May 23 – 24 – Adelaide – Australian Energy Storage Conference & Exhibition
Australia’s Federal government process for nuclear waste dump siting disrespects indigenous community
It has been said that this dump will not go ahead if the community is opposed to it, therefore we don’t understand why this discussion is even still happening given that the clear majority of Traditional Owners are so opposed to it?
This area is currently under some protection from the Aboriginal Heritage Act of SA however, we are concerned that the Federal Government may attempt to override this state legislation. This concern is increased given that the government has suspended federal environmental and Aboriginal heritage protections during the siting period for the planned dump.
ATLA is in partnership with IBA in owning the Wilpena Pound Resort and we don’t want a waste dump to affect our tourism future.
It is NOT international best practice to go against the Traditional Owners and we call upon the federal government to stop this proposal immediately
How can you determine Indigenous support, for each process advancement stage, when ATLA was not approached until the project entered phase 2.
Adnyamathanha Traditional Land Association RNTBC, Submission to the senate inquiry into the Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia. Introduction (Submission No.42)
The Adnyamathanha Traditional Lands Association RNTBC is the peak body for all matters relating to land, culture, heritage, language and native title for Adnyamathanha people. Adnyamathanha country includes the oldest mountain range in the world and we have the oldest living culture in the world.
Adnyamathanha people are important keepers of the knowledge of this country that is recognised worldwide. This is a very important role for each and every one of us to keep this culture strong and to protect this mountain range and surrounding country and ensure our knowledges are understood by future generations.
The Association has been set up on a culturally appropriate model that allows all Adnyamathanha people to have representation on this peak body. We have a governing committee of up to 24 members and each of these members represents a particular group of Adnyamathanha people. Our Board of Directors meet throughout the year to make the decisions in relation to the matters arising and where necessary decisions are brought back to the community for discussion and ratification.
This has been a very successful process for us all with our Consent Determination being handed down in 2009. We have been united in this process and by working together we have really achieved a great deal for our people and for the future generations. We have only achieved this because we work so hard to keep our culture strong and we were able to prove that we know our country and we know our story lines and our language is kept strong.
ATLA is in partnership with IBA to purchase the Wilpena Pound Resort.
Muda
Yura Muda is our term for our spiritual and cultural beliefs, it gives us our law, our rules for living and defines our spiritual beliefs and our boundaries. We believe our Muda in a way that is deeper than most other religions.
Some areas of our Muda have been disturbed or destroyed, by mining and other developments over the years and this causes a great deal of distress to our people. Once the land is destroyed the Muda is gone, we can no longer pass on that cultural and spiritual information to our younger generations and this of course effects our cultural survival.
The Waste Dump
The nuclear waste facility proposed for the Wallerberdina/Barndioota is in our country. We understand that this federal plan seeks to deal with the disposal of low level waste and the interim storage of intermediate level waste for a non-defined period at the facility site. In this submission we refer to the plan as a dump, please note that this refers to both the dump and store concepts. Our organisation has voted on several occasions stating we are totally opposed to the waste dump in that particular area.
We have been opposed to this dump from day one and we have made our views public where ever possible. Continue reading
Advertisements
USA agricultural community worried that a “temporary” nuclear waste dump will probably become permanently stranded wastes
State lawmakers, industry leaders tangle with nuclear waste site near Carlsbad
“We were rich in uranium, and we have been sacrificed” — Beyond Nuclear International
Tribes fight to stop new uranium mines on sacred Mt. Taylor
via “We were rich in uranium, and we have been sacrificed” — Beyond Nuclear International
“What’s at stake here is life for the whole planet” — Beyond Nuclear International
Student Vincent Laroza finds “a lot of hard things to think about” when studying nuclear history
via “What’s at stake here is life for the whole planet” — Beyond Nuclear International
RES plans 176MW solar and battery plant near Adelaide — RenewEconomy
RES Australia proposes 176MW solar farm plus lithium-ion battery bank for Pallamana, 60km south-east of Adelaide.
via RES plans 176MW solar and battery plant near Adelaide — RenewEconomy
Neoen wins council approval for 500MW solar farm and storage — RenewEconomy
Neoen gains council planning approval for a 500MW solar farm and large battery storage facility in south-west Queensland.
via Neoen wins council approval for 500MW solar farm and storage — RenewEconomy
AGL rejects Alinta bid for Liddell, Coalition goes mental — RenewEconomy
Despite intense pressure from Turnbull government, AGL rejects bid for Liddell power station, saying the “highly conditional” offer did not reflect the value of the site. Abbott and Joyce are apoplectic and call for forced sale.
via AGL rejects Alinta bid for Liddell, Coalition goes mental — RenewEconomy
Potential Historic Arctic Warming Scenario in the GFS Model Forecast for Late May — robertscribbler
For years, Arctic watchers have been concerned that if May and June ran much warmer than average following an equally severe winter, we could see substantial sea ice losses, severe Arctic fires, and related knock-on global weather effects. This May, temperatures over the Arctic Ocean have run much warmer than average. And in the GFS […]
via Potential Historic Arctic Warming Scenario in the GFS Model Forecast for Late May — robertscribbler
To May 19 – nuclear and climate news Australia
International politics teeters about over the Iran nuclear deal. Plans falter for nuclear summit meeting between Trump and Kim Jong Un. Trump will “decimate” North Korea unless Kim agrees to denuclearise the Korean peninsula.
Pro nuclear propaganda becomes more sophisticated and subtle. National Geographic now a stooge for the International “New Nukes”lobby
Scientists warn that worst-case climate change scenario could be more extreme than previously thought. Climate change is heading for a major wipeout of the world’s insect species.
AUSTRALIA
Labor prepared to strengthen environmental protections, as grass roots members demand.
ACT brings forward zero emissions target to 2045.
Australia’s nuclear propagandist Ben Heard wrote a paper rubbishing renewable energy’s potential: a group of international scientists refute it.
NUCLEAR. South Australia nuclear waste dump plan. A journey to the heart of the anti-nuclear resistance in Australia: Radioactive Exposure Tour 2018. ANSTO is lying to South Australians: nuclear medicine does NOT need a nuclear waste dump in Flinders Ranges. South Australia’s battles against nuclear waste dumping won, – and now fought again. Federal Nuclear Waste Dump the precursor to importing nuclear waste – South Australia’s Liberal Party plan. We must not leave nuclear waste decisions up to poorly informed Kimba residents.
Latest Submissions to Senate Inquiry:
- Sue Tulloch’s scathing criticism of the federal nuclear waste dump process and shambolic Barndioota Consultative Co
- Janette Thomas – on the biased “community consultation”on Barndioota nuclear dump plan, seismic and flooding dangers.
- Ken and Carole Wetherby demand that Eyre Peninsula remain ‘clean and green’ – NO nuclear waste dump.
CLIMATE. Turnbull’s budget shows complete ignorance about climate change. Adani’s vain hope global coal market will save Carmichael mine. ECOM withdrawal from Adani Coal Should be ‘Final Nail in the Coffin’
RENEWABLE ENERGY Australia’s scarce water could be helped by solar and wind power. Australian businesses on the move to renewable energy. Community Buying of solar power – a very good deal for Australia’s Non Profit organisations. Australia’s biggest solar farm switches on in Port Augusta . Australia’s biggest wind farm project lands connection deal. Queensland’s biggest solar farm connects to the grid. Mackay council goes solar – and saves big – with city-wide rollout . NAB, CBA to provide $80m finance for Crowlands wind farm .
Australian government increases pressure for nuclear waste dump – (will the Senate Inquiry be irrelevant?)
Make peace by defying SA nuclear dump https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=55371 Michele Madigan 17 May 2018
As Aboriginal elder and justice campaigner Kevin Buzzacott has said: ‘If we can’t make peace for the country, and look after the country — what’s the good of us?’
Sunday 29 April 2018 marked the second anniversary for many such South Australian peacemakers. It was on that date in 2016, at 2.30am, that Adnyamathanha Elder Aunty Enice Marsh heard the news that the federal government had ‘chosen’ the Flinders Ranges to be the ‘top of the list’ site of the proposed national nuclear dump.
Incredulous at hearing this on the 8am news, I rang Aunty Enice. ‘I’m sitting here trying to eat my weetbix and keep my thoughts calm,’ she said. ‘But do you know what I was thinking? Colonisation is again attacking the First Nations people and poisoning their land.’
For her colleague, Regina McKenzie, it was ‘like getting news of a death’: death to a 60,000-year cultural heritage.
Since then, South Australia’s international grain farming area of Kimba has again emerged as an alternative site. At last month’s first joint meeting in Port Augusta, both Kimba and Flinders Ranges peoples opposing the dump reported that after ‘a quiet last few months’, the pressure from the federal government is now back on with a vengeance.
The announcement of $2 million in ‘untied’ government grants to various local applicants in each region has been integral to this. What was surprising to the Kimba opponents, faced with the absence of five of their key colleagues, was the unannounced (at least to them) appearance of the Minister, National Party Senator Matt Canavan, at this announcement.
When challenged about this lack of notice, the senior public servant’s response was that he hadn’t been ‘really sure’ that the Minister was coming. Kimba opponents cite this as just another example of the government campaign strategy: ‘It’s all about stealth.’
The Minister also announced that the Australian Electoral Commission local voting for and against either region becoming Australia’s national nuclear dump would take place on 20 August. Currently there is a Senate Estimates Committee examining the process of site selection and related matters, with its recommendations due on 13 August — leaving hardly time for a dispersion, reading and respectful cognisance of its findings prior to the vote.
Political maneuvering is again evident in the insistence of the Minister to tightly restrict the voting area — as if the small numbers of local people will be the only ones affected. Kimba farmer opponents warn constantly of the danger to their international markets of other crops and produce (such as Port Lincoln’s seafood trade) on the whole of the Eyre Peninsula region.
The oft-repeated government saying: ‘We will not impose the federal nuclear dump on an unwilling community’ continues to fly in the face of the lately renewed state legislation, which actually forbids the transportation of such waste into South Australia.
On 28 April, some of us ‘southerners’ joined locals at the glorious Wilpena Pound (pictured) site to inform national and international tourists of the Australian government’s intention to make the region home to Australia’s highest level nuclear waste — if permitted.
Predictable reactions to the news (‘Incredible!’ ‘Why?‘) included inquiries about the distance from the Pound. Amazement followed the map sighting: that any government would deliberately jeopardise such an internationally recognised site by proposing, just 40km away, a dump site for nuclear waste. Measured by radioactivity, over 90 per cent of the waste would be intermediate long lived nuclear waste from the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney — waste that will be hazardous for thousands of years.
Our dinner at the camping ground was accompanied by ring-necked parrots and, later, flocks of apostle birds. In the morning, my prayer companions included a mother kangaroo, who fossicked among the leaves while keeping herself discreetly behind the wire fence. Her joey however was a close encounter type, constantly circling within a metre of my chair.
The Flinders is an idyllic place. Kimba is important grain farming country. No wonder much of the emphasis in the government campaign, and by local proponents for both regions, continues to be on the low level nuclear waste component.
With the campaign stretching past its third year since the announcement of the respective leaseholders simply ‘offering’ their respective properties, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal opponents are rock solid in their constant efforts ‘to look after the country’. But it has come at huge personal and communal costs.
Barry Wakelin, the retired Coalition federal member, is one of the farmers fiercely opposing the plan. In the face of groundwater, transport and serious, hugely long-term safety risks, Wakelin insists, ‘This is a national issue, not something that a regional community should be left to deal with.’
A national response (in the form of a petition being circulated by Conservation South Australia) can be made in solidarity with the country and peoples who will be affected by the proposed site. Click here to sign the petition.
Response to ‘Burden of proof: A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems’
Science Direct 18 May 18
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.
Highlights
- •We respond to a recent article that is critical of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems.
