I was shocked to read in 26 October’s InDaily:
Jay spruiks nuclear expansion as an agent of economic change
Jay Weatherill has told a nuclear industry forum in Adelaide he is personally convinced of the potential for an expansion of South Australia’s role in the fuel cycle, framing the push as part of his ambition to forge a “new economy”.
It appears that Premiere Weatherill has at last come out and played his pro-nuke card. So much for his publicly-avowed position that he would make up his mind when the whole process of the RC has been undertaken. It’s patently clear that he’s been captured by the nuclear industry and foisted an expensive sham of a royal commission onto the SA public, which overwhelmingly has repeatedly been opposed to expansion of nuclear in this state.
The Royal Commission process and the biased ‘findings’ of its subsequent Report are deeply flawed on a range of issues from the dubious economics right through to the non-existent risk assessment. No project of this magnitude, scope, cost and risks into the far-distant future, should be entertained without a comprehensive Risk Assessment Plan. The Report does not meet the criterion in the Terms of Reference to present “the risks and opportunities associated with establishing and operating those facilities” It does present the supposed opportunities but dismisses the risks and assures us that risk assessments will be done in due course.
TOR, Management, Storage and Disposal of Waste
4. The feasibility of establishing facilities in South Australia for the management, storage and disposal of nuclear and radioactive waste from the use of nuclear and radioactive materials in power generation, industry, research and medicine (but not from military uses), the circumstances necessary for those facilities \0 be established and to be viable, the risks and opportunities associated with establishing and operating those facilities
Further, to base this project on the cost-benefit analysis of a single assessor, Jacobs MCM, that has ties to the nuclear industry, and consequently makes predictions based on the fictitious cost of a barrel of nuclear toxic waste, for which is there is no existing market price, is risible at best and unconscionable and criminally negligent at worst.
There is a vast range of well-founded criticisms from expert economists, scientists and engineers, academics, independent media, environmental groups such as Conservation Council of SA, Friends of the Earth etc, and most First Nation communities.
The Government’s Know Nuclear propaganda unit hysterically pushes the one-sided agenda of Premiere Weatherill and his RC across all media channels and exhorts the people of SA to appraise ourselves of the facts. However, the overwhelming majority of South Australians understand the facts and do not support the findings of the RC and the proposed high-toxic nuclear dump or expanding the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, as evidenced across a range of media, including these forums.
The sentiments expressed are summed up by the questions on:
the false economics, “If the proposal is so good, why is it that no other country, especially the great nuclear super-powers, have embraced this wonderful ‘opportunity’? and,
on the viability of technology of long-term high-toxic nuclear dump, “If the technology is available and safe, why is it that not one other country has such a high-toxic dump as the one being proposed?”
In short, it doesn’t pass the ‘sniff’ test. And no amount of exhortation by the pro-nukers to ‘know the facts’ aka red-herring obfuscation arguments about nuclear physics and engineering, crystal-ball gazing of cure-all waste technologies in the future, and hysterical rants about ‘greenies’, NIMBYS etc, has convinced the SA public of this credibility of the snow-job RC and its Report.
There is ample damning evidence about the global nuclear industry and the catastrophic consequences of its operations at places such as Sellafield (UK), La Hague (France), Gorleben (Germany, and the Yucca Mountains (USA).(1)
Premier Weatherill has pushed hard and long at extragavent expense this sham of a Royal Commission. He has played his pro-nuke hand and placed his political career on this process. So be it; the people of SA have been played for fools by Jay and his nuclear mates. Undoubtedly, with typical hubris, he will push this RC sham-democratic process to its inexorable outcome and approve the proposal. We, the people of SA, however, will have the final say and consign Weatherill and his pro-nuke supporters to the waste-bin of history. It will be his ‘Bannon/State Bank’ moment. Bring it on.
