October 26 – Sunday – Melbourne – Film: Fight For Country: the story of the Jabiluka Blockade
High level nuclear wastes returned from France to Australia are not actually wastes of Australian origin
Orano explains about foreign nuclear waste https://actu.fr/economie/orano-sexplique-sur-dechets-nucleaires-etrangers_18903890.html
The 2017 report on the treatment of spent fuels from abroad gave rise to a debate on Thursday October 4 before the local information committee of Orano la Hague.Posted on 4 Oct 18 Without waiting for October 16 and the decision of the Judge of the Court of Cherbourg , which will rule in the dispute between Greenpeace and Orano , the issue of spent fuels Australian was on the agenda of the meeting of the local commission of information from Orano la Hague, this Thursday, October 4th.
“All the waste goes back to their country”Orano first presented its 2017 report on the treatment of spent fuels from abroad. These fuels, not yet treated, they represent only 0.4% of the 9 970 tonnes present at the end of last year in the pools of the establishment of La Hague.
Most of the fuel is actually owned by EDF. Less than 40 tonnes belong to Belgian, Italian and Dutch electricians.
And René Charbonnier, the deputy director of Orano, the hammer:
The principle is that all the ultimate waste goes back to their country.
Paid storageA principle that Greenpeace readily accepts. But the leader of the nuclear campaign Yannick Rousselet believes however that some of this foreign waste remain on the site well beyond the industrial process.
He cites the example of Germany, for which the date of return of compacted waste, fixed by contract, is exceeded. Or Spain, where the deadline was December 21, 2011. Since then, Spanish electricians pay compensation.
If he does not mention any amount, the deputy director of Orano confirms:
The principle, I repeat, is the return of waste to their country. We obviously discuss with our customers. But when it lasts too much, we charge for storage.
The difficulty, says Greenpeace on the eve of a public debate on the national plan for radioactive materials and waste management , is that these countries have no or little solution for storing final waste.
No Mox for Australia
This is not the case of Australia . A first contract, signed in 1999 between Orano and the Australian agency Ansto, gave rise in 2015 to a first return of this waste. A new contract was awarded in 2016 .
It is in this context that 2 tonnes of spent fuel – 236 elements from the Opal research reactor – were landed on September 14 in Cherbourg .
Australia does not have a reactor that can run on Mox fuel from reprocessing. Under the terms of this contract, to which Greenpeace seeks legal access, uranium and plutonium, which account for 92% of the material weight, are purchased by Orano and reused to manufacture Mox.
As for the ultimate waste, they are vitrified with others. Yannick Rousselet observes:
It is not actually the initial material that is returned, but the equivalent in weight and radioactivity. Orano has it on the shelf, and could have sent it back immediately.Orano agrees: “Yes,” replied René Charbonnier.
Advertisements
No comments yet.
1.This month
Australian town goes off the grid ditching power companies
100% renewable by 2020. It will happen’ – Canberra | Renewables Roadshow
**************************************************************************
The Senate Committee has now released its Report . It is a wishy washy support for the process– quotes extensively from the submissions, but has little idea of its own. Greens Dissenting Submission packs a punch, as does Senator Rex Patrick’s Additional Comments.
Read summaries of submissions to the Senate, re the Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia. Each summary has a link to the full submission. Obviously the Department of Industry Innovation and Science (DIIS) was not happy with the majority of submissions opposing the process, so now are trying to get a better (for them) result
NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP – Senate Committee of Inquiry
********************************************************************************************************
The Senate Inquiry on Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia. has now 112 submissions published
Read the brief summaries of submissions – 55 anti-nuclear, 41 pro nuclear (13 confidential) , with links to each full submission published on this Antinuclear website.
See our page: Submissions on Radioactive Waste Code 2018/ Submissions published by ARPANSA are overwhelmingly critical, and in opposition to the Federal nuclear dump plan for rural South Australia. [not to be confused with the current SENATE INQUIRY Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia.]
************************************************************************
PETITIONS
Online Open letter requesting ACTION to enforce South Australia’s law against nuclear waste dumping. http://petition.dyndns.org/
Say no to the federal plan to dump and store nuclear waste in SA.
Don’t Let Frydenberg approve Yeelirrie uranium mine or extinction!
No Nuclear Bundabunda at Brewarrina – bad poison [SIGN THE PETITION]
Advertisements
Leave a Reply