Parts of Victoria’s Bellarine Peninsula, Melbourne suburbs, at risk from sea level rise
important for local communities to know whether they were at risk so they could decide whether to invest in adaptation strategies, such as infrastructure, to protect the coastline, or simply retreat from the danger zone.
How coastal communities on Victoria’s Bellarine Peninsula are dealing with the reality of sea level rises, ABC, By Nicole Mills, 26 Jul 20, As Vicki Perrett plays with her granddaughter Rachel on the beach in front of her home on Victoria’s Bellarine Peninsula, she knows she has to cherish these moments.Key points:
And not just because children grow up so fast. She also knows the beach they play on may not be there forever. “The beach is coming closer towards us, towards the road and towards our property,” Ms Perrett says. “It’s very prone to sea level rise here and to storm surges.” This stretch of coastline at Indented Head has already been earmarked as at risk of going underwater by 2100. Ms Perrett’s house is also in the danger zone………… Councils ordered to plan for sea level risesThe Victorian Government has instructed all councils to plan for a 0.8m sea level rise by the year 2100. That figure is based on a 2007 report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which agreed on the projected rise, but could not rule out larger increases. Although the worst impacts of sea level rises may still be decades away, this bayside community, about an hour-and-a-half south of Melbourne, has already had a taste of what is to come………. Dr McInnes leads the CSIRO’s climate extremes and projections group, which has contributed to the mapping of high-risk areas. Publicly available mapping tools, such as Coastal Risk Australia, allow anyone to find out how their local area would fare under different sea-level rise scenarios. Dr McInnes said it was important for local communities to know whether they were at risk so they could decide whether to invest in adaptation strategies, such as infrastructure, to protect the coastline, or simply retreat from the danger zone. “Land subject to inundation is land that is low-lying, that is potentially at risk from inundation during extreme sea-level events or even potentially high-tide events in the future,” Dr McInnes said. Dr McInnes says while the worst impacts will be felt during storm surges, there might be some areas that will suffer more permanent flooding. “If [the land] is low enough, it could be permanently inundated,” she said. “Parts of Swan Bay [on the Bellarine Peninsula] could potentially become quite affected by inundation, certainly high-tide inundation, in the future.” And it’s not just regional areas. Dr McInnes says Melbourne suburbs such as Elwood, Aspendale and Mordialloc are also at risk of more-regular flooding in future……….. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-26/climate-change-sea-level-rises-prompt-action-in-coastal-towns/12383968
|
|
Despite Minerals Council lobbying, Australia’s Environmental Law prohibits nuclear and limits uranium mining
K-A Garlick, Nuclear Free WA, 22 July 20, This week, the interim report of the review into the Environmental Protection Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act – Australia’s federal environmental laws was released. This found that the Federal government should maintain the capacity to intervene in uranium mining and that there be no change to the existing prohibition on nuclear activities, including domestic nuclear power.
Environment groups have given a cautious welcome to this continuation of the status quo, especially in the face of lobbying by the Mineral Council of Australia to weaken nuclear protections and scrutiny. This outcome is a tribute to the efforts of those who have worked hard over years to highlight the deep community concerns with the nuclear industry.
While no amount of regulation can make uranium mining socially or environmentally acceptable, it can reduce the impacts. The reports sensible approach means it is now incumbent on both State and Federal government to ensure the highest standards or rigour, transparency and public interest.
The nuclear power ban has been retained despite years of concerted effort by the Mineral Council of Australia and pro-nuclear lobbyists to have this removed. Again, this is testimony to the power, importance and effectiveness of sustained community advocacy and action.
In future updates, there will be more information on further developments and action to take, but in the meantime zip over to the excellent resource page, Don’t Nuke the Climate, Australia for all information and myth-busting to keep sharing that nuclear power cannot solve the climate crisis. Click on website link https://dont-nuke-the-climate.org.au/
Australian govt trying to keep its $1.3bn arms purchase a secret, a dangerous precedent
Coalition says making public parts of $1.3bn Thales arms deal audit would penalise weapons company
Australian government claims disclosure would damage chances of multinational Thales to sell Hawkei combat vehicle to other countries, Guardian Christopher Knaus, The Australian government is arguing parts of an audit of a $1.3bn arms purchase must be kept secret because a multinational weapons company Thales would have trouble selling its product if they were disclosed.But the administrative appeals tribunal has heard that such an argument if allowed to stand would have a “devastating effect” on the auditor general’s ability to transparently and publicly criticise other government purchases.
The tribunal is hearing a case between the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and crossbench senator Rex Patrick, who is fighting through freedom of information for full release of a 2018 audit report examining the government’s acquisition of the $1.3bn Hawkei combat vehicle fleet from French-based manufacturer Thales.
After representations from Thales, the attorney general, Christian Porter, made an extraordinary and largely unprecedented intervention to redact sections of the audit on the grounds they unfairly prejudiced Thales’s commercial interests and threatened Australia’s national security and defence.
The Guardian has since revealed the redacted material included a cost-comparison suggesting that Australia could have saved money by purchasing a different vehicle – the joint light tactical vehicle – from the United States……. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/23/coalition-says-making-public-parts-of-13bn-thales-arms-deal-audit-would-penalise-weapons-company
Australia should join regional nations in signing and ratifying the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW)
Push to join nuclear weapons banm https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/letters-push-to-join-nuclear-weapons-ban-20200719-p55dhy Daryl Le Cornu, Member of the board of ICAN Australia 22 July 20, It was good to read William Stoltz’s ‘‘How Australia can help the world avoid nuclear war’’ (July 17) about the diplomatic initiative to push for a treaty of no-first-use based on the Chinese model.
His argument that Australia may be the only country that could lobby the US to agree to the principle of no-first-use has merit.
Furthermore, Stoltz argues that it is only through the ‘‘strength of principled examples and ambitious diplomacy that responsible nations can hope to make the legacy of Trinity and the nuclear threat to civilisation a thing of the past’’.
However, there is another potentially more effective ‘‘ambitious diplomacy’’ that Australia could pursue. This would be to join with the majority of the nations in the world and a majority of the people in the world in signing and ratifying the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) that was created at the United Nations on July 7, 2017.
New Zealand has already done so, as have most of our regional neighbours. The Labor Party at its December 2018 national conference committed a future Labor government to such a diplomatic initiative. Furthermore, the organisation whose 10-year global campaign led to the creation of the TPNW – the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) – was born in Australia in 2007 and launched by former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser, who became ICAN’s first patron. With only 10 more ratifications for the TPNW to come intoforce in international law, it is surprising that Stoltz did not devote some time in his article reflecting on the 75th anniversary of the Trinity test to this citizen-initiated global campaign.
Hasty new nuclear dump agency will have some overseas staff, – and law for waste dump is not yet passed!
Nuclear dump to be managed from SA, https://www.cessnockadvertiser.com.au/story/6842627/nuclear-dump-to-be-managed-from-sa/?cs=7, Tim Dornin, 22 July 20
Staff from around Australia and possibly overseas will be recruited for a new government agency to manage a nuclear waste dump in South Australia.
Legislation to establish the dump has already passed federal parliament’s lower house and is before a Senate committee after the location was selected earlier this year.
Resources Minister Keith Pitt said the establishment of the new agency was another step forward in what had been a very long-running process to develop a vitally important facility.
“Two in every three Australians will use nuclear medicine and that means two of every three Australians will produce some low-level radioactive waste that needs to be stored and managed,” he said.
“This is a national piece of infrastructure that is critical for all of those individuals.”
Mr Pitt said ARWA would operate as an independent agency with staff to be drawn from around Australia and possibly around the world to secure those with the right skill set.
But the Australian Conservation Foundation said the government had jumped the gun, establishing the new agency when legislation for the dump was still before the parliament.
“It is absurd to establish a new federal agency for a proposal that is still under active Senate review and has no current legislative basis,” campaigner Dave Sweeney said.
“This initiative has all the hallmarks of a tailor-made political fix for a federal plan that has no broad social licence.”
When the Napandee site was chosen, owner Jeff Baldock welcomed the plan and urged the government to move forward.
He said it was a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to secure Kimba’s future” and the waste facility would potentially provide jobs and much-needed revenue for the region.
