The huge carbon footprint and massive energy use of online activities and of bitcoin

This is a most timely article. Why is the world not noticing this? Elon Musk and other billionaire Bitcoin fans are also fans of space travel – another energy-gobbling thing. They are fans of nuclear energy. The thing that nuclear energy fans have in common with space travel fans and Bitcoin fans is their religious fervour for endless growth and endless energy use.
Unfortunately our entire culture, the Western consumer culture, has swept the world with a mindless belief in ever more stuff, ever more digital use, with no awareness of the energy used. So we tink that our billions of trivial tweets are up ”in the cloud”, – not even realising that they are in dirty great steel data buildings that use massive amounts of energy just to keep cool, This ever- expanding energy and resource gobbling is going to kill us, – and Bitcoin is just one glaring, sorry example of this.
Truth or fiction: Is mining bitcoin a ticking time bomb for the climate? Rehabilitating Earth By Jennifer Sizeland 2 May 21
While many of us may consider the carbon footprint of buying a physical item like a jumper or a toaster, it is truly mind boggling to think about the environmental impact of time spent online. This may be why the huge carbon footprints of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin are going largely under the radar for many of us, including investors and climate activists.
Yet the real-world cost of bitcoin cannot be underestimated. A University of Cambridge study found that the network burns through 121 terawatt-hours per year, putting it into a category of a top-30 country in terms of electricity usage. In fact, the carbon cost was largely ignored altogether until 2017 when prices surged and the general population started to take more notice. Aside from the significant carbon footprint of bitcoin, it’s important to understand what bitcoin is and why it’s so popular.
Decoding Cryptocurrencies
Bitcoin is created by mining a 64-digit hexadecimal number (known as a ‘hash’) that is less than or equal to the target hash that the miner is looking for. The miner gets paid in crypto tokens for all the currency they make. The act of solving these computational equations on the bitcoin network makes the payment network trustworthy. It proves the worth of the bitcoin and verifies it at the same time so that it can’t be spent twice. Essentially, an online log makes records of the transactions made and once approved, they’re added to a block on the chain, hence the phrase ‘blockchain’.
What makes it all the more confusing is that not only is cryptocurrency fairly new to the general population, but the way it is created is shrouded in secrecy due to its niche status. This makes it much harder for miners to be held accountable for their intensive carbon usage, in a time when every company needs to consider their impact on the planet.
The secrecy is also what excites investors about bitcoin since it isn’t tied to a certain location or institution and it’s completely decentralised – unlike a bank. Investors trust bitcoin as inflation is controlled algorithmically by cutting the reward rate periodically, rendering the rate of new bitcoin supplies as unalterable by design. The issue remains that there is no government or organisation to hold them to account for their carbon footprint. A footprint which is intrinsically tied to its value as the demand for it increases, using more and more energy. With every market jump, the cost to the planet is greater.
The price of one bitcoin is $57,383 at the time of writing, which takes the market cap value above that of Facebook and Tesla. The wider cryptocurrency market that includes dogecoin, ethereum and litecoin has reached an estimated $1.4 trillion and counting.
From a financial perspective, miners want cheap servers to increase their profit margins which is why much of the bitcoin activity is done in China. As the industry is unregulated there is no reason why activity wouldn’t surge in the place where it costs the least to do it. Currently, China does not have a cost-effective renewable energy supply so two thirds of the grid is fuelled by dirty coal power stations.
Another problematic caveat to the bitcoin story is the amount of so-called green companies and investors that are buying into it. Some of them are not disclosing this element of their portfolio due to the immense carbon footprint but those that are publicly traded have no choice. Perhaps one of the most high-profile companies to reap the rewards from bitcoin is Elon Musk’s Tesla, who have made $1 billion in 10 weeks from their investment. It remains to be seen whether these businesses are doing their due diligence regarding the origins of their bitcoin and if it is mined from a sustainable source. While this may give Tesla more money to invest in green infrastructure, it’s hard to say whether this is the more ethical way to do so……….
