Malcolm Turnbull – fine words, but actually retreating on climate action
‘Walking in the other direction’: Malcolm Turnbull’s broad retreat on climate, The Age April 22, 2016 Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald When Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull rose to address the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris late last year, he told the world Australia would meet the challenges of global warming “with confidence and optimism”.
You don’t turn off R&D spending when there’s a revolution under wayAndrew Blakers, Centre for Sustainable Energy Systems, ANU
Australia’s carbon emissions target – slicing 2000 levels by about 19 per cent by 2030 – would halve pollution on a per capita basis, “one of the biggest reductions” of any G20 nation, Turnbull said. The government would also double “clean energy innovation” investment over the next five years, and carve out $1 billion from the existing aid budget to help threatened Pacific neighbours build “climate resilience” and cut emissions……….
The pact, which the government plans to ratify later this year if re-elected, aims to limit global temperature increases to between 1.5 and 2 degrees of pre-industrial levels – even if current national offers fall far short of the greenhouse gas reductions needed.
But in the four months since Turnbull’s speech, climate news from abroad and at home has been anything but positive………..
For policy areas directly under Turnbull’s control, it’s been a dismal few months for climate action, not least CSIRO’s assault on climate science launched on February 4 that will see dozens of leading researchers sacked among as many as 450 jobs to go.
Despite pleas of budget penury, the government somehow managed to find $15.4 million a couple of weeks later for a new Oil, Gas and Energy Resources Growth Centre to, among other things, “foster community support” for non-renewables, including coal and nuclear energy.
It is also forked out $3.3 million to two researchers to examine the effects of wind farms on health. Just four researchers made submissions for the cash, a remarkably small number, according to Sydney University public health expert, Simon Chapman.
Taken for granted
And a fresh concern surfaced this week with 61 leading scientists writing to Turnbull decrying the government’s decision last month to end grants from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA).
Set up by the Rudd-Gillard government, the agency still had $1.3 billion in funding to disperse by 2022.
Instead, it will now work with the Clean Energy Finance Corp to offer $100 million in loans annually for 10 years to foster “clean and renewable energy”. ARENA still has $130 million to be allocated, with “high interest” from potential proponents, Hunt says.
The proposed end of ARENA’s grant funding removes “an essential component of technology innovation”, the mostly solar researchers said in the letter obtained by Fairfax Media.
Forty years of such grants over had allowed Australia to contribute “very far above its weight” in renewable energy. By contrast, reliance on equity returns “have rarely been effective” in advancing early-stage research, the scientists said.
Richard Corkish, chief operating officer of UNSW-based Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics, said his facility faced “an existential threat” if the $4 million in annual ARENA funds ended. The school continues to spawn world-leading technology, including new types of solar cells using abundant, non-toxic materials.
“ARENA is our major funding source,” Corkish says.
Andrew Blakers, who led development of the solar PV technology being adopted by the world’s largest producers, said all new electricity investment in Australia over the past five years had been in solar or wind energy.
“This is incredible”, says Blakers, who heads the Centre for Sustainable Energy Systems at the Australian National University. “You don’t turn off R&D spending when there’s a revolution under way.”
………Greens deputy leader Larissa Waters said there’s “an obvious disconnect between the Prime Minster’s rhetoric in Paris last year and his actions in Canberra”.
“Presiding over cuts to CSIRO’s world-leading climate research and gutting renewable technology research is stupid on so many levels.
“The government is tipping new money into fossil fuel research so that the big mining companies profiting off the world’s warming don’t have to pay for research themselves,” Waters says……..http://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/walking-in-the-wrong-direction-malcolm-turnbulls-broad-retreat-on-climate-20160420-goat2p.html
Australia needs action, not just Turnbull’s words, to save the Great Barrier Reef
Climate deal won’t stop Great Barrier Reef from getting ‘cooked’, say Greens, Guardian, 23 Apr 16 Australia’s lack of action on pollution reduction targets has made the country a laughing stock on the international stage, according to senator Larissa Waters Australia’s lack of follow-through on climate change will leave the Great Barrier Reef “completely cooked” despite it signing the Paris climate deal, the Greens say…….
