Exposing the vested interests of pro nuclear publicists like Oscar Archer
Dennis Matthews, 26 Feb 16 The Advertiser newspaper has been printing lots of Letters to the Editor on the nuclear issue.
Two pro-nuclear letters caught my attention.
One was by a writer (Oscar Archer) who is regular contributor to a pro-nuclear website, and who prides himself on having a PhD in Chemistry. The PhD, however, is in an area of chemistry not evenly faintly related to nuclear issues and is no basis for claiming any special insight. What is highly relevant however is that the supervisor of his thesis was Stephen Lincoln who, as a member of the board of SA Nuclear Energy Systems, has a vested interest in promoting the nuclear industry.
Another letter was written by a geologist (Sean Kennedy) who was one of the people acknowledged by Senator Edwards as contributing to his submission calling for an integrated nuclear industry in SA.
Noel Wauchope – Oscar Archer is a star publicist for the nuclear lobby. And – he really gave the game away in a talk on ABC Radio National “Ockham’s Razor” – in which he elaborated the plan of USA nuclear industry “new nukes” – their idea to set up a suite of experimental SMRs -Small Modular Reactors in Australia at their own expense. All Australia has to do to get these is to invite in the world’s radioactive trash. They don’t mention that SMRs need plutonium or enriched uranium to start the reaction – so Australia would have to import those, to get these reactors working.
Interesting that they just call them “SMRs” – leaving out that unpopular word “Nuclear”. As USA govt has difficult safety regulations for setting up new nuclear reactors, why not have Australia be the guinea pig?
Adelaide Advertiser poll – nearly all supporters of nuclear waste import had vested interests!
Dennis Matthews, It was heartening to see that in a survey stacked with vested interests (The Advertiser, 23/2/16), of those who had no apparent vested financial or professional interest only two people supported the importation of high-level nuclear waste into South Australia and one of those had imprecise information about Finland.
Stacking inquiries and surveys is a trade mark of the nuclear lobby.
I look forward to the day when we can trust the business community, media and politicians to be honest with the people of South Australia and to stop treating us as like idiots.
Naively, I thought this would have happened after the State Bank fiasco in 1991. Consecutive South Australian Premiers have clearly demonstrated that they have learnt nothing from past indiscretions.
It is now up to ordinary South Australians to keep South Australia free from exploitation by vested interests and incompetent politicians.
China criticises Australia’s ‘Cold War mentality’,in its planned $150 billion military spendup
Defence white paper shows Australia’s ‘Cold War mentality’, says China, February 26,2016 Philip Wen China correspondent for Fairfax Media
Shanghai: China has accused Australia of maintaining a “Cold War mentality” with its alliance with the United States, following the release of the Turnbull government’s defence white paper which criticised China’s role in rising tensions in the South China Sea.
At a regular press briefing in Beijing, Defence Ministry spokesman Colonel Wu Qian said China was “seriously concerned” about the contents in the white paper, and that it was “firmly opposed to the accusations against China’s construction activities on the islands and reefs in the South China Sea”.
“We urge the Australian side to cherish the hard-won good momentum of development in bilateral relations, and don’t take part in or conduct any activities that may compromise the stability in the region,” Colonel Wu said at Thursday’s briefing, alluding to pressure on Australia to join the United States in sailing warships within 12 nautical miles of China’s artificial islands in the sea in so-called freedom of navigation operations…….. http://www.smh.com.au/world/defence-white-paper-shows-australias-cold-war-mentality-says-china-20160226-gn4d6j.html#ixzz41PmdN1zf
Australia’s $150 billion Defence white elephant spending
Sub-standard plan for Defence, SMH, February 27, 2016 Michael West Business columnist After a welter of strategic press leaks, targeted with the precision of a laser-guided missile, the 2016 Defence white paper was finally unveiled this week.
Defence spending has the added allure of political expedience. Who can argue with a government bent on safeguarding its citizens from future unspecified invaders? Certainly not the opposition……
It may cost taxpayers $150 billion.
Although the cost to design and build each of the 12 submarines is mooted at $4 billion – just shy of a Medibank float – the cost of running them is far greater. They describe the submarine spend as the “largest defence procurement program in Australia’s history”.
Chance of attack is small
The white paper concedes there is but a remote chance of a military attack on Australian territory by a hostile foreign power. Further, it says Australia cannot afford to equip, train and prepare its military forces solely for the remote prospect of such a major attack.
This would leave the defence forces less capable of addressing the wide range of more likely threats Australia faced to 2035.
So the policy is therefore to devote unprecedented billions of dollars, the biggest defence outlay ever, to build submarines on the implausible chance of a foreign military attack.
China is not discussed much, though it is deemed by Defence to be the biggest threat. There are a few brief references in the paper though there is no discussion of what sort of force we would need if China were to attack.
And you don’t have to be a defence guru to work out that Australia would stand little chance of withstanding a Chinese military with its 70 submarines, 2.3 million frontline personnel and $US155 billion defence budget.
The white paper’s submarine analysis is flimsy. The first subs only become operational in the 2030s, at the end of the strategic environment which the paper addresses.
It fails moreover to establish why this weapon system is superior to far more agile, responsive and modern air and surface weapon systems for meeting the faint threat of invasion, or how the huge outlay is justified……
The public deserves better than for this critical issue of defence spending to be treated as such a sacred cow that there is no debate about it in Parliament and no more than feeble inquiry in the mainstream media.
You could select the tiniest thing on the share market and bet it would boast superior disclosures to Defence white paper 2016.
Rather than having cash thrown at them willy-nilly, the armed forces should undergo the same blow-torch as other institutions. You can bet there is a lot more fat in defence than the ABC (whose white paper coverage has also been lame).: http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/substandard-plan-for-defence-20160226-gn4cx3.html#ixzz41PkqKAgL
#NuclearCommissionSAust ‘s plan – not necessarily an Eldorado for South Australia
SA’s Nuclear Waste Boom: A Hot Story Requires Cool Heads http://adelaidereview.com.au/opinion/business-finance-opinion/nuclear-waste-boom-a-hot-story-requires-cool-heads/ John Spoehr Director of the Australian Industrial Transformation Institute at Flinders University February 26, 2016
As the alluring prospect of a nuclear waste storage boom fades a little in our minds, attention needs to turn to the risks associated with large–scale radioactive waste storage…….
I think the Commission’s estimates might prove to be over-optimistic. If the proposition is as attractive as the modeling provided by the Commission suggests, then you would expect a range of players to enter the market at the same time as Australia does……
We cannot rely on a radioactive storage facility to deliver short-term benefit. ‑The lead times on a project like this are long and will be complicated by the need for very thorough and accurate geological, environmental, social and economic impact assessment. Community attitudes will be shaped by this as it unfolds.
In the meantime, we must guard against seeing the Commission’s findings as the foundation for some kind of nuclear Eldorado. The prospect of great riches and jobs flowing from being a storehouse for radioactive material is seductive at a time when job losses in the automotive, mining and steel industries loom large. We must be convinced rather than seduced by the case for a storage facility in South Australia. Future generations will not forgive us if we get this one wrong.
Australian Senate passes motion calling on Western Australia to drop Anti-Protest Law
Federal Senate Urges WA Parliament To Drop Anti-Protest Law, New Matilda, By Thom 
Mitchell on February 24, 2016 The Federal Senate has passed a motion calling on the West Australian government to abandon “divisive and unnecessary” anti-protest laws which have been strongly condemned by the United Nations.
The motion, introduced by Greens Senator Rachel Siewert and passed on the voices, adds to a long list of institutions and individuals who are concerned about what Colin Barnett’s government is proposing.
Last week three separate United Nations Special Rapporteurs issued a joint statement condemning the anti-protest laws, saying it would have the “chilling affect of silencing dissenters”.
“It would go against Australia’s international obligations under international human rights law, including the rights to freedom of opinion and expression as well as peaceful assembly and association,” the three Special Rapporteurs said.
Hundreds of people protested against the bill at the West Australian Parliament yesterday, and a coalition of more than 80 community organisations, legal centres, and unions have signed an open letter opposing the bill. The Federal Senate this afternoon noted “the important role public protest and free speech have played, and continue to play in a healthy democratic society”. However that role may be dramatically curtailed by the time West Australia’s Parliament adjourns tonight.