Footnote: (1) see for example, the new book by Andrew Blowers, The Legacy of Nuclear Power (Taylor & Francis, UK, 2016)
The South Australian government set up this site for comments on the plan. Comments close at 5 pm today (30 October). I wonder if the Citizens Jury members will have managed to see them – the vast majority of comments were very negative about the plan Here are some of the most recent:
Antinuclear 
I was shocked to read in 26 October’s InDaily:
Jay spruiks nuclear expansion as an agent of economic change
Jay Weatherill has told a nuclear industry forum in Adelaide he is personally convinced of the potential for an expansion of South Australia’s role in the fuel cycle, framing the push as part of his ambition to forge a “new economy”.
It appears that Premiere Weatherill has at last come out and played his pro-nuke card. So much for his publicly-avowed position that he would make up his mind when the whole process of the RC has been undertaken. It’s patently clear that he’s been captured by the nuclear industry and foisted an expensive sham of a royal commission onto the SA public, which overwhelmingly has repeatedly been opposed to expansion of nuclear in this state.
The Royal Commission process and the biased ‘findings’ of its subsequent Report are deeply flawed on a range of issues from the dubious economics right through to the non-existent risk assessment. No project of this magnitude, scope, cost and risks into the far-distant future, should be entertained without a comprehensive Risk Assessment Plan. The Report does not meet the criterion in the Terms of Reference to present “the risks and opportunities associated with establishing and operating those facilities” It does present the supposed opportunities but dismisses the risks and assures us that risk assessments will be done in due course.
TOR, Management, Storage and Disposal of Waste
4. The feasibility of establishing facilities in South Australia for the management, storage and disposal of nuclear and radioactive waste from the use of nuclear and radioactive materials in power generation, industry, research and medicine (but not from military uses), the circumstances necessary for those facilities \0 be established and to be viable, the risks and opportunities associated with establishing and operating those facilities
Further, to base this project on the cost-benefit analysis of a single assessor, Jacobs MCM, that has ties to the nuclear industry, and consequently makes predictions based on the fictitious cost of a barrel of nuclear toxic waste, for which is there is no existing market price, is risible at best and unconscionable and criminally negligent at worst.
There is a vast range of well-founded criticisms from expert economists, scientists and engineers, academics, independent media, environmental groups such as Conservation Council of SA, Friends of the Earth etc, and most First Nation communities.
The Government’s Know Nuclear propaganda unit hysterically pushes the one-sided agenda of Premiere Weatherill and his RC across all media channels and exhorts the people of SA to appraise ourselves of the facts. However, the overwhelming majority of South Australians understand the facts and do not support the findings of the RC and the proposed high-toxic nuclear dump or expanding the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, as evidenced across a range of media, including these forums.
The sentiments expressed are summed up by the questions on:
the false economics, “If the proposal is so good, why is it that no other country, especially the great nuclear super-powers, have embraced this wonderful ‘opportunity’? and,
on the viability of technology of long-term high-toxic nuclear dump, “If the technology is available and safe, why is it that not one other country has such a high-toxic dump as the one being proposed?”
In short, it doesn’t pass the ‘sniff’ test. And no amount of exhortation by the pro-nukers to ‘know the facts’ aka red-herring obfuscation arguments about nuclear physics and engineering, crystal-ball gazing of cure-all waste technologies in the future, and hysterical rants about ‘greenies’, NIMBYS etc, has convinced the SA public of this credibility of the snow-job RC and its Report.
There is ample damning evidence about the global nuclear industry and the catastrophic consequences of its operations at places such as Sellafield (UK), La Hague (France), Gorleben (Germany, and the Yucca Mountains (USA).(1)
Premier Weatherill has pushed hard and long at extragavent expense this sham of a Royal Commission. He has played his pro-nuke hand and placed his political career on this process. So be it; the people of SA have been played for fools by Jay and his nuclear mates. Undoubtedly, with typical hubris, he will push this RC sham-democratic process to its inexorable outcome and approve the proposal. We, the people of SA, however, will have the final say and consign Weatherill and his pro-nuke supporters to the waste-bin of history. It will be his ‘Bannon/State Bank’ moment. Bring it on.
Footnote: (1) see for example, the new book by Andrew Blowers, The Legacy of Nuclear Power (Taylor & Francis, UK, 2016)