“It’s very rare that a small country community gets the chance to guarantee that it’s still going to be here in 300 years’ time,” he said.
Hasty and crummy pro nuclear media release from Messrs Pitt, Ramsey and Van Holst Pellekaan

Peter Remta, 22 July 2020. Here we go again.
This is a very poorly and hastily planned and quite ill-conceived attempt to deflect from the true situation with the proposed facility at Napandee which only shows up the incompetence and lack of knowledge within the federal government as to the management of nuclear waste
The joint media release is inconsistent within itself and with other previous reports and is surely an embarrassment to the two ministers while confirming the long-held partiality of the local member It is hoped that ANSTO will not be relying on this quite meaningless release as part of its licensing submission requirements for ARPANSA which in turn should immediately as the regulatory and licensing authority require a full explanation of the reasons behind the release
ARPANSA must not on this occasion hide behind its licensing independence in refraining from strong comment as the release could be viewed to be an attempt to usurp its status and functions
I will separately comment on the different parts of the release
South Australian Government must oppose the Federal government’s nuclear waste dump
Friends of the Earth, 21 July 20, Today’s announcement by federal resources minister Keith Pitt that a new ‘Australian Radioactive Waste Agency’ will be established and located in Adelaide is the latest move by the federal government to impose a national nuclear waste dump in SA. The Agency will be responsible for all functions of the proposed nuclear ‘facility’
including engagement with the Kimba community.
Dr. Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia, said: “‘Locating the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency in Adelaide is a cynical attempt to present the strongly contested nuclear waste dump as a done deal.
“The imposition of a nuclear waste dump is a clear breach of the SA Nuclear Waste Facility (Prohibitions) Act, legislation introduced by Liberal Premier John Olsen and strengthened by Premier Mike Rann. Yet current SA Premier Steven Marshall and energy and mining minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan support the proposed nuclear dump. That support should be reversed.”
“van Holst Pellekaan falsely claims that Kimba has ‘clearly’ expressed its willingness to be the host community. In fact, a narrow majority supported the facility, and that narrow support was won with a multi-year, multi-million-dollar federal government PR campaign including the fictitious claim that 45 local jobs will be created.
“A majority of South Australians oppose the proposed nuclear dump and there has been no consultation let alone consent along transport corridors. Barngarla Traditional Owners were excluded from the Kimba ballot and their separate ballot found unanimous opposition.
“If the results of the Barngarla ballot are included with the ballot of local Kimba residents (and out-of-town ratepayers), the overall level of support falls to just 43.8% of eligible voters (452/824 for the Kimba ballot, and 0/209 for the Barngarla ballot). That is well short of a majority and a long way short of the government’s 65% benchmark for ‘broad community support’,” Dr. Green said.
Prof. Graeme Samuel’s EPBC Interim Report released yesterday noted that the federal government’s framework environment legislation “reflects an overall culture of tokenism and symbolism, rather than one of genuine inclusion of Indigenous Australians”.
An April 2020 report by Federal Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights noted that planned changes to the National Radioactive Waste Management Act, currently the subject of a Senate inquiry, do not sufficiently protect the Barngarla’s rights and interests. The Committee found “there is a significant risk that the specification of this site will not fully protect the right to culture and self-determination”. Importantly, the Human Rights Committee’s report was unanimous and was endorsed by Liberal and National Party members.
Dr. Green said: “Shamefully, the Federal Government has acknowledged that its proposed changes to the National Radioactive Waste Management Act will deny Barngarla Traditional Owners, farmers and other interested parties a right to a judicial review of the proposed nuclear waste facility; indeed, it appears that the purpose of the legislation is to do just that.
“Prof. Samuel’s EPBC Review and the Coalition and Labor members of the federal parliament’s Human Rights Committee have found that the rights of Traditional Owners need to be strengthened, yet Premier Marshall and Minister van Holst Pellekaan are supporting the imposition of a nuclear waste dump unanimously opposed by Barngarla Traditional Owners. Their crude racism diminishes all South Australians and must be resisted,” Dr. Green concluded.