The bill is being progressed in the lower house of the state Parliament this afternoon, having moved through the upper house last week.
The legislation will inevitably pass, because the Barnett Government controls both houses, but it faced nearly a year of staunch opposition from Labor and the Greens.
The anti-protest law creates two new criminal offences. Under the first, it will become illegal to physically and intentionally prevent a lawful activity being carried out. And under the second, it will become illegal to possess with the intent of using, or to use a “thing” to prevent a lawful activity.
On top of this extremely broad drafting, there is concern that the onus of proof is reversed for both new offences. The President of the West Australian Law Society, Mathew Keogh has previously said that the bill “may erode fundamental aspects of our criminal justice system”.
“The legislation is so broad that it is almost impossible to say how they may be applied down the track,” he said……..
Senator Siewart takes a different view, arguing “were it not for peaceful protest, awful projects such as James Price Point would have gone ahead”.
“The anti-protest laws that Colin Barnett is pushing through State Parliament attacks free speech, public protest and a healthy democratic society,” Siewart said.
“I urge Colin Barnett to consider the calls of the Senate, as well as the United Nations, and abandon these divisive and unnecessary laws,” she said. https://newmatilda.com/2016/02/24/federal-senate-urges-abandonment-of-anti-protest-law-as-wa-parliament-prepares-to-pass-it/
#NuclearCommissionSAust’s adviser AREVA is in deep financial trouble
Nuclear group Areva in the red again http://www.euronews.com/2016/02/26/nuclear-group-areva-in-the-red-again/ Nuclear power group Areva has reported a full-year net loss of 2.038 billion euros, its fifth consecutive annual loss.
The French state-controlled firm blamed extra costs at a reactor project in Finland for half of that.
The rest was due to restructuring expenses and other costs related to market conditions including reduced demand for uranium, nuclear fuel and services.
The group said it has enough funds for this year thanks to bank loans and will sell five billion euros worth of new shares by the first quarter of 2017 to stay afloat.
Areva is 87 percent state-owned and the French government has promised to subscribe to the new share issue.
Phasing out nuclear power is the best option for addressing nuclear waste problem
More money and some jobs would be offset by the stigma inevitably attached to radioactivity and by the risks involved, including accidents, radioactive leaks to underground water systems, and radioactive emissions to the air.
Recent accidents at nuclear waste dumps in Germany, New Mexico and France are deeply concerning. It is difficult to credibly predict cumulative environmental effects should a radioactive incident occur underground.
There are no straightforward answers. Given the dangers of radioactive waste, McKenna should invoke the precautionary principle which is enshrined in environmental laws worldwide. It states projects should not be undertaken if they might have serious adverse consequences, even if we don’t know whether these consequences will happen.
The next step would be to stop making more nuclear waste.
Dealing with nuclear waste is so difficult that phasing out nuclear power would be the best option http://www.lfpress.com/2016/02/26/dealing-with-nuclear-waste-is-so-difficult-that-phasing-out-nuclear-power-would-be-the-best-option Erika Simpson and Ian Fairlie, Special to Postmedia Network Environment Minister Catherine McKenna has dealt a setback to Ontario Power Generation’s plan for a nuclear waste burial site on the shores of Lake Huron. In a letter to interested parties last week,
McKenna delayed a decision on whether to approve the proposed deep geologic repository (DGR) for low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste and set a short April 18 deadline for OPG to furnish a timeframe within which it could provide an updated list of commitments to mitigate potential damage from the site.
Furthermore, she stated she will seek a further extension for the review from cabinet at a later date. We are probably in for long delays. Continue reading
Australian govt’s new fossil fuel “growth centre” !
Coalition digs deeper into fossil fuels with new “growth centre” http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/coalition-digs-deeper-into-fossil-fuels-with-new-growth-centre-82395 By Sophie Vorrath on 25 February 2016
Part of the government’s $248 million Industry Growth Centres Initiative, the Oil, Gas and Energy Resources Growth Centre was unveiled on Wednesday by federal energy minister Josh Frydenberg and minister for innovation and industry, Christopher Pyne. The ministers said they hoped the facility – in which the Turnbull government is investing $15.4 million over four years – would help position Australia’s energy and resources sector for the next wave of investment.
