Brett Stokes – a reminder about ANSTO and its zeal for the nuclear industry
Brett Burnard Stokes about ANSTO 15 Jan 18
(a) government backed nuclear corporation ANSTO are spending lots of money to establish a nuclear waste dump in South Australia,
|(b) there are laws in SA against nuclear waste dumps (see http://petition.dyndns.org/ ) including a provision that no public money be spent promoting nuclear waste dump.
(c) in contempt of SA laws, ANSTO has spent millions of dollars of public money on propaganda campaigns in South Australia, targetting various places with three sites active now, two in Kimba and one in the Flinders.
(d) ANSTO have run polling a while back, where the results were pretty marginal … and way short of “clear local consent” to proceed.
(e) ANSTO want to pretend that there is “clear local consent” so they are lying and also changing the rules,
(f) ANSTO have dodgy expansionary business plans involving huge export earnings from “medical isotopes” they plan to make at Lucas Heights.
If they do this, it will produce a lot of waste that they do not want to keep at Lucas Heights where there is room.
The business plans are dodgy on many levels.
(g) ANSTO are bullies with lots of cash.
Tesla’s South Australian battery project – a rapid success
Inverse Innovation 11th Jan 2018. The results are in: Tesla’s South Australian project, touted as the
world’s largest lithium-ion battery with enough energy to power 30,000
homes, had an astonishing first month of operation. The 100-megawatt
behemoth, originally conceived by Elon Musk through a bet over Twitter, has
inspired the states of Queensland and Victoria to follow suit with their
own projects.
https://www.inverse.com/article/40117-elon-musk-tesla-south-australia-batter
Australian banking giant Macquarie invests in energy storage system
Business Green 12th Jan 2018, Connected Energy has secured a £3m investment from Australian banking giant Macquarie and French utility ENGIE to support the rollout of its
stationary storage system, it announced yesterday. The E-STOR system
offered by Connected Energy uses second-hand batteries from electric
vehicles (EVs), repurposing them into an energy storage system to help
homes and businesses cut energy costs and manage their power use more
effectively.
https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/3024303/connected-energy-banks-gbp3m-investment-from-engie-and-macquarie
THE AUSTRALIAN reports on Queensland’s long drought (not a mention of climate change)
Farmers in distress as devastating drought enters its sixth year The Australian, RICK MORTON, Social Affairs reporter, Sydney @SquigglyRick
Almost five years after drought was last officially declared in Queensland, two-thirds of the state, or 120 million hectares, is in the grip of a dry so long and grinding that many who can afford to have forgotten it even exists.At the end of last year, 35 council areas in the state remained wholly drought declared — some since April in 2013 — affecting thousands of beef and sheep stations, farms and other agricultural businesses.
Take Audrey Stone, a beef cattle property in Queensland’s central-west. It would be easy, owner Brett Wehl says, to sit back and believe it is the driest place on the continent.
The Wehl family homestead, about 40km northwest of Barcaldine, sits among a flat moonscape filled only with choking acacia bushes and tumbleweeds. The 6070ha property has run about 1000 head of cattle in the past but there are just 20 on it now.
Others have it worse, some have it better, but playing that game will drive a person mad, Mr Wehl says.
At the end of last year, precisely two-thirds of Queensland remained drought-declared with much of this officially in drought for four years and counting.
The state government has handed out $140m in drought assistance in that time. The proportion of the state affected has fallen from 87 per cent at the beginning of last year but thousands of farmers and graziers are still in its grip.
The public has largely moved on, however, and families have been left behind to eke out an existence in the regions…….. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/farmers-in-distress-as-devastating-drought-enters-its-sixth-year/news-story/0f479b80d90d53fcf8360cd2c99a11ee
Defence analysts suggesting that Australia might need nuclear weapons?
