Felicity Wright: appalled at effect on Aboriginal communities of decision on National Radioactive Waste Dump Site
Felicity Wright – Submision to Senate Committee on National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions] Submission 98
I am a resident of the Eyre Peninsula. Whilst the bulk of this email has been taken from the ACF template I
confirm that I endorse the contents fully. As an ally and advocate for Indigenous peoples for more than 30 years
I was appalled at the terrible toll fighting the nuclear waste facility in the Flinders Ranges took upon my friends.
I watched one of my closest friends visibly age as she surrendered her art practice and her enjoyment of life to
dedicate herself to challenging it.
It does not escape my attention that the Eyre Peninsula is a significant distance from the east coast and few
politicians would be familiar with the area. Neither would their electorates, therefore it looks like a convenient
location to store something highly problematic.
I have deep concerns about the federal governments proposed changes to the National Radioactive Waste
Management Act. The government has not made a clear case about the need for the planned national facility at Kimba and the process has been restricted and inadequate.
In particular, I am concerned that the planned changes:
• restrict or remove options for judicial review of the government’s site selection under current laws
• unreasonably reduce the rights and options of the Barngarla Traditional Owners and other directly
impacted parties and have not been made with proper consultation
• exempt key environmental and cultural heritage protection laws from being used.
• fail to make any clear or compelling radiological or public health case for doubling handling the long-lived
intermediate level waste (ILW) at significant public expense
• do not provide any certainty about the long-term management of Australia’s radioactive waste
• are not consistent with international best practice in relation to siting, community consultation or
procedural fairness around radioactive waste
• do not recognise or respect long standing South Australian legislation prohibiting any federal radioactive
waste facility
Against the current context of uncertainty and disruption due to the impact of Covid 19 the further uncertainty
and contest generated by the federal government’s approach to radioactive waste is not helpful or justified.
I urge the Committee not to support the proposed changes to the current legislation and instead call for a
dedicated comprehensive review of management options in order to best realise responsible radioactive waste
management in Australia.
Terry Schmucker- unfairness of community funding for nuclear dump has split the local community
It is on advice from the Kimba consultative committee that the existing funding boundary has been set. The promise of many millions of dollars isolated to one particular local government area has changed our community and the way it works. This has also extended to communication and consultation……
I ask also that funding amounts allocated to different council areas be set in law to protect vulnerable neighbourhoodslike ours from bullying and manipulation.
Terry Schmucker. SUBMISSION TO: SENATE ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
Inquiry into the National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification,
Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions] Submission 92
I would like to put forward my views on some of the impacts this has had on my
neighbourhood and the flaws in the process that have not been addressed. This Bill should not
be accepted as there remain many unanswered questions about naming Napandee as the site.
Firstly, to limit community funding to one particular local government area will harm the
community and put the Radioactive Waste Management Facility at odds with local residents.
I live in a neighbourhood that has our land areas also known as hundreds split in half by two
local government jurisdictions; Kimba and Wudinna District Councils.
The hundreds of Cootra and Koongawa have a long and proud history of working together
and the majority of people here have descended from the original pioneers with a strong
sense of community that came from the history of schooling, socialising, and sporting clubs
covering different local government areas. Continuation of this community spirit is still most
evident in the current Koongawa sports club and the Cootra volunteer CFS brigade. Members
come from both council districts; however the majority of support comes from outside the
Kimba district. For example our CFS brigade responds to incidents in the area around or near
the proposed waste facility and it will again in the future. The majority of brigade members
will not receive any or little support from the community funding if it is limited to just the
Kimba council area.
Our neighbourhood borders the waste site at Napandee and some of my neighbours who live
in the Wudinna district are physically closer to the waste site than the Kimba township. I
have personally brought this to the attention of Minister Canavan, the Department and the
Kimba council, but with no results. I believe vested interests have excluded us from this
process. If our neighbourhood had been given an equal status in the vote we would likely
have a different result. This was the case at Hawker where the vote extended to a 50 km
radius around the waste site as well as the council area. The selected site at Napandee site is
not at Kimba and is offset within the council area.
