New DemocracyCo’s co-CEO Emily Jenke says Citizens’ Jury not about manufacturing nuclear consent
Nuclear jury about the big picture, not manufacturing consent. InDaily, Tom Richardson, 3 June 16 The citizens’ jury beginning this month to debate South Australia’s nuclear future is not an attempt to manufacture the “social consent” alluded to by Royal Commissioner Kevin Scarce, but a bid to establish whether it exists, says one of the architects of the forum.
InDaily can reveal that SA-based startup DemocracyCo has won the tender to deliver the first of the two planned Citizens’ Juries, to be held over two weekends, beginning on June 25.
The company, which also convened last year’s forum on dog and cat management, will oversee a randomly-selected congregation of 50 South Australians to ponder issues surrounding the prospective local establishment of a high-level nuclear waste dump. The jury selection process was conducted by a separate company, the Sydney-based New Democracy Foundation.
New DemocracyCo’s co-CEO Emily Jenke told InDaily the process was part of a broader body of work whose aim was not to engineer public support, but to “get an understanding by the end of the year as to whether the community are comfortable continuing this discussion”.
“This process… is about understanding; it’s not trying to build social consent, but understanding whether it’s there or not,” Jenke said. Continue reading
Infrastructure Victoria draft report includes nuclear power as an option
‘Bicycle highways’ through Melbourne CBD backed by cycling advocate, ABC News, 2 June 16 “….Infrastructure Victoria has proposed the cycle “highways” at a cost of $100 million, one of more than 200 ideas put forward in an options paper looking at state projects for the next 30 years…..
Nuclear port in Australia to receive and store High level Nuclear Wastes
The first high level nuclear waste shipment imposes untenable & unfunded liabilities on Australia, without a disposal capacity or even a site, and facing proposed decades of above ground storage.
David Noonan, 3 June 16 Nuclear port in Australia to store High level Nuclear wastes and receive waste ships every 24 to 30 days for decades:
The SA Nuclear Royal Commission Final Report (9 May 2016, 16 Mb) recommends a deep sea Nuclear port in Australia to receive an average 3 000 tonnes of high level Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) waste per year throughout the first three decades of proposed operations.
“In summary, the report recommends: Management, storage and disposal of waste, Recommendation: Pursue a purpose-built waste storage and disposal facility for used nuclear fuel. … The Commission’s firm conclusion is that this opportunity should be actively pursued, and as soon as possible.” (Nuclear Commission, Report Delivered, 9 May)
The Nuclear Commission report is based on a desk top nuclear waste consultancy “Radioactive waste storage and disposal facilities in SA” (Feb 2016) by Jacobs MCM, stating baseline requirements for:
the proposed Nuclear port is to take a total of 138 000 tonnes of high level nuclear waste (equivalent to 1/3 of total global SNF waste) over some 70 years from Project Year 11;
a “dedicated port facility specifically developed to transfer the canisters from the delivery ship to rail for transportation to the facility site” stating a “greenfield port is proposed”, with an allowance of A$100 million in baseline costs for the development of the port.
(Jacobs MCM, Enabling infrastructure, Port facilities, p.136);
“…estimated receivals of 3,000 tonne of SNF per year. With typical capacity per cask of 10 tonnes , this translates as 300 casks per year, requiring 12-15 sailings (nuclear waste shipments) per annum, meaning one ship each 24-30 days on average.” At 200 – 250 tonnes SNF waste per ship.(Jacobs MCM, Immediate port receival laydown area, p.170);
the proposed Nuclear port is to store high level nuclear waste on site, with a “minimum immediate port storage capacity for casks unloaded from ships suggested as 28 waste casks” required a storage capacity of some 280 tonnes of high level SNF waste, at an average timeline of 10-12 days to clear a shipment of 20 waste casks from the port (p.170). A loaded high level nuclear waste transport cask weighs in range of 100 to 140 tonnes (by type);
In addition, the proposed Nuclear port is required to receive some 390 000 cubic metres of intermediate level nuclear wastes. At a rate of 10 000 m3 per year for the first 28 years of operations (equating to circa 600 x OSO shipping containers per year) stepping down to circa 4 000 m3 per year over the following proposed 24 years of port operations (p.161 and 172).
The proposed Nuclear port is itself to become a high level nuclear waste dump holding SNF wastes (280 tonnes) equivalent to some 14 years operations of a nuclear power reactor. “A typical nuclear power plant in a year generates 20 metric tons of used nuclear fuel” (US Nuclear Energy Institute).
The first high level nuclear waste shipment imposes untenable & unfunded liabilities on Australia, without a disposal capacity or even a site, and facing proposed decades of above ground storage.
Climate Council reports on Australia’s top solar states and suburbs
Australia’s top solar states and suburbs http://onestepoffthegrid.com.au/australias-top-solar-states-and-suburbs/ By Sophie Vorrath on May 25, 2016Rooftop solar is becoming as “common as insulation” in some parts of Australia, a new report has found, with 14 suburbs now recording penetration above 50 per cent, and many others recording uptake far above their state’s average, sometimes as high as 65 per cent.
The report is the Climate Council’s latest round-up of data on the performance of renewable energy in Australia’s states and territories. . As you can see in the table below, at the state and territory level, South Australia, Queensland, and Western Australia all have a higher share of Australia’s solar PV installations than their share of the population [Table 3 on original]
But in terms of the percentage of households with solar PV, South Australia and Queensland are still leading the country, with PV penetration levels fast approaching one-third of all households. Western Australia comes in at third place, with solar PV panels on one in five households.
In the suburbs of Australia, the data tells a slightly different story, with some postcodes charting a solar PV penetration rate much higher than the average of the state or territory they are located in. Continue reading
Despite our solar resources, Australia way behind Britain in solar energy
Australia 10th in global solar capacity as industry looks ahead to sunnier times http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/australia-10th-in-global-solar-capacity-as-industry-looks-ahead-to-sunnier-times-20160531-gp83t6.html June 1, 201 Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald Australia installed almost 1 gigawatt of new solar capacity last year but was easily eclipsed by cloudy nations such as the United Kingdom, which installed about four times as much, according to the REN21 Global Status report on renewable energy.
Investment in new renewable energy and energy efficiency programs rose to a record $US286 billion ($396 billion) even as prices for most technologies, such as solar and wind energy, fell. Growth also came despite falling prices for rival fuel sources, such as coal and oil.
“Renewables are now cost-competitive with fossil fuels in many markets and are established around the world as mainstream sources of energy,” Arthouros Zervos, chairman of REN21, said in the report.
Globally solar PV capacity added 50 gigawatts to reach 227 GW of capacity. New wind power capacity rose even more, adding 63 GW of new capacity to reach 433 GW.
Australia added 900 MW of new solar PV last year – the eighth-most in the world – to reach 5.1 GW of capacity.
That total, though, ranked Australia 10th in the world, trailing nations not known for their sunshine, such as the UK, South Korea and Germany. The UK added 3.7 GW alone last year to reach 9.1 GW of capacity, or almost twice Australia’s tally.
Kane Thornton, chief executive of the Clean Energy Council, said it was “obviously disappointing that the UK had almost twice as much solar power as Australia by the end of 2015, given we have some of the strongest sunshine in the world.” Continue reading
Rum Jungle still polluted 45 years after uranium mine was closed
Rum Jungle uranium mine in NT polluting environment 45 years after closure, ABC Radio The World Today By Sara Everingham Traditional owner Kathy Mills finds every visit to site of the old Rum Jungle uranium mine upsetting.
The site, 100 kilometres south of Darwin, is overrun with scrubby weeds, there are two abandoned mining pits, large mounds of waste rock and the water in a diverted channel of the Finniss River is tinged orange and brown from contamination.
But the great-grandmother wants to show people around in the hope it will help her family’s long battle to have the site rehabilitated.
“It has just been lingering on and on and on and many of my people have passed on and I am almost the last man standing in that people who fought for recognition of this land,” she said.
Ms Mills wants the Commonwealth to “hurry up” and rehabilitate the Rum Jungle mine — a Commonwealth-backed venture that produced uranium for the nuclear weapons programs of the US and British governments.
The mine closed 45 years ago but acid and metals are draining into the environment and the site remains off limits to the public including traditional owners.
This month’s federal budget had $11 million for the NT Government to put the finishing touches on a plan for rehabilitation.
Ms Mills said she was running out of time to see Rum Jungle fixed.
Mine took away ‘aspect of land’s importance’
When Rum Jungle was developed traditional owners had no say in it.
One mining pit was dug into a sacred women’s site on the east branch of the Finniss River and the flow of the river was diverted for one kilometre. Ms Mills vividly remembers the anger of one of her older relatives when he saw for the first time how the mine had transformed the land.
“It took away the whole aspect of the importance of that land,” she said.
But in the early 1950s the Commonwealth saw uranium as an opportunity to develop the north.
At the time, Rum Jungle was a major industrial development in northern Australia.
The then prime minister Robert Menzies came to the Top End to open it.
Notorious for environmental problems
When mining finished at Rum Jungle in 1971, no rehabilitation was done and the site became notorious for its environmental problems.
In the early 1980s, the Rum Jungle site could not be handed over to traditional owners as part of the successful Finniss River Land claim in case they became liable for the environmental problems.
The Commonwealth spent $18 million on rehabilitation in the 1980s but some of the work did not last.
At Rum Jungle, scientists from the NT Government are monitoring contamination in the Finniss River…….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-30/rum-jungle-uranium-mine-in-nt-polluting-environment-45-years-on/7460666
Australian Conservation Foundation’s environment election scorecard
Environment scorecard rates Coalition’s policies ‘woefully inadequate’, Guardian, Gareth Hutchens, 31 May 2016 The Australian Conservation Foundation’s assessment of the parties’ policies awards the Coalition 11 points out of 100, Labor 53 and the Greens 77
The Australian Conservation Foundation has described the Coalition’s environmental policies as “woefully inadequate” in its traditional election scorecard.
It gave the Coalition 11 points out of a possible 100, Labor 53 and the Greens 77.
The ACF’s chief executive, Kelly O’Shanassy, said: “The politicians who want to lead the country must have real plans to protect people, rivers, reefs, forests and wildlife for the future.”
“The Coalition’s 11 out of 100 on the environment is woefully inadequate. If they are not prepared to lead on climate and nature, they are not fit to lead the country.
“It’s not as if conservatives can’t be good conservationists – Liberal cabinet minister Garfield Barwick was ACF’s first president; Robert Menzies signed the first Antarctic Treaty; Malcolm Fraser made Kakadu a national park; John Howard established the national greenhouse inventory and the national water initiative,” she said.
The scores were calculated by measuring the parties’ policies on clean energy, pollution reduction, and environmental protection, and comparing them with the 40 tests set out in ACF’s national agenda for 2016.
Those tests include setting stronger pollution targets to help limit global warming to less than 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures; stopping uranium mining and export; delivering on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan; and shifting to 100% renewable energy by 2050.
The ACF decides how many marks to award for each party policy on the basis of how completely it fulfils the ACF’s tests. Where a policy unwinds existing environmental protection, the ACF awards negative marks.
An ACF spokesman said the organisation had been in contact with all three major parties this year to tell them how their policies would likely rate in its election scorecard with its policies as they stand…….
A recent poll showed climate change is one of the top four issues for voters at this election. http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/31/environment-scorecard-rates-coalitions-policies-woefully-inadequate
Greg Hunt’s gaffe over UNESCO and the Great Barrier Reef
How Greg Hunt and his department turned good news into an international scandal
The full draft of the Unesco report on climate change reveals many mentions of Australia were actually positive, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 31 May 2016 Greg Hunt has conducted one of the strangest manoeuvres of his already rather gymnastic career, over the erasure of Australia from a United Nations report on climate change.
Guardian Australia had broken the story that all mentions of Australia and the Great Barrier Reef had been scrubbed from the report at the request of the environment department.
Hunt first denied knowing about it but then justified the move with reasons that went beyond those provided by the department.
In fact the full draft report, obtained exclusively by Guardian Australia, reveals many of the mentions of Australia were positive – but their removal turned what would have been a relatively good news story into an international scandal. Continue reading
South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill launches nuclear propaganda campaign
Premier Jay Weatherill Sunday, May 29, 2016 Consultation on nuclear future to extend across all of South Australia http://assets.yoursay.sa.gov.au/production/2016/05/29/01/29/06/0cee3e94-ed82-4dfa-992e-a44d25cec636/nuclearconsult.pdfPro coal, nuclear John White still quietly running Liberal govt’s resources policy
Turnbull’s #Innovation and #IdeasBoom is to flog fossil fuels. KaBOOM! Independent Australia Tracey Anton 28 May 2016 “………In an article in Crikey by Paddy Manning, entitled ‘Hunt pins hopes on uncompetitive clean coal technology’, Manning writes:
‘John White chairs the DICE network of companies and agencies developing the technology, and is an executive and founding shareholder of Ignite Energy Resources,(IER)’
White told Manning:
‘..It halves CO2 emissions and will be eligible for Emissions Reduction Funding under Direct Action policies.’
Not only was White in financial trouble prior to receiving over $20 million in “grants” for the DICE project but he had also incurred a loss of $6 million in the 2012 calendar year.
White is an old Liberal heavyweight who was former Prime Minister John Howard’s right hand man in developing the Uranium Industry Framework for Australia’s nuclear future and just happens to hold dominion over thousands of square kilometres in Gippsland through the company he is shareholder and founder of, Ignite Energy Resources. He also has an uncanny knack of developing new coal technology which will reward him benefits under the Coalition’s Direct Action climate policy that he advised on.
Then there were the concerns over a $3 billion port in Gippsland when White, allegedly, was head of the (GRID) panel on transport infrastructure. That would go with his planned open cut coal minein the groundwater depleted area of Gelliondale.
Next, was the inclusion of biomass (another “clean” energy project) in the Renewable Energy Target securing White feedstock from our Gippsland forests. Now, he is telling government that his Gippsland Gas project will provide an abundance of “clean, agricultural quality” extracted water from his proposed biogenic coal gas project in the water stressed area of South Gippsland. Simply put, it is coal seam gas with the same destructive intrusions and the same hazards.
White’s most grandiose venture was to produce nuclear energy for the world by turning uranium into nuclear fuel rods, leasing them and bringing back the waste (including plutonium from the U.S. weapons industry). It’s interesting that Ignite holds leases for thorium adjacent to the iconic Ninety Mile Beach in Gippsland. Thorium – uranium’s young sister – is hailed by nuclear proponents as the green energy source of the future.
Only problem is, its exploration and mining is banned in Victoria. Bizarrely, when IA‘s Sandi Keane and I reported on White’s involvement in Ignite (‘Victorian government ignores Gippsland gasfield concerns’), the Minerals Council of Victoria rather stupidly tried to get the article pulled. They claimed we’d got the WRONG John White. We didn’t. It was a desperate act by MCA. You can find the whole story here. It seems the reason they wanted us to pull the article was because they’d applied to the former state LNP government to have the legislation banning exploration and mining of thorium and uranium repealed and didn’t want White’s name mentioned. Welcome to the shadowy world of Dr White.https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/turnbulls-innovation-and-ideasboom-is-to-flog-fossil-fuels-kaboom,9038
Australia covered up plight of Tasmania wilderness and Kakadu in UN Report
Australia covered up UN climate change fears for Tasmania forests and Kakadu
Fears about damage to the Great Barrier Reef were removed from UN report along with concern about a threat to the environment in two other heritage sites, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 29 May 16, A draft UN report on climate change, which was scrubbed of all reference to Australia over fears it could deter visitors to the Great Barrier Reef, also outlined possible threats to the Tasmania wilderness and Kakadu.
The draft report contained a chapter on the Great Barrier Reef, which described climate change as “the biggest long-term threat to the [reef] today, and to its ecosystems services, biodiversity, heritage values and tourism economy”.
It concluded that “without a comprehensive response more in keeping with the scale of the threat, the [reef]’s extraordinary biodiversity and natural beauty may lose its world heritage values”.
But before it was scrubbed, the report had two other key sections on Australian world heritage sites, and the threats they face from climate change.
One of those sections was on the Tasmanian wilderness…….the censored section of the Unesco report on Tasmania is clear about the “dire” nature of the threat.
It said: “A 2013 assessment of climate threats identified the same habitats as at high risk from greater fire frequency and drier conditions, with likely catastrophic implications for fauna. These dire predictions appeared to be playing out in January 2016, when tens of thousands of hectares of forest burned, sparked by lightning strikes that came in a month when temperatures were 2C above average and in the wake of the driest two-year period ever recorded for the region.”
The deleted section on Kakadu national park contained similarly dire warnings.
It described the important natural and cultural values of Kakadu, which has been inhabited by Aboriginal people for 50,000 years.
“The thousands of rock art sites in the park are at risk from damage by more extreme rainfall events, while sea level rise is happening at twice the global average along the northern Australian coast,” the draft report said.
It warned that fresh-water wetlands were at risk from sea level rise, as they are likely to be inundated with salt water. “Climate change threatens Aboriginal traditional use by altering the ecosystems of the vast wetlands of Kakadu and raising temperatures to a level likely to lead to more intense fire regimes,” the report said.
The final version of the report entitled “World heritage and tourism in a changing climate” was published last week by Unesco, United Nationsenvironment programme and the Union of Concerned Scientists, with all references to Australia removed.
The lead author of the report, Adam Markham, told Guardian Australia: “I was shocked when I read in the Guardian the reasons the Australian government gave for why they had pressured Unesco to drop the Australian sites.” http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/29/australia-covered-up-un-climate-change-fears-for-tasmania-forests-and-kakadu
Greens energy plan to generate $53 billion of investment in Queensland
Greens announce $53b clean energy plan http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/05/29/greens-announce-53b-clean-energy-plan The Greens have announced a clean energy plan for Queensland which it says will generate $53 billion of investment in projects over 15 years. “This would be delivered through a combination of direct government investment and ownership, and reverse auctions which provide bankable incentives for private sector investment.”Queensland Greens Senator Larissa Waters said delivering a clean-energy economy would also safeguard Great Barrier Reef tourism jobs and agricultural jobs that were threatened by coal mining and coal seam gas.
“The old parties are leaving Queensland at risk of missing out on the job-rich clean energy revolution,” she said.
Major political parties downplay environment as election approaches
Parties yet to turn on the green light http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/parties-yet-to-turn-on-the-green-light/news-story/33847ddc845b64eaffc5a62566d89188 May 28, 2016 One of the key issues missing from the election campaign so far is the environment.The economy, health and education have been the focus of the first three weeks of the campaign.
However, the environment has proven to be a well-trodden battleground in federal elections over the past two decades.
Tony Abbott’s crusade against Labor’s carbon tax helped propel him into office in 2013, despite Kevin Rudd’s best efforts to bring forward the start of the emissions trading scheme.
In 2010, both major parties made announcements on climate change, the health of the Murray-Darling system, marine parks, Queensland’s controversial wild rivers laws and forestry.
In 2007, Rudd’s promise to ratify the Kyoto protocol and take strong action on climate change helped convince thousands of voters to unseat the Howard coalition government.
John Howard himself kicked around the idea of an emissions trading scheme, having realised tackling issues such as water and climate were not only good for the environment but made economic and electoral sense.
Turnbull was rolled by his own party in 2009 over his support for Labor’s ETS and has been forced to embrace Abbott’s direct action plan, despite evidence of its ineffectiveness and voter confusion over what he really believes. Shorten says separate emissions trading schemes for the electricity sector and industry, coupled with a target of 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030, is the way to go.
For both major parties, there are votes to be won in talking up the benefits of jobs and economic growth from renewable energy, clean technology, greener farming practices and ensuring the long-term health of the Great Barrier Reef.
There are big electoral benefits for strong environmental policy.
Younger voters, especially, rate climate and the environment among their top concerns and if Labor or the coalition are to woo them away from the Greens they will need to come out early with some impressive policy.
A policy misstep by Labor could cost the party valuable Greens preferences.
Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce all for the full nuclear fuel chain
Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce warns South Australians face higher power prices because of renewable energy, Adelaide Now, PAUL STARICKCHIEF REPORTER March 16 The Advertiser DEPUTY Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce is warning of rising household electricity prices triggered by South Australia’s world-leading renewable energy use and is urging nuclear power as a clean alternative.
In an interview with The Advertiser, Mr Joyce seized on the Port Augusta power stations’ looming closure in May and declared its impact of slashing baseload supply would likely result in higher prices for consumers……
Mr Joyce applauded SA’s Nuclear Royal Commission and backed public debate on its key interim recommendations, delivered last month, of an international waste repository for SA and further exploring nuclear power.
Declaring he would be unsurprised if both major parties eventually supported a waste repository, Mr Joyce said there was unprecedented bipartisan support for exploiting SA’s globally significant uranium resource across most aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle…..
“The ultimate renewable energy — zero emissions energy — is nuclear energy…” http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/deputy-prime-minister-barnaby-joyce-warns-south-australians-face-higher-power-prices-because-of-renewable-energy/news-story/89eb86ecfdc980fbb472a7617be0fdbb
Exposing Turnbull’s deceit on fossil fuels and climate change
Turnbull’s #Innovation and #IdeasBoom is to flog fossil fuels. KaBOOM! Independent Australia Tracey Anton 28 May 2016 Transitioning the economy away from fossil fuel dependency is now the global catchcry. So why is Turnbull funding DICE-y coal technology at the expense of renewables whilst claiming to mitigate climate change? Mining reformist, Tracey Anton reports.
CLIMATE CHANGE has quickly become an economic and energy policy nightmare for Government but what Turnbull is presenting to the public is based on deceit. The LNP’s mishmash of policy contradiction and current economic mismanagement of fossil fuel extraction is to defraud the public of billions of dollars.
Turnbull states:
“we transition from an economy that has been fired up by an unprecedented mining construction boom as we transition to the new economy of the 21st century.”
The great disparity between saying you will reduce emissions but then stealthily grow a new and bigger fossil fuel industry needs to be called out and exposed.
We already have LNP’s ongoing team assault on the environment now showing a jump in emissions since the removal of the carbon price in 2014 with increases in liquefied natural gas (LNG) greenhouse gases adding to the rise.
Worst still is the report by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. Due to the LNP’s continual backflip and integrity of Turnbull and Co to apply believable climate mitigation strategies, Australia is way down the list for credibility to implement policy commitments.
Under the LNP, the Department of Climate Change has never been valued with their aim to subvert its legitimacy. Now, Climate Change dwells as a subsection in the Department of Environment.
Currently, the taxpayers will be shelving out billions of dollars to facilitate and subsidise a burgeoning fossil fuel energy future and the pain will only get worse if the Turnbull government is returned………
As for new coal technologies, coal still has to be extracted so the pits get bigger, groundwater is still bleed, air pollution is increased, waste water still needs to be disposed of and land and coastal subsidence will worsen, and the cycle goes on.
We already know that the mining industry is dictating government policy but the infiltration of agencies and our main science and research organisation, CSIRO is concerning.
CSIRO is now one of “entrepreneurial” innovation to market technology to the world…….
The innovation that he [CSIRO’s CEO Dr Larry Marshall] wants to sell to the world is the DICE technology, a coal to fuel derivative that starts with turning prime agricultural land into an open cut brown coal mine. How is that to mitigate climate change? Worse, the technology is also water and energy intensive — so it can burn cleaner somewhere else. Meanwhile, Turnbull has to build more dams because he is giving all our precious water to mining……..https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/turnbulls-innovation-and-ideasboom-is-to-flog-fossil-fuels-kaboom,9038
1 This month.
20 September –National Day of Action in Melbourne on the International Day of Peace
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 