The SA Labor Party argues that Traditional Owners should have a right of veto over nuclear projects given the tragic history of the nuclear industry in South Australia. Deputy Leader of the Opposition Susan Close said that SA Labor is “utterly opposed” to the “appalling” process which led to the announcement regarding the Kimba site. The SA ALP State Conference in Oct. 2018 endorsed a resolution supporting Traditional Owners “in their current struggle to prevent a nuclear waste facility being constructed in their region.”
Federal radioactive waste agency flawed from day one
Australian Conservation Foundation, 21 July 20, In response to Resources Minister Keith Pitt’s announcement of a new Australian Radioactive Waste Agency, to be based in Adelaide, the Australian Conservation Foundation’s Nuclear Free Campaigner Dave Sweeney said:
“With his announcement of the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency, Minister Pitt is playing short-term politics with the management of long-term waste.
“This new agency appears to have been set up to rubber stamp and maintain momentum for the Federal Government’s deeply flawed and contested radioactive waste facility planned for Kimba in regional South Australia.
“From day one the perception of this new agency has been tainted – rather than being expert and independent, it has been created primarily to advance the Government’s Kimba plan.
“It is absurd to establish a new federal agency for a proposal that is still under active Senate review and has no current legislative basis.
“Instead of what is needed – an expert and independent authority to oversee radioactive waste management in Australia – this initiative has all the hallmarks of a tailor-made political fix for a federal plan that has no broad social licence.
“It is extraordinary that this announcement to advance a national radioactive waste facility in Kimba against the specific objections of the Barngarla Traditional Owners comes a day after a major review of federal environmental laws highlighted a tokenistic approach to Indigenous concerns.
“Minister Pitt continues to re-state the tired myths that have dominated the Federal Government’s approach to this issue.
“To be clear, nuclear medicine in Australia is not dependent on the Kimba plan. Universities and hospitals that produce radioactive waste will still need to manage waste at these places.
“This is a disappointing, half-baked and deeply compromised response to the growing uncertainty and contest surrounding the Federal Government’s approach to radioactive waste management.”
Minister Against the Environment, Sussan Ley, in a hurry for Environment Laws to help mining industries?
Environment Minister Sussan Ley is in a tearing hurry to embrace nature law reform – and that’s a worry The Conversation Peter Burnett, Honorary Associate Professor, ANU College of Law, Australian National University, July 20, 2020 The Morrison government on Monday released a long-awaited interim review into Australia’s federal environment law. The ten-year review found Australia’s natural environment is declining and under increasing threat. The current environmental trajectory is “unsustainable” and the law “ineffective”.The report, by businessman Graeme Samuel, called for fundamental reform of the law, know as the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act. The Act, Samuel says:
[…] does not enable the Commonwealth to play its role in protecting and conserving environmental matters that are important for the nation. It is not fit to address current or future environmental challenges.
Samuel confirmed the health of Australia’s environment is in dire straits, and proposes many good ways to address this.
Worryingly though, Environment Minister Sussan Ley immediately seized on proposed reforms that seem to suit her government’s agenda – notably, streamlining the environmental approvals process – and will start working towards them. This is before the review has been finalised, and before public comment on the draft has been received.
This rushed response is very concerning. I was a federal environment official for 13 years, and from 2007 to 2012 was responsible for administering and reforming the Act. I know the huge undertaking involved in reform of the scale Samuel suggests. The stakes are far too high to risk squandering this once-a-decade reform opportunity for quick wins.
‘Fundamental reform’ needed: Samuel
The EPBC Act is designed to protect and conserve Australia’s most important environmental and heritage assets – most commonly, threatened plant and animal species.
Samuel’s diagnosis is on the money: the current trajectory of environmental decline is clearly unsustainable. And reform is long overdue – although unlike Samuel, I would put the blame less on the Act itself and more on government failings, such as a badly under-resourced federal environment department.
Samuel also hits the sweet spot in terms of a solution, at least in principle. National environmental standards, legally binding on the states and others, would switch the focus from the development approvals process to environmental outcomes. In essence, the Commonwealth would regulate the states for environmental results, rather than proponents for (mostly) process. …….
From the outset, the government framed Samuel’s review around a narrative of cutting the “green tape” that it believed unnecessarily held up development.