Before the consultative committee member application process closed, my questioning
prompted the Department to announce that applicants from outside of the council area would
also be accepted. This created a fair bit of confusion and the nominations closed three days
later as scheduled. No extension was given and all the members appointed to the consultative
committee are only from within the Kimba district council area except for the independent
chairman who is not a local. This was the beginning of a bias towards our neighbourhood that
didn’t exist before.
Sue Woolford recommends the Canadian model for selecting a Nuclear Waste Facility Site
I would like to draw the committee’s attention to the Canadian leading example which has
empowered communities to self-nominate for assessment in a long-term process called
“Adaptive Phase Management”2 ensuring trust is being gained in communities prior to any
final site selection for radioactive waste disposal in a deep geological repository over a long
established timeline.
I could not support the proposal as it stands.
The Kimba District Council has not done its due diligence to request an an independent risk analysis for the people it
represents
Sue Woolford SUBMISSION TO SENATE ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE
RE: Inquiry into the National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site
Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions] Submission No 91
I would like to put forward my personal views on how acceptance of this Bill would be doing
an injustice to the responsible management of radioactive waste in Australia.
I am critical of this current process but not the value of nuclear medicine and the need to
find the right long term solution to benefit all Australians. I have advocated for a fair and
transparent process that instils trust in the public domain and believe that the National
Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 and this Bill need to have proper assessment to
deliver to all Australians a morally and legally acceptable Act with lessons learnt.
The government department responsible have initiated a consultation and site selection
process under the current Act but have not truly engaged meaningfully with all
stakeholders. Standards have not conformed alongside the principles of the International
Association for Public Participation1 (IAP2) and the spectrum of public participation which is
used internationally.
I believe if more of these principles were applied to provide objective information and listen
to feedback then the key challenges to site the nations radioactive waste into a central
location with community confidence would be taken to a new level of credibility and
assurances. My submission deals with finding the right solution instead of a second rate
option in my hometown.
Currently, I don’t believe the National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 has
allowed for the best and safest sites to be voluntarily put forward. The extinguishment of
Native Title holder’s rights and the Commonwealth having the authority to override states
and territories has only confirmed that the Australian example is inconsistent with world’s
best practice and is an abominable act that takes away rights of review to ensure a fair and
transparent process. Continue reading
Australian govt and ERA squabble over monitoring of Ranger uranium clean-up
|
Ranger Mine locked in stoush over funding for Kakadu uranium rehabilitation monitoring https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-19/nt-kakadu-uranium-stoush-ranger-mine-rehabilitation/12260130 By Jane Bardon,
The Federal Government is locked in a stoush with the company mining uranium on the edge of the Northern Territory’s Kakadu National Park over whether it will continue to fund monitoring of the site’s rehabilitation. Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) has flagged it wants to pull out of paying $2.5 million a year for the Supervising Scientist Branch independent monitoring agency, which it funds with the Commonwealth, at the end of June.
Community members of ERA’s independent technical consultation committee, including Dr Gavin Mudd, an Associate Professor of Environmental Engineering at RMIT University, have been told by the Supervising Scientist Branch its future research is in doubt because of the funding uncertainty. “That funding is no longer guaranteed for next year is a major concern,” Dr Mudd said. “This work is needed to give us confidence that what is done at Ranger actually works, including the restoration of ecosystems, how stable the landform is, the radioactivity and the surface and groundwater water quality issues.” Dr Mudd said failures in the rehabilitation of other Northern Territory uranium mines, including Rum Jungle near Bachelor, have demonstrated that there will need to be monitoring for decades after Ranger’s closure. ERA, which is owned by Rio Tinto, has been forced to close the mine by 2021 after a series of uranium leaks and spills into the Alligator Rivers system during its 35 years of operations. The company has promised the mine site will be returned to a pristine state, suitable for inclusion in the Kakadu World Heritage park by 2026, and that monitoring by the Supervising Scientist will prove that. The Federal Government provides three-quarters of the Supervising Scientist’s $8 million annual operating budget. ERA told the ABC it hasn’t made a final decision on the funding. “There has been no decision that ERA’s contribution would cease. But a spokesman for the Federal Environment Minister told the ABC the Government felt it was “unfortunate that ERA is choosing to dispute its ongoing contribution under the Deed”. “The role of the Supervising Scientist ensures the unique environment of Kakadu National Park, its Indigenous culture and its stunning wildlife are protected from the effects of uranium mining within that rehabilitation process and into the future,” he said. “The Commonwealth view is that ERA needs to continue to make an appropriate contribution to support ongoing research during the rehabilitation phase of the mine to ensure there are no shortfalls.” The spokesman added that the Minister Sussan Ley has asked the Environment Department to mediate with ERA to try to resolve the dispute. |
|
The Morrison government manipulates, to paint the coal industry as “clean” and “renewable”
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation has this awkward word “Clean”
The Australian Renewable Energy Agency has this awkward word “Renewable”
How can the those agencies put coal into those categories? With some difficulty.
My heart goes out to them, -like those poor gardeners in “Alice in Wonderland” – forced to paint red all the white roses , lest the Queen should cut off their heads.
Government looks to carbon capture for climate action, The Age By Mike Foley, May 19, 2020 The Morrison government is considering legislative changes to allow its clean energy agencies to fund carbon capture and storage from fossil fuel projects in a bid to unlock $2 billion of private investment to reduce greenhouse gases.
Energy and Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor has accepted 21 of the 26 recommendations from an independent panel reviewing the $2 billion Emissions Reduction Fund, including all those relating to carbon capture and storage.
The panel, chaired by former Business Council of Australia president Grant King, said the government would attract more private investment in the Emissions Reduction Fund if legislation were amended to “enable a method to be developed for carbon capture and storage”.
The King report also recommended an “expanded, technology-neutral remit” for the Clean Energy Finance Corp (CEFC) and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency so they too could attract more private investment in a wider range of technologies outside renewables, such as coal or gas-fired power incorporating carbon capture and storage. This would be a significant change to the remit of the agencies, which were set up to promote the development of renewable wind and solar supplied to the electricity grid.
Carbon capture and storage, which has not yet been successfully implemented on a commercial basis, involves capturing carbon dioxide from industrial processes and transporting it to a suitable storage site for safe, long-term storage deep underground.
Mr Taylor said emissions reduction policy driven by “technology not taxes” would attract significant private investment.
“The government will target dollar-for-dollar co-investment from the private sector and other levels of government to drive at least $4 billion of investment that will reduce emissions across Australia,” he said in a statement accompanying the report’s release.
The Climate Solutions Fund was set up in 2015 with $2.5 billion funding under the Abbott government as an alternative to a carbon tax. It pays polluters to employ cleaner technologies and funds carbon capture through tree planting, soil carbon sequestration on farms and energy efficient systems in commercial properties, as well as methane capture from landfill and waste management.
Last year, the Morrison government topped up the fund with another $2 billion and rebadged it the Climate Solutions Fund. To date, it has issued 450 contracts to abate a cumulative 190 million tonnes of carbon at a total cost of $2.3 billion, or an average of $12 a tonne of carbon…….
Current legislation prohibits CEFC from investing in carbon capture and storage. But changing the legislation would enable the $1 billion Grid Reliability Fund to invest in new gas, hydrogen and coal projects relying on carbon capture.
….
The marine food web threatened, as climate change damages Antarctic krill
Climate change threatens Antarctic krill and the sea life that depends on it The Conversation, Devi Veytia, PhD student , University of Tasmania, Stuart Corney, Senior lecturer, University of Tasmania, 19 May 20,
The Southern Ocean circling Antarctica is one of Earth’s richest marine ecosystems. Its food webs support an abundance of life, from tiny micro-organisms to seals, penguins and several species of whales. But climate change is set to disrupt this delicate balance.
What we found
Antarctic krill are one of the most abundant animal species in the world. About 500 million tonnes of Antarctic krill are estimated to exist in the Southern Ocean.
Antarctic krill play a critical role in the ocean’s food webs. But their survival depends on a delicate balance of food and temperature. Scientists are concerned at how climate change may affect their population and the broader marine ecosystem.
Krill growth depends largely on ocean temperature and the abundance of its main food source, phytoplankton (microscopic single-celled plants)………
Krill growth habitat shifted south as suitable ocean temperatures contracted towards the poles. Combined with changes in phytoplankton distribution, growth habitat improved in spring but deteriorated in summer and autumn.
This early end to the growth season could have profound consequences for krill populations. The krill life cycle is synchronised with the Southern Ocean’s dramatic seasonal cycles. Typically this allows krill to both maximise growth and reproduction and store reserves to survive the winter.
A shift in habitat timing could create a mismatch between these two cycles.
For example, female krill need access to plentiful food during the summer in order to spawn. Since larger females produce exponentially more eggs, a decline in summer growth habitat could result in smaller females and far less spawning success.
Why this matters
Krill’s significant role in the food chain means the impacts of these changes may play out through the entire ecosystem.
If krill shift south to follow their retreating habitat, less food would be available for predators on sub-Antarctic islands such as Antarctic fur seals, penguins and albatrosses for whom krill forms a significant portion of the diet.
In the past, years of low krill densities has coincided with declines in reproductive success for these species…….. https://theconversation.com/climate-change-threatens-antarctic-krill-and-the-sea-life-that-depends-on-it-138436
Japan needs to abandon its troubled nuclear fuel cycle
As the situation stands, plutonium will start to pile up with no prospects of it being consumed. Reducing the amount produced is also an issue that needs to be addressed.
The United States and Britain have already pulled out of a nuclear fuel cycle.
|
Editorial: Time to set a course away from Japan’s troubled nuclear fuel cycle https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20200518/p2a/00m/0na/029000c, May 18, 2020 (Mainichi Japan) The Rokkasho Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Facility being constructed in the northern Japan prefecture of Aomori has cleared a safety inspection by the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA).
Spent fuel from Japan’s nuclear power plants will be reprocessed at this facility, which will play a key role in Japan’s “nuclear fuel cycle” policy. Under the policy, uranium and plutonium extracted from such fuel is to be processed for further use. Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd., the operator of the reprocessing facility, aims to complete construction by autumn next year, but there are no immediate prospects of the facility going into operation. On top of this, due to changes in the circumstances surrounding nuclear power, the meaning of the facility’s existence is no longer clear. The first issue to consider is declining demand for the use of fuel to be reprocessed at the facility. Such fuel was originally destined to go mainly to the Monju fast-breeder reactor in the western Japan prefecture of Fukui, but a spate of problems with the sodium-cooled reactor led to a decision in 2016 to decommission it. There are no plans to construct a replacement facility. There were also plans to use reprocessed fuel at nuclear power stations to generate electricity, but there are only four reactors that can handle it, far fewer than the 16 to 18 originally planned. As the situation stands, plutonium will start to pile up with no prospects of it being consumed. Reducing the amount produced is also an issue that needs to be addressed. Japan already possesses more than 45 metric tons of surplus plutonium, and there are fears in international society that it could be converted for use in nuclear weapons. In 2018, the government pledged to reduce the amount. A realistic approach is not to reprocess the fuel in the first place. Forming the backdrop to Japan’s persistence with fuel reprocessing is the problem of how to handle the large amount of spent nuclear fuel being stored on the grounds of the reprocessing facility. If Japan gives up on its nuclear fuel cycle policy, then the spent fuel will be sent back to nuclear power plants across the country. But those facilities are already pressed for storage space, making it difficult for them to accept the spent fuel. The total cost of the reprocessing facility, including construction and maintenance costs, stands at 14 trillion yen. Some of the cost will be tacked onto electricity bills. There is a need to rethink the question of whether the public is receiving benefits commensurate with the huge investment into the facility. NRA Chairman Toyoshi Fuketa said he would check with the minister of economy, trade and industry whether operation of the reprocessing plant was in line with the nation’s energy policy. In the wake of the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami and the ensuing nuclear disaster, many countries across the world turned in the direction of abandoning nuclear power. There are sufficient uranium resources in the world, and the justification for reprocessing as “effective utilization of limited resources” has faded. The United States and Britain have already pulled out of a nuclear fuel cycle. Japan must avoid a situation in which it wastes time by sticking to a national policy and becomes laden with risks. The country should squarely face up to the fact that it is in a no-win situation, and search for an alternative to the nuclear fuel cycle policy. |
|
Comparing USA and Russia’s massive nuclear weapons spending with the rest of the world
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-pakistan-among-biggest-spenders-on-nuclear-weapons/30618712.html
Trump Says U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Must Be ‘Greatly’ Expanded
Trump Says U.S. Nuclear Arsenal Must Be ‘Greatly’ Expanded, Bloomberg, By Alex Wayne, December 23, 2016- Russian president said his arsenal also should be strengthened
- Obama has sought to both modernize and reduce U.S. weapons
President-elect Donald Trump said Thursday the U.S. should increase its nuclear arsenal, an apparent reversal of a decades-long reduction of the nation’s atomic weaponry that came hours after Russian President Vladimir Putin reiterated calls for his country’s arsenal to be reinforced.
