Nuclear power industry exists to provide the nuclear weapons industry – theme for December 17
Yes, they’re joined at the hip, and this is now becoming public news. The World Nuclear News spells it out proudly -“ A robust US nuclear energy sector is a “key enabler of national security”, helping the US military to meet specific defence priorities “In Britain, this is revealed in the BEIS Committee Brexit Inquiry.
The fact that the nuclear power industry supplies essential resources and personnel to the nuclear weapons industry explains why governments are so keen to subsidise this completely uneconomic method of providing electricity.
Of course, the fat cats and shareholders behind both industries are happy to sell nuclear anything to anybody.
We see Russia, especially, doing financial lending acrobatics to sell both industries to dodgy Middle 
Eastern and African dictatorships. But the wonderful Western democracies are not far behind – happy to sell “peaceful” nuclear power to India, for example – a country intent on nuclear weapons expansion.
The nuclear weapons lobby knows damn well, that the first step in selling to a country is to sell (un)commercial nuclear power.
AUSTRALIA’S RADIOACTIVE WASTE: WHAT TO DO WITH IT? WHERE TO PUT IT? WHERE DOES IT COME FROM? WHY KEEP PRODUCING IT?
by ENuFF(Everyone for a Nuclear Free Future SA) enuff.sa@gmail.com November 2017.In 2015 the SA Weatherill government established the SA NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL 
COMMISSION (RC). The following year, the government adopted 9 out of 12 of the RC’s recommendations including to expand uranium mining and to collaborate with the federal government on nuclear power developments. A proposal to remove the state’s Nuclear Waste Storage Prohibition Act and, thereby, allow the state to pursue an international highlevel radioactive waste (HLW) dump was not adopted.
Less publicised, the RC’s Report also recommended that the government pursue the disposal of Australia’s own radioactive waste in SA; hardly a novel idea! (Previous attempts have been made, and failed.) And, this recommendation was adopted.
Running in parallel with the RC; confusing many people, the federal government was, again, doing just that: seeking a ‘suitable site’ for shallow burial of decades of Australia’s accumulated low-level waste(LLW) and indefinite storage (co-location) of long-lived and highly hazardous intermediate-level waste (ILW).
A short list of three sites was selected; all in SA: one at Barndioota in the Flinders Ranges – traditional land of the Adnyamathanha people – and two sites at Kimba.
A decision about a final site in SA for the nation’s waste is imminent. State politicians are surprisingly mute about such an important decision. Clearly they do not want this issue raised in the forthcoming (March 2018) state election.
So where has Australia’s radioactive waste come from? Australia has been accumulating nuclear waste since the Cold War era of the late 1940’s. Initially, it is mostly this legacy waste that would be destined for a national waste dump.
During the post-World War 11 and Cold War decades, Australia mined and milled uranium for US and UK bomb projects; provided sites at Monte Bello, Emu Fields and Maralinga for British atomic bomb tests; established a research reactor at Lucas Heights and developed the Woomera Rocket Range. The forerunner to the CSIRO and a number of nuclear physics research laboratories at universities, especially at the ANU, were also conducting nuclear-related research. The facilities mentioned above were developed in close collaboration with the UK’s quest to develop and test atomic weapons, and the means to deploy them. They all produced and/or stored radioactive waste. There was no thought about what to do with the waste.
Following the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, many in military and government circles considered that the next war would be fought with nuclear weapons.
Some influential Australian politicians and scientists considered that Australia, too, should eventually produce its own bombs and nuclear power reactors. For example secret work on centrifuge uranium enrichment technology, ostensibly, to reduce the ‘lead-time’ required to develop weapons, was being conducted by the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC) in the 1960s. However, until now, apart from research reactors, such nuclear dreams have not yet come to fruition.
Since the 1970s after much controversy, a new era of uranium mining creating millions of tonnes of radioactive tailings has commenced; the oldest reactor at Lucas Heights(HIFAR) has been de-commissioned, the Moata reactor is due for decommissioning and a third reactor – the OPAL – has been built; all with no long-term plans for the waste.
