Malaysian MP insists that Lynas rare earths processing has contaminated grounwater
Contradicting Xavier, Fuziah insists groundwater near Lynas plant contaminated, The Star, 10 Jun 2019, by ong han sean KUANTAN: Staunch Lynas opponent Fuziah Salleh nsists that groundwater near the rare earth refinery contains toxic elements.The Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department said elements detected in the groundwater contamination monitoring data from the 2015-2016 Health Impact Assessment provided by Lynas to the executive review committee included nickel, lead and chromium.
“It is ironic that in Malaysia, Lynas has persistently denied that it is the source of serious heavy metal contamination, even though data taken over a 12-month period from September 2015 from its own groundwater monitoring stations have shown otherwise, apart from the month of April,” Fuziah said in a statement on Monday (June 10).
She said groundwater contamination detection required a protracted, regular and technically reliable independent monitoring strategy, and a conclusion could only be made with a high level of statistical confidence based on multiple and repeated samples taken across seasons.
The Kuantan MP said this kind of pollution had very serious public and environmental health implications in the long run.
“Of course, Lynas would never have admitted to the contamination because if it does, then it will be liable for this pollution. As a speculative rare earth junior mining company, its future lies in its ability to mask the real problems it is facing in Malaysia.
“Simply branding people who have raised concerns about its pollution and waste as activists is underestimating the many experts from different fields whom I have met over the years.
“These are highly skilled educated professionals with postgraduate qualifications from various reputable universities in Malaysia and from advanced industrialised countries overseas.
“They have given their pro-bono professional advice out of their sense of duty to the country and for our rakyat, and because they feel that Malaysia deserves the truth and environmental justice,” she said.
Fuziah’s statement is in stark contrast with a recent announcement by Water, Land and Natural Resources Minister Dr Xavier Jayakumar that the groundwater around the Lynas refinery was no longer polluted by heavy metals as shown by the latest tests conducted in the surrounding area there.
Lynas subsequently issued a statement expressing disappointment that anti-Lynas activists were using misleading and false information about groundwater in an attempt to create fear in the local communities……….
Fuziah added that Energy, Science, Technology, Environment and Climate Change Minister Yeo Bee Yin was planning to personally visit Australia later this month to negotiate the return of Lynas’ NORM waste to its mine pit in Mount Weld in Western Australia.
“Lynas had given two undertakings back in 2012 to remove its NORM waste to get its operating licence.
“Both thorium and uranium radionuclides and the heavy metals present in Lynas’ waste are toxic. Many of these are cancer-causing substances and must be isolated from the biosphere, not left to pollute the environment.
“Thorium especially is a long-living low-level radioactive radionuclide which will remain hazardous forever, leaving a toxic legacy for current and future generations.
“I have a duty and responsibility as an elected representative of the people to raise my concern,” Fuziah said.
On May 30, Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad reportedly told the media in Japan that Malaysia would allow the Australian rare earths producer to continue operating its plant in Gebeng, Pahang.
However, in an interview with 8TV, Yeo said she was making plans to go to Australia to discuss the Lynas issue with government officials there.
She also said that the confirmation on whether the Malaysian government would give the green light to Lynas would only be decided after her trip. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2019/06/10/fuziah-contradicts-xavier-says-groundwater-near-lynas-plant-contaminated/
The huge health damage from the Chernobyl nuclear accident, and why the West has whitewashed this
Soviet doctors treating Chernobyl-exposed suddenly had an unwelcome crash course in this medical problem. They found that radioactive contaminants, even at relatively low levels, infiltrated the bodies of their patients, who grew sicker each year. Gradually, health officials understood they had a public health disaster on their hands. Thousands of archival records document the catastrophe. Ukrainian doctors registered in the most contaminated regions of Kiev province an increase between 1985 and 1988 in thyroid and heart disease, endocrine and GI tract disorders, anaemia and other maladies of the blood-forming system.
In two closely watched regions of the province, infants born with congenital malformations grew from 10% to 23% between 1986 and 1988. And 46% of newborns in some fallout regions died within 28 days of life. Half of these deaths were stillborn, the other half had congenital malformations “that were not compatible with life”.
