Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Determined Aboriginal opposition to plan for Federal Nuclear Waste dump in rural South Australia

National waste dump: Aboriginal groups share support as ballot closure approaches, https://www.transcontinental.com.au/story/6504879/national-waste-dump-aboriginal-groups-share-support-as-ballot-closure-approaches/?fbclid=IwAR04J6eadTBu0gBqaT8IBVIo6jvv3wTo0hjnEbTqvbhRDJg6jOPdravwG2w, Amy Green, 21 Nov 19,

November 21, 2019 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Aboriginal group votes against nuclear dump, but government department warns that they cannot veto it

Barngarla ballot shows “no support” for facility  https://www.eyretribune.com.au/story/6503108/barngarla-ballot-shows-no-support-for-facility/?fbclid=IwAR1RVmemtqtKZXMRSYPUS85sTAmPayhMAFzTL4b-uCB2YLHVA5FZL80fW8E, Rachel McDonald 20 Nov 19,

The Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC) have announced the result of a separate ballot on the two proposed Kimba sites for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).

The BDAC recently conducted a confidential postal ballot of its members through independent ballot agent Australian Election Company, asking voters the same question posed to residents of the Kimba District Council area in a ballot which concluded earlier this month.

The Kimba district ballot returned a 61.58 per cent ‘yes’ vote and 38.42% ‘no’ vote.

Of 209 eligible voters in the BDAC ballot, all Barngarla native title holders, 83 valid ‘no’ votes were counted, with zero yes votes returned.

The BDAC board said the result showed native title holders were not supportive of the facility.

“This unanimous “No” vote demonstrates that there is absolutely no support at all within the Barngarla community for the NRWMF,” the board said in a statement.

The BDAC has written to resources minister Matt Canavan advising him of the result.

“BDAC has requested that given the first people for the area unanimously have voted against the proposed facility that the minister should immediately determine that there is not broad community support for the project,” the board said.

“In light of this total rejection of the NRWMF by the Barngarla people, it is BDAC’s responsibility to continue to give voice to the profound concerns Barngarla traditional owners have regarding the NRWMF, and to take whatever steps are necessary to oppose the NRWMF being located on Barngarla Country.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science said the ballot would be considered alongside other consultation.

“We will consider the results of the Barngarla’s own ballot alongside the ballot of people who live in Kimba, as well as submissions received, neighbour and business surveys, and direct feedback including at our drop-in offices over several years.

“The department has said on numerous occasions that the facility will only be delivered alongside a community that broadly supports it, that no single metric or number will determine the level of support, and that no one group or individual will have a right to veto the facility.

The spokesperson said the minister and the department had been working closely with relevant Indigenous representative groups throughout the consultation process and had previously offered to finance a ballot.

“Those conversations are in some instances ongoing.

“With respect to heritage, while native title on both of the Kimba sites has been extinguished, expert heritage consultants were engaged by the department to conduct an independent desktop assessment of Aboriginal cultural heritage, and confirmed no registered heritage sites in or surrounding them.”

Community submissions on the proposed facility will remain open until December 12.

November 21, 2019 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Political manipulations- the Swedish allegations against Julian Assange

We need to ask ourselves why the focus is not on the crimes perpetrated by those involved in war crimes. Why is an Australian citizen being subjected to US espionage laws even though he was never on US soil? More importantly, why should an Australian citizen have allegiance to the US?

Australia and the Morrison government now face the stark choice. Do we defend an Australian citizen facing rendition and an effective death sentence, because of Trump – a President facing impeachment. Or do we abandon him?

The Swedish case against Assange was always political,  https://www.theage.com.au/national/the-swedish-case-against-assange-was-always-political-20191120-p53cgs.html,By Greg Barns and Alysia Brooks, November 20, 2019 It is almost a decade since Julian Assange woke to discover, on the front page of a Swedish newspaper, that Swedish authorities had decided to pursue him on allegations of sexual misconduct. Immediately, Julian presented himself to the police station to make a statement and clear his name. After speaking with prosecutors, he was told he could leave the country; so he did.