A group of nuclear enthusiasts, undeterred by the intractable nature of nuclear waste and catastrophic nuclear accidents, is determined to take Australia further down the nuclear road. They wish for Australia to build nuclear power stations and nuclear submarines.
According to ANSTO (formerly AAEC), the organisation responsible for operating the Lucas Height’s OPAL research reactor, the nuclear isotopes currently being produced are for nuclear medicine; engineering; making our food more nutritious and undefined research. No reference is made about defence-related research, from either the past or present (ENuFF considers that at least 50% of Australia’s radioactive waste could have been created by defence activities. However, it is difficult to verify this.)
In spite of a backlog of decades of waste, no federal government has succeeded in persuading any community to willingly host either the LLW or the much more hazardous and long-lived ILW. Yet ANSTO is in the process of significantly expanding OPAL’s production of medical isotopes for export, thereby, increasing future highly hazardous spent fuel and reprocessed spent fuel waste.
Where is Australia’s waste currently located? It is estimated that there are around 100 sites; many of them in hospitals, universities and engineering businesses, generally holding very small amounts. Such wastes are the responsibility of the state in which they were used. But, the majority of the waste, both in terms of its quantity and level of radioactivity, is held at a number of federally controlled sites including Lucas Heights, Woomera, Radium Hill, Maralinga, St Mary’s in suburban Sydney and Amberley Air Force Base. Waste from these sites is a federal responsibility.
Like a dirty old can being kicked down the road, Australia’s radioactive waste has been moved from one temporary site to the next: for example, waste stored at Derrimut near Melbourne was shifted to St Mary’s in suburban Sydney. From St Mary’s it was moved to Woomera. CSIRO waste from Fisherman’s Bend was moved to Lucas Heights and, after three years, moved again to Woomera, where it has been ‘temporarily’ stored for the past 23 years.
And how is the waste being managed? Records for some of it are lost. Aircraft washings, following the atomic bomb tests, ended up in the Pacific Ocean. Waste from the first decade of Lucas Height’s operation was buried on site. Radioactive valves were buried in old paint tins at Derrimut. At Hunters Hill it was simply forgotten, until rediscovered when building work on a new development commenced there. The Fisherman’s Bend waste is currently stored in 10.000 corroding metal drums housed in a tin shed at Woomera, where the Defence Department doesn’t want it, and where it is leaking Radium-226. Uranium tailings exist in massive and growing quantities; they are stored in ‘dams’ which leak into surrounding soils and ground water when wet, or are blown away when dry and powdery. Uranium tailings, like higher levels of waste, remain radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years.
Meanwhile, the English routinely release waste into the Irish Sea and wanted to wash their hands of the Maralinga site. The Americans have polluted many sites: the Colorado River, Hanford, swathes of Nevada and the Marshall Islands to name just a few. The Russians, too, have a long history of radioactive pollution, most infamously the poisoning of Belarus and Ukraine from the Chernobyl disaster, and the Mayak region from their bomb programme. The Japanese do not know what to do with waste from their nuclear reactors, let alone from the Fukushima multiple melt-downs, that is, apart from releasing it into the Pacific Ocean.
Would a permanent dump for Australia’s LLW waste at Barndioota or Kimba be any better managed? Who Knows? But the highly hazardous waste, including reprocessed spent fuel classified by ANSTO as ILW but by France as HLW, would be kicked further down the road and stored ‘temporarily’ at the proposed national dump. There it would remain, until a permanent repository for hundreds of thousands of years is planned and built hundreds of metres below the ground.
The federal government insists that many other countries have successfully resolved their radioactive waste issues. But, they have not. Why else is there ongoing interest in the establishment of an international waste dump in Australia as recommended by the RC? A national radioactive dump could well become an opportunity to leapfrog into just such an international waste project, as proposed by state Liberal Party adviser Richard Yeeles.
