#NuclearCommissionSAust willing to pass huge costs on to future generations
we are bequeathing a stream of costs to our successor generations. They will be poorer as a result, and will have reason to curse their forebears for selfishly making themselves better off at their expense.
Nuclear waste dump confounds cost-benefit analysis, In Daily, 23 Feb 16 The proposal for a South Australian high level nuclear waste dump places too much risk on future generations, argues economist Richard Blandy.
The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission delivered its tentative findings on 15 February. It is seeking responses to these findings up until 18 March. I intend to submit this article to the commission for its consideration.
The only aspect of the nuclear fuel cycle that received the Royal Commission’s support in its tentative findings was the storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel, entirely from overseas, obviously. The Royal Commission described such an integrated storage and disposal facility as “likely to deliver substantial economic benefits to the South Australian community”.
I believe that the Royal Commission has got this wrong and that South Australia should not use part of its land mass as a dump for highly radioactive used fuel from overseas nuclear reactors (called “high level waste”) which, in the Royal Commission’s own words, “requires isolation from the environment for many hundreds of thousands of years”.
The reason why South Australia should not allow a nuclear dump within its borders goes to the heart of cost-benefit analysis involving many generations of people, literally tens of thousands of generations, in this case. Cost-benefit analysis works well when the costs are up front and the benefits accrue into the future. But it falls apart when the benefits are up front and the costs accrue into the future.
This is the case with the proposed high level nuclear waste dump. We are promised an up-front bonanza, after 30 years of construction of the facility, with a net present value of “more than $51 billion (at the intergenerational discount rate of 4 per cent)”. Continue reading
Aboriginal landowners shocked at plan for nuclear waste dump close to sacred site
Traditional owners in the Flinders Ranges say nuclear waste dump threatens cultural heritage ABC NORTH AND WEST MICHAEL DULANEY Traditional owners in the Flinders Ranges say a Federal Government nuclear waste dump could destroy significant cultural heritage and countless sacred sites around a permanent spring. The lush vegetation and birdlife along Hookina Creek, 30 kilometres north of Hawker in South Australia, stands out even among the imposing space and scale of the central Flinders Ranges. Its permanent waters are fed by aquifers that bubble up to feed ‘an oasis’ of reeds and large eucalypts bursting from the dry heat and dust of the pastoral landscape.It is an area integral to the lives of the Adnyamathanha people for generations and whose presence has left a rich cultural and archaeological record along the creek.
These waters are also just a few kilometres from Wallerberdina, a cattle station near Barndioota partly-owned by former Liberal senator Grant Chapman.
It is also one of six sites nominated to host Australia’s first nuclear waste dump.The Adnyamathanha people, who manage the Yappala Indigenous Protected Area which shares a boundary with Barndioota, said they were “shocked” by the prospect of storing Australia’s low and intermediate level nuclear waste so close to a significant cultural site.
Traditional owner Regina McKenzie said the facility would jeopardise their links to a place important for the present — a place where her children have learnt to swim and the family comes to camp — as well as the past, as seen in the tools, paintings and storylines that mark the area.
“The emotional stress we’re feeling is off the charts,” Ms McKenzie said. “We’re still the custodians here; we’ve always looked at it that way.”
The Adnyamathanha people are also worried about the risk from large floods known to hit the area, and elder Enice Marsh pointed out damage around the creek caused by the last flood a decade ago.
Ms Marsh said she feared the loss of her people’s heritage in the region if rising flood waters mixed with radioactive waste. “If we’re going to have that poison stuff here, even if it’s a low-level situation, it’s just absolute madness to put something like this near somewhere that’s so special,” she said.
“It’s everything; it’s a type of importance that you would never be able to describe. “The connection to this land for Adnyamathanha people is their culture, their customs; it’s their identity.”…….
With a final decision from the Government due by the end of the year, Ms McKenzie said the Adnyamathanha people would continue to oppose the expansion of the nuclear industry into their traditional lands.