Why Australia might be forced to consider nuclear weapons, Brisbane Times, By Tony WalkerLatest pro nuclear push in Australia shows the split in the nuclear industry
When they resuscitate Ziggy Switkowski to promote nuclear, and when Anti-Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg comes out of his quiet environmental closet to promote nuclear – you know that the nuclear lobby is having a serious attempt to persuade Australians.
Trouble is – the global nuclear lobby mightn’t be so happy about this.
They do pretend to be a professional, unified, competent force in the world. But not really. Small Nukes better shut up as Big Nukes will not tolerate them being successful, might allow them in only as a foot in the door for Big Nukes
With giant companies like Toshiba, AREVA, EDF, China National Nuclear Corporation, Rosatom determinedly pushing their “conventional”nuclear reactors -there’s no likelihood that they are going to let new “little” nukes take over. They tolerate the media acrobatics of the Small Modular Nuclear Reactor companies – just as long as those companies claim (pretend) to be helping them.
In reality, there’s an absolute dispute between the two.
Australian politicians seem to be easily sucked in by the propaganda antics of the Small Nukes lobby –
Former Big Nuclear propagandist Ziggy Switkowski is back – now spruiking for Small Nukes.
Australia has ‘missed the boat’ on nuclear power, SMH, Cole Latimer, 11 Jan 18, The Minerals Council of Australia has called for the country’s prohibition on nuclear power to be lifted. But both critics and supporters see little future for large-scale nuclear power in Australia’s energy mix.
The man who once famously called for 50 nuclear reactors across Australia, nuclear physicist and NBN chairman Ziggy Switkowski, says “the window for gigawatt-scale nuclear has closed”.
A lack of public support and any actual proposals for a nuclear plant had resulted in government inertia, he said on Thursday.
“Government won’t move until a real business case is presented and none has been, to my knowledge, and there aren’t votes in trying to lead the debate,” he said, adding that renewables were now a more economically viable choice. “With requirements for baseload capacity reducing, adding nuclear capacity one gigawatt at a time is hard to justify, especially as costs are now very high (in the range of $5 billion to $10 billion), development timelines are 15+ years, and solar with battery storage are winning the race.”
Warwick Grigor, the former chairman of Uranium King, mining analyst, and a director of uranium miner Peninsula Energy, agrees.
“I think nuclear energy is great, but we’ve missed the boat in Australia, no one is going down that path in the foreseeable future,” Mr Grigor told Fairfax Media.“When Fukushima [the 2011 nuclear accident in Japan] occurred, that was the closing of the door to our nuclear power possibilities.”
Mr Grigor sees battery technology, a market he has since entered, as a better alternative.
Australian Conservation Foundation nuclear free campaigner Dave Sweeney said talk of nuclear power was “a dangerous distraction” from the steps that needed to address the energy and climate challenges facing Australia.
Nuclear energy has been officially banned in Australia since 1998, with the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation’s OPAL reactor at Lucas Heights, NSW, the only nuclear reactor in the country.
But the Minerals Council’s executive director for uranium, Daniel Zavattiero, said the nation had excluded a low-emissions energy source of which Australia has an abundant supply from the current debate.
“Maybe nuclear power might be something that is not needed, but an outright prohibition on it is not needed,” he said.
Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg supported the Mineral Council’s stance. “There needs to be bipartisan support for nuclear power and that does not exist right now,” Mr Frydenberg said. “You would also need state-based support and that is not clear at this stage either.”…..
Mr Switkowski said smaller, modular nuclear reactors could play a part in the future energy mix, and could support regional centres.
An ANSTO spokesman told Fairfax Media these smaller plants could technically work in Australia.“If Australia did want to expand into nuclear energy technologies, there would be a number of options to consider in the future, including small modular reactors and Generation IV reactors, which could be feasible if the policy, economic settings and technology were right and public support was in place,” he said.
However, the country currently did not have enough skilled personnel to safely operate a nuclear energy industry, he said.
“The question of whether nuclear energy is technically or economically feasible is a different question to whether Australia should or should not have a nuclear energy program, the latter of which is a matter for policy makers and the people of Australia,” the spokesman said…….. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australia-has-missed-the-boat-on-nuclear-power-20180111-p4yyeg.html
Minerals Council puts in its bid to overturn Australia’s laws prohibiting nuclear power
Lift nuclear power ban: Miners http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/lift-nuclear-power-ban-miners/news-story/231d015d56b36a3e8f0fa94ea9ec86df, Australian Associated Press
January 10, 2018 The peak mining body has urged the federal government to lift the ban on nuclear power in Australia in order to help shore up the nation’s energy supply.
The Minerals Council of Australia made the call in its pre-budget submission.
“Nuclear power has the advantage of being able to generate baseload electricity with very low CO2 emissions over its life cycle,” the submission says.
The council said the ban on nuclear power in Australia is hampering an open debate about future energy and climate change management and stands at odds with Australia’s export uranium mining industry.
Turnbull government’s duplicity on climate and greenhouse gas emissions
Turnbull Government conceals damning climate data, Independent Australia, Turnbull Government is negligently concealing its massive climate change policy failure, writes Peter Boyer. 8 January 2018
“……..a malignant trend in public life: the willful, calculated, planned use of the festive season to disguise government failure to meet its obligations.
In this case, it’s about accounting for national carbon emissions as required under an international agreement to which we’re a party — and the principal culprits are Minister for the Environment and Energy Josh Frydenberg and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull……
Climate change is not just some trivial idea to be tossed aside at will. It’s real and it’s dangerous. And in failing to take their reporting obligations seriously, the Minister and his leader are seriously negligent.
This latest example of Turnbull Government misbehaviour also happened last year. By rights, the pair should be made publicly accountable; and applying their own party’s law-and-order mantra about repeat offenders they should, at the very least, lose their jobs. Fat chance, I know.
The emissions data released before Christmas takes us up to June 2017, fully six months ago. The Government has had all that time to put it out there for public and Parliamentary scrutiny. But this matter of crucial importance was relegated to a footnote that got buried in the Christmas rush.
To understand why the official figures have been withheld for so long, we need to set aside land use data, which since the 1997 Kyoto Protocol has repeatedly been used by successive Australian governments to make the picture look much rosier than it really is.
The Turnbull Government’s climate policy centrepiece, the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), has been focussed mainly on land use — including tree growing and clearing. The problem with that is huge uncertainty around the data, making it impossible to measure the scheme’s effectiveness.
With fossil fuel use, which the ERF does not address, we know where we stand. The good news from last year was that our per capita emissions were at their lowest for 28 years and the emissions intensity of the economy was nearly 60 per cent below its 1990 level.
But the really important figure is the actual amount of emissions, which in 2016-17 totalled 550.2 megatonnes. That is a rise of 0.7 per cent on the previous year and continues a clear, steady rising trend since early 2014……..
The Turnbull Government’s National Electricity Guarantee, which is being heavily promoted in the Government’s climate policy review, does no more than shut the stable door after the horses have bolted. It will do little to cut electricity emissions and will not affect petrol and diesel use.
Expectations were low ahead of the release of the policy document this month, but even so, it’s a big disappointment. Having set weak emission targets for 2020 and 2030, the Government seeks to avoid heavy lifting by using foreign carbon credits while relaxing the obligations of business.
We have nothing to look forward to in 2018. Malcolm Turnbull may be a better policy salesman than former PM Tony Abbott, but the awkward truth is that, just like his predecessor, while having no climate measures of any substance to offer, he hoodwinks electors into thinking all is as it should be.
It isn’t. National climate policy is a shambles. Frydenberg’s attempts to hide emissions data show that he knows the figures are damning, yet he and his leader continue to play games with us.
We need an explanation, and they need to be called to account. They will be hoping the silly season erases all this from people’s memories. I hope and expect they’ll be proved wrong. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/turnbull-government-conceals-damning-climate-data,11087
Jeff Baldock looks to four times value of his land to host nuclear waste dump: others not so keen.