STOP PRODUCING THE WASTE, ONLY THEN WILL WE TALK ABOUT WHAT TO DO WITH IT
Hows easily Trump could set off a nuclear war with North Korea
Here’s how one crazed Trump tweet could set off a nuclear war with North Korea: Arms control expert HTTPS://WWW.RAWSTORY.COM/2017/12/HERES-HOW-ONE-CRAZED-TRUMP-TWEET-COULD-SET-OFF-A-NUCLEAR-WAR-WITH-NORTH-KOREA-ARMS-CONTROL-EXPERT/ BRAD REED 11 DEC 2017
Jeffrey Lewis, an arms control expert and a scholar at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, has written a terrifying war game scenario for the Washington Post in which he shows how one particularly ill-timed and ill-tempered tweet from President Donald Trump could set off a chain of events that would end in a nuclear war with North Korea.
In Lewis’ scenario, the trouble begins when North Korea shoots down a commercial South Korean aircraft that had strayed into North Korean airspace that it mistook for an American bomber.
In response to this, South Korea orders a limited missile strike against North Korea’s air defense battery to send a message aimed at deterring further attacks from Pyongyang.
Things quickly go haywire, however, Trump sends out an all-caps tweet in the wake of Seoul’s retaliatory strike that reads, “LITTLE ROCKET MAN WON’T BE AROUND MUCH LONGER!”
This leads the North to believe that Trump is planning an imminent invasion — and at that point, Pyongyang unloads its full nuclear arsenal at targets in Seoul, Tokyo, San Diego, Manhattan and, yes, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.
It would be years before the U.S. government could provide an accounting of the toll,” writes Lewis in his conclusion. “The Pentagon would make almost no effort to tally the enormous numbers of civilians killed in North Korea by the massive conventional air campaign. But in the end, officials concluded, nearly 2 million Americans, South Koreans and Japanese had died in the completely avoidable nuclear war of 2019.”
Queensland Premier’s first act will be to veto Adani railway line loan
Annastacia Palaszczuk to officially veto Adani railway loan after swearing in
Letter confirming veto will be sent to Malcolm Turnbull as Liberal National party elects new leadership team, Guardian, Amy Remeikis, 12 Dec 17, The Queensland premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, will move to officially veto any loan to the Indian mining company Adani from the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, as soon as she and her new government are sworn into office.
After almost two weeks of vote-counting, Labor was declared the winner of the 25 November poll on Friday, returning to parliament with a majority for the first time under Palaszczuk’s leadership.
A letter confirming the Adani veto, which marked a turning point in Labor’s campaign, will be sent to the prime minister immediately after Queensland’s governor swears in the new state government on Tuesday……
The move to veto the Naif loan has frustrated the federal government, particularly the minister for resources and northern Australia, Matt Canavan, who last week told News Corp the Queensland government decision was motivated by “xenophobia” and “racisim”, comments Bill Shorten’s office labelled “unhinged”…….
She further vowed to stop all direct taxpayer funds going to the mine and its associated infrastructure……. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/dec/12/annastacia-palaszczuk-to-officially-veto-adani-railway-loan-after-swearing-in
Trump to weaken nuclear rules , in order to sell nukes to Saudi Arabia
Trump Considers Easing Nuclear Rules for Saudi Project https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-12/trump-is-said-to-consider-easing-nuclear-rules-for-saudi-project By Jennifer Jacobs, Ari Natter,and Jennifer A Dlouhy
-
Westinghouse is looking for new markets after bankruptcy
-
Past deals barred uranium enrichment for overseas projects
The Trump administration is encouraging Saudi Arabia to consider bids by Westinghouse Electric Co. and other U.S. companies to build nuclear reactors in that country and may allow the enrichment of uranium as part of that deal, according to three people familiar with the plans.
A meeting to hammer out details of the nuclear cooperation agreement, known as a 123 Agreement for the section of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act that requires it, will be held at the White House Wednesday, two administration officials said.
A successful U.S. bid would help deliver on President Donald Trump’s promise to revive and revitalize the domestic nuclear industry, helping American companies edge out Russian and Chinese competitors to build new fleets around the world. Saudi Arabia plans to construct 16 nuclear power reactors over the next 20 to 25 years at a cost of more than $80 billion, according to the World Nuclear Association.
Westinghouse, the nuclear technology pioneer that is part of Toshiba Corp., went bankrupt in March, after it hit delays with its AP1000 reactors at two U.S. plants. After it declared bankruptcy, Westinghouse — whose technology is used in more than half the world’s nuclear power plants — said it shifted its focus to expanding outside the U.S.
Winning contracts in Saudi Arabia could provide a new market that Westinghouse needs and provide at least a partial vindication for the investment in the AP1000 technology.
“Westinghouse is pleased that Saudi Arabia has decided to pursue nuclear energy,” Sarah Cassella, a spokeswoman, said in a emailed statement. “We are fully participating in their request for information and are pleased to provide the AP1000 plant, the industry’s most advanced technology.”
Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Washington-based Arms Control Association, said weakening the prohibition against enrichment and reprocessing, often referred to as “the gold standard,” is disturbing given what he said was Saudi Arabia’s “sub-par nuclear nonproliferation record.”
“We shouldn’t compromise our longstanding efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons in order to play favorites with certain companies or countries,” he said in an email, calling the idea “disturbing and counterproductive.”
— With assistance by Chris Martin
The Greens will not stop “until this mine is stopped’
The Plan to Stop Adani ‘Invest in renewables, not fossil fuels. greens.org.au/qld/stopadani youtu.be/oSdFiGI1xWc
‘Adani intends to build the largest coal mine in Australia. ‘The Greens will not stop until this mine is stopped’
Newsletter of 11 December 2017,
Quick Facts ‘The Queensland Greens will:
Veto the $1bn NAIF loan
Scrap the $300m tax break from the Qld government
Cancel Adani’s licence to operate in Qld
Cancel Adani’s unlimited groundwater licence
and more!’
‘The Adani Coal Mine threatens the survival of the Great Barrier Reef,
will drain the Great Artesian Basin
and clear 28,000 soccer fields of land.
‘The Greens are the only party running in the Queensland election fighting to stop Adani.
‘Global warming kills people.
Labor’s Adani mine will trash the Reef and wreck our future
and it will supercharge droughts, bushfires and extreme weather.
‘The killer Adani coal mine would pump 7.7 billion tonnes of carbon pollution over its life,
which is almost ten times Australia’s current annual pollution.
One Nation, Labor the LNP support this deadly mine.
‘Queensland Labor has just tried to veto giving Adani a $1 billion taxpayer funded loan.
But not because Queenslanders have been asking Palaszczuk to for nearly a year …
‘Now the LNP says it won’t support the veto.
‘The Greens are the only party that will stop the loan.
‘Queensland Labor is still giving Adani a royalty tax break worth between $370 million to $700 million.
‘The Adani group has a shocking overseas track record of environmental destruction.
‘Several Adani companies are under investigation for money laundering, tax evasion, corruption and fraud.
Many Adani companies are registered in the Cayman Islands tax haven.
‘The Greens stand alongside thousands of other everyday Queenslanders
who are fighting to Stop Adani and kick big corporations out of politics.
‘The Greens would stop Adani. The Queensland government could do any of the following immediately:
‘Veto the $1bn loan from the federal government under the federal Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Act 2015.
Scrap the $300m tax break from the Queensland government
Back the Wangan and Jagalingou traditional owners in their fight against Adani to defend their land rights
Cancel Adani’s licence to operate in Queensland on the basis of its shocking environmental and track record overseas and allegations of fraud, money laundering and corruption.
Cancel Adani’s unlimited groundwater licence
Simply legislate to stop the mine’
‘There is no “fine” or compensation payable if the Queensland government takes any of the above steps.
The above steps are completely consistent with the State government’s executive or legislative powers,
and there is no “contract” which prevents the State from taking these steps.’
Any integrity Turnbull ever had is now blown as he kowtows to the Right on energy
Turnbull blows trumpet for right wing idiocy on energy http://reneweconomy.com.au/turnbull-blows-trumpet-for-right-wing-idiocy-on-energy-35004/
After more than two years at the helm, Turnbull has done nothing to change the policies laid out by his predecessor Tony Abbott, and has only added to uncertainty by canning the major recommendation of the Finkel Review and trying to force the likes of AGL to invest yet more money in their ageing coal fired generators.
In an appearance on ABC TV’s Q&A program on Monday night, on the same day as a series of end-0f-year interviews with mainstream media, Turnbull appeared triumphant, cock-sure and combative, and unwavering from the hard right line on climate and energy.