“We’re feeling as though we’re being forced to do something we don’t want to do,” she said. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/traditional-owners-flinders-ranges-fears-on-nuclear-waste-dump/7195030
Aboriginal cultural heritage threatened by plan for nuclear waste dump in Flinders Ranges
Flinders Ranges communities divided over whether to host Australia’s planned nuclear waste dump , ABC News, By Nicola Gage 23 Feb 16 Communities in South Australia’s Flinders Ranges remain deeply divided over whether the nation’s nuclear waste should be stored locally.
Wallerberdina Station, north-west of Hawker, is one of six locations being considered by the Federal Government to house low-level waste…… Meetings have been held in the region recently and Flinders Ranges Council Mayor Peter Slattery said there were mixed feelings in the community…….
Traditional owners vow to fight against waste dump For the Adnyamathanya people of the Flinders Ranges, their land is filled with songlines and sacred sites.
Traditional owner Regina McKenzie said she wanted to send a strong message to the Federal Government that her people did not want a dump built locally. “We’re just hoping that it’s not going to be here,” she said. “The amount of archaeology and the amount of heritage that’s in this area is way, way too high. “It’s actually the site of our first storyline that runs 70 kilometres from Hawker right down to Lake Torrens, so it’s a very significant place for us.”
Adnyamathanya man Tony Clark helped successfully fight against a nuclear dump being built at Woomera a decade ago.
He said he would fight with the same vigour against any proposal to store nuclear waste in the Flinders Ranges.
“This is a pristine area and represents a dreaming story that we want to preserve,” Mr Clark said.“The white man preserves ancient things in museums, this part of our land is our museum.“So our great-grandchildren can come along with their great-grandchildren and show people.”
The Federal Government is expected to make a final decision on a site by the end of the year. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/flinders-ranges-communities-divided-over-nuclear-waste-dump/7194592
Senate motion today on nuclear waste dumping and community opposition
22 Feb 16 NOTICE OF MOTION
I give notice that on the next day of sitting I shall move that –
The Senate –
- Notes that
- the Australian Government has initiated a voluntary site selection process for a
national radioactive waste facility; - consecutive Ministers have confirmed that a such a facility would not proceed against the wishes of host communities;
- six sites have been selected for further assessment for shortlisting, including Hill End in New South Wales, Omanama in Queensland, Hale in the Northern Territory, Cortlinye, Pinkawillinie and Barndioota in South Australia;
- strong local opposition clearly exists at all six sites currently under consideration, and;
- Calls on the Government to:
- Acknowledge the opposition and lack of community support at all six sites
- Respect previous commitments on non-imposition and the importance of community consent and remove all six sites from further consideration
- Initiate a genuinely independent inquiry to investigate long-term stewardship options for spent fuel, reprocessing wastes, and other categories of radioactive waste, including drawing on international examples and experience;
- Investigate options for active waste minimisation, including increased use of non-reactor based methods for radioisotope production, and;
- Clearly reaffirm policy and legislative prohibitions on the importation and disposal of international radioactive waste.
SENATOR SCOTT LUDLAM
Australian govt lies about medicine and nuclear waste
Government information on nuclear waste is misleading and omits important facts. Failure of informed consent? Medical Association for Prevention of War – health professionals promoting peace 22 February 2016 – MELBOURNE:
Nuclear medicine has been highlighted as a key reason to have a nuclear waste repository. MAPW President, Dr Margaret Beavis observes that ‘The Commonwealth government fact sheet: Information for communities- Key questions answered’ is a gross misrepresentation and reads more like a puff-piece for the nuclear industry. The recently released brochure states “One in two Australians – everyone who has ever had a broken bone, heart scan or cancer diagnosis – will need nuclear medicine at some point in their lifetime.”