Consultants from UN agencies dismissed the findings of scientists in Ukraine and Belarus…
Why would UN officials whitewash evidence of Chernobyl health damage? At the time the US, Russia, France and the UK faced huge lawsuits from their own exposures of people to radioactive contamination during four decades of reckless bomb production. If they could assert that Chernobyl was “the worst disaster in human history” and only 54 people died, then those lawsuits could go away. And that is indeed what happened.
Chernobyl horror has nuclear lessons for SA https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/life/2019-06-04-chernobyl-horror-has-nuclear-lessons-for-sa/
As we consider this energy option it is key to bear in mind that the manipulation following this disaster means the full scale of damage can only be guessed at, 04 JUNE 2019 – 05:10 Powerful storms, record-breaking temperatures and rising water levels remind us daily of the impact of climate change and our need to address it. Policymakers are debating what shape the post-carbon future will take and SA is one country where that conversation is taking place.
Proponents of nuclear power argue that nuclear energy is the most viable and powerful alternative to fossil fuels. Opponents point to waste storage problems, plus the slow pace and high cost of building new reactors. And, they ask, what about when something goes wrong?
I recently published a book called Manual for Survival: A Chernobyl Guide to the Future, about the 1986 explosion of reactor number four at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine, which was at the time a republic in the Soviet Union. I found as I worked through 27 archives that much of what we are told about the Chernobyl accident is incomplete or incorrect. People were far sicker and far more people died than we are led to believe. Chernobyl contaminants were not safely enclosed within the Chernobyl Zone. Nor has the chapter been closed. We are still ingesting Chernobyl fallout from 33 years ago.
The official tally records 300 people hospitalised after the accident. These were mostly firemen and plant operators, but I found that Soviet leaders gave orders to release information on Chernobyl patients from only one Moscow hospital. In the months after the accident, villagers in contaminated regions streamed into many other hospitals. Archival records show that not 300 but 40,000 people were hospitalised for Chernobyl exposures in the summer after the accident. Many of them were children. Continue reading
Governor of New Mexico: Holtec Nuclear Waste Storage Bad for the Economy & Environment; Unacceptable Risk to Agriculture and Oil & Gas Industry — Mining Awareness +
“The interim storage of high-level radioactive waste poses significant and unacceptable risks to New Mexicans, our environment and our economy… New Mexico’s agricultural industry contributes approximately $3 billion per year to the state’s economy… New Mexico’s oil and natural gas industry contributed $2 billion to the state last year.” (New Mexico Governor Michelle Grisham) Notice […]
According to Japan govt’s official statistics on pediatric cancer, children cancers doubled since Fukushima — Fukushima 311 Watchdogs
From the Japan govt’s official statistics of children cancers: The country has been taking statistics on pediatric cancer since 1975. Every year, 2,000 to 2,500 people were affected. The least was in 2006, where there were 1861 people affected, the year before the Niigata Chuetsu Earthquake. But the numbers of children cancers really […]
A rogue regulator worth reading — Beyond Nuclear International
Book blows the whistle on industry shot-calling inside NRC
via A rogue regulator worth reading — Beyond Nuclear International
Nuclear power – violent from the very beginning
Born Violent: The Origins of Nuclear Power, Asian Journal of Peacebuildling, 2019, Robert (Bo) Jacob
Please excuse the “t”s and “f”s which have somehow turned into squares – my copying problems.
“…his article traces the origins o nuclear power technology as it was speciically developed to produce nuclear weapons or use against a civilian population in war……
It will trace numerous radiological disasters during the production history o the Hanord reactor fleet and at other military plutonium production reactor sites during the early Cold War.It will describe the later emergence o the nuclear power production industry which used nuclear reactors to also produce energy or civilian use and the history o partial and ull nuclearuel meltdowns that accompanied that industry……..
Hanford during the Cold War…..During the Cold War, the United States produced over 60,000 nuclear weapons, most o them with the plutonium produced at Hanord. This includes both ission weapons like the one used in the nuclear attack on Nagasaki, and also in thermonuclear weapons. While nuclear weapons were not used in wararea ater 1945, over 2,000 weapons have been detonated in nuclear tests, roughly hal o those (1,054) by the United States. The United States tested 928 nuclear weapons at the Nevada est Site, and another 67 at the Pacific Proving Grounds in the Marshall Islands. wo hundred and sixteen o those tests were in the
atmosphere, which distributed vast quantities o radioactive allout in heavy quantities close to the test sites, and also globally when the atmospheric clouds reached the upper atmosphere.
A 2015 article in The Lancet describes how “risk modelling studies o exposure to ionising radiation rom the Nevada est Site in the United States suggest that an extra 49,000 (95 percent CI 11 300–212 000)cases o thyroid cancer would be expected to occur among U.S. residents alive at the time o the testing—an excess o about 12 percent over the 400,000 cases othyroid cancer expected to develop in the absence o allout” (Simon and Bouville 2015, 407-408).
The Marshall Islands had ar ewer tests than the Nevada test site, however the United States tested its thermonuclear weapons exclusively at the Pacific Proving Ground which resulted in massive amounts o radioactive allout aecting the local population and also entering into the Paciic Ocean rom which the radionuclides could disperse throughout the Pacific Rim.
One test, the Bravo test o 1954, which was the largest weapon ever tested by the United States, created a vast and lethal allout cloud that enguled numerous Marshallese atolls. he entire population o Rongelap Atoll suered rom radiation sickness after the Bravo test. The Japanese tuna fishing boat the DaigoFukuryu Maru , among many others, was also exposed to the allout cloud. When it came to port in Yaizu, Japan two weeks after the test, its crew was hospitalized or radiation sickness. One crew member, radioman Aikichi Kuboyama, died ocomplications rom his exposure six months later,even though he was physically located about 100km rom the actual detonation point. All of these illnesses and deaths can be traced back to the nuclear reactors at Hanford.
During its years o production, Hanord was the site o numerous substantial radiological releases that endangered the local population as well as those downwind. …….. Large releases o radiation into the nearby ecosystem would be routine during the operation o the Hanord reactors and especially the plutonium extraction procedures. hese activities would leave a disastrous legacy once the plants were closed……
Historical Disasters at Plutonium Production Sites
Hanord did not suffer a major uel meltdown or catastrophic fire. However, all other nuclear weapon states have also operated multiple plutonium production reactors and the first two large-scale nuclear disasters occurred in such reactor complexes, happening within two weeks o each other.
On September 29, 1957, writes Kate Brown, as a soccer game was beingplayed in a stadium in Ozersk, in the Chelyabinsk Oblast near the Ural Mountainsin Central Russia, where the Mayak Production Association was located, a loudexplosion was heard nearby.Te source o the blast was an underground storage tank holding highly radioactivewaste that overheated and blew, belching up a 160-ton cement cap buried twenty-oureet below the ground and tossing it seventy-five eet in the air. Te blast smashedwindows in the nearby barracks and tore the metal gates off the perimeter ence.
The explosion and subsequent radiological disaster, known as the KyshtymDisaster, occurred just eight years and one month after the detonation o the firstnSoviet nuclear weapon made with plutonium produced at Mayak, the plutonium production that was the target o surveillance motivating the Green Run at Hanord.
he radioactive cloud rom the explosion, “settled over an area o 20,000square kilometers, home to 270,000 people” (Rabl 2012). Te Soviet authorities were slow to react to the crisis. “A week after the explosion,” writes Brown, who did extensive fieldwork in the region as well as at Hanord, “radiologists ollowed the cloud to the downwind villages, where they ound people living normally,children playing bareoot. hey measured the ground, arm tools, animals and people. he levels o radioactivity were astonishingly high” (Brown 2013, 239-240). he contaminated area would eventually be known as the East Urals Radioactive race (Ichikawa 2015).