Asked about his warnings – made in 2010 – that failing to address climate change would endanger future generations, Turnbull predicted a long future for fossil fuels, and repeated the usual fear-mongering about wind and solar.
“Energy policy has to be driven by engineering and economics, not by ideology, and as we’ve seen, for example, in South Australia, sheer idiocy.
“You know, where you had an enormous investment in wind power – nothing wrong with that, except they didn’t have anything to keep the lights on when the windmills stopped turning. A catastrophe. So you’ve got to plan it right. There will be a role for fossil fuels for a long time.”
But whether Turnbull likes it or not, the idiocy does not lie with Labor in South Australia; it lies with the mind numbing ignorance and obstinacy of the right wing in Australia’s politics and media, forever holding on to their attachment to coal.
The blackout in South Australia proved one thing, that the country’s ageing dumb grid was no longer fit for purpose, and the solution would not come from last century technologies like coal and gas, but a new system built around wind, solar, smart thinking and new management practices.
The Coalition’s response to wind and solar, and new technologies such as battery storage and smart things like demand response, betray their own ideology and their lack of respect to both engineering and economics.
Turnbull will be buoyed by the fact that the mainstream media has declared the energy policy issue to be “sorted” – the AFR on Tuesday said the energy policy conundrum was “fixed” and even the Guardian has suggested any opposition to the proposed National Energy Guarantee is just “playing politics”.
But energy and climate policy is anything but: stitched up maybe, fixed no.
Turnbull claims, and did so again on Q&A, that the NEG – currently little more than a thought bubble – has widespread support, but that is only among the incumbents and big business players that stand to profit from it, and their lobbyists and boosters.
The support of others is highly conditional, and is on the basis that the NEG must not look like what the modelling suggests it might look like – useless on emissions, inviting no new investment, doing little on prices, and simply reinforcing the market power of the incumbents.
The lack of scrutiny from mainstream media, and its willingness to pursue Coalition and fossil fuel industry talking points about “clean coal” and “base-load”, will make Turnbull’s task easier and take much of the political risk out of his informal treaty with the technology troglodytes on his right.
But his pursuit of these lines is all the more disappointing because he has plenty of evidence say otherwise.
+ The government’s own modelling suggested that more rnewsbles, not less, would lead to the greatest price reductions;
+ The Finkel report on storage reinforced what the CSIRO and the networks had already made clear, that the level of storage required is remarkably small and almost non-existent for the levels contemplated by this government;
+ And numerous reports put emissions at their ever highest level, point out the uselessness of the current Direct Action policy and the growing risks from global warming.
That’s why the AGL decision on Liddell is significant. A combination of renewables, storage, and some gas peaking plant would slash emissions and offer technology 20 per cent cheaper than the Coalition’s preferred option of spend money keeping ageing and unreliable coal generators on line.
But as the Institute of Sustainable Futures points out, emissions could be cut even further, and costs halved (rather than cut by 20 per cent), if an even smarter approach was adopted – a mixture of renewables and energy efficiency and demand management.
However, as ISF’s Chris Dunstan points out, this does require the government to actually do something, and reframe policy so that utilities and consumers benefit.
The sole incentive for the utilities under current market settings is to invest in more generation and continue to extract the monopoly rents from their market dominance that are screwing consumers. This report from the regulator last week underlines exactly how they are doing that.
This makes Turnbull’s latest utterings completely indefensible.
It is no longer good enough to lock himself into the Abbott era policies designed and framed by climate deniers and technology skeptics who sought to do the minimum possible.
(It may be partially explained by the fact that one of his principal climate and energy policy advisors, Sid Marris, used to work for the Minerals Council of Australia. And Patrick Gibbons, the former advisor to environment minister Greg Hunt, is now head of climate and energy at the MCA).
If he wants it, Turnbull has all the evidence he needs to argue that the energy trilemma – emissions, reliability and affordability – is best addressed by wholesale market and policy reform and ambitious renewable and climate targets.
It would lead to a smarter, cleaner, cheaper, and more reliable grid. And in quick time. What’s not to like about that?
The issue over marriage equality showed how reasoned argument, and just a little political and a lot of community leadership, can overcome the fear and loathing of the small but powerful conservative base.