One important lesson we can take from this is that it demonstrates how the digital world has a very real impact on planet Earth. Whether we’re buying cryptocurrency or simply scrolling the internet, we are impacting the planet in one way or another. https://rehabilitatingearth.com/2021/05/02/truth-or-fiction-is-mining-bitcoin-a-ticking-time-bomb-for-the-climate/
Graphic courtesy of Alice Eaves
Running the numbers on Victoria’s climate plan – the leader in state climate action — RenewEconomy

Victoria has raised its climate ambition – but has it raised it far enough? There seems to be plenty of low hanging fruit left strangely unpicked. The post Running the numbers on Victoria’s climate plan – the leader in state climate action appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Running the numbers on Victoria’s climate plan – the leader in state climate action — RenewEconomy
Inside and Outside the Military Industrial Complex with Ann Wright — Rise Up Times

Ann Wright talks about discrimination against Asians and the new Cold War against Russia.
Inside and Outside the Military Industrial Complex with Ann Wright — Rise Up Times
Malaysia needs to speak out on releasing nuclear waste into the sea
Malaysia needs to speak out on releasing nuclear waste into the sea https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/malaysia-needs-speak-out-releasing-nuclear-waste-seaBernama/Bernama
May 02, 2021 KUALA LUMPUR : Malaysia needs to play its role as a member of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) by speaking out on the long-term effect of releasing treated water from nuclear power plants into the ocean.
Co-founder of Project Ocean Hope, Mogesh Sababathy said actions need to be taken to ensure environmental sustainability, especially for marine life, is not threatened.
“Even though the nuclear waste will be diluted in water, its radioactive concentration should also be considered. And even when diluted, toxic is still toxic and it can still affect everyone.
“Hence, Malaysia needs to play its role and speak out on this issue at an international level, as this involves people’s security and health, as well as marine life in the region,” he told Bernama.
The Japanese government has recently approved a plan to release more than one million tonnes of treated water from the ruined Fukushima nuclear plant into the sea.
The plan also has the support of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which says the release is comparable to the disposal of waste water from other nuclear plants globally.
Mogesh argued that this method will affect the world’s food chain security. “Nuclear radioactive is capable of affecting marine life and killing organisms, thus threatening the economic source of those who rely on it.
“It’s undeniable that Malaysia is far removed from Fukushima but we still share the same ocean. It is not impossible for the waste to drift to our country,” he said.
He hopes the relevant international bodies will study and develop safer alternative to dispose radioactive nuclear waste without harming the environment.
New Zealand nuclear veterans want apology and compensation from the government
New Zealand’s nuclear horror still not acknowledged say vets Stuff, Janine Rankin May 02 2021 Photos on a wall, names on a board and an academic study will ensure the radiation damage to 551 men who witnessed Britain’s nuclear bomb explosions in the Pacific is never forgotten.
But what the New Zealand survivors of those blasts really want is an apology and compensation from the Government.
The stories of the nuclear veterans and the subsequent heartache and illness affecting them and the off-spring of those who had families have been retold in Palmerston North this weekend.
It was the third opening of Denise Baynham’s exhibition of the photographs and stories of navy veterans “Operation Grapple, We were There” at Te Manawa art gallery……………
…….. The men exposed to those bomb blasts, many times more powerful than the bombs that ended World War II in Japan, suffered radiation damage, and still do.
A carefully controlled sample of 50 veterans showed three times the frequency of genetic damage, technically called total chromosome translocations, than the control group.
Rowland is now the association’s patron, and he and Sefton’s close friend and successor Tere Tahu are determined to have the Government acknowledge the harm done.
They have a meeting with Veterans’ Affairs Minister Meka Whaitiri on May 10, with the goal of gaining an audience with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.
Veteran John Purcell said until now, they had only received “a wall of silence” from successive ministers.
“It is my belief that the Crown abrogated its duty of care by dispatching HMNZS Pukaki and Rotoiti to take part in the British nuclear testing, being fully aware that we were being sent into harm’s way.”
What he wants is a public apology, a public acceptance of the research findings, urgent research regarding the children and grandchildren of veterans, and compensation., https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/125002784/new-zealands-nuclear-horror-still-not-acknowledged-say-vets
Poor prospects for small nuclear reactors (SMRs) as a cure for climate change

The nuclear industry and the U. S. Department of Energy are promoting the development of SMRs, supposedly to head off the most severe impacts of climate change. But are SMRs a practical and realistic technology for this purpose?
