Australian news, and some related international items

One response to the recommendations of the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission

scrutiny-Royal-Commission CHAIN  john jasson  09 Jun 2016
In general the report is far too insular and skewed completely in the direction of nuclear at the expense of the raft of other energy technologies that are safer, have much lower risk profiles and show far greater promise with respect to overall cost and sustainability. As a nation we should be focussing greater energy, effort, investment and research into solar, geothermal, and other sustainable energy
For the avoidance of any doubt, I am strongly opposed to the creation of a nuclear storage facility in this State or Australia for that matter excepting the storage of our own low level nuclear waste.
In regard to the recommendations in Chapter 10 of the report my comments are a s follows:
Recommendations 1, …. Strongly disagree with removal of State powers on these matters. This is contrary to the interests of South Australians
Recommendations 2,3,4…….Agree with these recommendations as they apply to mining generally.
Recommendation 5 is an absolute nonsense and I strongly disagree as it is not practical and realistically enforceable. This appears to me be a hollow and deceptive assurance to gain support for recommendations 8 through 12. The recommendation overlooks the appalling history of contamination in this State that has already occurred and can not be economically remediated.
Recommendation 6 Strongly disagree. Do not agree with removing powers on these matters at the State level. Undermines the function and purpose of State Government.
Recommendation 7 Agree subject to this activity NOT contravening the original intent and purpose of this facility. Priority should at all times support the fundamental purpose for which this facility was created.
Recommendation 8 Strongly disagree.
Recommendation 9 Agree with the intent of this recommendation but subject to the removal of Nuclear.
Recommendations 10, 11, 12 Strongly disagree.

June 15, 2016 - Posted by | NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: