Flinders Local Action Group want a new process for disposal of Australia’s nuclear waste
From the communities’ perspective this entire process has been dogged by a lack of procedural fairness.
There has been a flood of information but many of the finer details have been obscured. The communities
have been urged to vote “Yes” without knowing exactly what they were voting for.
It is little wonder that we view the proposed amendments, as far as we understand them, with
considerable concern and distrust. We are fearful of opening the way for future nuclear activities that
could be implemented or imposed without the need for public consultation, assent or debate
We are particularly worried that this legislation is being debated under the current cloud of CV-19. We
believe the debate should be postponed at least until this current national crisis has abated and we have
a clearer view of the country’s direction, the effects on our economy and the path to recovery.
We believe that this current process to establish a NRWMF should cease in favour of an entirely new
approach. This should be a fully consultative process, based on the best science to identify a site that is
geologically, culturally and socially suitable for the permanent disposal of Australian generated waste.
Greg Bannon (Spokesperson for the Flinders Local Action Group Inquiry into National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions] Submission No 79
Introduction: For over 60 years Australia has been operating a nuclear reactor. A by-product of this
operation is nuclear waste. ANSTO plans to greatly increase the production of medical isotopes. To this
day, no single, safe location for the permanent disposal of Australian generated radioactive waste has
ever been established.
In March 2015, the Minister for Industry (DIIS) Ian McFarlane, seeking a new approach for Australia’s
nuclear waste, invited private land nominations from around Australia for assessment as potential sites for
a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).
Six potential sites were short listed and in 2016 one of those, on Wallerberdina Station near the Flinders
Ranges, became the first to progress to the next stage. The other five sites were abandoned, including two
near Kimba in SA. In 2017, a year behind the Flinders, two new sites near Kimba were nominated, accepted
and embarked on the same process.
Flinders Local Action Group (FLAG): Many people, including Traditional Owners, landholders, residents
and visitors, believed that Wallerberdina was culturally and geologically unsuitable for such a proposal.
They began individually protesting about it. Sadly, individual voices carry little weight against a Federal
Department with a pre-determined agenda. This Group was formed in September, 2016, to bring those
voices together.
We have had over four years of interaction with DIIS on this issue and believe we are well qualified to
comment. We believe this particular model for the NRWMF and process developed to implement it is
badly flawed. It has Continue reading
Dr Helen Caldicott explains the (virtually eternal) problem of toxic nuclear waste – Submission to Senate Committee
how much water would theoretically be required to dilute all the high level waste expected to be on hand in the USA by the end of the 20th century, to existing drinking water standards?
The answer: If you add up all the fresh water in the world, including not only all lakes and rivers and glaciers and ground water, but also all the soil moisture (which far exceeds the sum total of all the other sources), and then double that grand total, then you have about the right amount of water to do the dilution.
The USGS points out that this calculation is only to emphasize why it is so important to keep this material out of the environment to an unprecedented degree.
Dr Helen Caldicott – re National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions]. Submission No. 71. have deep concerns about the federal governments proposed changes to the National Radioactive Waste
Management Act.
process has been restricted and inadequate.
mutagenicity I attach the following summary of the elements in radioactive waste, which is written for Canada
but applies equally to all radioactive waste. And by the way France which has produced our radioactive waste
from Lucas Heights calls it high level, not low level radioactive waste!
Why does the Morrison govt hear the experts on coronavirus, but ignore the experts on climate change?