“The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes,” Trump said in a Twitter post…….(subscribers only)
Morrison govt plans to direct climate action measures to promote coal industry
Coalition reveals new emissions reduction measures, including paying polluters to stay under capMorrison government also plans to allow businesses to bid for carbon capture projects via the $2.55bn emissions reduction fund Guardian Adam Morton Environment editor @adamlmorton 19 May 2020
Big polluters will be able to earn revenue by emitting less than their allocated limit under new emissionsThe Morrison government has promised new measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including introducing an incentive scheme to allow big industrial polluters to earn revenue by emitting less than an agreed limit.
It also plans to allow businesses to bid for funding from its main climate policy, the $2.55bn emissions reduction fund, for projects that capture emissions and either use them or store them underground.
Angus Taylor, the energy and emissions reduction minister, said the government had agreed to 21 of 26 recommendations in a review headed by former Business Council of Australia president Grant King, who was charged with coming up with new ways to cheaply cut emissions.
The appointment in October of the panel of business leaders and policy experts was not publicly announced, and was seen by observers as an effective concession the emissions reduction fund, now rebadged as a climate solutions fund, was failing to cut national pollution………
Recommendations agreed by the government included allowing carbon capture and storage projects to qualify under the fund, a step the government said it had began consulting with industry on last month.
In a shift likely to be criticised by clean energy advocates, the government gave in-principle support for two agencies, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Arena) and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), to be given a “technology neutral remit” to support “the widest possible range of technologies that reduce emissions”. The Greens previously accused the government of planning changes to the CEFC to allow it to fund more fossil fuel projects……
Recommendations agreed by the government included allowing carbon capture and storage projects to qualify under the fund, a step the government said it had began consulting with industry on last month.
In a shift likely to be criticised by clean energy advocates, the government gave in-principle support for two agencies, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Arena) and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), to be given a “technology neutral remit” to support “the widest possible range of technologies that reduce emissions”. The Greens previously accused the government of planning changes to the CEFC to allow it to fund more fossil fuel projects…….https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/19/coalition-reveals-new-emissions-reduction-measures-including-paying-polluters-to-stay-under-cap
Morrison to redirect climate funds to carbon capture and big emitters as ‘King Review’ released — RenewEconomy
Secretive “King Review” into emissions policies released, with the Morrison government to funnel climate funds into carbon capture and big emitters. The post Morrison to redirect climate funds to carbon capture and big emitters as ‘King Review’ released appeared first on RenewEconomy.
May 18 Energy News — geoharvey
Opinion: ¶ “After The Covid-19 Crisis, Will We Get A Greener World?” • The current Covid-19 crisis has revealed a sobering truth: the global economic shutdown has barely dented our carbon emissions. They may be down by 6% to 8%. They have to fall by 7.6% of what they now are every year to 2050 […]
Greens pitch Green New Deal, 100% renewables target for post-Covid recovery — RenewEconomy
The Australian Greens pitch vision for a green Covid-19 economic response, including 100 per cent renewables and a revived, green, manufacturing sector. The post Greens pitch Green New Deal, 100% renewables target for post-Covid recovery appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Greens pitch Green New Deal, 100% renewables target for post-Covid recovery — RenewEconomy
Huge 2GW of wind, solar and storage to deliver green future for Queensland industrial hub — RenewEconomy
Energy Estate and RES join forces to propose 2GW of wind, solar and storage to deliver low emissions and long term future Queensland industrial hub of Gladstone. The post Huge 2GW of wind, solar and storage to deliver green future for Queensland industrial hub appeared first on RenewEconomy.
The future of solar power: From unbelievably cheap to insanely cheap — RenewEconomy
Solar power has fallen to prices that are, by any stretch of the measure, insanely, world-changingly cheap. And they are going to fall further. The post The future of solar power: From unbelievably cheap to insanely cheap appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via The future of solar power: From unbelievably cheap to insanely cheap — RenewEconomy
Antinuclear 