But Turnbull has shown that he has not the courage, nor the political need, to push these through.
Instead, he is likely to push ahead with Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro scheme. Its feasibility study, due to be released soon, will make fascinating reading.
But if climate policies stay as they are, then Snowy 2.0 will not be, as Turnbull claimed on Q&A, “the largest single renewable project in our history since the Snowy Mountains Scheme was built”.
In fact, it won’t be renewable at all, it will simply be using excess coal power at night to push water up hill and then wait for high prices before allowing it to cascade back down again.
And if Snowy 2.0 is built in these circumstances, it will lock in the power of the incumbents, the arrival of zero marginal cost generation from wind and solar will be kept to a minimum, and it won’t just be customers getting screwed, it will be the planet as well.
But that’s the Turnbull we’ve come to know.
Custodians ‘in dark’ over dump
The Northern Land Council failed to consult traditional land owners when it rejected a nuclear waste dump, court documents allege. (subscribers only)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/indigenous/traditional-owners-not-consulted-as-nlc-abandoned-nuke-dump/news-story/94ff701569f80c179d2df820abed5874
Intensifying the Fukushima denial campaign
Not contented with its media strong censorship and its 2013 passed State Secrecy Law discouraging any possible whistleblower inside Japan , Japan’s government is now directing its Fukushima denial propaganda toward the international community, in preparation of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics venue and its numerous visitors to come, and also to encourage its Asian neighbor countries to lift their import restrictions and their radiation contamination tests, for them to buy anew Eastern Japan’s agricultural and marine products.
Its Ministry of Environment has added a new segment to its website on radioactive decontamination in Fukushima Prefecture to promote the ‘understanding of progress’ in Fukushima’s environmental recovery among people residing outside Japan.
The irony is that they have the balls to call one of their programs, the Fukushima Diairies. I think many of you remember that the Fukushima Diary Blog was one of the very few blogs informing us about the Fukushima…
View original post 769 more words
13 Dec REneweconomy News
RenewEconomy-
Turnbull blows trumpet for right wing idiocy on energyMalcolm Turnbull now appears perfectly comfortable parroting right wing nonsense about energy policy, branding high renewable policies as “idiocy” and defending the future of coal. That may be because mainstream media won’t challenge him.
-
Queensland names new energy minister – meet Dr Anthony LynhamA post-election cabinet reshuffle has delivered a new energy minister for Queensland. Here’s what we know about Dr Anthony Lynham.
-
CEFC continues to expand clean energy investments in South AustraliaThe CEFC is helping demonstrate the diverse potential of energy efficiency programs by helping finance clean energy improvements to two Adelaide buildings.
-
ARENA gives perovskite solar tech a push, with $6m Greatcell grantCommercial development of cheap, printable, Australian made perovskite solar cells boosted with $6m ARENA grant to Greatcell Solar.
-
AEMO relaxes constraints on wind power in South AustraliaAEMO relaxes limits on wind generation in South Australia as it continues to review system strength needs of the grid with the highest penetration of wind and solar in the world.
-
80MW solar farm proposed for Tamworth, NSWNew Australian solar developer, Oriens Energy, announces plans for 80MW solar farm in Tamworth, with more projects in the pipeline.
-
New study smashes myths about “embodied” energy in wind and solarCritics have argued renewable energies could come with high hidden greenhouse gas emissions that would negate their benefits to the climate. A new study shows the opposite is true.
1 This month
7 April – WEBINAR – Australia and the Doomsday Clock – Preventing nuclear war through NoFirstUse and other policies
Online | Tuesday April 7, 4:00-5:30pm, Australian Eastern Time / 8:00-9:30am Central Europe Time
– Access the registration link
15 April – Zoom –Nuclear Power is Not the Solution
Apr 15, 2026 01:00 AM in Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney
Join the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) on Tuesday, April 14th for a timely webinar exploring the risks associated with nuclear power and challenging the myth that it offers a simple, safe, carbon-free solution to the climate crisis
21 April Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-04-21 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-04-21 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
Event Type: Virtual
A virtual link will be communicated before the event.
Host Contact Info: australia@icanw.org
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 