In June the government announced fast-tracked approvals for 15 major infrastructure projects in response to the COVID-19 economic slowdown. And on Monday, Ley indicated the government will prioritise the new national environmental standards, including further streamlining approval processes……..
Here’s where the danger lies. The government wants to introduce legislation in August. Ley said “prototype” environmental standards proposed by Samuel will be introduced at the same time. This is well before Samuel’s final report, due in October.
I believe this timeframe is unwise, and wildly ambitious……
The government’s fixation with cutting “green tape” should not unduly colour its reform direction. By rushing efforts to streamline approvals, the government risks creating a jumbled process with, once again, poor environmental outcomes. https://theconversation.com/environment-minister-sussan-ley-is-in-a-tearing-hurry-to-embrace-nature-law-reform-and-thats-a-worry-141697
Australian government could create 76,000 jobs within three years if it invests more in renewables
Climate Council unveils plan to create 76,000 jobs in three years, The New Daily, KellyReporterThe federal government could create 76,000 jobs within three years if it invests more in renewables, a new report has found.
In conjunction with economic consultants AlphaBeta, the Climate Council has released a 12-point plan to create 76,000 jobs while slashing emissions – recommending everything from restoring ecosystems to retrofitting public buildings.
“The job creation could start immediately and continue over three years. Federal, state and territory governments all have the opportunity to put these measures in train.”
By targeting 12 policy areas, state and federal governments could create employment for communities hit hardest by the COVID-19 economic crisis.
The 12 areas include large-scale projects such as installing wind and solar and investing in pilot-scale green hydrogen, as well as more localised initiatives such as accelerating construction of public transport and increasing the amount of tree canopy cover in urban areas. ………
Ms McKenzie said the plan would create jobs, cut energy bills and reduce Australia’s emissions.
And she said taxpayers wouldn’t have to foot the entire bill, as private investors have a big appetite for investment in renewables.
“We know renewable energy is the cheapest source of power. It can attract the most private investment,”…….. https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2020/07/21/climate-council-job-creation-policies/
Indigenous Australians have been failed by the nation’s environmental protection laws, a review has found.
Indigenous ‘tokenism’ in environment lawsHTTPS://WWW.BENDIGOADVERTISER.COM.AU/STORY/6841657/INDIGENOUS-TOKENISM-IN-ENVIRONMENT-LAWS/, Rebecca Gredley, 21 July 20, Indigenous Australians have been failed by the nation’s environmental protection laws, a review has found. Forrmer ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel on Monday released his interim review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which says the laws are not fit for purpose. The laws are supposed to recognise the role of Indigenous Australians in conservation, protect cultural places and promote the use of Indigenous biodiversity knowledge. But Professor Samuel says that’s not occurring. “Traditional knowledge is not valued,” he said.
“There is a culture of tokenism and symbolism…. Indigenous Australians want and frankly, they deserve and we deserve stronger protection of Indigenous culture and heritage.” Prof Samuel said the EPBC Act should have an Indigenous knowledge and engagement committee to provide the federal environment minister with advice. He said there should be a standard for best practice for Indigenous engagement and a comprehensive review of national laws to protect Indigenous cultural heritage. “The EPBC Act has failed to fulfil its objectives as they relate to Indigenous Australians,” the interim report says. “Indigenous Australians’ traditional knowledge and views are not fully valued in decision-making, and the Act does not meet the aspirations of traditional owners for managing their land.” Australia’s Indigenous heritage protections recently came under scrutiny after mining giant Rio Tinto destroyed a significant site in Western Australia that dated back 46,000 years. The Australian Conservation Foundation’s Dave Sweeney said there were many examples of when the national laws failed Indigenous communities. Although Tjiwarl native title holders had taken Western Australia to court to prevent a uranium project, the federal government gave expedited approval in 2019. “Right now, the federal government is seeking to build a national radioactive waste store and dump site near Kimba in regional SA,” Mr Sweeney told AAP. “The area’s traditional owners, the Barngarla people, were not included in a local council’s regional ballot to test the public mood on this and remain strongly opposed to the waste plan.” Federal Environment Minister Sussan Ley and Indigenous Australians Minister Ken Wyatt will hold a meeting with their state counterparts in a bid to improve protections. WA-based Labor MP Josh Wilson said the ministers must be clear about a timetable for reform so change can happen. “Labor will consider all and any reasonable changes to legislation that will deliver proper protection of First Nations heritage, stronger consultation with First Nations people, and greater clarity for all stakeholders,” he said. |
|
Federal environment law review calls for independent cop, but Morrison Government rules it out
Federal environment law review calls for independent cop, but Morrison Government rules it out, ABC News, By national science, technology and environment reporter Michael Slezak 21 July 20,
Key points:
The 124-page interim report comes 20 years after the laws were first implemented by the Howard government
The report’s author has called for a “strong, independent cop” on the environment beat
The Federal Government has accepted some recommendations, but rejected the report’s call for an independent regulatorThe independent review into the 20-year-old Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC), released this morning, also flagged legally enforceable “national standards” to stop the decline of Australia’s natural environment.