Opinion poll results 8 Jan 17 “3.30 pm – “NO vote is currently up to 76.75%
The Advertiser, South Australia is running an opinion poll – Should a nuclear waste facility be built at Kimba? on their article
As choice of nuclear waste facility starts narrowing, people of Kimba are either excited or disgusted
[Ed note 12 Jan – at a later date, the “NO” vote jumped to 85%]
Jeff Baldock and family: A Kimba nuclear waste dump on their property would be a bonanza for them
But what would it do for the market’s perception of South Australia’s farm produce?
Keep ANSTO’s deadly radioactive waste at Australia’s only accepted high grade nuclear waste dump, Lucas Heights.
Paul Waldon, Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA Australian Nuclear Science 
and Technology Organization, founded 1987… Australian Atomic Energy Commission, established 1952… Atomic Energy Policy Committee, created 1949…
How long it was on the drawing board is unknown. However the locals willingness to embrace and accept a nuclear waste producing machine with its ever growing stockpile of manufactured waste in their region is alive and strong.
For 69+ years the facility has been endorsed every time someone relocates to Lucas Heights/Barden Ridge and surrounding burbs,, or when a contract for a house or business in the area has been secured. 69 Years is along time in the cycle of a persons life, and presents a question:are there any surviving post nuclear residents residing in the district? So keep ANSTO’s deadly radioactive waste at Australia’s only accepted high grade nuclear waste dump, Lucas Heights. https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/
Kimba town hopes to win top environmental award – but wants nuclear waste dump !!
where do we want to see Kimba in 300 years? We’ll be a national centre for rubbish.
The community is a finalist for the Australian title of KESAB’s Sustainable Communities top town…..the award honours the community that does the most to protect the environment [!!!]
As choice of nuclear waste facility starts narrowing, people of Kimba are either excited or disgusted, Erin Jones, Sunday Mail (SA) January 6, 2018 IF there are two words that can split an already isolated South Australian town and destroy lifelong friendships, they are “nuclear waste”.
Kimba, on the northern edge of the Eyre Peninsula’s vast grain-growing belt, is home to two of the three proposed sites where the nation’s radioactive waste might be stored.
Most city slickers probably only know about the town because of its giant silo artwork or the ageing giant galah structure. But it is where farming is the lifeblood of the community and where the proposal to use agricultural land as a nuclear site weighs heavily on some residents in the town of 650.
“We were a really tight-knit community but now we’re just a town,” says farmer Amy Koch. “We’re not even a community anymore.”
Everything changed two years ago when the owners of two farms nominated to be the site for a nuclear waste repository. The move has had a polarising effect. Long-time friendships have broken down, businesses have been boycotted and people deliberately avoid each other in the street and at events.
Mrs Koch’s friend, Rachel Yates, also a farmer, says the division between residents is palpable.
“When you go into town, you make sure you know a friend is going to be there and you have someone to talk to,” Mrs Yates says. “I’ve never seen anything like this that has divided the whole town.” The women are part of No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA — a group started in response to the two farming families offering their land.
If approved, the successful farm will hold low-level waste from the Lucas Heights nuclear facility, in NSW, and Australia’s intermediate-level waste such as that from industrial, medical and research applications. (Ed. note: no mention of the high level nuclear waste from the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, which will also come)
Many see the facility as a way forward, helping to boost the local economy and creating jobs.
Others say there will be little economic benefit and the town’s reputation will be tarnished.
Third-generation farmer Jeff Baldock defends his decision to offer 100ha of his Napandee property, 25km northwest of Kimba, despite some resistance.“When this process first started I felt physically ill going to Kimba and my family would feel really uncomfortable going to functions,” he says.“Twelve months ago I asked if it’s worth it but one of our neighbours said ‘If you believe in it you just have to keep going’. “Now we feel more than happy to go to town.
“Ninety per cent of people are still chatting away merrily to whoever but there is a group that has decided that they don’t want to be a part of that.
“I still say ‘G’day’ to everybody — if they choose not to say it back, that’s up to them.”
Mr Baldock and his wife, Jenny, nominated another of their properties last year but it was ruled out by the Federal Government following the assessment process and opposition.
As a result, they nominated their Napandee property, where they live with their children and five grandchildren. If successful, they will be paid four times the value of the land — believed to be about $400,000 — and Mr Baldock says they aim to crop the site’s 60ha buffer zone to put money back into the community through the local Agricultural Bureau and Lions Club.
But Mr Baldock believes the real benefit of the repository will be for the town’s residents in safeguarding them financially in the event of drought.
About 50 per cent of residents are employed in agriculture, according to figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. “This is an industry that doesn’t rely on agriculture, that’s the big thing,” Mr Baldock says.
“Seven of the last 10 years have been good but it won’t keep going that way and it might be a bit ugly if we have two or three droughts.
“We see this as drought-proofing the community.”
An Electoral Commission ballot of Kimba residents found 57 per cent of the 698 respondents — there are 1100 residents in the council area — agreed the sites should progress to the next round of consultation.
The process included a 90-day consultation period and the Government said there was widespread support from direct neighbours of the nominated properties, with all but one supporting proceeding to the next phase.
The Kimba properties have now joined Wallerberdina Station, near Hawker, to advance to stage two of consultation but the Flinders Ranges site is facing strong opposition from the Adnyamathanha people — the traditional owners — for cultural reasons.
Both communities now have access to $2 million worth of grants — from the Government’s community benefit fund for local projects to create economic or social benefits — in recognition of any disruption during the assessment process.
A $10 million fund for community development projects has been promised to the area of the final chosen site — expected to be announced in the second half of this year — which critics fear is a sweetener to encourage the waste facility’s approval.
Michelle Rayner believes the nuclear debate has already had positive benefits in town, including accommodation being filled with government workers and the media visiting on a regular basis.
Mrs Rayner, who owns Eileen’s cafe just off the main street, and her husband, Brett, proposed their Lyndhurst farming property as the other potential site to become the repository. That decision resulted in them being castigated by former acquaintances. but Mrs Rayner said the town needed something to boost its economic prospects.
“My husband wasn’t interested in it all initially but then he came to a community meeting and was blown away by the opportunities for the town,” she says.
“To become a government town, you’re guaranteed to have a decent hospital, better infrastructure and better internet communications.”
The Federal Government says wherever the facility is located, it will bring a minimum of 15 jobs in
administration, waste management and security.
As well, a facility of this scale would likely have additional investment in infrastructure such as roads and telecommunications.
Mayor Dean Johnson does not skirt around the issues and the importance of finding new ways to bring more people to the town, which currently has dozens of empty houses. “The truth is our population is on a slow decline and if we can’t turn that around our sustainability will be questioned,” he says.
“While we have the agriculture roots — and it will always be the main industry in Kimba [Ed note: Not when then market learns about the radioactive trash dump nearby]— any opportunity to diversify the economy and bring more jobs into the town should be investigated.
“That’s not saying this definitely is the thing but we believe we have to investigate it fully and the community has supported that view.”
The stage two consultation process was announced in June and, last month, 16 community members were appointed to a local consultative committee by the Federal Government.
In total, 51 people applied and explained why they wanted to be part of the committee to act as a link to
the government, the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science and residents.
The committee is to provide advice on jobs and business opportunities, relay information on the project’s technical aspects and review nominations for the $2 million community benefit fund.
TEACHER Meagan Lienert — one of the committee members — supports the waste facility because of the benefits she believes it will bring, especially to the school’s 174 students.
She says medical and nuclear experts had run science lessons at the school and there was talk of access to scholarships at the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, at Lucas Heights.
But she understands some people fear nuclear waste because they believe it will affect farming land.
“From my research, I can see the facility is safe and I know it won’t have any affect on the things around it but the fear some people have is real,” Mrs Lienert says.
“I don’t take that away from anyone but I hope to be able to help people gain a bit of understanding and perhaps relieve some of that fear through the consultative committee.”
No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA secretary Toni Scott is also on the consultative committee and raises concerns about whether the process will be fair.
Mrs Scott says there is a struggle to get information from the Government on why federal land is not used and how many jobs the waste facility will create, saying the number has fluctuated from 15 to 30.
“How do we trust the Government building this facility when we can’t even trust the process?” Mrs Scott says.
“We’re trying to get in writing that if there’s another vote what percentage the Minister needs for this to go ahead. The department head said he would need more than 65 per cent to build the facility but it has never reached 60 per cent.”
FOR two years, Mrs Scott has represented the group’s 204 financial members to oppose the facility, including 
making representations at Parliament House in Adelaide and Canberra.
“The key concerns we have are for our farming and our produce; we live in a big country and only 4 per cent is arable farming land — and we sit within that,” she says. “We think we don’t need to risk productive land when there is so much non-arable land. They should try a bit harder to find a suitable site because people aren’t very happy here and it feels like two years of a government process has been forced upon you.”
Kimba farmer and former federal Liberal MP Barry Wakelin is a member of the anti-nuclear group and believes the Government is struggling to find a suitable site — an issue plaguing successive governments since 1992.
“This is their third go after Woomera, Mataranka, and now we have the Kimba/Hawker situation,” Mr Wakelin says.
“The Federal Government has so many other options; it’s absurd to have a community divided on this issue.
“The other thing that weighs heavily on people’s minds is where do we want to see Kimba in 300 years?
We’ll be a national centre for rubbish.” Federal Minister for Resources Matt Canavan told the Sunday Mail
no final decision on the site had been made. He says the Kimba community will get another vote on whether they support a facility — but says there is no “arbitrary figure” which will determine whether it will go ahead.
“The people of Kimba will have a chance to have their say again through another vote after this more comprehensive consultation period concludes,” he says. “There is no arbitrary figure for each step but I have always said there must be broad community support.” Mr Canavan says the process has been rigorous and transparent and a decision would not be made without consultation.
NEW LANDMARK PRAISED
KIMBA locals are forever trying to attract more visitors to their town — and now their efforts are gaining national attention.
The community is a finalist for the Australian title of KESAB’s Sustainable Communities top town — previously the Tidy Towns competition — after being named state winner in November.
The award — to be announced in April — honours the community that does the most to protect the environment, enhance their town and embrace sustainability.
Kimba Community Development Group chairwoman Heather Baldock says their entry included the Igniting Kimba arts project, which included stunning artwork on the town’s grain silos — a refreshing foil to the better-known but now tired-looking Big Galah.
“In a community where sport has always been important, art adds a whole other element to our community and it’s excited the locals even more than we expected,” she says.
“The media interest from across Australia regarding our silo art has been amazing and I think it’s something the whole community is quite proud of.
“We saw a 35 per cent increase in traffic when it was finished (in September) which was over 600 vehicles, so we’re pretty pleased with that.
“Anything that can make people stop for an extra night or two will help us economically because we have businesses that are struggling.”
The award also recognises the town’s grey nomad program, encouraging travelling retirees to work alongside local volunteers, pass on skills and, in return, stay for free….., http://www.adelaide now.com.au/news/south-australi a/as-choice-of-nuclear-waste-f acility-starts-narrowing-peopl e-of-kimba-are-either-excited- or-disgusted/news-story/ 8460ea159b77d47d915dc0abfc362b 37
Timeline of present and recent plans to dump radioactive trash in the Flinders Ranges
As choice of nuclear waste facility starts narrowing, people of Kimba are either excited or disgusted, http://www.adelaide now.com.au/news/south-australi a/as-choice-of-nuclear-waste-f acility-starts-narrowing-peopl e-of-kimba-are-either-excited- or-disgusted/news-story/ 8460ea159b77d47d915dc0abfc362b 37Erin Jones, Sunday Mail (SA)
January 6, 2018 “………..1998: The Howard Government announces plans for two low-level nuclear waste sites in SA, both at Woomera. Low level nuclear waste includes items like contaminated clothing, rags, tools, medical tubes and swabs.
2003: The SA Government passes a Bill banning the establishment of a low-level waste dump, but the Commonwealth tries to acquire the land at Woomera.
2004: The Federal Court rules that the acquisition is unlawful and the Commonwealth abandons its SA plans.
February, 2015: SA Premier Jay Weatherill announces a royal commission into the role the state could play in the nuclear future, including establishing a high-level waste facility in SA. High level waste includes spent nuclear fuels and waste from the vitrification process.
May, 2015:Mr Weatherill decides upon a citizen’s jury process, to decide whether SA should pursue a high-level dump.
November, 2015:Six sites across Australia, including two at Kimba and one in the Flinders Ranges, are short-listed for a low-level nuclear waste site.
April, 2016: Wallerberdina Station, near Hawker, in the Flinders Ranges, goes to the next stage of the consultation phase — ahead of the five other sites.
November, 2016:The majority of Citizen’s Jury participants vote against a high-level waste dump.
June, 2017 Mr Weatherill formally abandons his high-level nuclear waste push.
■ Two more properties at Kimba nominate to be a low-level nuclear waste site and also progress to the next stage of consultation. http://www.adelaide now.com.au/news/south-australi a/as-choice-of-nuclear-waste-f acility-starts-narrowing-peopl e-of-kimba-are-either-excited- or-disgusted/news-story/ 8460ea159b77d47d915dc0abfc362b 37
Australian government deception on climate change policy
Cooking the books on climate change policy, The Age, 7 Jan 18, Eryk Bagshaw
The Turnbull government’s climate change policy review would have you believe we are well on our way to reaching our international commitment of a 26-28 per cent reduction by 2030.
wo reports released on the same day, from the same government department with two very different sets of findings.
The Turnbull government’s climate change policy review would have you believe we are well on our way to reaching our international commitment of a 26-28 per cent reduction by 2030.
While the policy review states: “we have a record of meeting and beating our emissions reduction targets and are on track to meet our 2030 target,” the department’s emissions report admits clearly: “Australia’s emissions have risen in the past three years.” …….
An independent analysis commissioned by the Greens suggests the size of the abatement is now so great that it would require us to take all cars off the road or cows off farms, not in a decade, but tomorrow.
The laughable proposition underscores the size of the task in the decade to come.
The first step in addressing that gap is admitting that it exists. Which why the deliberate omission of a chart in a review that clearly shows Australia sailing way above its targets in the climate change policy reviews is so striking.
The department and Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg consulted no less than 270 stakeholders and received 357 submissions but the government’s obfuscation in omitting the offending chart from its final policy review is remarkable.
By pretending it doesn’t exist, it has given themselves room to move.
Into that space falls the government’s concessions to “stakeholders”, aka big business, which have been carefully worded to essentially allows companies to increase their emissions if their production does. ……http://www.theage.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/cooking-the-books-on-climate-change-policy-20171229-h0ba0h.html
1 This month
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
19 May – Webinar- Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-05-19 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-05-19 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
20 May – Webinar – The dangerous world of AUKUS, US, military occupation and suppression of dissent
National Webinar, 20th May, 2026, 6.30pm AEST. Confronting laws restricting/suppressing protest speech and action
Speakers: Former Sen. Rex Patrick, Lawyer Nick Hanna ,Arthur Rorris ,Jorgen Doyle, Sen David Shoebbridge,
Facilitator Kelley Tranter.
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 