To answer, two factors are paramount to consider – time and cost. These factors can be used to divide SMRs into two broad categories:
Light water reactors based on the same general technical and design principles as present-day power reactors in the U.S., which in theory could be certified and licensed with less complexity and difficulty.
Designs that use a range of different fuel designs, such as solid balls moving through the reactor core like sand, or molten materials flowing through the core; moderators such as graphite; and coolants such as helium, liquid sodium or molten salts.
On both counts, the prospects for SMRs are poor.
EWG 25th March 2021
UK in secret talks with Australia and others, about mining rare earths
Telegraph 2nd May 2021, Fears China will “turn off the taps” on Britain’s green revolution
has forced ministers to enter secret talks with seven commonwealth
countries to mine their rare earths. Officials from the Department of
International Trade and the Foreign Office have had meetings with
representatives from Australia, Canada, Malawi and Tanzania in a bid to
persuade them to supply rare earths, as well as critical metals such as
lithium to the UK.
Rare earths are found in abundance across the world, but
are difficult to process and China controls around 90 per cent of the
market. The UK has no known deposits of rare earths, unlike other major
economies such as the US, Canada and Australia, which are also grappling
with the problem. Rare earths are used in a wide variety of technology,
from fighter jets, to MRI machines and loudspeakers, but also in the motors
of electric vehicles and in wind turbines, and the worldwide transition to
green infrastructure is expected to put pressure on global demand.
May 2 Energy News — geoharvey

Opinion: ¶ “Why E-Fuels In Cars Make No Economic Or Environmental Sense” • With the review of the EU CO₂ emissions standards for cars and vans scheduled for June 2021, some are advocating CO₂ credits for advanced biofuels and synthetic fuels. Transport & Environment’s analysis shows why this is neither environmentally nor economically credible. [CleanTechnica] […]
May 2 Energy News — geoharvey
”Low Level” radioactive trash to be removed to USA from posh Sydney suburb, while govt plans to send Higher Level nuclear waste to Kimba, rural South Australia.
This is very interesting. They say it’s ”low leve” – presumably ”safe”. Yet for the residents of a posh Sydney suburb, its worth a century-long fight to get it removed – and sent to America !! Makes you see why the residents of Lucas Heights , – now called Bardon Ridge – might be keen to have their much higher-level radioactive trash foisted on distant rural Kimba, South Australia
Hunters Hill radioactive waste to be removed sent to United States https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-30/hunters-hill-radioactive-waste-to-be-removed-sent-to-us/1001
By Rani Hayman 1 May 21,
Key points:
- The land was the former site of the Radium Hill refinery, which closed in 1915
- The removal will begin in the coming weeks and take 12 months
- Melinda Pavey said the issue had taken a long time to resolve because it was “complicated”
Several properties on Nelson Parade at Hunters Hill were built on land contaminated by a former uranium processing site, which closed in 1915.
The area was also occupied by a carbolic acid plant until the early 1900s and a tin smelter until the 1960s.
Residents have spent decades fighting for the state government to remove the affected soil.
Finally, their calls have been heard, with the waste due to be excavated and sent to the United States.
Philippa Clark from the Nelson Parade Action Group said she was pleased the issued had finally been resolved.
“This is the way you deal with this kind of contamination and the best way possible for us and the environment and future generations,” she said.
The NSW government said the process would begin in the next few weeks and was expected to take 12 months.
The Minister for Water, Property and Housing Melinda Pavey said the health and safety of the community would be the main priority during site remediation works and the transportation of the material.
“The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) will supervise the excavation and packing of the contaminated material into sealed bags and containers prior to transport to the USA,” she said.
While there is a sense of relief within the community, the decades-long battle has put strain on the affected residents.
When asked why it has taken so long to find a solution, Ms Pavey said: “Because it was complicated.”
A parliamentary committee in 2008 called for a comprehensive remediation plan for the site and in 2014 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a management order to Property NSW to commence the works — although it said the development consent still had not been issued.
A plan to move the contaminated material to Kemps Creek in Sydney’s west was also abandoned in 2014 following community backlash.
The Mayor of Hunters Hill, Ross Williams, said the residents were looking forward to the area being rehabilitated.
“It’s been a health issue and a legacy issue for all that time.
It’s low-level radioactive material and it came from an industry that was essential [really?] back in those days,” he said.