Eleven days later a fire ignited in one o the reactors at the Windscale Works, the plutonium production site o the United Kingdom located in Cumbria in Northwest England. he ire burned inside o the reactor or three days and released massive amounts o radiation blanketing surrounding communities and downwind areas. “While the authorities denied large releases o radioactivity at the time, this was not a correct portrayal o the situation…On 12 October, authorities stopped the distribution o milk originating rom seventeen areaarms. However, just three days later, milk rom a ar wider area (200 square miles compared to the previous 80) was restricted” (Makhijani et al. 1995, 418). Falloutrom the accident was detected in Ireland, and the confiscated milk was dumped into the Irish Sea (Bertell 1985)
The Establishment of Commercial Nuclear Power……. Many o these plants would experience occasional leaks or releases oradiation into their local ecosystems. Several would have catastrophic nuclear accidents. In addition to the accidents at plutonium production reactors citedabove, partial core meltdowns would occur at Santa Susana in Simi Valley,Caliornia (1957), Fermi-1 in Detroit, Michigan (1966), the Lucens reactor inVaud, Switzerland (1969), Leningrad-1 in Leningrad, USSR (1975), and hreeMile Island-2 in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania (1979). A ull, catastrophic nuclearmeltdown occurred at Chernobyl-4 (1986) and three ull meltdowns occurred at Fukushima 1-2-3 in 2011.
In addition to these dire nuclear accidents, the spent uel rom normal operations at nuclear power plants pose a vexing problem or tens o thousands o generations. hese spent uel rods will need to be eectively contained or millennia as they will remain highly dangerous or over 10,000 years, and seriously dangerous or over 100,000 years. Almost all o this spent uel, millions o tons, sit in temporary or intermediate storage on the grounds o the reactors where the uel was burned. Finland will be the very irst nation to attempt to permanently store the spent uel rom its very limited nuclear power program in deep geological storage at the Onkalo site on the Baltic Sea, beginning in the2020s. All o the spent nuclear uel rom the long history o operation at Hanord still sits in temporary storage, some o it or over seventy years now (Deense Nuclear Facilities Saety Board 1997).
he challenges o containing this highly toxic waste or millennia and insuring that the sites are not damaged by geologicalorces or breached by uture human societies is speculative at best. The ongoing capacity o nuclear power to damage the health o human beings and other creatures or millennia, through the risks posed by this waste, means that we can never adequately grasp the ull violence that will result rom its production (Jacobs2018). o date, over seventy years after the successul operation o CP-1, not one spent uel rod has been placed in “permanent” storage anywhere on the planet………
The world is losing plant species at a frightening rate
|
‘Frightening’ number of plant extinctions found in global survey https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/10/frightening-number-of-plant-extinctions-found-in-global-survey
Study shows 571 species wiped out, and scientists say figure is likely to be big underestimate, Damian Carrington Environment editor @dpcarringtonTue 11 Jun 2019 |
|
|
Japan’s Prime Minister Abe touts the 2020 Olympic Games with the lie that Fukushima nuclear plant is “under control”
Abe pushing idea that Fukushima nuclear disaster is ‘under control’, http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201906110001.html THE ASAHI SHIMBUN, 10 June 19 Without special protection against radiation, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe stood on elevated ground about 100 meters from the three melted-down reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
“I was finally able to see the view just wearing a normal suit without having to wear protective clothing and a mask (for radiation),” he said on April 14 after hearing explanations from Tokyo Electric Power Co. officials. “The decommissioning work has been making progress in earnest.”
An act of bravado, perhaps. But it was more likely one of the ways Abe and his government want to show that the Fukushima disaster is, as he famously said, “under control.”
Progress has been made, albeit slowly, for the monumental task of decommissioning TEPCO’s crippled nuclear plant.
But radiation levels in certain areas of the plant are still lethal with extended exposure. The problem of storing water contaminated in the reactors continues.
And only recently was TEPCO able to make contact with melted nuclear fuel in the reactors through a robot. The means to extract the fuel has yet to be decided.
However, the government keeps touting progress in the reconstruction effort, using evacuee statistics, which critics say are misleading, to underscore its message.
Abe’s previous visit to the nuclear plant was in September 2013.
“When I conducted an inspection five years ago, I was completely covered in protective gear,” he said at a meeting with decommissioning workers in April. “This time I was able to inspect wearing a normal suit.”
Officials in Abe’s circle acknowledged that they wanted to “appeal the progress of reconstruction” by letting the media cover the prime minister’s “unprotected” visit to the site.
His visit in a business suit was possible largely because the ground was covered in mortar and other materials that prevent the spread of radioactive substances, not because decommissioning work has lowered radiation levels as a whole.
The radiation level at the elevated inspection ground still exceeds 100 microsieverts per hour, making it dangerous for people who remain there for extended periods.