“The foundation of the report was that there is too much focus on process and not enough focus on outcomes and that should be changed entirely,” Graeme Samuel, the review’s independent author, said.
He concluded that Australia’s environment was getting worse under the laws designed to protect it.
“Australia’s natural environment and iconic places are in an overall state of decline and are under increasing threat,” he said.
Environment Minister Sussan Ley immediately moved to rule out an “independent cop”, which was policy taken to the last federal election by the Opposition.
But the Federal Government accepted the recommendation for national standards, which she said would form the basis of agreements with states, allowing federal approvals to be devolved to the states.
If brought into law it would establish a “one-stop shop” or “single-touch approvals”.
The devolving of federal approval powers to states has long been the aim of the Federal Government.
The report calls for the Government to maintain the power to step in on any decisions it deems important, or when a failure of state processes has been identified.
The 124-page interim report comes 20 years after the laws were first implemented by the Howard government……….
Independent cop call
In his review, Professor Samuel, the former chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, said a “strong, independent cop on the beat is required”.
“An independent compliance and enforcement regulator, that is not subject to actual or implied political direction from the Government Minister, should be established,” he said.
“The regulator should be responsible for monitoring compliance, enforcement and assurance. It should be properly resourced and have available to it a full toolkit of powers.”
The call echoes Labor Party policy from the last election, which called for a federal environmental protection agency — a move backed by the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF).
ACF chief executive, Kelly O’Shanassy, said at the moment protecting nature was “optional”.
Regardless, Ms Ley moved quickly to rule out any new regulator……….
Funding cuts and approval delays
The review began in November 2019 but its findings were delayed by the bushfires and then the coronavirus crisis.
While the report was being prepared, the Auditor General released a report finding 80 per cent of approvals under the laws were non-compliant or contained errors.
Federal Labor analysed those findings and concluded that since the Coalition came to power, there had been a 510 per cent blowout in the number of environmental approvals delayed beyond time frames indicated in the laws.
The delays came as the government cut funding to the environment department, which Labor said was now 40 per cent lower than it was before the Coalition came to power……. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-20/epbc-act-environmental-review-report-recommends-independent-cop/12392594
South Australian government (ignoring its own nuclear prohibition laws) joins Federal govt’s haste for nuclear waste dump
|
New agency to safely and securely manage Australia’s radioactive waste, The Hon Keith Pitt MP, Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia, 21 July 2020
Joint media release with the Member for Grey, Rowan Ramsey MP, and the South Australian Minister for Energy and Mining, Dan van Holst Pellekaan……. The Australian Radioactive Waste Agency (ARWA) will be based in Adelaide and be responsible for all functions of the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (the Facility), including engagement with the Kimba community. Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia, Keith Pitt, said the creation of the new agency is the next important step in developing Australia’s radioactive waste management storage solution and capabilities……. Member for Grey Rowan Ramsey said this was another step in establishing the NRWMF at the Napandee site at Kimba. …… For SA, this is yet another win building on the expansion of our technological know-how.” South Australian Minister for Energy and Mining Dan van Holst Pellekaan welcomed the establishment of the agency. “The South Australian Government has consistently said one best practice national facility is appropriate for the storage of this medical and research waste and Kimba has clearly expressed its willingness to be the host community,” Mr van Holst Pellekaan said. The new agency will also progress long-term work to site a separate, permanent location for disposal of intermediate level waste, as well as other waste management functions outlined in the Australian Radioactive Waste Management Framework……. A domestic and international search for a CEO will be undertaken to ensure that the agency is led with the appropriate skills and expertise. The agency will be operational from 21 July 2020, initially established as a separately branded function of the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources before transitioning to a non-corporate Commonwealth entity. ……. https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/pitt/media-releases/new-agency-safely-and-securely-manage-australias-radioactive-waste |
|
Nuclear status quo in federal environmental law review
Mineral Policy Institute and Friends of the Earth Australia, 20 July 2020
National and state environment groups have given a cautious welcome to the continuation of long-standing protections against nuclear risks in the current statutory review of the Environmental Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act – Australia’s federal environmental laws. The interim report released today has stated that the Commonwealth should maintain the capacity to intervene in uranium mining and made no recommendation to change existing prohibitions on nuclear activities, including domestic nuclear power.
