Government Divides Hawker and Kimba Communities While Hiding Suitable Alternate Radioactive Waste Sites
28 NOVEMBER 2018, Centre Alliance Senator Rex Patrick today called on the Australian Government to reopen consideration of the 122,000 square kilometres of the Woomera Prohibited Area (WPA) as a location for a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).
Documents released under FOI to Senator Patrick show the Department of Industry undertook analysis of a number of sites, including the WPA, as potential homes for a NRWMF. In a very shallow response to the Department of Industry, Defence dismissed the WPA for its “impracticability” and “intolerable risk”.
Defence’s analysis cannot be reconciled with the fact that Woomera Test Range is already serving as a radioactive waste storage site. CSIRO is storing 10,000 drums of low and intermediate level waste in a hangar at Evetts Field, 1.3 kilometres from the Woomera Range head, while Defence is storing 35 cubic metres of intermediate level waste in a bunker 5 kilometres down range. Both the CSIRO and Defence waste has been stored there for 24 years.
“Defence’s claims are disingenuous and are nimby in attitude,” said Rex.
“If storing radioactive waste in the WPA represents an intolerable risk, why has this considerable store of waste been allowed to stay there for 24 years?”
“It seems that Defence is never stronger in defending territory than when it comes to defending its own.”
At question time today Senator Patrick today revealed the existence of a 414 page report undertaken for the former Department of Education, Science and Training that examines locating a NRWMF inside and nearby the WPA. It recommends Evetts Field inside the WPA as a preferred location.
The 414 page report contradicts Defence’s shallow analysis and addresses all of Defence’s concerns, and more.
“How can the Government tell the deeply divided communities of Hawker and Kimba that there is absolutely nowhere within the more than 122,000 square kilometres of Woomera that would be suitable for a radioactive waste facility,” Rex asked.
“Noting Minister Payne’s apparent lack of knowledge of the Evetts field option in the Senate today, I will definitely be pursuing this further.”
The relevant FOI documents and reports can be found here.
No comments yet.
1.This month
For international nuclear news go to https://nuclear-news.net/
FEDERAL. Inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia (Submissions close 16 September 2019 https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Environment_and_Energy/Nuclearenergy?fbclid=IwAR0Sw4LB2qdcxSI6U6l67lI7Mwz9IEWw7_0RIq3mtN-nfpkfBn4z2VkQGog
FEDERAL Submissions about the proposed National Radioactive Waste Management Facility in Kimba or the Flinders Ranges. The Standing Committee on Environment and Energy are accepting submissions to the ‘Inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia’ until 16 September 2019. Please write your own submission or use FOE’s online proforma.
AUSTRALIA’S LAWS PROHIBITING THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY
FEDERAL LAW prohibits
Nuclear actions are:
- establishing or significantly modifying a nuclear installation
- transporting spent nuclear fuel or radioactive waste products arising from reprocessing
- establishing or significantly modifying a facility for storing radioactive waste products arising from reprocessing
- mining or milling uranium ores, excluding operations for recovering mineral sands or rare earths
- establishing or significantly modifying a large-scale disposal facility for radioactive waste. A decision about whether a disposal facility is large scale will depend on factors including:
- the activity of the radioisotopes to be disposed of
- the half-life of the material
- the form of the radioisotopes
- the quantity of isotopes handled
- decommissioning or rehabilitating any facility or area in which an activity described above has been undertaken
- any other type of action set out in the EPBC Regulations.
STATE OF VICTORIA
PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES
-
- 5 Prohibition against exploration etc. for uranium or thorium
- 6 Mining in the course of mining for minerals other than uranium or thorium etc. 7 Radiometric surveys etc. to be permissible
- 8 Prohibition against constructing or operating certain facilities
- 9 Prohibitions against possessing etc. nuclear material
- 10 Where two or more persons commit etc. an offence under the Act
- 11 No advances for exploring etc. for uranium or thorium
NEW SOUTH WALES
Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Act 1986 No 194
a) to prohibit mining for uranium, and
(b) to prohibit the construction or operation of nuclear reactors and other facilities in the nuclear fuel cycle,
in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of New South Wales and the environment in which they live.
STATE OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
Nuclear Waste Storage Facility (Prohibition) Act 2000
8—Prohibition against construction or operation of nuclear waste storage facility
9—Prohibition against importation or transportation of nuclear waste for delivery to nuclear waste storage facility
13—No public money to be used to encourage or finance construction or operation of nuclear waste storage facility (this law is already being broken!)
14—Public inquiry into environmental and socio-economic impact of nuclear waste storage facility.
………any waste material that contains a radioactive substance and is derived from—
(i) the operations or decommissioning of—
(A) a nuclear reactor; or
(B) a nuclear weapons facility; or
(C) a radioisotope production facility; or
(D) a uranium enrichment plant; or
(ii) the testing, use or decommissioning of nuclear weapons; or
(iii) the conditioning or reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel;
nuclear waste storage facility means any installation for the storage or disposal of nuclear waste;
public authority has the same meaning as in the Environment Protection Act 1993;
radioactive substance means any substance that spontaneously emits ionizing radiation.
STATE OF QUEENSLAND.
Laws to protect Queenslanders from dangers of nuclear energy
Nuclear facilities, including power stations and radioactive waste dumps, are now banned in Queensland.
Nuclear facilities banned under the Act include:
·nuclear reactors (whether used to generate electricity or not);
·uranium conversion and enrichment plants;
·nuclear fuel fabrication plants;
·spent fuel processing plants; and
·facilities used to store or dispose of material associated with the nuclear fuel cycle e.g. radioactive waste material.
Exemptions under the legislation include facilities for the storage or disposal of waste material resulting from research or medical purposes, and the operation of a nuclear-powered vessel.
1 FEDERAL Submissions about the proposed National Radioactive Waste Management Facility in Kimba or the Flinders Ranges. The Standing Committee on Environment and Energy are accepting submissions to the ‘Inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia’ until 16 September 2019. Please write your own submission or use FOE’s online proforma.
2. FEDERAL. Inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia (Submissions close 16 September 2019 https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House/Environment_and_Energy/Nuclearenergy?fbclid=IwAR0Sw4LB2qdcxSI6U6l67lI7Mwz9IEWw7_0RIq3mtN-nfpkfBn4z2VkQGog
3, NEW SOUTH WALES. Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Repeal Bill 2019 (Submissions close 18 October 2019)
4 .Inquiry to explore Victoria going nuclear
ALSO Sustainability of energy supply and resources in NSW (Submissions close 15 September 2019)
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/committees/inquiries/Pages/inquiry-details.aspx?pk=2542#tab-termsofreference
Australia has long rejected nuclear power, and it is banned in Federal and State laws. The nuclear lobby is out to first repeal those laws, and then to get the Australian government to commit to buying probably large numbers of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) . This could mean first importing plutonium and/or enriched uranium, as some reactor models, (thorium ones) require these to get the fission process started. That would, in effect, mean importing nuclear wastes.
There’s an all-too short period for people to send in Submissions to the 4 Parliamentary Inquiries now in progress.
You can be sure that the well-paid shills of the nuclear industry will already have sent in their glossy submissions. But let’s remember – these SMRs do not actually exist except as designs – they haven’t been tested. This would be a huge financial gamble by the tax-payer. And that’s just one of the drawbacks. For a few more, see //independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/seven-reasons-why-small-modular-nuclear-reactors-are-a-bad-idea-for-australia,13010
Inquiry to explore Victoria going nuclear
CN LIVE! Mark Davis Wikileaks Revelations
Leave a Reply