Abe’s inspection ended in six minutes.
The prime minister raised eyebrows, particularly in Fukushima Prefecture, in 2013 when he gave a speech to promote Tokyo’s bid to host the 2020 Summer Olympics.
Concerning the Fukushima nuclear plant, he told International Olympic Committee members, “Let me assure you, the situation is under control.”
An hour before he inspected the plant in April, Abe attended the opening ceremony of the new government building of Okuma, one of the two towns that host the nuclear plant.
The ceremony followed the lifting of an evacuation order for part of the town on April 10.
“We were able to take a step forward in reconstruction,” Abe said.
The central government uses the number of evacuees to show the degree of progress in reconstruction work.
In April 2018, Abe said in the Diet that the lifting of evacuation orders has reduced the number of evacuees to one-third of the peak.
According to the Reconstruction Agency, the number of people who evacuated in and outside of Fukushima Prefecture, including those who were under no orders to leave, peaked at about 160,000. But the initial evacuation orders for 11 municipalities in Fukushima Prefecture have been gradually lifted, and the agency now puts the total number at about 40,000.
About 71,000 people were officially registered as residents of areas that were ordered to evacuate. Now, only about 11,000 people live in those zones.
This means that about 60,000 people have not returned to the homes where they were living before the nuclear accident unfolded in March 2011.
The gap of 20,000 can be attributed to how the agency classifies or declassifies evacuees.
NOT COUNTED AS EVACUEES
The Reconstruction Agency sent a notice in August 2014 to all prefectures that have counted the number of evacuees.
It defined “evacuees” as people who moved to different places because of the nuclear disaster and have the “will” to return to their original homes.
The notice also said that if it is difficult to perceive their “will,” they can be regarded as people who have ended their evacuation if they bought new homes or made arrangements for new accommodations.
Based on the notice, people in Fukushima Prefecture who have bought new homes during their evacuation or settled down in public restoration housing or disaster public housing are regarded as living “stable” lives and are not counted as evacuees.
“It is not a problem because we continue supporting them even if they are removed from the evacuee statistics,” a prefectural government official said.
An official of the Reconstruction Agency said, “The judgment is made by each prefecture, so we are not in a position to say much.”
However, the prefecture has not confirmed all evacuees’ will to return to their homes. In addition, those who are removed from the list of evacuees are not informed of their new status.
Many people bought homes in new locations during their prolonged evacuations although they still hope to return to their hometowns in the disaster area.
Yumiko Yamazaki, 52, has a house in Okuma in a “difficult-to-return” zone.
But because she moved to public restoration housing outside of the town, she is not considered an evacuee by the agency and the prefecture.
“I had to leave my town although I didn’t want to,” Yamazaki said. “It is so obvious that the government wants to make the surface appearance look good by reducing the number of evacuees.”
“I can’t allow them to try to pretend the evacuation never happened,” Yamazaki said.
Critics say the central government’s emphasis of positive aspects and the downplaying of inconvenient truths in the evacuee statistics have much in common with its response to the suspected nepotism scandals involving school operator Moritomo Gakuen and the Kake Educational Institution.
CEFC big solar investments pass $1 billion, with stake in Kiamal Solar Farm — RenewEconomy
Clean Energy Finance Corporation passes $1 billion-mark for equity investments in Australia’s large-scale solar sector, after taking a $51m stake in Victoria’s largest PV farm. The post CEFC big solar investments pass $1 billion, with stake in Kiamal Solar Farm appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via CEFC big solar investments pass $1 billion, with stake in Kiamal Solar Farm — RenewEconomy
Ditch the jobs v environment slogan and get on with doing both
Brisbane Times, By Jeff Angel, June 11, 2019 — ……… In a little publicised study released this year, the NSW Innovation and Productivity Council assessed the environmental goods and services sector. The activities involved include delivering waste, water and energy management; and biodiversity, landscape and climate services. It found the number of jobs generated as 152,000 larger than the total number of jobs in agriculture and mining combined. Importantly a significant number were in regional areas and the vast majority of businesses, small to medium size. With a 6 per cent growth rate, the environmental goods and services sector was already contributing $43.9 billion a year across the economy.
So, protecting the environment is not a job destroyer. It’s the opposite. But what has caused this positive situation?