Civil society groups made a joint submission to the EPBC review calling for the retention of the long standing ban on nuclear power and continuing federal oversight of uranium mining. The EPBC review committee’s interim report has flagged an intention to continue both protections despite lobbying from the Mineral Council of Australia to weaken these.
However, environment groups are concerned about a possible weakening of uranium mining regulations flagged in the interim report. Associate Professor Gavin Mudd, Chair of the Mineral Policy Institute, said: “The interim report proposes the further devolution of uranium mining regulation to states and territories, coupled to the establishment of ‘National Environmental Standards’. An obvious risk is that the standards will be weak, enforcement will be deficient as is already the case, and devolution will weaken the already inadequate oversight of uranium mining.”
“Uranium mining is different to other types of mining. Australia’s uranium mining sector has been dominated by license breaches, accidents, spills and a persistent failure to rehabilitate as promised. The last thing we need is a weakening of regulations and oversight. Apart from SA and NT every state and territory have a ban or prohibition on uranium mining. It is unsafe and unpopular and needs greater scrutiny, not less,” Assoc. Prof. Mudd said.
The Review’s interim report makes no recommendation to repeal the long-standing prohibition on domestic nuclear power. “Nuclear power is expensive, dangerous and unpopular,” said Dr Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia. “The prohibition in the EPBC Act reflects this. Nuclear is thirsty, produces high level nuclear waste for which there are no safe storage options and produces materials that can be diverted into nuclear weapons. It is a profound security and safety risk. And nuclear power is absurdly expensive.”
“Recent comments from the current Environment Minister and Opposition Leader show a clear bipartisan rejection of nuclear power. There is broad opposition among civil society as shown through a joint statement by over 60 organisations representing millions of Australians. Given the lack of social license for nuclear power in Australia we welcome the continuation of this prudent prohibition,” Dr Green said.
Following the Australian uranium-fuelled Fukushima nuclear disaster the UN Secretary General called for all uranium producing countries to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the industry. Groups have called on the Morrison government to now hold an independent review of the uranium sector.
Cory Bernardi resuscitated – renewed zeal for nuclear and “Advance Australia”
Failed extreme right-wing politician Cory Bernardi seemed to have disappeared from the news. His zeal for the nuclear industry did not go down well with the Australian public.
But no, Cory is now resuscitated in the media – well, not exactly the reliable and respected news media. But he has found his natural habitat – where else but at right-wing paradise – Sky News?
And where has Cory found the political embrace that he craves? in the Advance Australia lobby group – perfect for Cory – climate denialism, pro nuclear fanaticism, and ever so coy about where they get their funding.
So-here’s Cory’s Sky News spiel: Nuclear is the ‘gold standard of power’ ticking all the boxes – “Nuclear energy solves the climate wars unravelling around the world” [Ed. note hang on, I thought that Advance Australia didn’t believe that climate change is real] “You want reliable and cheap, affordable energy? Nuclear ticks that box too,”
Advance Australia Director Liz Storer told Sky News: “The sooner we get nuclear off the ground the better,” she said. “It’s the gold standard of power.”






