware that sevral Submissions to the South Australia Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission have their sights set on Port Augusta. For example, the one on this page, from the Australian Nuclear Association – that persistent lobbyist and publicist for the nuclear industry.
Port Augusta Council to consider DP Energy’s big solar/wind project
DP Energy seeks approval for big solar/wind project near Port Augusta as public urged to have say ABC News2 Feb 16 Port Augusta’s council is encouraging the public to share their views on a renewable energy park proposed to the south of the city, along the Augusta Highway.
DP Energy has submitted an application to the state Development Assessment Committee for the project, which contains up to 59 wind turbines and 1.6 million solar panels, to be built in stages south of Port Augusta.
Port Augusta Mayor Sam Johnson said the project fits in well in the region, which aims to be a centre for renewable energy.
“It’s been demonstrated in Port Augusta through Sundrop Farms using the technology which they’re using, in this case yes we know that wind turbines do exist around the world and around the countryside and in South Australia as well as solar PV [photovoltaic], but this one is the first of its kind in linking the two together,” he said.
The proposal is now out for public consultation and councillor Johnson is encouraging people to have a say……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-02/dp-energy-seeks-nod-for-solar-wind-project-near-port-augusta/7133076
AUSTRALIAN NUCLEAR ASSOCIATION wants nuclear reactors on Spencer Gulf
THE AUSTRALIAN NUCLEAR ASSOCIATION (ANA) put in a submission to #NuclearCommissionSAust devoted only to promoting NUCLEAR ELECTRICITY GENERATION. Of course, they made no attempt to consider renewable energy generation, let alone compare the costs. Heaven forfend, as that would have blown their argument right out of the water!
Anyway, they selected recommending Upper Spencer Gulf Area as the site for South Australia to get nuclear reactors:
“The sites are · Site 1 – Fleurieu Peninsula · Site 2 – Upper Spencer Gulf Crag Point · Site 3 – Kadina site, Spencer’s Gulf east coast”
ANA went to great lengths comparing the different types of nuclear reactors – large, small and medium reactor types.
They were hesitant about Generation IV (new nukes) stating that emerging technologies would be available too late to be effective against global warming.
As for Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, ANA sees hurdles, and is not enthusiastic:
“their deployment is highly dependent on: 1. An order book which matches factory scale manufacture to ensure their economic competitiveness 2. A new regulatory regime which enables operations and security personnel to be deployed in reduced numbers to match the scale of power output”
So, ANA wants to put existing types of nuclear reactors on Spencer Gulf coast:
“the Westinghouse AP1000, the Russian VVER1000 and the Enhanced Candu 6”
Their conclusion?
“nuclear power is a realistic option to connect the grid in SA provided the interconnector to Victoria is upgraded.” (Nary a word about how there’s have to be a nuclear waste dump site set up first. )
South Australian community in Kimba alarmed: nuclear waste site “at Minister’s discretion”
Community shortlisted for nuclear waste site says consultation is driving community apart ABC Radio PM 1 Feb 16 “……..NATALIE WHITING: Three of the six sites shortlisted for Australia’s nuclear waste dump are in the federal seat of Grey in South Australia.
Two of those are in the small farming community of Kimba. Local farmer Peter Woolford says consultation about the proposal is taking its toll.
PETER WOOLFORD: The stress that’s there is quite evident, and the community is fractured…….
PETER WOOLFORD: They meet with groups, they meet with individuals, so to me it’s a pretty divisive thing doing it separately, and in small groups, but you know, that’s what they have to do. They say they’re trying to get word to everybody, and I guess that’s the consultation process.
NATALIE WHITING: The Federal Government has said the shortlist will be whittled down further in March. But across the border in New South Wales, a shortlisted community has already been told they won’t be getting the dump.
The Federal Member for Calare, John Cobb, assured a packed community meeting in Hill End on the weekend that it wouldn’t be the site. He said he had already spoken with the Minister, and it would be ruled out because of community opposition. That’s frustrated some people in Kimba……..
NATALIE WHITING: The Commonwealth process has been running alongside South Australia’s Royal Commission into the Nuclear Cycle.
The country’s chief scientist Alan Finkel told Radio National he looks forward to advising the Commonwealth when it responds to the findings.
ALAN FINKEL: The primary focus I anticipate from the report will be on storage: is there an opportunity for Australia, in particular South Australia, to have a role in a global nuclear fuel cycle by taking the role of long term storage.
NATALIE WHITING: That goes well beyond the waste plans currently being discussed by the Government……..http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4398054.htm
Turnbull copying Abbott as destroyer of renewables, stripping Australian Renewable Energy Agency
“The fact that Arena and the CEFC are still on the chopping block shows that the Liberals’ attacks on renewables hasn’t stopped under Malcolm Turnbull. Greg Hunt has confirmed that these two agencies will remain in the Turnbull Liberal government’s sites.”