It will be chaired by long-time oil and gas industry executive, Ken Fitzpatrick, with a board and management team drawn from across the oil, gas, coal seam gas, coal and uranium industries.
According to the website, the growth centre’s mission is to reduce industry costs, direct research to industry needs, improve work skills, facilitate partnerships and reduce regulatory burdens.
It will also have a particular focus on improving knowledge and techniques needed to unlock Australia’s marginal gas resources like coal-seam gas – a controversial and high-cost field of exploration and production that AGL Energy recently ruled out of its repertoire to focus, instead, on the “evolution” of the energy industry.
Pyne says the new growth centre – which will be known as National Energy Resources Australia, or NERA – will work closely with researchers from universities and the newly streamlined CSIRO, the irony of which was not lost on critics of the scheme.
“Pouring millions of dollars into research for the fossil fuel industry adds insult to injury for the CSIRO climate scientists who are set to lose their jobs under Malcolm Turnbull and his government’s watch,” said Greens energy spokesman Adam Bandt on Thursday.
“Not only is the Liberal government allowing the CSIRO to cut climate science, it’s making the scientists who don’t lose their job try to breathe life into the dying fossil fuel industries.
“(It) is pouring millions of dollars into a big hole in the ground, which is directly at odds with what the science tells us we must do,” Bandt said.
The Australian Conservation Foundation said the establishment of NERA amounted to another multi-million dollar subsidy to big polluting energy companies. “This money would be better spent extending the funding of the Australian Climate Change Science Program which is due to expire in June this year,” said ACF climate program manager Victoria McKenzie-McHarg.
“The world has changed since the Paris agreement. This budget the government should focus on supporting the science, technology and clean energy innovation of the future, not keep subsidising pollution.”
“Australia’s energy and resources sectors make a vital contribution to the Australian economy,” said Frydenberg in a statement on Thursday. “During this challenging time, the Growth Centre will drive collaboration and innovation, and direct research to industry needs, ultimately improving productivity to ensure Australia remains globally competitive.”
Hail to our glorious, smoggy, cancery future!
View from the Street: Government believes that fossil fuels are the future Canberra Times, February 25 2016 Andrew P Street Hail to our glorious, smoggy, cancery future!
It’s a great time to really revel in the endless possibilities of continuing to mine and burn fossil fuels – at least, that’s according to our Industry, Science and Innovation Minister Christopher Pyne and his sidekick Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg, who announced the creation of the Oil, Gas and Energy Resources Growth Centre on Wednesday: a centre to “drive innovation and productivity in the Australian resource sector.”
And what better time could there be to launch such a boondoggl… sorry, completely legitimate and necessary centre of excellence than in 2016? After all, it’s a fossil fuel industry boom time!
Heck, only yesterday the headlines were celebrating the ‘Worst day for BHP since 2008 as market plummets’, thanks to the tumbling price of oil. And then there’s the recent report from Oxford University, which found that Australian coal mines are among the riskiest investments in the world.
In fact, the Senate is currently investigating BP’s plans to drill for oil in the Great Australian Bight, since their last application was knocked back on the grounds that it somehow failed to meet the government’s already-largely-voluntary environmental impact requirements.
So with that sort of universal global enthusiasm for the always-trustworthy fossil fuel biz, you can understand why Pyne’n’Frydy feel that Australia needs to invest $15.4 million taxpayer dollars into it. After all, the industry is clearly on the rise – heck, only yesterday it made a whopping $15.4 million!
And sure, we supposedly made a non-binding deal in Paris to pretend to cut emissions last year – but then again, last month we confirmed that climate change monitoring at the CSIRO is a big ol’ waste of dollars on dumb science stuff.
