Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

1.This month

 For international news go to https://nuclear-news.net/

Donald Trump inauguration: 5 things we can all do

***************************************************************

WTF is the REAL Deal with Global Warming?  Paul Beckwith

***************************************************************************************
ACTION 

23 Febrtext-Please-Noteuary Webinar on nuclear medicine production 

from No High Level International Nuclear Waste Dump in South AustraliaNational Radioactive Waste Management Facility project, 5 Dec 16 

The project team will be hosting a webinar which will consider the suitability of Australia’s use of nuclear medicine production facilities and cyclotrons and the case around importing and exporting nuclear medicine products. Some topics for discussion may include:

• Productive capacity of cyclotrons and nuclear reactors
• Importing and exporting nuclear medicine
• Waste generation from Australian production

The webinar will be live online from our Sydney office and accessible from any computer. You will be able to send questions to the panel members at any point throughout the discussions. The webinar will run from 9am to 1pm on 23 February 2016.

Please signal your interest in attending this event in person in your area to radioactivewaste@industry.gov.au as this will assist us in our planning. If there is enough interest, we may look at hiring a hall.

text TreatyDonate to Justice for South Australian First People – Treaty Now

sign-thisPETITION No Nuclear Waste Dump for South Australia  http://sagreens.markparnell.org.au/no_waste_dump_for_sa

PETITION. Citizens of Australia demand action to enforce South Australian Nuclear Waste Storage Facility (Prohibition) Act 2000   http://petition.dyndns.org/index.php

*************************************************************************************************

8 Comments »

  1. Imagine a planet where our families were very moderate in size – we wouldn’t be using as much energy in total and could leave some energy for the next generation.

    Comment by L Hunter | September 28, 2009 | Reply

  2. Thank you, L. Hunter.
    I totally agree with you – the goal would be moderation in human numbers, as well as moderation in the way we live, and consume the Earth’s resources.
    I read recently of someone’s suggestion that “the best tool for reducing greenhouse gas emissions is the condom”

    Comment by Christina MacPherson | September 29, 2009 | Reply

  3. I’d have to admit that my views have been influenced by the information put out by the ‘independent’ radio and television broadcasters and by the institutes you have mentioned.
    I feel that I have made a conscious effort to become better educated on the issue of nuclear power but if our public broadcasters and institutes are not providing unbiased information on the issue then where else do I go?
    I personally think the case for nuclear power is strong but I am now wary that I may not have been presented with all the relevant information.

    Comment by MattSmith | January 20, 2010 | Reply

    • Australia’s public broadcasters are not doing such a bad job, by world standards. Of course they find trivia, sensationalism, and overly sentimental topics are more popular than serious matters. And of course, they find it easier to just use the media releases that pour out from industry and government.

      Still, one can find very fair and informative stuff in Australia’s mainstream media – (eg. The Age, Sydney Morning Herald, Courier Mail), just that it’s likely to be on about page 7 of the newspaper, or on TV or radio at an unfriendly time (e.g ABC’s Lateline). Also, journalists aren’t always resourced (or inclined) to spend time at the “coal-face” or rather, the “uranium-face” – some topics just not covered.

      All coupled with Australians, (including journalists’) extraordinary reverence for the opinions of “hard” scientists, (nuclear physicists, like Ziggy Switkowski,) compared to their scepticism about “soft” scientists, ( ecologists, environmental scientists like Mark Diesendorf, or Prof Ian Lowe)

      Comment by Christina MacPherson | January 21, 2010 | Reply

  4. A message we get from the media is that Nuclear power is the only way to provide full-scale baseload power.

    Rarely do Nuclear power proponents mention REDUCING or ELIMINATING the gargantuan full-scale waste of power.

    Examples:

    millions of burning electric lights on bright sunny days, eccentric eclectic electric doors opening for any people/objects passing by and often not coming in, almost countless numbers of devices chewing up electricity in standby power-buy mode, dinosaur toasters and dinosaur ovens run on days that a solar oven could do the job, shop “background” subliminal propaganda programming music and video feeds, hair dryers when extreme water wasteful cotton for towels is unused or discarded in frantic frenzy, “boom box” speaker earthshakers human-attempted earthquakers, electric air conditioning to cool those already overflowing with excessive cold-weather-survival calories, grid iron heaters instead of exercise + no-restrictive-nicotine + no-depressive-alcohol + comfortable clothes in winter.

    The True Cost on my electric bill at home is ONE KILOWATT $0.25 per day, but outside of home, and due to waste society, is probably an order of magnitude (10 times) greater at a minimum.

    “WASTE NOT WANT NOT”

    “To Waste is a Crime.”

    Comment by NoNukes Australia | March 3, 2010 | Reply

  5. I have a query regarding using some material on your website, and getting permission from you to do so. Could you please contact me by email, and I will send you the details?

    Comment by Debbie Gallagher | July 23, 2012 | Reply

  6. Scientists must dump toxic nuclear waste in their own backyard FIRST for many, many centuries to PROVE that it is safe, before pedalling their evil lies and deceit onto human beings, who have a heart and a soul and are of sound mind !
    Why don’t the world’s scientists buy an island or landsite somewhere in the world and use it as a toxic nuclear waste dumping ground as they are clearly so obsessed with nuclear power ? Most of them are multimillionaires after the nuclear deals they have made, some even with our enemies and also all of the evil lies they have preached to human beings. Perhaps the countries that create nuclear waste, could also contribute to the cost of this toxic nuclear waste dump island or landsite. I propose that humanity demands that all the world’s nuclear scientists go an live on such an island together with the world’s toxic nuclear waste as an EXPERIMENT before spreading their EVIL ERRORS and LIES and DECEIT onto human beings. We need to DEMAND PROOF !

    Comment by Esther | February 21, 2016 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: