Sickening pro nuclear spin from THE AUSTRALIAN today
Here’s an example:
“…..Politically, the need for a centralised facility has bipartisan support across multiple levels of government. Socially, the government has moved from suggesting sites to prioritising community consultation in all stages of the project, especially site selection. Environmentally, international experience has demonstrated that highly engineered and well-regulated low- and intermediate-level repositories can be managed safely with no impact on the community or agricultural industry….”
Climate change doesn’t get a mention in Turnbull’s budget
Turnbull’s first budget ignores climate change and dumps clean energy: That’s #innovative?, Independent Australia , Giles Parkinson 5 May 2016 So much for Turnbull’s trumpeting of a ‘transitional economy’ with zip $ for climate initiatives and $1.3 billion stripped from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.RenewEconomy‘s Giles Parkinson reports.
CLIMATE CHANGE, prime minister Malcom Turnbull once said, is the ultimate long-term problem that needs to be acted on urgently. But in his first budget as government leader, it is as though the issue does not exist.
Climate change was not even mentioned as a word, or a concept, or even an issue — despite Tuesday’s budget apparently being about growth and jobs for the future. T
here was no new money for climate initiatives and the only mention renewable energy got was to confirm that $1.3 billion in funds would be stripped from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.
“There was nothing in the speech, not a word,”Professor John Hewson, a former leader of Liberal Party, told the SolarExpo conference in 2016.
“The slogan is jobs and growth. I would have though that one of the most significant sectors for economic and jobs growth is renewables — I am staggered that it didn’t get a mention in the speech or in the documents.”
Hewson said the decision to remove funding from ARENA was an “absolute tragedy.”
In the budget papers, for instance, there is no extra funding for the Direct Action plan that Turnbull once ridiculed and dismissed as a “fig-leaf” for a climate policy and now forms the basis of the government’s emissions reductions plan, including the Paris agreement it signed just a few weeks ago.
Once the government has spent the current $2.5 billion allocation for handouts to polluters to do pretty much what they were doing anyway, there is zero extra funding for emissions abatement.
The Coalition government might have been expected to shift towards a “modified” scheme that would see Direct Action evolve with its safeguards mechanism to become a baseline and credit scheme. But that’s what Labor suggested last week, and rather than accept the tentative offer of a return to a bipartisan approach to climate policies, the government slammed the door.
It slammed the door, too, on renewable energy innovation. The $1.3 billion of unallocated funds for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency remains excised from the budget papers – even though it remains legislated – while $1 billion is transferred from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and rebadged as a new Clean Energy Innovation Fund.
Don’t expect Labor to stand in the way of that initiative. It voted with the Coalition earlier this week against a Greens motion to protect ARENA, and has since blamed NGOs for not standing up to the Coalition move to de-fund ARENA,so it won’t stand up either.
For his part, Australian Solar Council chief John Grimes was taking a stand on the matter, telling the Energy Storage Conference in Melbourne on Wednesday that the federal government had “taken a backwards step” in defunding ARENA, and not making the Agency’s competitive grants available any more……..https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/turnbulls-first-budget-ignores-climate-change-and-dumps-clean-energy-thats-innovative,8955
Australian govt not able to meet its Emissions Reduction goal
Budget 2016: Funding hole may leave Emissions Reduction Fund out of money, think tank says, ABC News, 4 May 16 By environment reporter Sara Phillips The Coalition may be left without a functioning climate policy after no new funding was announced for one its flagship climate policies in last night’s budget, according to a think tank specialising in climate change.
The Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) is the centrepiece of the Direct Action policy and is designed to do the heavy lifting in reducing Australia’s emissions.
After two auctions to purchase emissions reductions from businesses last year, around half its funding was exhausted.
A third auction was held last week, with the results yet to be announced, leading the Climate Institute to speculate that the ERF may now be running low.
“If the next two auctions are anything like the last two then we will run out of money in that Emissions Reduction Fund a bit later this year — well before the next election cycle,” said John Connor, chief executive the Climate Institute. Continue reading
Australian Greens plan to subsidise households’ solar batteries
Greens to hand households 50% battery cost https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/31522244/greens-to-hand-households-50-battery-cost/ Elise Scott – AAP on May 5, 2016 The Australian Greens would spend billions handing back half the cost of battery storage to households to encourage the uptake of renewable energy.
The five-year program would be funded by savings through slashing fossil-fuel tax breaks.
The $2.9 billion plan would allow individuals to claim a 50 per cent refundable tax credit on battery storage for their homes, up to $5000 in the first year.The credit would taper off to $1500 by 2021 which the Greens say reflects the projected decline in battery storage costs.
The minor party will on Thursday reveal the policy, which also includes a grant scheme for low income households.”Our battery storage plan will help people power up their home and power down their bills,” Greens leader Richard Di Natale said.
Business would be able claim depreciation on the battery storage asset over an accelerated period of three years.
Batteries enable simpler storage of renewable energy, which otherwise needs to be consumed as it is generated. New technologies are emerging, however battery storage remains relatively expensive for households and business.
Parliamentary Budget Office costings obtained by the Greens showed $2.85 billion would be needed over the forward estimates for the household policy.
The business incentives would cost an additional $38 million. The Greens said it would be funded through by savings, including $2.75 billion from removing accelerated depreciation from fossil fuel intensive industries.
Origin Energy to buy whole output from new Queensland solar farm
Origin Energy signs up for output from new Queensland solar farm, The Age, May 4, 2016 Angela Macdonald-Smith Energy Reporter A 13-year deal signed by Origin Energy to buy all the electricity produced at a new 100 megawatt solar project in north Queensland has accelerated the recovery of the renewable energy sector after a stalling in new investment over the past two years.
The contract, which will have Origin buy both the output and the renewable energy certificates generated by the Clare Solar Farm, also underscores how large-scale solar is improving in competitiveness, catching up with wind power…….
The Clare project will be built by Spanish company Fotowatio Renewable Ventures at a site 35 kilometres west of Ayr. Production is due to start next year and Origin will buy all of the output until 2030.
The deal follows Origin’s commitment in March to buy the output of FRV’s 56MW Moree solar farm, a project that is already in production in northern NSW. It has also applied for government funding for its own solar project in south-east Queensland.
Origin is one of the biggest liable parties under the RET regulations, which requires it to buy an increasing proportion of renewable energy for its electricity retailing activities. The deal with FRV for the Clare output will take Origin’s portfolio of renewable energy generation and purchase contracts to more than 700MW.
Origin’s head of energy markets Frank Calabria said the cost of solar “is falling rapidly compared with other renewable resources”.
“Now is the ideal time to invest in solar and we have been actively looking for opportunities to diversify and add more renewable energy to our portfolio,” Mr Calabria said.
For FRV, the contract with Origin kicks off a third new investment in Australia, after the Royalla solar project in the ACT and the Moree venture. http://www.theage.com.au/business/energy/origin-energy-signs-up-for-output-from-new-qld-solar-farm-20160503-gollf5.html
Dr Andrew Allison challenges The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s reckless Tentative Findings
The proposal is that we should accept waste before the repository has been completely built and tested. This proposal is so reckless, as to be negligent. We would face the very real risk of being left with high-level nuclear waste, and no technology to properly handle it.
Response to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s Tentative Findings By Dr Andrew Allison, B.Sc. B.Eng. PhD. (Elec. Eng.) 17 March 2016
Flinders Aboriginal elders strong in their fight against nuclear waste dumping on their sacred lands
Dumped-on Elders down but not despairing, Eureka Street Michele Madigan | 02 May 2016 “……..Outlining the numerous times that the Traditional Owners had asked the State Minister for the Environment and the Federal Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg to visit the site, she [Enice Marsh, Adnymathanha Elder/Traditional Owner for the Flinders Ranges area of SA.] could only conclude, ‘But all this has come to no avail — it’s all been totally ignored.’
On Friday Frydenberg managed to have it both ways, in what seems to be a now fashionable way to go about such announcements. ‘There is no final decision.’ And yet, there is only one site remaining from what was a ‘self selection’ offer by the original 28 property owners and the shortlisted six.
Frydenberg described the selection process to date as ‘rigorous’. However, as the follow up process will now include ‘technological, safety and environmental assessment’, an obvious question remains about just how ‘rigorous’ it could really have been.
In a repeat of the one of the Kimba owners’ comments some months back, Chapman seems to be quite ill-informed regarding what will actually be deposited on the property, quoting the usual presenting argument used in the former SA campaign of 1998-2004: that the dump will be for medical low-level waste from various hospitals and universities around the country.
No mention as usual that there is no need for this to be stored long term in the first place. No mention of the intermediate level radioactive spent fuel rods which arrived back from France in December, and are presently housed at Lucas Heights. One wonders when such news will be broken to the property owners and the Hawker community.
In contrast, the Adnyamathanha neighbours and other Traditional Owners are completely aware of this and decry the flawed, seemingly unscientific process where one person can offer their land with absolutely no consultation to the neighbours.
Their own Indigenous Protected Area expert research and eyewitness knowledge cites that as well as being a site replete with ‘countless thousands of Aboriginal artifacts and registered cultural heritage sites’, ‘There are frequent yarta ngurra-ngurrandha (earthquakes and tremors). We see the ground move and the hills move; we feel the land move. At least half a dozen times each year.
‘It is flood land. The water comes from the hills and floods the plains, including the proposed dump site. Sometimes there are massive floods, the last one on 20 January 2006.’
In stark contrast to the previous national dump campaign of 1998-2004 which was opposed by the state government, it seems that this time no member of the SA government has come to the defence of the extraordinary Flinders Ranges, a focal point for the tourism industry of South Australia. Wilpena is a famous tourist site of great beauty and heritage, popular with both national and international tourists.
Indeed the SA community next Friday will hear the royal commission’s final recommendation to import high-level radioactive waste into our seemingly politically disposable state — disposable, now, even to our own politicians…….
despair is a temptation but there is also ‘the distressing matter of indifference. Indifference can be lethal.’ And what pain it gives to those like Enice Marsh who care.
But still there is resilience, and still there is hope. Not only are the Adnyamathanha determined to fight on, the five other communities that are now off the shortlist have pledged their solidarity in a continuing fight against ‘this flawed process’.
Who knows the power of such leadership to break the bonds of our own indifference and despair. http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=47266#.VylNVdJ97Gh
No thought of nuclear upgrade for submarines, says Prime Minister Turnbull
Possibility of nuclear upgrade held no sway in subs decision: PM, THE AUSTRALIAN MAY 3, 2016 Brendan Nicholson Malcolm Turnbull has strongly rejected claims his government picked the French submarine so the navy could more easily swap to nuclear powered boats in the future……….
Mr Turnbull said the submarines would be the best.
“This is a great national enterprise and it will drive our economic plan for jobs and growth.” http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/possibility-of-nuclear-upgrade-held-no-sway-in-subs-decision-pm/news-story/ce2c7e245db93571fbd7007a86ce0f04
Why must we always force nuclear waste onto Aboriginal people?
What we believe is needed now is an independent and deliberative inquiry into long-term isolation and stewardship options for this material, and learning from countries overseas who are dealing with much larger inventories of this material than we are. What have they learned, long term? Isolation and stewardship of this material, rather than simply which outstation we should build the shed on.
The second thing that we believe should happen while that inquiry is underway is to properly containerise, in these 60-year licence caskets, the existing spent fuel and reprocessed material that at the moment is lying at the Lucas Heights facility. We believe that should be properly hardened and containerised, and there should be an audit of the existing collections of dispersed waste, non-reactor isotope investigations so that we are not producing this waste, and a commitment to not take international waste.
We need to respect the voices of the communities who are standing up and saying no.
03 May 2016 | Scott Ludlam I rise this evening to speak on the long history of failed plans to locate national radioactive waste dumps here in Australia at multiple sites across South Australia, the Northern Territory and Western Australia and to point out the disturbing consistency with which it is disproportionately Aboriginal land that is targeted, Aboriginal communities who are expected to host the most dangerous categories of industrial waste that this society is capable of producing.
It seems that so little has been learnt since when long ago, in 1991 or 1992, the federal government embarked on a national site selection process to try and work out where the waste from the HIFAR reactor at Sydney’s Lucas Heights should go—more than 30 years after the reactor first went online. It probably came as something of a surprise to the community then that, 30 years after this industrial facility had started operating, there was still no coherent plan for the disposal of its waste products.
And here we are now, in 2016, and you have to ask: what on earth have we learnt in the intervening time? One thing I think we have learnt is that coercive attempts to dump radioactive waste on unwilling communities are doomed to fail. That is not just the experience here in Australia; international experience bears this out as well. And so little has been learnt from a process which, in my view and in the view of some of my colleagues, actually held some promise…..
Whether it be spent fuel, whether it be radioactive waste from the isotope plant at the Lucas Heights complex, whether it be other categories of medical waste—trash, gloves and other items—or whether it be radioactive waste of various categories from mining operations, the question ‘Which outstation should this stuff be dumped on, which Aboriginal community should host this material, at which outback site can we dump this stuff out of sight out of mind?’ is simply wrong. If we start with the wrong question, we inevitably come to the wrong answer……… Continue reading
Montebello nuclear test veterans return to site – no compensation over 60 years later
Atomic test veterans back at Montebello Islands as compo bid drags on Malcolm Quekett – The West Australian on May 4, 2016 “……After returning to HMAS Fremantle, the sailors were tested with the Geiger counter and told they had to decontaminate themselves using a hard brush and soap under the shower.
They stayed under the water for hours and scrubbed. But they were then told they were wasting their time. They were showering under sea water which was itself contaminated.
Mr Whitby said he collapsed soon afterwards and was taken to a naval hospital in Darwin where he stayed for a week, lost one-third of his body weight and developed extreme anxiety and a chronic cough.He was transferred to hospital in Perth for another two weeks. “No one had any knowledge of radiation illness,” he said.
Mr Whitby was eventually discharged from the Navy in 1961, but the problems have followed him to this day. He said he developed skin cancers that had to be removed, and he still had the anxiety and the cough.
His best man, who had gone ashore with him, died at the age of 38 from cancer, and another mate died before turning 40. Wives of men on the ship suffered miscarriages.
After years of struggling to have his case acknowledged by officialdom, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal found in 2012 that he should be paid compensation and have his legal bills met.
Mr Whitby, 76, of East Fremantle, said he was still waiting. A Department of Veterans’ Affairs spokesman said the DVA was “investigating the claims and will be in a position to respond when that investigation is complete”.
Mr Whitby has allies among the other members of the Australian Ex-Services Atomic Survivors Association. Between 1952 and 1957, Britain conducted 12 atomic tests at the Montebellos as well as Emu Field and Maralinga in South Australia.
“Minor trials” were also conducted at Emu Field and Maralinga between 1953 and 1963. Next month, members of the association and family members will journey to the Montebellos to place a plaque to mark the 60th anniversary of the last test.Among them are Jim Marlow, 80, of Canning Vale, Rex Kaye, 76, of Melville, and Denis Flowers, 80, of Ferndale, who will all pay their own costs to be part of the expedition.
Mr Marlow was aboard HMAS Karangi near the Montebellos when one of the tests took place. He said the crew assembled on deck and were told to turn their backs just before the explosion, and then turned back again to see the massive cloud build up.
Mr Kaye was a general hand in the Royal Australian Air Force and worked with planes used in the SA tests. He said he was still fighting leukaemia and side effects……..https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/31511899/atomic-test-veterans-back-at-montebello-as-compo-bid-drags-on/
End of Kakadu uranium era brings old threats, new challenges and new hope
4 May 16 The Australian Conservation Foundation and the Mineral Policy Institute have today welcomed further moves towards the end of the uranium industry in Kakadu and called for confirmation that no underground mining plans will be pursued ahead of Energy Resources of Australia’s (ERA) annual meeting in Darwin today.
Last week ERA confirmed it had finally formalised a A$100 million credit deal with parent company Rio Tinto to provide extra certainty and capacity around rehabilitation of the Ranger mine site. The credit deal, described by ERA as ‘prudent, appropriate and in the best interests of all shareholders,’ is predicated on no further uranium mining at Ranger.
“ERA no longer mines uranium and soon will no longer process uranium at the troubled Ranger site,” said ACF campaigner Dave Sweeney. “This annual meeting is a good time for the company to accept that the uranium production era is over and it is now time for clean-up and repair. ERA should now formally withdraw its Ranger 3 Deep (R3D) application for underground mining at Ranger and instead focus its full efforts on closure, exit and transition”.
All mining and mineral processing at Ranger is required to end by early January 2021 and ERA is obliged to ensure the comprehensive rehabilitation of the mine site and surrounds.
This rehabilitation is required to be of a very high standard – suitable for the former Ranger mine site to be formally included into the surrounding Kakadu World Heritage region. Environment groups will be inside the Darwin meeting and will ask questions of ERA about the future rehabilitation of the site.
“There are massive challenges facing ERA and Rio Tinto at Ranger and they will be long judged by their efforts in the coming years,” said Mineral Policy Institute legacy mines project coordinator Lauren Mellor.
“Ranger has had a troubled and contested history and there is a clear need to now do business differently and better. Many eyes across Australia and around the world are watching ERA and Rio Tinto and this rehabilitation work is a key test of the company’s credibility and responsibility”.
Environment groups will be continuing their efforts to ensure the highest standard rehabilitation and closure work at Ranger and to support the aspirations of the region’s Mirarr Traditional Owners in the transition to a vibrant post mining regional economy.
New legal case against Adani coal mine now underway
Activists launch fresh court challenge over Carmichael coalmine ‘Australian Conservation Foundation argues emissions from coal mined from Adani’s project
will put the Great Barrier Reef at risk by exacerbating climate change’ Michael Slezak | The Guardian Australia http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/03/activists-launch-fresh-court-challenge-over-carmichael-coalmine 3 May 16:
” … If successful, the case will have ramifications beyond the Carmichael mine or even the Great Barrier Reef. It could have implications for any fossil fuel development, and require the minister to consider the effect of the burned fuel on any world heritage area – like the forests in Tasmania, for example.
“This is the first case of its kind to be heard in Australia,” said O’Shanassy. “The court will be asked to examine a section of Australia’s national environment law that has never before been tested in court. If this case is successful it will strengthen climate change considerations and world heritage protection in Australian law.” The hearing at the federal court in Brisbane is expected to go for two days. Hunt and Adani will be represented.”
Adani Big Coal Case Could Make It Harder To Get Mines Approved ‘A landmark case that could “put a brake on Australia’s fossil fuel exports” kicked off this morning in the Federal Court, in a precedent-setting bid to invalidate Environment Minister Greg Hunt’s approval of the largest coal mine the nation would ever see’ Thom Mitchell | New Matilda https://newmatilda.com/2016/05/03/adani-case-coal-mines-approved/ 3 May 16:
” … Under the United Nations process, the country that burns fossil fuels is responsible for them. Who exported the fossil fuels is considered irrelevant. And that was why Hunt, and all governments to date, largely ignored the damage Australia’s fossil fuels exports do to our environment when making approval
decisions.
The Australian Conservation Foundation is trying to change that. They’re arguing that irrespective of where the coal is burnt, it will have a serious impact on the Reef, and that this impact will be felt irrespective of how the United Nations framework on climate change works. … “
More research needed into climate change – bushfire links
Senate inquiry told of need for more research into bushfire-climate change links May 3, 2016 BLAIR RICHARDS State Political Reporter Mercury CALLS for more research into the links between climate change and bushfires and for greater national firefighting capacity have emerged from a Senate inquiry into the Tasmanian Wilderness fires.
The Senate’s environment and communications reference committee is examining the response to the fires that blazed through more than 20,000ha of the state’s Wilderness World Heritage Area in January and February.
The inquiry has received 24 submissions from stakeholders including scientific and conservation organisations, government agencies and individuals.
Some submissions called for more research into the impact of climate change on fire risk:…….
THE Australian Conservation Foundation said the fires should be a “wake-up call” for Australian governments to act on climate change.
However, the Tasmanian Government’s submission said the forecast outlook for the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area was classified as “normal”.
The Senate committee is due to report by May 30. http://www.themercury.com.au/news/politics/senate-inquiry-told-of-need-for-more-research-into-bushfireclimate-change-links/news-story/4ab57529e85c2a55a9ec82fbd64a2f0e
Liberal and Labor will downplay nuclear waste issues, until the election is safely over
Decision on low-level nuclear waste dump unlikely before year-end and without public support, April 30, 2016, The Advertiser, DANIEL WILLSPARIS, FRANCE, Sunday Mail (SA) A GO-AHEAD for a low-level nuclear waste dump for South Australia will not be granted before the end of the year – and will only proceed if there is public support, Premier Jay Weatherill says.
Speaking to the Sunday Mail during a visit to France to meet the designers of the future submarines, Mr Weatherill said the proposal could only be approved after the final Royal Commission report and the delivery of a State Government response to Parliament.
An array of state laws currently ban both low- and high- level waste facilities, as well as the use of nuclear energy and enrichment of mined uranium……..
“I think it’s a community debate that will begin in earnest after the next federal election,” he said.……http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/decision-on-lowlevel-nuclear-waste-dump-unlikely-before-yearend-and-without-public-support/news-story/4fb4790f8c5d433ddb509b60bec39cdc
The submarine boondoggle- over $2000 per each Australian
4. BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE So we spend $2,000 each. That just gets us the big lumps of steel. If you actually want to use them, you’re paying more. It could be another $2,000 to $4,000 per Australian….
OPTIONS The great thing about the way the acquisition will work is there should be the opportunity to cut back from 12 when the inevitable delays and cost blowouts happen. From here we can’t save the whole $2000 but maybe we can save some, for better uses.
Sub standard: why the $2,000 we are each spending on submarines will probably be a terrible waste http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/design/sub-standard-why-the-2000-we-are-each-spending-on-submarines-will-probably-be-a-terrible-waste/news-story/6922de6f6a72657c669fdc1a1248916f APRIL 30, 2016, Jason Murphy news.com.au@jasemurphy AUSTRALIA is spending $50 billion to buy submarines. The biggest whack of money we’ve ever spent on a Defence project. It comes out at $2000 per person. And it’s probably a shocking idea. Continue reading
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 