|
Perhaps we should ditch the word entirely, and with it the forest of feel opinions about what governments “must” do to advance an author’s previously-held ideological positioning in the post-corona world. Imagine if we took just two lessons from the way Australian governments responded to the coronavirus: that good decisions are made when they consider the evidence and the best available expert advice; and that policy-making can accommodate reasonable differences of opinion, without becoming a “war”…… For six years now leading business, environmental, investor, union, farming and social welfare groups have been trying, largely in vain, to create a space for a sensible discussion about global heating, and to give Australian politicians a way to retreat from the self-defeating culture war that has scuppered all attempts at policy. They wouldn’t put it this way, but in effect the environmentalists, desperate for Australia to make some meaningful move towards reducing emissions, and the business groups, desperate for some kind of investment certainty, have been trying to save Australia’s politicians from themselves. The starting point for the Australian Climate Roundtable’s deliberations is that Australia needs to reach net zero emissions, and that delaying action just increases the cost of reaching that goal. Unremarkable propositions in any fact-based forum, but in some Coalition circles, still close to heresy. Now the roundtable, including its business members, argues that this post-corona reconstruction is a chance to speed up decarbonising the economy. The Business Council of Australia chief executive, Jennifer Westacott, argued in an opinion piece that the post-corona discussion should divest itself of “ideological constraints”. “In resuscitating our economy, we can tackle some of our most vexed problems. Every dollar we invest in energy should be a dollar towards a lower carbon economy and lower energy bills,” she wrote. And expert evidence about what might be possible has been flooding in by the day. The Australian Energy Market Operator this week released its long awaited “renewable integration study”, which found Australia could accommodate levels of up to 75% “instant” penetration of wind and solar in its main grid by 2025 – that we have the know-how, but need to update market and regulatory settings….. And then there was the advice from the International Energy Agency this week that renewable electricity will be the only energy source resilient to the biggest global energy shock in 70 years, triggered by the pandemic. …. – the latest Climateworks report released earlier this month found that net zero emissions by 2035 is possible in Australia, using technologies that are mostly already mature and available. The CSIRO’s roadmap released last year found there was no trade-off between economic growth and transitioning to zero emissions, and in fact strong action could lead to GDP growth, an increase in real wages and net zero emissions by 2050. …… https://www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2020/may/02/australia-listened-to-the-experts-on-coronavirus-its-time-we-heard-them-on-climate-change |
|
Fatigued or unwell experts in charge? -the special pandemic danger for the nuclear industry
The Hidden Nuclear Risk of the Pandemic The coronavirus crisis highlights the resilience problem of civilian nuclear power plants. https://thebulwark.com/the-hidden-nuclear-risk-of-the-pandemic/ by VICTOR GILINSKY AND HENRY SOKOLSKI APRIL 27, 2020
The coronavirus crisis has revealed a significant Achilles’ heel in civilian nuclear power: The plants can’t operate if their relatively few highly skilled operators get sick or become contagious and have to be quarantined, a situation that, according to news reports, some plants are getting close to. That puts a dent in nuclear-industry assertions that its plants provide a level of protection against natural events far beyond that of most other electricity suppliers.
In recent weeks, several vital institutions—police forces, food-processing plants, the U.S. Postal Service, not to mention health care providers—have reportedly been strained as personnel have become sick with COVID-19. As the pandemic spreads, it could create a problem for the smooth functioning of nuclear plants, as well. Just operating in safe shutdown state could be challenging. The details differ from plant to plant and are spelled out in technical specifications that are part of each plant’s federal license, but generally it takes a supervisor and several operators to man the control room and some number of maintenance staff. Altogether, counting all shifts, there may be a couple of dozen operators per plant. That doesn’t sound like much, but these are highly skilled personnel who are licensed to operate an individual plant. You can’t just pull in operators from elsewhere. If the licensed operators are unavailable because of disease or medical concerns, you are out of luck.
The Nuclear Energy Institute also argues that by contributing reliable power to military installations, nuclear energy “supports the nation’s ability to defend itself.” Yet here we have a type of emergency—involving a possible lack of operating staff—in which the nuclear plants could become a serious liability rather than an asset.
Nuclear plants are not without their advantages. But they also come with serious disadvantages, one of which—the safety imperative for constant, highly trained staffing no matter what—has become evident during the current pandemic. They are an inflexible source of energy that carries an enormous overhead in terms of safety and security, when what we need in our energy system for dealing with inevitable emergencies is not rigidity, but resilience.
Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) continues attacks on ABC
Surprise! Surprise! IPA continues attacks on ABC https://www.abcfriends.org.au/ipa_continue_attacks_on_abc
Latest news from ABC Friends , Margaret Reynolds, President ABC Friends National, 28 February 2020 The Institute of Public Affairs has (IPA) commissioned a survey by global firm Dynata to continue its campaign against the ABC and public broadcasting in Australia.