- •Based on a literature review we show that none of the issues raised in the article are critical for feasibility or viability.
- •Each issue can be addressed at low economic cost, while not affecting the main conclusions of the reviewed studies.
- •We highlight methodological problems with the choice and evaluation of the feasibility criteria.
- •We provide further evidence for the feasibility and viability of renewables-based systems.
-
Abstract
A recent article ‘Burden of proof: A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems’ claims that many studies of 100% renewable electricity systems do not demonstrate sufficient technical feasibility, according to the criteria of the article’s authors (henceforth ‘the authors’). Here we analyse the authors’ methodology and find it problematic. The feasibility criteria chosen by the authors are important, but are also easily addressed at low economic cost, while not affecting the main conclusions of the reviewed studies and certainly not affecting their technical feasibility. A more thorough review reveals that all of the issues have already been addressed in the engineering and modelling literature. Nuclear power, which the authors have evaluated positively elsewhere, faces other, genuine feasibility problems, such as the finiteness of uranium resources and a reliance on unproven technologies in the medium- to long-term. Energy systems based on renewables, on the other hand, are not only feasible, but already economically viable and decreasing in cost every year
-
1. Introduction
………..https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032118303307
Scientists refute Ben Heard’s paper opposing reneweable energy
Can we get 100 percent of our energy from renewable sources? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-05/luot-cwg051718.php New article gathers the evidence to address the sceptics LAPPEENRANTA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Is there enough space for all the wind turbines and solar panels to provide all our energy needs? What happens when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow? Won’t renewables destabilise the grid and cause blackouts?
In a review paper last year in the high-ranking journal Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Master of Science Benjamin Heard (at left) and colleagues presented their case against 100% renewable electricity systems. They doubted the feasibility of many of the recent scenarios for high shares of renewable energy, questioning everything from whether renewables-based systems can survive extreme weather events with low sun and low wind, to the ability to keep the grid stable with so much variable generation.
Now scientists have hit back with their response to the points raised by Heard and colleagues.The researchers from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, the South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Delft University of Technology and Aalborg University have analysed hundreds of studies from across the scientific literature to answer each of the apparent issues. They demonstrate that there are no roadblocks on the way to a 100% renewable future. Continue reading
Busting the pro thorium nuclear spin
Should Australia consider thorium nuclear power? The Conversation
Today, advocates of thorium typically point to a variety of advantages over uranium. These include fail-safe reactor operation, because most thorium reactor designs are incapable of an explosion or meltdown, as was seen at Chernobyl or Fukushima. Another is resistance to weapons proliferation, because thorium reactors create byproducts that make the fuel unsuitable for use in nuclear weapons.Other advantages include greater abundance of natural reserves of thorium, less radioactive waste and higher utilisation of fuel in thorium reactors. Thorium is often cast as “good nuclear”, while uranium gets to carry the can as “bad nuclear”.
Not so different
While compelling at first glance, the details reveal a somewhat more murky picture. The molten salt architecture which gives certain thorium reactors high intrinsic safety equally applies to proposed fourth-generation designs using uranium. It is also true that nuclear physics technicalities make thorium much less attractive for weapons production, but it is by no means impossible; the USA and USSR each tested a thorium-based atomic bomb in 1955.
Other perceived advantages similarly diminish under scrutiny. There is plenty of uranium ore in the world and hence the fourfold abundance advantage of thorium is a moot point. Producing less long-lived radioactive waste is certainly beneficial, but the vexed question remains of how to deal with it.
Stating that thorium is more efficiently consumed is the most mischievous of the claimed benefits. Fast-breeder uranium reactors have much the same fuel efficiency as thorium reactors. However, they weren’t economic as the price of uranium turned out to rather low.
Senate climate report is a warning for Australia’s military
Climate change warning for Australia’s military Former defence chief Admiral Chris Barrie, who led Australian forces until 2002, says a new Senate committee report on the security risks of climate change must be taken seriously. SBS World News, By James Elton-Pym , 18 May 18
Climate change is a clear and present danger to Australia’s security – Senate report
Senate report: climate change is a clear and present danger to Australia’s security, The Conversation, Associate Professor of International Relations, The University of Queensland,
The Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade yesterday presented its report on the national security implications of climate change.
The report makes several findings and recommendations, noting at the outset that climate change has a range of important security implications, both domestically and internationally.
Tellingly, none of the expert submissions questioned the rationale for this inquiry, nor the claim that climate change challenges Australian national security.
The report concludes that:
the consensus from the evidence (is) that climate change is exacerbating threats and risks to Australia’s national security.
Significantly, it also notes that climate change threatens both state and human security in the Australian context. Here are some of the key security implications.
Sea-level rises and natural disasters are key challenges
The report emphasises the risks posed by rising sea levels and an increase in the frequency and intensity of environmental stress (droughts and floods, for example) and natural disasters such as cyclones. In turn, it notes that these could trigger population movements, with people displaced by extreme weather events or rising seas.
This, the report argues, would have significant implications for the Australian Defence Force (ADF). Humanitarian assistance and disaster relief missions involving the ADF have increased significantly in Australia and our region in recent years. The report predicts that the ADF will face even more pressure to carry out this type of mission in the future.
In its submission, the Department of Defence pointed out that the ADF was not established to provide these roles. The report recommends the creation of a senior leadership position within Defence to plan and manage disaster relief missions both here and abroad.
Australia, and its backyard, are particularly vulnerable
The report notes that Australia and its region are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change.
Australia’s population is largely clustered in coastal areas, and this is also true of the Asian region generally and the Pacific specifically. Pacific island nations – as low-lying and with limited resources for implementing adaptive measures – are acutely vulnerable to sea-level rises. In the Asian region 40 million people were displaced by natural disasters in 2010-11 alone.
The report argues that Australia’s obligation to its neighbours in the region, acknowledged in recent statements on the Pacific, will create significant pressure on Australia and its defence force to manage the implications of climate change. It recommends sending even more aid to the Pacific region to help build climate resilience.
Defence needs to plan ahead
While the report acknowledges Defence efforts, a key finding is the urgent need for Defence to plan for a climate-affected world………https://theconversation.com/senate-report-climate-change-is-a-clear-and-present-danger-to-australias-security-96797
1.This month
For international news go to https://nuclear-news.net/
Federal nuclear waste dump plan – unnecessary for medical purposes – theme for May 2018
The Lucas Heights nuclear reactor offers a “cover”, respectability, for the nuclear power and nuclear waste industries to get into this country.
The real agenda for Australia’s Lucas Heights nuclear reactor has always been to maintain an opening for the nuclear industry. With Lucas Heights and ANSTO, nuclear expertise is continued, in preparation for possible Australian nuclear power, and nuclear weapons.
The Lucas Heights nuclear reactor now functions as a support for the Australian uranium industry, and a foot in the door for an Australian nuclear waste import industry.
ANSTO is not facing up to the reality that non-nuclear methods – e.g cyclotrons can now produce all medical radioisotopes. Nor is ANSTO admitting that medical radioactive wastes are most suitably be dealt with at the local level, near the point of use. NO NEED FOR A NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP OVER A THOUSAND Km AWAY!
Medical Isotope and Cyclotron Facility
The Senate Inquiry on Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia. has now 88 submissions published Brett Stokes and I are going through them, not at this point able to estimate how many pro-nuke how many anti-nuke.
**********************************************************
EVENTS
See our page: Submissions on Radioactive Waste Code 2018/ Submissions published by ARPANSA are overwhelmingly critical, and in opposition to the Federal nuclear dump plan for rural South Australia. [not to be confused with the current SENATE INQUIRY Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia.]
************************************************************************
PETITIONS
Say no to the federal plan to dump and store nuclear waste in SA.
Don’t Let Frydenberg approve Yeelirrie uranium mine or extinction!
No Nuclear Bundabunda at Brewarrina – bad poison [SIGN THE PETITION]
Advertisements