It was only after his arrival in London that an Interpol notice was issued for his arrest. In the meantime, Assange sought and was granted asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy on the grounds that he would be subjected to grave human rights abuses should he be extradited to the US. Despite years of his legal team requesting that Swedish authorities provide assurances that he would not be extradited onwards to the US, the opportunity for Assange to formally clear his name was never afforded to him. Nor was the right to the presumption of innocence. Many in the media still falsely claim that charges were laid. It was trial by media.
The political nature of the Swedish case became apparent from the beginning. As early as 2013, emails from the UK Crown Prosecution Service, released under Freedom of Information, demonstrated that the prosecutors wanted to drop the case. However, pressure was placed on them to keep it open – and they were told not to get “cold feet”. The London-based organisation Women Against Rape point out that the case was pursued with “unusual zeal” and concluded it was only  pursued for the simple fact that he has uncovered war crimes.
Let’s make one thing clear, any sexual misconduct allegations should be treated seriously. But, as Women Against Rape and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture point out, this case was never about protecting the women involved; it was about ensuring the focus was kept off the war crimes that  WikiLeaks exposed, and assassinating Assange’s character.
The decision now to drop the investigation is welcome news for Assange and his legal team, and removes the possibility of extradition from Sweden to the US. However, the fact remains that an Australian citizen is being pursued by the Trump administration for political purposes and is facing serious human rights violations if extradited to the US.

Currently, Assange is held on remand in Belmarsh prison, in conditions that are exacerbating his already fragile health, and impeding his ability to prepare his defence. He is facing unprecedented charges under the US Espionage Act, for allegedly carrying out actions that journalists and publishers engage in as a part of their work. He is facing 175 years – an effective death sentence – for allegedly engaging in journalism.

And let’s not forget the material that was exposed by WikiLeaks. The releases included evidence of war crimes, including torture and unlawful killings, perpetrated during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and the Guantanamo files, which demonstrated that the majority of men, and children, were being held and tortured at the prison, even though they were innocent of any crime.

We need to ask ourselves why the focus is not on the crimes perpetrated by those involved in war crimes. Why is an Australian citizen being subjected to US espionage laws even though he was never on US soil? More importantly, why should an Australian citizen have allegiance to the US?

Australia and the Morrison government now face the stark choice. Do we defend an Australian citizen facing rendition and an effective death sentence, because of Trump – a President facing impeachment. Or do we abandon him?

Greg Barns is a barrister and adviser to the Australian Assange Campaign. Dr Alysia Brooks is a human rights and due process advocate.

November 21, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, civil liberties | Leave a comment

Journalists beware! Australia now a surveillance state

November 21, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, civil liberties, legal, media, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

Survey showed environment and climate to be Australian children’s top concerns

November 21, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, environment | Leave a comment

Climate change will make fire storms more likely in southeastern Australia

Climate change will make fire storms more likely in southeastern Australia  https://theconversation.com/climate-change-will-make-fire-storms-more-likely-in-southeastern-australia-127225, Giovanni Di Virgilio, Research associate, UNSW, Andrew Dowdy, Senior Research Scientist, Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Jason Evans, Associate Professor, UNSW, Jason Sharples, Associate Professor, School of Physical, Environmental and Mathematical Sciences, UNSW Australia, UNSW, Rick McRae, Researcher, Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre, ACT Emergency Services Agency

November 20, 2019  Temperatures across many regions of Australia are set to exceed 40℃ this week, including heatwaves forecast throughout parts of eastern Australia, raising the spectre of more devastating bushfires.
We have already heard warnings this fire season of the possibility of firestorms, created when extreme fires in the right conditions form their own weather systems.

Firestorms are the common term for pyrocumulonimbus bushfires – fires so intense they create their own thunderstorms, extreme winds, black hail, and lightning.

While they are very rare, our research published earlier this year, found climate change is making it likely they will become more common in parts of southeast Australia.

We also identified certain regions in southern and eastern Australia, including near Melbourne’s fringe, that in the second half of this century will be far more vulnerable to these events than others. Continue reading

November 21, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming | Leave a comment

Australia as the salvation of the nuclear industry?

