Adelaide Advertiser readers not all taken in by Premier Weatherill’s dishonest spiel about nuclear waste

Some comments on Weatherill’s article .( Jay Weatherill: South Australia can learn valuable lessons from nuclear waste facility at Eurajoki, Finland)

James, 23 Sept 16 We will certainly need to be right on top of our game to beat out all those other places fighting to become the world’s nuclear lavatory, right Jay?

Perhaps, if this is the best idea we have to ‘save’ our economy then we may as well turn the lights off now and hopefully save a few native species in the process. It doesn’t matter how it’s dressed up, whether it’s made of plastic, porcelain or gold, it’s still a toilet.

Chad, 23 Sept 16 No mention of the massive cost blow-outs the Finns have experienced, then? The Finns do not need to transport it through rough seas and huge distances over remote roads, our transport risks are huge. The vast majority of the waste in fact comes from 800 metres up the road, at the Olkiluoto Nuke plant. Sweden is firmly against the dump, just 90km from it’s own coastline. The Swedish Royal Institute of Technology just released a report suggesting the privately sourced copper capsules are not actually corrosion-proof. Oh, and the Finnish dump will only be able to accept waste for 100 years! Then they’ll need billions of euros for a new hole.

It is not a good legacy to leave behind, Jay. 100,000 years is a long time for something to go wrong and you’ll be remembered for it, if it does.

Sanity, 23 Sept 16

@Michael well, actually the Fins haven’t. Not any radioactive waste at all. But they hope too! Probably some time next decade, unless things go wrong. But they are c̶e̶r̶t̶a̶i̶n̶ c̶o̶n̶f̶i̶d̶e̶n̶t̶ hopeful that it will be fine, that is why they want to sell it to us. Not for money, because it has cost them so much more than they expected and taken so much longer. No for altruistic reasons, sortof.

Of course they don’t trust it for foreign high level waste – I mean you never know what might be in there! No, only Finland’s waste! And they have tight laws about not importing anyone else’s waste.

Finland currently have two different types of operating reactors and the different fuel rods mean canisters are different for the two types of reactors they have. It also means that they drill different depth holes.

But Australia won’t be so lucky if SA imports high level waste from different countries because there will be all sorts of different reactors with many, many different fuel rod length and array dimensions. Lucky eh?

Well, that is if we stick to Finland’s quality KBS-3V system, and not try to sacrifice safety for price by using cheap steel and concrete vessels. When has safety ever been sacrificed for cost in SA? n̶R̶A̶H̶, R̶a̶i̶l̶ ̶u̶p̶g̶r̶a̶d̶e̶, s̶o̶u̶t̶h̶ ̶r̶o̶a̶d̶ ̶s̶u̶p̶e̶r̶w̶a̶y̶, a̶m̶b̶u̶l̶a̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶r̶a̶m̶p̶i̶n̶g̶…..

Pfffft! mere details, it only has to work without failure for 100,000 years!, http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/jay-weatherill-south-australia-can-learn-valuable-lessons-from-nuclear-waste-facility-at-eurajoki-finland/news-story/b8e2250210f4f2a3b0c6a60d9a8037d5

Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items