“Unfortunately, minister Hunt likes to bandy about some figures but Australia has been a laughing stock on the international stage,” she said.
“Our pollution reduction targets are so far below the science and people know that our policies aren’t even getting us towards those very low targets.”
Senator Waters rejected the government’s commitment of a further $11m on projects to continue improving water quality on the Great Barrier Reeffollowing a study this week showing 93% of the reef was bleached.
She pointed to the Queensland and federal government’s backing of the Adani coal mine, which critics say will further imperil the reef. “We need to really have a change of policy when it comes to approving every coal mine anyone ever thinks of and instead really fund and support the transition and speed it up to clean-energy,” Senator Waters said. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/23/climate-deal-wont-stop-great-barrier-reef-from-getting-cooked-say-greens
Secrecy on health information about uranium workers – Submission to #NuclearCommissionSAust
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL COMMISSION TENTATIVE FINDINGS RESPONSE March 2016 Dan Monceaux – Documentary filmmaker & South Australian citizen
EXPLORATION, EXTRACTION & MILLING “………I have previously expressed my criticism that this, and indeed all Royal Commissions conducted in South Australia are exempt from the Freedom of Information Act 1991. This is fundamentally undemocratic, and contradicts claims made by the Commissioner on many occasions of his commitment to openness and transparency.
Returning to the subject of exploration drilling, I would suggest that there is another factor confounding the efficacy of exploration drilling regulation in South Australia- namely regulatory capture. This is accompanied by a tendency to withhold information regarding non-compliance and regulatory failure. The resulting impression can be one of false assurance. For example, by citing Marathon Resources Rectification Plan 2008 in its Tentative Findings, while neglecting to list the Eyre Iron compliance audit report which it also received, the Commission is misleading the reader. A reader would be forgiven for assuming that Marathon’s non-compliance was an isolated example, when clearly, this is not the case. The compliance audit report is found as Appendix A attached to my submission below. http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/app/uploads/2016/03/Dan-Monceaux-10-08-2015.pdf
The Government of South Australia has on its own record admissions of its institutional knowledge of lung cancer risk to uranium workers in underground mines. The evidence base dates back to the early experiences of miners at Joachimstahl in Czechoslovakia, from whose high incidence of lung cancer the first precautionary safety standards were subsequently set in other jurisdictions. The risk was understood in the 1920s as evidenced by publications of the South Australian Department of Mines from the mid 1950s, namely: Possible health hazards in uranium mining – Armstrong, A.T., Department of Mines (1955) https://sarigbasis.pir.sa.gov.au/WebtopEw/ws/samref/sarig1/image/DDD/RB00429.pdf The health consequences of workers in the uranium industry – Dr. B. S. Hanson (1956) https://sarigbasis.pir.sa.gov.au/WebtopEw/ws/samref/sarig1/image/DDD/RB4200080.pdf
They are found in the results of Radium Hill worker cohort studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals. The epidemiological studies of the 1980s, published circa 1990 proved, with epidemiological evidence of elevated cancer incidence, that confidence expressed in the safety of working conditions at the Radium Hill mine in the 1950s and 1960s was ill-founded.
Radon daughter exposures at the Radium Hill uranium mine and lung cancer rates among former workers, 1952-1987 – Alistair Woodward, David Roder, Anthony J. McMichael, Philip Crouch and Arul Mylvaganam (1991) http://www.jstor.org/stable/3553403………
the Olympic Dam mine’s radiological safety measures and records remain protected by special secrecy provisions established under the Roxby Downs (Indenture Ratification) Act 1982. Secrecy during the time of the Radium Hill mine was a matter of protecting Commonwealth secrets during the Cold War. The secrecy provisions of the Roxby Downs Indenture (Ratification) Act 1982, were according to Ian Gilfillan of the Australian Democrats, at least in part to protect the project from attack by environmental groups. The Indenture Act was revised in 2011, and forfeited the ideal opportunity to repeal Cold War-style exemptions as a sign of good faith to the people of South Australia and movement towards open government………… https://www.academia.edu/23544163/Nuclear_Fuel_Cycle_Royal_Commission_Tentative_Findings_Submission_-_March_2016
ANOTHER Liberal Senator doubts the science of climate change!
Senator agrees climate science ‘not settled’ http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2016/04/21/senator-agrees-climate-science–not-settled-.html 21 April 2016 Deputy Nationals leader Fiona Nash has supported her coalition colleague Liberal Senator George Brandis’ view that the science on climate change is not settled.
Labor has condemned Senator Brandis after he told parliament he was not ‘at all’ convinced there is a scientific consensus about climate change.
‘It doesn’t seem to me that the science is settled at all,’ Senator Brandis said on Tuesday during debate on the tabling of documents relating to the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO).
‘The commitment of Senator Brandis to addressing the impacts of climate change is so shallow, he hasn’t made up his mind whether it actually exists yet,’ environment spokesman Mark Butler and shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus said in a statement.
Senator Nash told Sky News she agrees there are ‘varying views’ between scientists on climate change..
‘I don’t think it is certainly necessarily settled,’ she said. ‘I think we should be taking every precaution that we ensure the planet is healthy.’
The NSW Senator says she was not sure whether her view on climate science was shared by her cabinet colleagues
‘I think you would have to ask the other cabinet ministers but it’s certainly my view.’
– See more at: http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2016/04/21/senator-agrees-climate-science–not-settled-.html#sthash.4k3e4pDd.dpuf– See more at: http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2016/04/21/senator-agrees-climate-science–not-settled-.html#sthash.4k3e4pDd.dpuf– See more at:http://www.skynews.com.au/news/politics/federal/2016/04/21/senator-agrees-climate-science–not-settled-.html#sthash.4k3e4pDd.dpuf
The health of uranium and nuclear workers. Response to #NuclearCommissionSAust’s ‘Tentative Findings’
It is extraordinary that the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission is not publishing Responses to its “Tentative Findings” before it makes its final announcement on May 6th.
Meanwhile, here is part of at least one very clear and informative response.
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL COMMISSION TENTATIVE FINDINGS RESPONSE March 2016 Dan Monceaux – Documentary filmmaker & South Australian citizen.
“…… I sincerely hope that the health and wellbeing of South Australia’s workforce, its citizenry and its environment are considered sufficiently important topics for this Commission to elaborate on the matters raised here ahead of its final report to Parliament in May.
………The Commission’s opening tentative finding states that “South Australia can safely increase its participation in nuclear activities, and by doing so, significantly improve the economic welfare of the South Australian community.”
The evidence base for adopting such a confident and conclusive statement is questionable. In the case of nuclear industrial activities which have established links with health conditions including cancer and associated heart, lung and liver conditions and potential genetic harm, the safety or otherwise of an activity or regulatory regime can only be proven by epidemiological studies spanning a timeframe of decades. For example, little is known about the fates of worker cohorts from existing and past uranium mining and milling activity in South Australia………. The Commission has had time to consider this matter, but appears to have not deemed it sufficiently important. ……
I wish to make a case for the prioritisation of epidemiological studies of past and present South Australian uranium worker cohorts as a matter of the utmost importance. The results of such studies could provide an empirical basis for future commentary regarding the safety or otherwise of the industry as it has existed until now…….
The Commission states that “policies must be based on evidence, not opinion or emotion.” The same rule should apply to statements made by the Commission. To be considered credible, they must be supported by material evidence. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Harm can neither be proven, nor safety assured without relevant epidemiological studies. This was known to South Australia’s Department of Mines in 1956, when Dr. B. S. Hanson wrote in The Health of Workers in the Uranium Industry (pg. 16): “It is only by long-term health examinations that the validity of our present speculative exposure limits may be tested.” This document is currently available on SARIG, the South Australian government’s resources industry geoserver: https://sarigbasis.pir.sa.gov.au/WebtopEw/ws/samref/sarig1/image/DDD/RB4200080.pdf…….
The available evidence suggests that contemporary publications of South Australian Government departments fail to adequately communicate occupational exposure risk to their readers. The perfect example of this is the Uranium fact sheet published by the Department of State Development in 2015, during the proceedings of this Commission. The “Fact Sheet” poses the question “Is uranium safe?” then neglects to answer the question. Instead, it provides the graphic reproduced from http://www.statedevelopment.sa.gov.au/upload/uranium/uranium%C2%ADthe-facts-final.pdf? t=1458534521755
Compare this to Hanson and Armstrongs statement from 1956, in documents held by the same South Australian government, written 60 years earlier:
“Hazards associated with uranium ore are of two kinds, those due to radioactivity, including 6 external radiation as well as internal radiation; and those due to uranium metal poisoning. Radon gas and its solid daughter products would appear to offer the greatest potential danger. They can be inhaled and the solid products so lodged in the body.” (Armstrong, pg. 18)
“The individual employed in a mine or mill risks damage by external or internal radiation, and as to the latter the radioactive particles which form a danger are either ingested or inhaled.” (Hanson pg. 7)
“The daughter products are insoluble, but together with the dust to which they adhere some are engulfed by the reticulo-endothelial cells of the lung surface and there theoretically give a high intensity of alpha radiation to those very surface cells which form the type seen in the usual cancer of the lung.” (Hanson pg. 9)
“The inhalation of active deposit on dust particles, is so much the most important one that most of our [Department of Mines’] effort should be directed towards overcoming it.” (Hanson pg.10)
“In my opinion, dusty clothes inevitably mean an inhalation risk as well as an ingestion risk.” (Hanson pg.14)
“Almost without exception this report deals with the real or probable dangers of radioactivity.” (Hanson pg. 19)
The disparity between the messages of 1955 and 1956 (Department of Mines) and 2015 (Department of State Development) is alarming and deeply concerning…… https://www.academia.edu/23544163/Nuclear_Fuel_Cycle_Royal_Commission_Tentative_Findings_Submission_-_March_2016
Australia at New York climate talks – the ultimate climate action hypocrite
Australia is the hollow man of global climate action, SMH April 21, 2016 Kelly O’Shanassy This week a record number of more than 130 countries will gather in New York to sign the Paris Climate agreement that was thrashed out last December. In doing so, they are acknowledging that human-induced climate pollution from burning fossil fuels is driving dangerous changes to our climate – and they are on board to tackle the problem.
Australia will be among those nations gathered in New York – but despite seeking to project a perception of credibility on climate, the Turnbull Government is still implementing the retrogressive policies from the Abbott era – and that needs to change………..
Speaking on behalf of the Umbrella Group of Countries, a loose coalition of non-European developed 
nations, Julie Bishop went further stating the Paris Agreement “recognises that our common purpose is to hold global temperature rise well below 2 degrees, keeping 1.5 degrees in our sights and that this will require a long term transformation to an emissions neutral and climate resilient world”.
These are welcome words, but stacked up against Australia’s woeful climate policy record – they ring hollow and fail to convince. Let’s break down recent Australian government climate policy against Ms Bishop’s words.
Firstly, Australia’s current pollution reduction targets of 26-28 per cent pollution reduction by 2030 are nearly the weakest of any developed nation. If the rest of the world adopted such poor targets, we would likely see global warming of 3-4 degrees – with much more devastating impacts than we are currently witnessing.
Far from nurturing a vibrant and agile renewable energy sector, recent Australian governments have mounted what looks more like a long-running and sustained attack on renewable energy in Australia.
This has resulted in an 88 per cent reduction in investment in 2014 and a weakened Renewable Energy Target. It has effectively stymied progress in the sector at the very time we needed to be stepping up as a global renewable energy leader – and comes despite the fact the Australian public, through rooftop solar PV, has been among the leading adopters of clean energy globally.
At the same time, we’ve witnessed the Australian government unsuccessfully trying to get rid of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and Australian Renewable Energy Agency. These vital agencies were only saved in the Senate – but the signal from the Federal government was clear for all to see.
Moreover, those carbon abatement mechanisms that have been set up are floundering. Despite $2.55 billion being committed to Australia’s much-vaunted Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), market analysts RepuTex have found that Australia’s emissions growth is significantly outpacing abatement contracted. The ERF instead uses taxpayer funds and reverse auctions to buy pollution reduction without getting to the heart of the problem – how to break our addiction to the dirty energy sector.
Added to all this, the government has only committed to review Australia’s inadequate raft of climate policies in 2017 – meaning unnecessary delays and offering no certainty that better policies will be implemented any time in the next 12 months.
This inglorious litany of weak policy settings and lack of tangible support for the growth of the renewable energy sector bespeaks Australia’s inability to break the shackles of the fossil fuel industry. It was captured neatly during the Paris climate conference by the global Climate Change Performance Index, which placed Australia third from last in climate policies, above only Kazakhstan and Saudi Arabia.
Despite fine words in international forums, Australia’s carbon pollution from the electricity sector has been steadily increasing. Reporting by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory shows clearly that changes in the fuel mix – particularly an increase in coal – is driving this pollution growth.
And to top it off, the government has approved one of the biggest coalmines in the world – Adani’s Carmichael coal proposal in the Galilee Basin – a veritable carbon bomb that would strongly contribute to pushing global warming over the 2-degree limit.
So while the world is desperately trying to avert a climate catastrophe and our coral reefs are fighting for their lives, the Australian government is standing alongside global leaders in New York this week having done very little to meaningfully address the problem.
All scenarios that limit global warming to well below 2 degrees require a clean energy transformation that includes rapidly getting carbon pollution out of the energy sector. That means replacing coal-burning power plants with clean renewable energy, an end to new coalmines and fossil fuel developments and a massive ramp up in energy efficiency.
Australia has become the hollow man of the Paris Climate Agreement – spouting fine words in the international spotlight but ultimately bringing nothing substantial to the table. http://www.smh.com.au/comment/australia-is-the-hollow-man-of-global-climate-action-20160420-gob80a.html
Mierals Council’s Pro Uranium campaign – a fizzer already?
Pro-uranium campaign backfires on Twitter http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/04/20/pro-uranium-campaign-backfires-twitter A Minerals Council campaign urging people to discuss the ‘untapped potential’ of uranium on social media has been used against it. A resources industry campaign to promote uranium mining has been hijacked by Twitter users keen to voice their opposition to the practice.The Minerals Council of Australia launched the Uranium: Untapped Potential campaign on Wednesday, using social media content including videos and posters to highlight the benefits of uranium.
“The material is designed to showcase facts on the table about the uranium industry and the benefits it can provide to the Australian community, including the creation of hundreds of jobs,” the council’s executive director Daniel Zavattiero said in a statement.
It also aims to reassure the public on safety, while pointing out opportunities in nuclear medicine and the environmental upside of nuclear energy.
“A lifetime’s use of electricity from nuclear power plants produces the spent fuel equivalent of one soft drink can,” a poster says.
But the hashtag #UntappedPotential, which was trending by Wednesday afternoon, has attracted a large amount of undesired banter by environmentalists who have instead used it to express their concerns around the practice and advocate for alternative energy.
“#UntappedPotential for meltdowns and nuclear disaster?” said Twitter user Jemila Rushton.
“We need to better harness the #untappedpotential of solar power”, tweeted Upulie Divisekera.
“#UntappedPotential to put more communities at risk of nuclear waste dumps,” Ace Collective said on Twitter.
“We concur that uranium has much #untappedpotential – for disaster, cost and time blowouts and proliferation,” Anglesea After Coal said.
The Minerals Council is running the campaign on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.
Steaming hot world sets more temperature records, especially in Australia
The most abnormally hot regions of the world last month included Australia, which set a record with minimum temperatures almost 2 degrees above the average for 1961-90, while the Arctic region was about 3.3 degrees above average, NOAA said.
‘
Worse things in store’: Steaming hot world sets more temperature records, The Age, April 20, 2016 Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald
The Earth sizzled in March with the most unusually warm month in recorded history as average land surface temperatures easily exceeded levels deemed by scientists to constitute dangerous climate change.
The abnormal weather has continued into April as the most powerful tropical cyclone ever recorded in the Indian Ocean dumped rain at rates reaching 300 mm an hour, and Australian scientists declared the worst coral bleaching event ever on the Great Barrier Reef.
Combined global land and sea-surface temperatures in March were 1.22 degrees above the 20th-century average, beating the previous record for the month – set just a year earlier – by almost one-third of a degree, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. Each of the past 11 months have now broken global temperature records, the longest such streak in the agency’s 137 years of data collection. Continue reading
The death of the Great Barrier Reef – due to Australia’s carbon exports
Greenpeace: Australia’s Carbon Exports Are Killing The Reef, New Matilda, By Thom Mitchell on April 21, 2016 On Friday the Australian Government will be in New York presenting itself as a world-leader in the race to reduce carbon emissions, at the official signing of the Paris agreement.But on the eve of this historic hippodrome, Greenpeace Australia has released a new report which it says puts the lie to the Government’s posturing.
It notes that while Australia’s emissions have remained relatively stagnant since 1990, coal exports have exploded a staggering 253 per cent, and now represent almost twice as much carbon as total domestic emissions of carbon dioxide.
Greenpeace says that this year Australia will “export” one billion tonnes of carbon dioxide, through coal alone. That’s more than it plans to cut down through reducing domestic emissions using the Direct Action in the decade to 2030, according to the report.
It’s a carbon trade that the United Nations process takes no stock of: emissions are counted at the national level. Conversely, the fossil fuels nations export are treated as the responsibility of the importer country where they’re burned.
Greenpeace maintains that in reality – outside the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – “Australia’s overall contribution to global climate change is getting worse, not better”.
The report argues Australia has taken advantage of the international framework around climate change by “growing its coal exports and disowning the consequences”. “This has helped to suppress coal prices, making the dirtiest option more competitive for longer in electricity generation and in steelmaking.” And the iconic environmental group points out the government has no plans to stop.
According to government projections, coal exports will continue to grow nearly two thirds more by 2030. It’s an ambition this government, and the Labor governments before it, have made little secret of……… https://newmatilda.com/2016/04/21/greenpeace-australia-carbon-exports-killing-reef/
Changes to CSIRO may mean loss of international grant money
CSIRO changes risk losing millions of dollars in international grants, leading scientists say, ABC Lateline By political correspondent David Lipson, 20 Apr 16 Some of Australia’s leading scientists say the CSIRO is at risk of losing millions of dollars in international grants due to changes being implemented under CEO Larry Marshall.
Key points:
- CSIRO staff fear they will lose grants due to new CEO
- CEO rejects claims, says valuable research will continue
- Former manager says CSIRO at risk of breaching Paris climate agreements
Lateline has obtained unofficial minutes of a CSIRO staff meeting last month, where one researcher directly raised the United Nations Development Program’s concerns about funding the organisation in future. “The UN told him that in their view, the new CEO was not reliable,” retired CSIRO fellow Dr Nick Abel said.
“And they were frightened that if they did hand over a lot of money to CSIRO under contract, there was a danger that he might cancel those contracts and leave them with the ultimate embarrassment for the UN, which is millions of dollars of unspent money.”
Billions of dollars worth of grants were pledged for climate research and mitigation at the Paris climate talks last year.
Lateline has spoken to a number of scientists who fear the CSIRO’s new innovation and industry focus is leading to a “dramatic reduction” in “public good” science………
Australia ‘reneging’ on Paris agreement, ex-CSIRO manager says
Research manager Dr Peter Craig retired from the CSIRO just over two weeks ago. He believes as well as the loss of reputation and capacity, Australia is also at risk of breaching commitments made at last year’s climate talks in Paris.
“The COP21 agreement actually requires an increase in climate science, not a decrease in climate science,” he said……http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-20/csiro-changes-risk-losing-millions-in-grants-scientists-say/7343750
Breakfast with the Toffs, after May 6th Nuclear Royal Commission announces wonderful waste import plan
Spin all over the place about Australia’s so wonderful opportunities in the uranium/nuclear industry! It’s all part of the leadup to the shonky Nuclear Fuel Commission’s unsurprising recommendation that South Australia should import radioactive trash.
I guess they had a good time with the charade of the Royal Commission, jaunts overseas for the nuclear shills, and the spurious business of taking submissions – of course, as Kev says, the antinuke ones were mostly “emotional, so they don’t count anyway.
Let’s begin with good old reliable nuclear stooge Kevin Scarce. For just the measly $67.50 , you can have brekky with him – a sit-down hot breakfast, layered berry yoghurt muesli shot, seasonal fruit, brewed coffee, T Bar teas and fresh juice.
Meanwhile, Kev will tell you how you beaut it will be when South Australia goes full steam ahead with importing radioactive trash and expanding the nuclear fuel chain. See more at Action Australia.
Anyway, it’s a suitable breakfast price. We do want to keep the great unwashed out, after all .
Meanwhile, back at the struggling, barely surviving uranium mining industry, they are putting on a bold face, too.
The Minerals Council of Australia’s Uranium Forum has today released a range of material that purports to demonstrate the potential benefits of further developing Australia’s uranium industry. ‘Uranium: Untapped Potential’ includes a poster, a series of videos featuring industry experts and voices, and social media material highlighting the untapped potential further growth of the uranium industry offers Australia. They’r on Facebook, Twitter, Youtube. linked in, as well as the usual mainstream media.
Australia to sell uranium to Ukraine? – insensitive timing, economic and security folly
For security reasons, Australia has suspended uranium sales to Russia. It seems extraordinary that Australia should now enter into a deal with even more unsafe and unstable Ukraine, in its present war and political crisis.
No doubt the federal parliament’s influential Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT) will examine the planned deal, that Julie Bishop signed up to in New York with Ukrainian Energy and Coal Industry Minister Volodymyr Demchyshyn.
JSCOT recently warned against the agreement to sell uranium to India but its recommendations were ignored by the Coalition Government. Here’s hoping that there will be scrutiny on the Ukrainian agreement and that the government will pay attention.
Four big reasons not to sell uranium to Ukraine https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/fourbig-reasons-not-to-sell-uranium-to-ukraine,8895 Noel Wauchope 18 April 2016 As the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster approaches, Noel Wauchope outlines just a few compelling reasons why the Coalition Government’s uranium deal with Ukraine may have further disastrous consequences.
WHAT AMAZINGLY insensitive timing! As the anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe approaches, Australia makes a deal (at the Nuclear Security Summit) to sell uranium to Ukraine.
This is such a bad idea for so many reasons — it’s hard to know which to pick first!
Economics: simply because uranium exporting is not really economically worthwhile.
Chernobyl’s plight: because Ukraine’s Chernobyl radioactive disaster is continuing. (We supplied uranium for that other catastrophe — Fukushima.)
Insecurity: Ukraine’s dangerous nuclear industry due to civil war, ageing reactors, risks of smuggling and terrorism.
Political crisis: Ukraine’s notoriously corrupt and unstable political regime.
Let’s check those four reasons.
Economics
The global uranium industry is in a declining state. Price reporting companies describe repeated low and falling uranium prices. Australia’s uranium industry now accounts for 0.2 per cent of national export revenue — and that’s not counting profits that go overseas, due to the high degree of foreign ownership of companies mining uranium in Australia.
Chernobyl’s plight
Just where does South Australia’s Senator Nick Xenophon stand on nuclear waste importing?
Nuclear caution vital, Port Lincoln Times, 18 Apr 16 ROAD funding, nuclear waste and drilling in the Great Australian Bight are among the issues on the agenda for recently announced candidate for Grey, Andrea Broadfoot.
Ms Broadfoot was last week announced as the Nick Xenophon Team’s candidate for the seat of Grey and said she hoped to make the safe Liberal seat marginal to attract the resources the region needed.
“We’re very committed in the community about getting out and talking to people and finding out what their issues are.”
Speaking in Port Lincoln on Thursday, Senator Nick Xenophon said Ms Broadfoot would give current member for Grey, Liberal Rowan Ramsey, a “run for his money”…….
Ms Broadfoot said the potential for a nuclear waste storage facility at one of three sites in South Australia was another issue she was concerned about.
She said the region needed to look at the long term impact on the perception of the region rather than the short term monetary gains that may be made.
“We need to be really cautious and careful about the decisions we make,” Ms Broadfoot said……..
She said the community was divided on the issue, with even the former Liberal member for Grey Barry Wakelin publicly coming out and saying Kimba was not the place for nuclear waste.
Mr Xenophon said it did not make sense to have a nuclear waste storage facility in a premium agriculture region……http://www.portlincolntimes.com.au/story/3855319/nuclear-caution-vital/?cs=1500
Australia’s Attorney General George Brandis doubts the science of climate change
Brandis questions climate change science, Herald Sun, April 19, 2016 Attorney-General George Brandis has questioned the science of climate change, saying he’s not “at all” convinced it is settled.
Labor has seized on comments by the senior Turnbull government minister that there were a number of views about the cause of climate change, arguing it proves the deep climate scepticism in the coalition.
“It doesn’t seem to me that the science is settled at all,” Senator Brandis told parliament on Tuesday during debate on the tabling of documents relating to the CSIRO.
The attorney-general was addressing a recent CSIRO restructure – undertaken internally – which will move the focus away from collecting climate data.
About 200 jobs are at risk, however the overall head count is expected to return to current levels within two years………CSIRO head Larry Marshall said in an email to staff when announcing the restructure that the question of climate change had been proved and it was time to refocus on solutions to it.
However, scientists say without continuous data collection – some of which is undertaken by the CSIRO in partnership with the Bureau of Meteorology – huge gaps could form that could never be recovered.
Labor said the attorney-general’s comments were breathtaking.
“The commitment of Senator Brandis to addressing the impacts of climate change is so shallow, he hasn’t made up his mind whether it actually exists yet,” environment spokesman Mark Butler and shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus said in a statement. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/brandis-questions-climate-change-science/news-story/b64dbb4d1c70a5429142f02f4aca0b3c
Bleaching of Barrier Reef inevitable, unless govt policies change
Great Barrier Reef: Federal, Queensland governments not listening to scientists, ‘Godfather of Coral’ says, ABC News, By Stephanie Smail 18 Apr The Queensland and Federal governments are not listening to scientists about the mass coral bleaching hitting the Great Barrier Reef, a renowned researcher says.
Dr Charlie Veron, a prominent marine scientist who is known as the “Godfather of Coral” for having discovered about one-third of all coral species in the world, described the severe bleaching across the northern reef as “gut-wrenching”.
Dr Veron said he was angry the Great Barrier Reef was not being made a priority. “Governments are being anything but up-front — they’re behaving like a mob of drunken sailors,” he said.
Dr Veron said scientists had warned governments for decades about risks to the reef and frustration was building over state and federal approvals forAdani’s giant Carmichael coal mine in central Queensland.
“For heaven’s sake, take it seriously – listen to scientists for a change,” he said. “They never listen about climate change in general and now they’re not listening about the Great Barrier Reef.”
University of Queensland Professor Justin Marshall, who has been monitoring the reef for decades, also urged action. “I’m now just furious that the Federal Government is still sitting back not doing enough,” he said.
Scientists warn if policy does not change, severe bleaching would keep happening…….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-18/great-barrier-reef-federal-qld-governments-not-listening-science/7336134
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 