“In modern times the environmental consequences wouldn’t have been tolerated.
“Once it’s totally cleaned up it will be available for any use.”
Ms Clark is pleased with the outcome despite how long it has taken.
“The government has listened to what we all wanted and what the parliamentary inquiry recommendation had been,” she said.
“We overwhelmingly just want to see ordinary houses and [go] back to [living in] an ordinary street, but without the stigma and without the constant anxiety that we’ve had to live with.”
Morrison in mad scramble to boost fossil fuels while the world changes fast — RenewEconomy

A taxpayer funded gas plant and a proposed subsidy for fossils on the grid. As the world shifts away from coal and gas, Australia’s government doubles down. The post Morrison in mad scramble to boost fossil fuels while the world changes fast appeared first on RenewEconomy.
Morrison in mad scramble to boost fossil fuels while the world changes fast — RenewEconomy
Antarctic ‘doomsday glacier’ may be melting faster than was thought
| Christina Macpherson <christinamacpherson@gmail.com> | 11:29 AM (3 hours ago) | ![]() ![]() | |
to me![]() |
Antarctic ‘doomsday glacier’ may be melting faster than was thought

Antarctic ‘doomsday glacier’ may be melting faster than was thought
Study finds more relatively warm water is reaching Thwaites glacier than was previously understood, Guardian, Matthew Taylor Fri 30 Apr 2021, An Antarctic glacier larger than the UK is at risk of breaking up
after scientists discovered more warm water flowing underneath it than previously thought.
The fate of Thwaites – nicknamed the doomsday glacier – and the massive west Antarctic ice sheet it supports are the biggest unknown factors in future global sea level rise.
Over the past few years, teams of scientists have been crisscrossing the remote and inaccessible region on Antarctica’s western edge to try to understand how fast the ice is melting and what the consequences for the rest of the world might be.
“What happens in west Antarctica is of great societal importance,” said Dr Robert Larter, a scientist with the British Antarctic Survey and principal investigator with the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration, the most ambitious research project ever carried out in Antarctica. “This is the biggest uncertainty in future sea level rise.”……….
Wahlin said the front of the Thwaites glacier was resting on a number of “pinning points” under the sea. But as relatively warm water from the deep ocean increased the melting, she said, these would be lost, breaking up the ice and allowing warm water further under the ice. This would speed up the flow of the glacier into the sea……..
The worst-case scenarios for Thwaites are grim. It is the widest glacier on the planet, more than 1km deep and holds enough ice to raise the sea level by 65cm.
Ice loss has accelerated in the last 30 years and it now contributes about 4% of all global sea level rise. Experts say this could increase dramatically if the ice at the front of Thwaites breaks up, with knock-on effects for other glaciers in the area.
To heighten scientists’ concerns, west Antarctica has been one of the fastest-warming place on Earth in the past 30 years, and since 2000 it has lost more than 1tn tons of ice.
Last year, a team of British scientists discovered cavities half the size of the Grand Canyon under Thwaites that, like decay in a tooth, allow warm ocean water to erode the glacier, internally accelerating melting. And because a lot of the ground on which the glacier sits is below sea level, it is thought to be particularly vulnerable to melting as warmer water encroaches further under the ice inland……
Ella Gilbert, a research scientist at the University of Reading, said what was happening in the polar regions demanded an urgent response from the international community.
“The polar regions are the canary in the coalmine – they are the symbol of climate change,” said Gilbert, who was a joint author of a recent study warning of the catastrophic impact of global heating on Antarctic ice.
“We really do need to minimise our emissions because if we lose the polar regions, not only are we going to amplify climate change … it will contribute to sea level rise which affects everyone around the globe.” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/30/antarctic-doomsday-glacier-may-be-melting-faster-than-was-thought
Extinction Rebellion climate activists block Faslane nuclear base

Extinction Rebellion block Faslane nuclear base entrance, Climate activists set up a blockade at the Faslane nuclear base by attaching themselves to plant pots. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-56941041 30 Apr 21,
Members of Extinction Rebellion Scotland staged the protest at the north gate of the base on the Gare Loch in Argyll and Bute.
The all-female group placed three planters painted with the words “Safe”, “Green”, and “Future” on the road.
Police Scotland said they were made aware of the incident at 06:20 and officers were at the scene.
HMNB Clyde – known as Faslane – is the Royal Navy’s main presence in Scotland.
It is home to the core of the submarine service, including the UK’s nuclear weapons, and the new generation of hunter-killer submarines.
The protest group said they were demanding a future “safe from the threat of nuclear weapons and environmental destruction”.
Extinction Rebellion said the action was part of the Peace Lotus campaign, a global day of anti-war resistance celebrating the anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War.
An HMNB spokesman confirmed police were in attendance and assisting Ministry of Defence officers in dealing with the protest. He added: “Well-established, fully co-ordinated procedures are in place to ensure the effective operation of HMNB Clyde is not compromised because of protest action.”
Mobile nuclear reactors? Scathing report slams ‘disturbing’ military program
Mobile nuclear reactors? Scathing report slams ‘disturbing’ military program, Times, 1 May 21, Todd South The author of an academic report on Pentagon plans to build mobile nuclear reactors to power future combat bases called the effort “extremely disturbing” and “based on a lie.”
The report released Thursday slams the Pentagon and Army G-4, logistics — specifically the Army office’s 2018 report that lays out the potential uses and needs for such mobile nuclear reactors in future operations.
Alan J. Kuperman wrote the 21-page report titled, “Proposed U.S. Army Mobile Nuclear Reactors: Costs and Risks Outweigh Benefits,” in his role as coordinator of the University of Texas at Austin’s Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project.
“They don’t reduce casualties, they increase costs and they increase threats to the lives of U.S. service members,” Kuperman said.
The program, known as “Project Pele,” is prototyping the mobile advanced microreactor concept under the Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office……..
The DoD spokesman pointed out that the project is part of a collaboration involving the Department of Energy, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and private industry. Project Pele is not being designed for a specific military service branch but does include experts across defense for a variety of requirements.
Army officials for G-4 deferred comment on the program to DoD……..
Congress approved funding for prototype reactors and the Army awarded $40 million in contracts to three nuclear reactor companies in March 2020 for Project Pele, according to the NPPP report.
Kuperman struck at the Army’s rationale, calling the project unnecessary and dangerous. He counters some of the main justifications that have been provided by DoD and Army reports:
High cost – Kuperman said the Army’s claims that nuclear power can provide cheaper electricity for powering future forward bases is “based on unrealistic assumptions.” Those include that such a reactor would have low construction costs and operate for 18 hours a day over 40 years. The more likely scenario is a mobile reactor would run for half that time over about 10 years, meaning nuclear electricity could cost 16 times more than estimates and still seven times more than diesel-generated power.- Vulnerability to missile attacks – The report points to the 2020 missile attack on forces at al-Asad air base in Iraq. Even with warnings hours ahead of time, more than 100 U.S. personnel suffered traumatic brain injury from the 11 strikes that hit the facility. And the missiles were 10 times more accurate than the Army has predicted in its report on the vulnerability of reactors to precision strikes. The service admits that a direct hit on a reactor would destroy the device. Kuperman notes that even the Army’s plans to protect the reactors, by burying them underground, could inadvertently cause meltdowns by impeding air cooling and causing overheating. A similar strike on an similar such future base with a reactor could cause far more devastating consequences.
Captured reactors – Should a U.S. base housing a mobile reactor be overrun or abandoned, the radioactive waste from the reactor could be used in “dirty bomb” terror attacks.- No mission for reactors – One of the chief purposes of pursing such reactor programs was to reduce casualties from diesel transport to remote bases. But Defense Department data shows a dramatic drop in casualties of five per 1 million gallons of fuel delivered in 2005 to nearly zero by 2013.
- High-energy weapons don’t need reactors – Kuperman states that the justification that future high-energy or laser weapons that the Army hopes to have protecting bases don’t require a reactor to power. “A high energy weapon would have to be fired millions of times to justify a reactor,” Kuperman said. “In reality such a weapon would be fired perhaps hundreds of times in its lifetime.”
- Transport problems – The Army wants to air deliver these reactors to combat posts. Kuperman questions the “regulatory nightmare” that would create. The program calls for initial tests flying the reactors domestically to run then returning them, and their radioactive waste, to another domestic location. Foreign transport would require approval of countries airspace traversed and the approval of a host nation where the reactor would be placed, he said. Other Army recommendations include truck or rail transport domestically and either ship or over-the-ocean flights to friendly ports to then move the reactors again via truck or rail.