Yes, this is the same IPA which tries to influence the Liberal Party to privatise the ABC!
Guess the results: less than a third of Australians agreed that the ABC was out of touch with ordinary Australians.
So, all you extraordinary Australians who value the ABC may like to phone, text, write or visit the IPA to record why you value the essential services the ABC provides.
Website: ipa.org.au/contact-us
Email: ipa@ipa.org.au
Phone: (03) 9600 4744
Next time the IPA commissions a survey they may like to consider a poll on how many Australians value the IPAs contribution to Australian public policy debate!
Sea level rise ‘could threaten nuclear power station’ planned for UK
Sea level rise ‘could threaten nuclear power station’ planned for UK, report claims, Independent UK, EDF about to submit planning application for major development at Sizewell on Suffolk coast, Harry Cockburn, 1 May 20
Rising sea levels and coastal erosion could pose a threat to two nuclear reactors planned to be built on the low-lying Suffolk coast, according to local councils and analysis by an independent environmental group.
East Suffolk Council and Suffolk County Council have already lodged various concerns about French company EDF Energy’s plans for the new facilities at Sizewell C, and a new analysis by experts at the Nuclear Consulting Group suggests planned sea defences may be inadequate in future climate change scenarios.
EDF is reportedly about to submit its official planning application for the project, and has been working with Chinese state-owned nuclear company.
The Nuclear Consulting Group’s paper, written by structural engineer, Nick Scarr, suggests the Suffolk coast where the Sizewell development is planned, is inherently “unstable”, and that due to erosion by the sea the site could become an island before the station reaches the end of its active life, thereby risking a serious accident. Mr Scarr told the Climate News Network:
“Any sailor, or lifeboat crew, knows that east coast banks need respect — they have dynamic patterns, and even the latest charts cannot be accurate for long. “I was deeply concerned by EDF’s premise that there is micro-stability at the Sizewell site, which makes it suitable for new-build nuclear. It is true if you restrict analysis to recent historical
data, but it is false if you look at longer-term data and evidence-based climate science predictions…….. (subscribers only) https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/nuclear-power-sea-rise-sizewell-c-edf-suffolk-a9492901.html
May 1 Energy News — geoharvey
Science and Technology: ¶ “The Ocean Genome Helps Fight Disease: Here’s How We Save It” • The ocean plays a surprising role in fighting Covid-19. The “ocean genome” is a rich source of anti-viral compounds. And enzymes from a remarkable hydrothermal vent bacterium have been key to the technology in virus test kits, including those […]
Major contractor quits Australia solar market after huge losses on projects — RenewEconomy
Exodus of contractors from Australia’s large scale solar market continues after international company quits, citing delays, faulty materials and regulatory issues. The post Major contractor quits Australia solar market after huge losses on projects appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Major contractor quits Australia solar market after huge losses on projects — RenewEconomy
ARENA told to strengthen processes, as decisions on future loom — RenewEconomy
ARENA told to tighten up evaluation processes as audit office hands down review of the agency’s funding for clean tech research and development. The post ARENA told to strengthen processes, as decisions on future loom appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via ARENA told to strengthen processes, as decisions on future loom — RenewEconomy
Paralysis by analysis: Absurd regulatory regime is burying energy transition — RenewEconomy
South Australia may have to follow Victoria and NSW out of national regulatory regime if the absurd process proves a stumbling block to its proposed new link to NSW. The post Paralysis by analysis: Absurd regulatory regime is burying energy transition appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Paralysis by analysis: Absurd regulatory regime is burying energy transition — RenewEconomy
Deep dive: Why “step change” to high renewables grid will deliver low cost, reliable grid — RenewEconomy
An Australian power system dominated by renewables by 2030-40 will deliver reliable and affordable electricity, as long as regulator and policy makers come to the party and create clear investment signals. The post Deep dive: Why “step change” to high renewables grid will deliver low cost, reliable grid appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Antinuclear 