Renewables agency stripped of members and run by bureaucrat http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/02/australian-renewables-energy-agency-arena-board-terms-expire-bureaucrat
Board terms expire, leaving body tasked with investing in emerging technology in hands of department secretary for second time in two years. ll appointed board members of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency have had their terms expire and have not been replaced, leaving it governed by the secretary of the Department of the Environment, Guardian Australia has learned.
The same thing happened in 2014 while Tony Abbott was prime minister, and the move has now been criticised as an attempt by the Turnbull government to remove the independence of the agency.
According to legislation, the board must consist of the secretary of the Department of the Environment and up to six others appointed by the minister. The agency can operate with the secretary being the only board member, since it reaches quorum when a majority of the board members are present, which now occurs with one.
Parliament sits for the first time in 2016 on Tuesday, with bills abolishing both the renewable energy agency (Arena) and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation still before parliament, despite having been rejected by the Senate. Signs indicate the Turnbull government intends to keep them. Continue reading
The astronomic costs of a nuclear power future for Europe
Without lifetime extensions, around 90% of the EU’s existing nuclear reactors would be shut down by 2030. But even with lifetime extensions, 90% of existing nuclear electricity production capacity will need to be replaced before 2050. This will cost €350-500 billion, estimates the Commission.
The Commission admits that the costs of new-build projects “are in the high range” of what analysts expected. Hinkley Point C tops the charts with €6.755 per KWe (vs. a €5.290 per KWe average for a “first of a kind” twin unit). There is a “historical trend of cost escalation”, the Commission concludes.
EU paints challenging picture of Europe’s nuclear future, Energy Post. February 2, 2016 by Sonja van Renssen In a leaked draft document obtained by Energy Post, the European Commission outlines the investments in the EU nuclear industry that it believes are needed out to 2050. The document, originally announced for last year, but off the table again for February, paints a challenging picture for the European nuclear industry. €450-550 billion will have to be spent on new plants and lifetime extensions, costs of decommissioning and waste management are high, competitiveness is a challenge and nuclear’s share in the energy mix will decline from 27% today to 17-21%. Sonja van Renssen investigates.
The “Communication for a Nuclear Illustrative Programme” or PINC is a non-legislative document “periodically” produced by the European Commission, as required by the Euratom Treaty (article 40) that “provides an overview of investments in the EU for all the steps of the nuclear lifecycle”. The last PINC dates back to 2008 so the one currently under preparation will be the first since the Fukushima disaster in March 2011. It “provides a basis to discuss the role of nuclear energy in achieving the EU energy objectives”………
Globally, nuclear-related investment needs are estimated at around €3 trillion out to 2050, with most of that money due to be spent in Asia. …… Continue reading
Queensland govt faces outrage after approving Adani coal project
Environmental groups outraged over Adani approval http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/environmental-groups-outraged-over-adani-approval-20160202-gmk0re.html Amy Remeikis Queensland political editor Environment advocates have been quick to express their disappointment following the news the state government has granted an environmental authority for the controversial Adani coal mine project in the Galilee Basin.
While the environmental approval is still one less hurdle the India-based company has to overcome, it is still to secure funding for the $16 billion project and receive a mining licence from the state.
But the authority has drawn criticism from green groups, including the Environmental Defenders Office, with Queensland principal solicitor Sean Ryan announcing the group’s “disappointment” with the decision.
“The EA, granted by Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, authorises the environmental harms of the project subject to conditions but the project still requires mining leases to proceed,” he said.
“These leases are under the cloud of an appeal currently in the Queensland Supreme Court regarding native title issues.
“The lawfulness of federal approval of this project, re-issued by the Environment Minister on 14 October 2015, is also being questioned by our client Australian Conservation Foundation in the Federal Court. ACF’s challenge includes whether the minister had sufficient regard to the protection of the Great Barrier Reef required by international convention.”
Last year, the Queensland Land Court found Adani had exaggerated the benefits the project would bring, agreeing it was most likely to create just under 1500 net jobs a year, rather than the 10,000 it had been promoting and that Adani’s modelling had “probably overstated the selling price of the coal and therefore the royalties generated by the project and the corporate tax payable”.
But it rejected testimony that the mine would not be financially viable.
Greenpeace Australia’s Shani Tager said the government had “sold out” the Queensland environment.
“This environmental authority waves through a project that threatens the health of the Great Barrier Reef, which is already suffering from climate change and pollution,” she said in a statement.