Army Times reported on the proposed program in 2019, which had drawn backlash from the Union of Concerned Scientists and its then-director of the Nuclear Safety Project, Edwin Lyman, who called the proposal, “naïve.”The original proposal, approved by the Pentagon’s Strategic Capabilities Office asked for industry solutions in January 2019 on providing a less than 40-ton small, mobile nuclear reactor design that could operate for three years or more and provide 1 to 10 megawatts of power.Planners want the reactor to fit inside a C-17 cargo plane for air transport to theater. More recent moves have reduced the power output to 5 megawatts……..
Lyman notes a major failure with one of the original eight designs in 1961 when a core meltdown and explosion of the ML-1 reactor in Idaho killed three operators.
The three deployed to Antarctica, Greenland and Alaska proved “unreliable and expensive to operate,” Lyman wrote in his response to the Army’s 2018 report on the mobile reactor program.Lyman told Army Times on Thursday that a number of those old reactors required decades of decommissioning and one used at Fort Belvoir, Va., near Washington D.C. is finally scheduled for decommissioning in late 2021……….. https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2021/04/30/mobile-nuclear-reactors-scathing-report-slams-disturbing-military-program/
| Virus-free. www.avast.com |
April 30 Energy News — geoharvey

Opinion: ¶ “Climate Migration” • Climate change is already displacing millions of people. And if countries fail to make sharp cuts to carbon pollution, it will displace hundreds of millions more. By one estimate, climate disasters could uproot upwards of 1 billion people by 2050, raising important questions about how the world will respond. [CleanTechnica] […]
April 30 Energy News — geoharvey
Australia sleepwalks towards nuclear war – enthusiasm for nuclear rockets and submarines.
Small nuclear reactors (SMRs) are being pitched to Australians as ”climate salvation”, ”cheap electricity” etc. Of course this is nonsense. But the toxic macho nuclear zealots are confident that SMRs will have a great future in nuclear wars on land, on sea, in space.
SPACE: Australia’s ”cultural cringe” is so obvious, in the fervour for space research. Breathless enthusiasm in media coverage of rockets, space exploration . Yet the truth is that Australian space research is tied to America’s goal of militarising space. We hold events like The Australian International Aerospace and Defence Exposition – pitched as family entertainment:
”THE AIRSHOW will feature the raw potency and power of modern military aviation. The thrust and grunt of the latest military heavy metal will take centre stage. The stars of the show will be state-of-the-art jet fighters, bombers and giant heavy lift leviathans from home and abroad. See them so close you could almost touch them. Shudder to the roar of their mighty jet turbines as they perform high octane routines and simulated combat manoeuvres. Marvel as swarms of attack helicopters join in the fray.”
Of course, if we can help the American drive for weapons in space, it is all the better to have the tax-payer fund our space research.
SUBMARINES. Australia’s nuclear zealots have long been working away for nuclear submarines…… way before the so-called ”neutral” nuclear military fan Kevin Scarce was made head of the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission, in 2016.
A push for nuclear submarines has been part of Australia’s appalling history of submarine deals in recent years. Part of this mess was recently exposed by Michelle Fahy in Murder, corruption, bombings – the company at centre of Australia’s submarine deal. But the whole sorry tale goes further. It probably explains why the Australian government chose the super costly French submarine design – in the hopes that it could easily be transformed from a diesal to a nuclear -powered form.
Impelled by the very right-wing Australian Strategic Policy Institute, the push continues. Academia is co-opted, as The University of New South Wales joins with the Submarine Institute to promote nuclear submarines in a July 15 Canberra seminar. The speakers include well known nuclear propagandists Tom Frame, Kevin Scarce, and Hugh White.
Tom Frame has also recently published a book, rapturously received by the nuclear lobby, enthusing about nuclear submarines, and recommending them as Australia’s way into the full nuclear fuel chain, and into the space race .
With Australia’s Murdoch media monopoly, and the ever-weakening ABC, the public is unaware of these machinations towards Australia’s role in nuclear militarism. The push for small nuclear reactors is the starting point.