Another is the NSW Energy Savings Scheme, where electricity retailers are required to meet escalating targets helping business, industry and households save energy (and have lower bills). The Council notes the government law created a competitive market to deliver energy savings at least cost, resulting in NSW now leading the world in the wide-scale adoption of efficient lighting.
A more recent development has been “return and earn” providing refunds on drink bottles and cans. Originally decried by major beverage companies as a tax on consumers that would cost jobs – the evidence is that more than 500 new jobs have been created. None have been reported lost. The state’s Pricing Regulator has also found minimal cost impact; and when you return your drink container for the 10 cent refund, you are saving on the purchase price.
This does not mean that these jobs are replacing employment in the extractive industries, but rather at a macro level there is a social and economic benefit. The issue confronting policy makers is transition as one industry declines and another grows. Some skills are transferable but more deliberate assistance programs are needed. …..
It’s not a choice between jobs and the environment, but how to transition in a way that manages inevitable dislocation and also prevents ongoing, damaging and serious environmental impacts on present and future generations. This is the challenge for the new federal and NSW ministers for the environment and industry.
We know there are many jobs in the green economy – NSW has shown this. Income and job creating services that protect the climate will grow if government allows it. Establishing a local reprocessing industry for our recycling is also essential. Asia has rejected our kerbside recyclate and we can’t just dump or incinerate it here. On the optimistic side, we have a new federal Minister for Waste Reduction in the environment portfolio, the first in Australia’s history; and state ministers are grappling with how to embrace the circular economy where resources are not wasted. Let’s dispense with the slogan of jobs v the environment and get on with doing both.
Jeff Angel is the director of the Total Environment Centre. https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/ditch-the-jobs-v-environment-slogan-and-get-on-with-doing-both-20190610-p51w8n.html
Not a single watt of electricity, but still 1 trillion yen in basic revenue — Fukushima 311 Watchdogs
Japan Atomic Power Co.’s Tokai No. 2 nuclear power plant in Ibaraki Prefecture faces the Pacific Ocean. May 25, 2019 Even though it hasn’t generated any electricity at its two nuclear power plants since May 2011, Japan Atomic Power Co. chalked up close to 1 trillion yen ($9.1 billion) in basic revenues in that time. […]
2020 Tokyo Olympics Torch Relay Starts at the J-Village Sports Complex in Fukushima — Fukushima 311 Watchdogs
It’s official! The 2020 Tokyo Olympic torch relay starts at the J Village Sports Complex in Fukushima, which is just 10 miles from the crippled nuke plant. Olympics: Tokyo 2020 torch relay route revealed, uniforms unveiled June 1, 2019 TOKYO (Reuters) – Tokyo 2020 organisers on Saturday unveiled the uniforms to be worn […]
Colonial backs solar and battery roll-out in major shopping centres — RenewEconomy
Colonial First State backs commercial solar plan to roll out up to 9MW of PV panels and 12MWh of battery storage across 15 major shopping centres. The post Colonial backs solar and battery roll-out in major shopping centres appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Colonial backs solar and battery roll-out in major shopping centres — RenewEconomy
NSW government quietly cancels $50m VPP, redirects funds to solar loans — RenewEconomy
NSW government confirms cancellation of planned 200MW virtual power plant to cover costs of interest-free loans for solar, promised in the state election. The post NSW government quietly cancels $50m VPP, redirects funds to solar loans appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via NSW government quietly cancels $50m VPP, redirects funds to solar loans — RenewEconomy
June 10 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “Beyond Renewables: How To Reduce Energy-Related Emissions By Measuring What Matters” • Despite the uptick in renewable energy usage, global emissions have grown steadily. John Woolard, of the World Resources Institute, argues that commitments to 100% renewables will not alone curb the worst impacts of climate change. [Eco-Business] ¶ “Conservatives Should Change How […]
1.This month
PETITION – Stop Nuclear Submarines for Australia
GO to https://www.foe.org.au/nonuclearsubs?fbclid=IwAR3JuFtAviP_kTDb5YX3lxHDZymQu86RWp9eW4zUWb9GV966nha3VeyFvCU The Morrison government’s decision to build nuclear submarines has shocked communities around the country.
