First a propaganda push for nuclear waste importing, then one for nuclear submarines
Federal election 2016: nuclear-powered subs needs discussion, PETER JENNINGS, THE AUSTRALIAN, JUNE 7 “……..Readers will appreciate the irony of Australia selecting the French-designed Shortfin Barracuda — a nuclear submarine that will be adapted to conventional propulsion……….
[2016 white paper] –
“During the long life of the new submarines, the rapid rate of technological change and ongoing evolution of Australia’s strategic circumstances will continue. As part of the rolling acquisition program, a review based on strategic circumstances at the time, and developments in submarine technology, will be conducted in the late 2020s to consider whether the configuration of the submarines remains suitable or whether consideration of other specifications should commence.”
This could be hinting that nuclear propulsion may be considered a decade or more from now. However, no Australian government in the 2030s or later will be in a position to adopt nuclear propulsion unless earlier decisions have been taken to prepare the ground for such a major development…….
After the 2016 election, the government should start to scope out what steps might sensibly be taken to create a realistic option for nuclear propulsion at the end of the 2020s. A key part of this strategy should be to have an open discussion with the Australian people explaining the basis for the submarine design decision. Government should consider the following steps:
1. Commission an expert panel to evaluate the necessary steps to position for a nuclear propulsion option. The panel should produce a public discussion paper setting out the challenges, risks, opportunities, financial cost and industry requirements necessary to support this technology.
2. As Adelaide is being positioned to be the centre of continuous ship and submarine construction in Australia, the federal and state governments should jointly develop a plan to strengthen university-level instruction in physics, nuclear engineering and necessary supporting sciences based in South Australia.
3. The Royal Australian Navy should develop a training program in collaboration with the US Navy, and potentially the French and British navies, for officers and other personnel involved in operating nuclear propulsion systems.
4. The Defence Science and Technology Group should do its own scoping study to determine Defence’s science and technology requirements to support a move to nuclear propulsion.
5. Defence, in conjunction with other government agencies, will need to determine how to establish an appropriate safety regime to manage nuclear propulsion systems, and quantify the investment needed to make naval bases and support systems suitable for nuclear submarines.
6. Defence should discuss with the US the possibility of seconding significant numbers of RAN personnel into the US Navy submarine arm. Beyond the nuclear propulsion aspect, this has several benefits: the RAN can develop its own cadre of submariners, which it will have to do to prepare for the future submarine, and we will be able to enhance alliance co-operation with the US Navy in a critical area of strategic interest to both countries.
These six steps point to the very substantial investment needed to make the capability leap to nuclear propulsion. They also point to the reasons why nuclear propulsion has been off the table for Australian governments up to now. This is no small step. The 2016 white paper is, however, quite right to say that changing technology and strategic circumstances might well force an Australian rethink about nuclear propulsion.
The responsibility of the government we elect in 2016 should be to do what’s needed to enable a government in 2026 or later to make realistic decisions about nuclear propulsion.
Peter Jennings is the executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. This is an extract from ASPI’s Agenda for change 2016: Strategic choices for the next government, released today.
No comments yet.
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 
Leave a comment