Australia is the great ‘white’ hope for the global nuclear industry, Independent Australia, By Noel Wauchope | 19 November 2019, The global nuclear industry is in crisis but that doesn’t stop the pro-nuclear lobby from peddling exorbitantly expensive nuclear as a “green alternative”. Noel Wauchope reports.

The global nuclear industry is in crisis. Well, in the Western world, anyway. It is hard to get a clear picture of  Russia and China, who appear to be happy putting developing nations into debt, as they market their nuclear reactors overseas with very generous loans — it helps to have stte-owned companies funding this effort.

But when it comes to Western democracies, where the industry is supposed to be commercially viable, there’s trouble. The latest news from S&P Global Ratings has made it plain: nuclear power can survive only with massive tax-payer support. Existing large nuclear  reactors need subsidies to continue, while the expense of building new ones has scared off investors.

So, for the nuclear lobby, ultimate survival seems to depend on developing and mass marketing “Generation IV” small and medium reactors (SMRs). …..

for the U.S. marketers, Australia, as a politically stable English-speaking ally, is a particularly desirable target. Australia’s geographic situation has advantages. One is the possibility of making Australia a hub for taking in radioactive wastes from South-East Asian countries. That’s a long-term goal of the global nuclear lobby.   …..

In particular, small nuclear reactors are marketed for submarines. That’s especially important now, as a new type of non-nuclear submarine – the Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) submarine, faster and much cheaper – could be making nuclear submarines obsolete. The Australian nuclear lobby is very keen on nuclear submarines: they are now promoting SMRs with propagandists such as Heiko Timmers, from Australian National University. This is an additional reason why Australia is the great white hope.

I use the word “white” advisedly here because Australia has a remarkable history of distrust and opposition to this industry form Indigenous Australians…..

The hunt for a national waste dump site is one problematic side of the nuclear lobby’s push for Australia. While accepted international policy on nuclear waste storage is that the site should be as near as possible to the point of production, the Australian Government’s plan is to set up a temporary site for nuclear waste, some 1700 km from its production at Lucas Heights. The other equally problematic issue is how to gain political and public support for the industry, which is currently banned by both Federal and state laws. SMR companies like NuScale are loath to spend money on winning hearts and minds in Australia while nuclear prohibition laws remain.

Ziggy Switkowski, a long-time promoter of the nuclear industry, has now renewed this campaign — although he covers himself well, in case it all goes bad, noting that nuclear energy for Australia could be a “catastrophic failure“. ……

his submission (No. 41) to the current Federal Inquiry into nuclear power sets out only one aim, that

‘… all obstacles … be removed to the consideration of nuclear power as part of the national energy strategy debate.’

So the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) should be changed, according to Switkowski. In an article in The Australian, NSW State Liberal MP Taylor Martin suggested that the Federal and state laws be changed to prohibit existing forms of nuclear power technology but to allow small modular reactors.

Switkowski makes it clear that the number one goal of the nuclear lobby is to remove Australia’s national and state laws that prohibit the nuclear industry. And, from reading many pro-nuclear submissions to the Federal Inquiry, this emerges as their most significant aim.

It does not appear that the Australian public is currently all agog about nuclear power. So, it does seem a great coincidence that so many of their representatives in parliaments – Federal, VictorianNew South WalesSouth Australia and members of a new party in Western Australia – are now advocating nuclear inquiries, leading to the repeal of nuclear prohibition laws.

We can only conclude that this new, seemingly coincidental push to overturn Australia’s nuclear prohibition laws, is in concert with the push for a national nuclear waste dump in rural South Australia — part of the campaign by the global nuclear industry, particularly the American industry, to kickstart another “nuclear renaissance”, before it’s too late.

Despite its relatively small population, Australia does “punch above its weight” in terms of its international reputation and as a commercial market. The repeal of Australia’s laws banning the nuclear industry would be a very significant symbol for much-needed new credibility for the pro-nuclear lobby. It would open the door for a clever publicity drive, no doubt using “action on climate change” as the rationale for developing nuclear power.