The move, which occurred without any community consultation, undermines Australia’s nuclear-free status and will generate radioactive waste for decades.
The Prime Minister must reverse the decision to build nuclear-powered submarines and commit to keeping Australia’s military nuclear free.
global pandemic, both locally and throughout our region and on urgent action to deal with the climate crisis.
Read more about the background of this nuclear submarine proposal and why this radical shift in military capability is the wrong decision for those who care about environmental and social justice.
Australia is in some ways, a world leader in renewable energy. And this is in spite of its Liberal Coalition government’s drive to suppress renewable energy!
Small scale solar power is revolutionising electricity supply in Australia, with households and small businesses benefiting from affordable rooftop solar systems, while grid prices are too high. Community energy continues to go ahead, without government support. Battery storage systems now accelerate Australia’s transition to clean energy, with almost half of large businesses shifting to renewables.
The States, and Australian cities and towns, are showing the way ahead.
- South Australia powers ahead with large scale solar systems, as well as rooftop. Wind power booms in South Australia – it s variable, at times exporting electricity to Victoria.
While South Australia heads to becoming a global renewable energy success story, in other States and Territories renewable energy is booming, too.
- Australian Capital Territory is a star leader, with its target of sourcing 100% renewable electricity .
- Queensland surges in solar energy.
- Tasmania, with its abundant hydro and wind energy, plans to be self-sufficient in renewables and already has 93% renewable energy.
- New South Wales is installing more renewables capacity than any other State.
- Victoria is catching up, and the State Labor government has launched ambitious plans and a renewable energy target of 40 per cent renewables by 2025.
- Solar energy is going ahead in Western Australia, which has its own renewable energy policy.
- The Northern Territory Government has committed to adopt a target of 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030. The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) is helping to fund the rollout of solar and battery technology to remote communities.
Australia, with its abundant sunshine, and wind is the nation best suited to renewable energy. It can, combines with energy efficiency, meet Australia’s electricity needs, and also export renewable energy, and innovative clean power and water conservation systems.
We have that opportunity. We must not let it be derailed by the greed and idealogy of a few powerful Australian individuals in the nuclear cult.
****************************************************************
For updates: see Adelaide group Don’t Dump on SA https://www.facebook.com/dontdumponsa
No Radioactive Waste Facility for Kimba District https://www.facebook.com/noradwastekimba
And https://www.facebook.com/nodumpalliance
Please Sign: the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) sign on letter to federal Minister Pitt
Support the Barngarla People:
“Barngarla: Help us Have a Say on Kimba” to fund a legal challenge (judicial review)
Fundraiser by Barngarla People : Barngarla: Help us Have a Say on Kimba (gofundme.com)
Barngarla need as much support as we can to say NO to the Nuclear Waste Facility for KIMBA
Mahalia Bilney started this petition to Ken Wyatt (Minister for Indigenous Australians) and 1 other
Our Barngarla Mob need as much support as we can to say NO to the Nuclear Waste Facility proposed for Kimba! Help us fight to be heard and included in the importance of such a decision �� We won our native title to then be told we have no say and to go through this process all over again.
We don’t want the nuclear waste facility as they can’t guarantee it’s going to be safe and it will be a huge risk to the wildlife and environment. Not to mention the proposed areas are sacred and hold significance to my people and we don’t want more major damage to be caused, we want to try and preserve what we have left.
Research into this for yourselves, they say it’s low level but it’s technically high level! but our country marks it as low as our standards aren’t the same as the countries we’ll receive the waste from. It’s appalling and not wanted! So help us fight for our right to vote and hopefully stop it from happening.
For international nuclear news go to https://nuclear-news.net
Appeal for Australian Government’s Actions on Japan’s Dumping Nuclear Wastewater into Sea
Submissions to the Senate Committee Inquiry into National Radioactive Management Amendment Bill. 2020. Go to our summaries of significant submissions, conveniently listed in alphabetical order at Kimba waste dump submissions or see all submissions listed at Read the Submissions
—
Submissions to the Senate Committee Inquiry into National Radioactive Management Amendment Bill. 2020. Go to our summaries of significant submissions, conveniently listed in alphabetical order at Kimba waste dump submissions or see all submissions listed at Read the Submissions