Unlike, say, centres to drive innovation and productivity in the Australian resource sector, overseen by former energy company executives, which are obviously wise and necessary public investments. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/view-from-the-street/view-from-the-street-government-believes-that-fossil-fuels-are-the-future-20160225-gn3ojs.html
India soon to have nuclear-armed submarine
India close to first nuclear-armed submarine, SMH, February 27, 2016 N.C. BipindraNew Delhi: India is close to becoming the world’s sixth country to put a nuclear-armed attack submarine into operation, a move that would give it a leg up on neighbouring Pakistan and intensify a race for more underwater weapons in Asia.
The 6000-tonne Arihant, developed over the past three decades under a secret government program, is completing its final trials in the Bay of Bengal, according to a senior navy officer who declined to be identified because he’s not authorised to speak about the program. The vessel will be operated by the navy yet remain under the direct control of India’s Nuclear Command Authority headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The deployment would complete India’s nuclear triad, allowing it to deliver atomic weapons from land, sea and air. Only the US and Russia are considered full-fledged nuclear triad powers now, with China and India’s capabilities still largely untested……… http://www.smh.com.au/world/india-close-to-first-nucleararmed-submarine-20160226-gn54ja.html#
Anti nuclear advocate recommended for Nobel Peace Prize
Anti-nuclear Nobel nomination ‘exciting’ http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/297588/anti-nuclear-nobel-nod-‘exciting‘ Alexa Cook, 26 Feb 16 – alexa.cook@radionz.co.nz
A New Zealander working on a lawsuit to hold nuclear powers to account is excited about the team’s nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize. Professor Roger Clark is part of an international team representing the Republic of the Marshall Islands, which includes Bikini Atoll.
The islands have launched a legal bid at the International Court of Justice in The Hague to hold accountable the nine countries in possession of nuclear weapons.
Mr Clark said the team of eight lawyers had done a lot of hard work, and he was thrilled to be part of it.
“It’s an exciting thing. I think it’s a really important case and, of course, the nomination is for former RMI [Republic of the Marshall Islands] Foreign Minister [Tony] De Brum and the whole team that is working on the case.
“What we are arguing about in March is the quite technical question of jurisdiction.”
Between 1946 and 1958, the United States detonated 60 nuclear weapons on the islands, the equivalent of 1.7 Hiroshima bombs detonated daily for a dozen years.
Professor Clark, who began his law studies at Victoria University, and is now based at Rutgers University in New Jersey, said the case would be hard to win but he thought they had a shot.
The legal system in the court was quite different to others and there had been a lot of hard work, particularly in the past few weeks, he said.
“Co-ordinating eight lawyers from Italy, the UK, the US and Holland is an interesting feat and the most complicated piece of litigation I’ve ever engaged in.”
It was a strange court to argue in, he said. “You have to give them a written copy of your oral argument beforehand and then you basically read the oral argument.
“It’s not like in New Zealand or Australian court where you can have an interchange with judges.”
A statement from Rutgers University said if the team’s arguments were successful it could “further the cause of total nuclear disarmament”.
The case, which is being taken against the United Kingdom, India and Pakistan, accuses nuclear-armed states of breaching obligations under international law to negotiate in good faith to rid the world of weapons of mass destruction.
“The hearings in March explore whether these three states have properly accepted the jurisdiction of the court over the cases,” the statement said.
“The United States has declined to accept the court’s jurisdiction over these issues.”
Professor Clark had previously presented a case at the International Court of Justice on behalf of Samoa in 1995 and 1996 to outlaw nuclear weapons.
Hearings on the Marshall Islands case begin in March.
The Nobel Peace Prize Laureates will be announced in October, with a ceremony in Oslo in December.
Highly radioactive black sand found as far away from Fukushima as Tokyo
New Meltdown Byproduct Found Far From Fukushima Daiichi, Simply Info February 4th, 2016 Another type of material has been found by researchers that is tied to the meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi. We have reported extensively over the years on the finding of “black stuff” around mainland Japan. This is a highly radioactive black sand like material that had gathered in gutters and roads as far away as Tokyo. Analysis of materials of that type has linked them to the meltdowns inside the reactors at Fukushima Daiichi. This new finding is also linked directly to the reactor meltdowns……..http://www.fukuleaks.org/web/?p=15283
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 