In the meantime, Australia has abundant natural resources for sun, wind and wave energy, and could become a leader in the South-East Asian region for developing and exporting renewable energy — a much quicker and more credible way to combat global warming. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/australia-is-the-great-white-hope-for-the-global-nuclear-industry,13326

November 19, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, technology | Leave a comment

Kimba and Flinders Ranges communities do not know what nuclear wastes they are getting, and for how many decades

Dump in decades, The Advertiser, GREG BANNON, Quorn, 19 Nov 19, REGARDING the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility, taskforce manager Sam Chard wrote a separate facility “will be found for the permanent disposal of intermediate level waste, but that’s a few decades off” (“Nuclear assurance”, The Advertiser, 16/11/19).

Temporary storage of intermediate-level waste is a major reason why some in the communities of Kimba and the Flinders Ranges are objecting so strongly to this proposal.

The Federal Industry Department acknowledges this material will need to be disposed of for 10,000 years to be considered safe. After four decades a disposal site has not been established and now we are being told it is still “a few decades off”.

The Department acknowledges that intermediate-level waste is the most toxic nuclear waste in Australia. We have asked for, but have received no guarantees, that this material will not end up being stranded at whichever site is chosen at the end of this ballot process. Why should these communities be expected to accept all of Australia’s nuclear waste, on behalf of all Australians, when they don’t know what they are signing up for?

 

November 19, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Record heat, catastrophic fire danger for South Australia – what a great place to plan transport and dumping of nuclear waste -NOT

November 18, 2019 Posted by | climate change - global warming, South Australia | Leave a comment

Journalism’s future in crisis – the case of Julian Assange

JOHN PILGER: Assange’s case will define the future of free journalism,  https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/john-pilger-assanges-case-will-define-the-future-of-free-journalism,13324  By John Pilger | 18 November 2019   John Pilger describes the disturbing scene inside a London courtroom last week when the WikiLeaks publisher, Julian Assange, appeared at the start of a landmark extradition case that will define the future of free journalism.

THE WORST MOMENT was one of a number of “worst” moments. I have sat in many courtrooms and seen judges abuse their positions. This judge, Vanessa Baraitser – actually she isn’t a judge at all; she’s a magistrate – shocked all of us who were there.

Her face was a progression of sneers and imperious indifference; she addressed Julian Assange with an arrogance that reminded me of a magistrate presiding over apartheid South Africa’s Race Classification Board. When Julian struggled to speak, he couldn’t get words out, even stumbling over his name and date of birth. 

When he spoke truth and when his barrister spoke, Baraister contrived boredom; when the prosecuting barrister spoke, she was attentive. She had nothing to do; it was demonstrably preordained. In the table in front of us were a handful of American officials, whose directions to the prosecutor were carried by his — back and forth this young woman went, delivering instructions.

The Magistrate watched this outrage without a comment. It reminded me of a newsreel of a show trial in Stalin’s Moscow; the difference was that Soviet show trials were broadcast. Here, the state broadcaster, the BBC, blacked it out, as did the other mainstream channels.
Having ignored Julian’s barrister’s factual description of how the CIA had run a Spanish security firm that spied on him in the Ecuadorean embassy, she didn’t yawn, but her disinterest was as expressive. She then denied Julian’s lawyers any more time to prepare their case — even though their client was prevented in prison from receiving legal documents and other tools with which to defend himself.

Her knee in the groin was to announce that the next court hearing would be at remote Woolwich, which adjoins Belmarsh Prison and has few seats for the public. This will ensure isolation and be as close to a secret trial as it’s possible to get. Did this happen in the home of the Magna Carta? Yes, but who knew? 

Julian’s case is often compared with Dreyfus, but historically it’s far more important. No one doubts – not his enemies at The New York Times, not the Murdoch press in Australia – that if he is extradited to the United States and the inevitable Supermax, journalism will be incarcerated, too.

Who will then dare to expose anything of importance, let alone the high crimes of the West? Who will dare publish ‘Collateral Murder’? Who will dare tell the public that democracy, such as it is, has been subverted by a corporate authoritarianism from which fascism draws its strength?

Once there were spaces, gaps, boltholes, in mainstream journalism in which mavericks, who are the best journalists, could work. These are long closed now. The hope is the samizdat on the internet, where fine disobedient journalism is still practised.

The greater hope is that a judge or even judges in Britain’s court of appeal, the High Court, will rediscover justice and set him free. In the meantime, it’s our responsibility to fight in ways we know but which now require more than a modicum of Julian Assange’s courage.

November 18, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, civil liberties, legal, media | Leave a comment

How does the climate denialist Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) get away with being a “charity”?

The climate denialist IPA and its ‘public interest’ charity status, Independent Australia, By David Paull | 19 November 2019Since the IPA and CIS organisations argue against the scientific consensus on the climate change emergency isn’t that against the public interest? Why, then, are they classified as ‘charities’? David Paull reports.

The Prime Minister’s recent comments on the rights of individuals to undertake actions, such as boycotts, that may adversely affect “secondary” company interests raises questions of free speech and public interest.

But the increasingly shrill advocacy for climate denial in the public sphere in this country has reached a stage where it seems that substantive scientific arguments regarding future Earth scenarios are being drowned out.

The debate has descended – thanks in no small part to Murdoch media and political pundits – so that now it’s a “conspiracy” by the Bureau of Meteorology and NASA,  or it’s “sun-spots”, which will initiate a new “ice-age”. Even the line, “We must take a balanced view” provides anti-science advocates with a platform.

Which raises the clear question: Is climate change denial of benefit to our community? Or, to put it another way, if some are still arguing against the scientific consensus on the climate change emergency we are confronting, isn’t that against the public interest?

What does it take to be a charity?

As it turns out, not if you are a “charity” registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission (ACNC).  When talking about climate denialist organisations, key among those in Australia is the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) and the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS). Both have generated substantial public communication, which is “climate sceptical” in nature and at deviance from the consensus scientific view. Yet both organisations – particularly the IPA – and through their front groups such as the Australian Environment Foundation, have been at the forefront of promoting the idea that global warming is a conspiracy. Examples are the recent book published by the IPA and edited by Dr Jennifer Marohasy who is working on releasing a new edition next year.

The CIS, while not being a loud advocate of climate scepticism, has certainly hosted talkfests which have articulated these views. Both organisations are also within the international Atlas Network, which channels money into groups around the world that seek to further the climate denialist and libertarian agendas. And both have registered charities with the Australian Charities and Not-For-Profits Commission (ACNC).

The IPA’s registered charity is called Trustee For Institute Of Public Affairs Research Trust, while the CIS has registered a charity under the name of, The Centre For Independent Studies Ltd……

Follow the money

The IPA receives only about ten to 20 per cent of its annual income through its charity, most of which is spent each year, amounting to some $800,000 in 2017-18. These are nearly all classed as “donations” under the ACNC disclosure requirements — though of course “donors” are not required to be identified…….

Both charities claim they are benefiting the “general community of Australia”. However, given the difficulty in matching a climate denialist agenda with a supposed community benefit, this simply does not stack up anymore.

The reviews by the ACNC in January 2014 of the charitable status of these two registered charities, in this light, needs to be reviewed again. This is particularly so of the IPA with its increasing focus on spreading misinformation (none of which stands up to proper scientific scrutiny) since 2014.

But there are also other issues which need clarification in order that better transparency occurs, such as better definitions of income and expenditure, the question of influence by foreign entities and perhaps what is key: whether charity funds being used by these organisations is for a purpose that may be deemed as being of detriment to the community. Charitable status should be relinquished under these circumstances.

I have written to the Australian Charities and Not-for-profit Commission (ACNC) to undertake a fresh review of these charities and await a response in anticipation. You can make a complaint to the ACNC HERE.   David Paull is an Australian ecologist  . You can follow David on Twitter @davesgas.  https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/the-climate-denialist-ipa-and-its-public-interest-charity-status,13325

November 18, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

50 bushfires continue to rage across New South Wales

November 18, 2019 Posted by | climate change - global warming, New South Wales | Leave a comment

Flood risk at proposed nuclear dump site at Wallerberdina.

Barb Walker shared a post.  Flinders Local Action Group  Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 18 Nov 19

Last Thursday five members of FLAG met with James Rusk from AECOM, and Johnathon from DIIS to voice our concerns regarding the flood threat from the Hookina Creek to the proposed dump site at Wallerberdina.

James admitted that flood waters could cover the site up to a meter deep in a rare Possible Maximum Flood event, and that this could be easily mitigated by raising the surface area of the 40 hectare site by approximately one metre.

To put this in perspective: This would require the the mining of approximately 600,000 tonnes of top soil from a borrow pit close to the site,
the carting of 26,400 semi tipper loads and the spreading and compaction of this fill to a metre deep over the entire site. Huge amounts of water of would also be needed for the costruction.

The resulting massive desecration of the proposed area, containing many sites of cultural significance to the Adnyamathanha women was not perceived by either James or Johnathon to be a problem. – Bob. https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/

November 18, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

With 40% opposed to Kimba nuclear waste dump, is this “consensus”

November 17, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Visionary Leaders Symposium: ‘Our planet is our patient.’

Visionary Leaders Symposium: ‘Our planet is our patient.’  http://publichealthnewswire.org/?p=physicians-for-social-responsibility-visionary-leaders-symposium#.XdARGW8_6rw.twitter    by Louise Dettman on 11/8/2019   Nearly 200 organizations representing medical, health care and public and environmental health professionals, including APHA, have so far endorsed the 2019 U.S. Call to Action on Climate Change, Health and Equity: A Policy Agenda.It challenges government, business, civil society and the health sector to recognize climate change as a public health emergency and to act now for climate, health and equity.

“Being health professionals, it’s important for us to realize that our planet is our patient, and it’s in the intensive care unit. We’re doctors to a dying planet and we have a job to do,” said Helen Caldicott, MD, keynote speaker at yesterday’s Physicians for Social Responsibility Visionary Leaders Symposium in Washington, D.C.

PSR founder and former president, anti-nuclear activist, author and pediatrician from Australia, Caldicott has spent her life educating world leaders and the public about the medical hazards of the nuclear age. She urged those gathered at the Ronald Reagan Building for the symposium to “stop being polite and speak the truth loudly and clearly” about the need for action on climate change. As one of the drafters of the U.S. Call to Action, PSR is using it to mobilize and give voice to more health professionals.

It advocates for policies that promote a just transition to clean, safe renewable energy and energy efficiency; sustainable food production and diets; clean water; active transportation; and green cities. Such policies can lower climate pollution, reduce the incidence of communicable and non-communicable disease, improve mental health and realize significant cost savings in health care.

“I’m not being radical. I’m being a physician,” Caldicott said as she stressed the urgency of the situation; challenged attendees to question the role of politicians, corporations and the military in the production of greenhouse gases; and told everyone to contact members of Congress. “If you don’t use your democracy, they’ll swoop in and use it for you — for their own political and financial gain,” she said.

The U.S. Call to Action urges the health sector itself to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and — as a trusted voice — to effectively communicate the health threats of climate change and the health benefits of climate action. The symposium focused specifically on the role of women in the climate, health and equity movement and the importance of economic justice for the most vulnerable communities.

Heidi Hutner, PhD, a filmmaker, writer and professor at Stony Brook University, moderated an expert panel of women advocates discussing the health hazards of and solutions to nuclear power and climate change. Hutner opened the program with a trailer of her upcoming documentary about the women of Three Mile Island and, along with the other participants, questioned nuclear power as the answer for a just transition to clean energy.

Following the symposium, at the 2019 Visionary Leadership Awards, PSR presented Caldicott with a Lifetime Achievement Award for her work. It also recognized other individuals and organizations for their efforts in advancing nuclear weapons abolition and addressing environmental risks to human health, including the consequences of climate change.

November 17, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, environment, health | Leave a comment