“As Australia’s largest coal mine, Carmichael will add to the global warming that is threatening the reef. It will mean expanding Abbot Point port, dredging in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, and sending more ships through this delicate ecosystem.”
Australian Conservation Foundation CEO Kelly O’Shanassy said the foundation, which was challenging the federal government approval of the mine in court “could not understand the decision”.
Corruption in South Africa’s nuclear project – a model for Australia?
Zuma, the Guptas and the Russians — the inside story RAND DAILY MAIL LILY GOSAM 02 FEBRUARY 2016
“……..Stacked deck
Overall, the tendering process for the 9 600MW nuclear build programme will include 80% South African sourced construction companies, engineers, waste management system suppliers, security systems providers, cabling, cement, steel, finance, transport, IT firms, mining, and more[286] [287].
Which on the face of it sounds wonderful, but not when one considers it is for a nuclear programme that has already been declared by government and independent studies to be unnecessary and unaffordable, will ultimately result in 10 to 50 times higher electricity costs than we are paying now, and already exhibits alarming signs of fixed tendering through devious means[288]……..
Conclusion
Zuma’s 9 600MW nuclear procurement programme and its accompanying contracts are tainted with alleged vested interests of the most deplorable kind.
If the country has any hope of having a rational, legal, and transparent evaluation of the need for nuclear energy, the procurement process has to start afresh.
This however can only occur under new leadership, which places the country’s interests ahead of its own.
If this does not occur, the future of South Africa will consist of a dark and discontented nuclear winter. Day][56]…….http://www.rdm.co.za/politics/2016/02/02/zuma-the-guptas-and-the-russians–the-inside-story
A nuclear waste dump disaster- expensive and ages to fix
Environment state secretary Jochen Flasbarth, who described the situation in Asse II as “disastrous”, told journalists in Berlin that the current plan was to store the Asse waste, once retrieved, with the high-level radioactive waste for which the government is still searching a site…….
The Asse case shows how difficult it can be to undo a decision related to nuclear waste storage. It will take longer to retrieve the waste than it did to dump it
Why Germany is digging up its nuclear waste, By PETER TEFFER , EU Observer, WOLFENBUETTEL, GERMANY, TODAY, 2 Feb 16 “….. in hindsight, the Asse II salt mine should never have been used in the 1960s and 1970s as a site to dump nuclear waste, said Ingo Bautz of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection………To anti-nuclear activists, Asse is a prime example of government not listening to citizens’ concerns. “Incidents were predicted,” said Wolfgang Ehmke, activist in the Gorleben region.
But the waste had to be stored somewhere, so the voices that warned against selecting Asse II were ignored. Continue reading
How Gorleben refused to be Germany’s nuclear dump
By PETER TEFFER GORLEBEN, GERMANY, 1. FEB (subscribers only) https://euobserver.com/beyond-brussels/132065
Queensland disused coal power site could be solar station this year
Solar power station in Collinsville could be under construction this year, ABC News 
(includes Audio) 2 Feb 16 QLD Country Hour By David Sparkes Construction of a $100 million solar power station in Collinsville, North Queensland, could begin this year if a deal is struck for selling the electricity.
Ratch Australia plans to build the station on the site of the disused coal power station it purchased in 2011.
Business development executive general manager Anthony Yeates said the company had been short-listed in an tender process with Ergon Energy and, failing that, there were other potential clients for an off-take agreement.
“The bulk of the development activities are all completed, so it’s a fairly advanced project and it’s really just awaiting us to close out some of the important commercial arrangements,” he said………http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-02/ratch-australia-collinsville-solar-project-could-begin-this-year/7132424
Energy self sufficiency- battery storage and solar getting cheaper
The latest report shows that almost two-thirds of Australians want to be self-sufficient in meeting their energy needs and while battery systems will not give complete independence for most consumers, it does offer a bit more control.
Costs of battery storage systems have been falling at a rapid rate and forecasts are for this trend to continue as more and more households adopt them. It is expected that prices will halve again within the next five years.
Solar panels have also gotten cheaper, with the Climate Council reporting a 75 per cent drop in price over the past five years.
Companies such as Reposit, an ACT-based start-up, are using the grid’s infrastructure to allow people to trade their energy directly on the wholesale market, effectively acting like a mini power station in everybody’s backyard.
Explained: The Tesla Powerwall and what it means for Australia’s energy market, ABC News, 2 Feb 16, The Powerwall, a lithium-ion battery system designed to store electricity generated from rooftop solar panels, is widely considered to be a game-changer for the electricity industry. 7.30 has asked consumer group Choice to crunch the numbers. Here’s what they found.
What is the Tesla Powerwall?While the concept of a home battery storage system is not new to Australians, the Tesla Powerwall unit has been highly anticipated. Continue reading
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 