“This is very clearly misleading in all three areas” said Dr Beavis . “X Rays for a broken bone rarely require nuclear medicine, the vast majority of heart scans are done by ultrasound, and most cancers are treated by surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, none of which use radioisotopes. Even the assertion the half the population needs nuclear medicine is not credible.”
In addition ANSTO continues to insist that using reactors to produce radioisotopes is the only option. In January 2015 Canada – the world leader in radioisotope commerce – had a successful pilot project for commercial cyclotron production. Current regulatory testing and expansion will likely make Canada self-sufficient through cyclotron generation in 3-5 years. “Cyclotrons are a more reliable, safer and cheaper source of radioisotopes than nuclear reactors, and produce no long term waste, but ANSTO has not mentioned this” said Dr Beavis
Nor is mention made of ANSTO’s plans to increase reactor production (from previously 1%) to supply 25-30% of world markets, vastly increasing Australia’s waste from the generation of medical radioisotopes for international sales. “We already have more waste than we know what to do with” said Dr Beavis “We need community debate before massively increasing radioactive waste production.”
Earlier this month it was reported that ANSTO would stop making radioisotopes next year if a waste repository site was not found. Subsequently in Senate Estimates hearings it emerged this was sourced from a previous document and was not the case. These alarming claims have yet to be widely rebuffed by ANSTO, despite requests to do so.
Finally, the telephone information hotline for communities has been very poor. “Comments such as suggesting televisions and microwaves are radioactive when used are clearly wrong.” said Dr Beavis.
If the government is sincere about informed consent it needs to do much better than this.
South Australia”destined to be locked in to nuclear industry” – Adelaide Advertiser
The Adelaide Advertiser – mouthpiece of the nuclear lobby advises that we should all just give up – “see the light’ and let South Australia just roll over like a tame dog, and let the nuclear juggernaut roll over it.
we hosted the British nuclear bomb tests at Maralinga in the 1950s, and we have the world’s largest uranium mine at Olympic Dam.
So we are destined to be locked in to the nuclear fuel industry for decades to come. – Chris Kenny, The Advertiser 21 Feb 16
National Radioactive Waste Management Act overrides any local opposition to nuclear waste dump
Overriding opposition, Jim Green 21 Feb 16 Bruce Wilson said it would be unlikely that the federal government would override state/territory government opposition to a repository. But that’s exactly what the federal government did the first time round (1998– 2004). And that’s exactly what the federal government did in the NT (2005– 2014). As Wilson acknowledged, the government retains the power to override state/territory governments in order to impose a radioactive waste repository/store. The government should amend the legislation so it no longer has that power.
Wilson said the National Radioactive Waste Management Act is consent-driven ‘world’s best practice’ legislation. In fact, it gives the federal government extraordinary powers to override state/territory governments, councils, communities, Traditional Owners and anyone else.
A government rep said the government gave up on the Muckaty / NT site when it realised that community support was lacking. That’s false. The government knew that a majority of Traditional Owners opposed the proposed repository/store in 2006/07 but only gave up in 2014.
Kimba residents are all too aware of the distress and division that the radioactive waste issue has created in the past six months. Muckaty Traditional Owners endured the same problems for the best part of a decade. “We’ll probably have one of the first good sleeps we’ve had in eight years,” Marlene Bennett said when the government finally stopped its thuggish attempt to impose a radioactive waste repository on an unwilling community.
Julie Bishop, Christopher Pyne, Bill Shorten do their bit for the pro nuclear dance
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has indicated he is open to the idea as long as there is community support, an economic benefit, and reassurance of environmental protection….
Overall Ms Bishop is optimistic that public opinion is in favour of more engagement with the nuclear fuel cycle………http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/australia-the-ideal-location-for-nuclear-waste-dump-says-julie-bishop/news-story/c2655249dd4f655d05bf809d6d1795c8
Australia breaches Paris climate agreement, damages economy, by cutting CSIRO climate modelling
CSIRO climate cuts will breach Paris agreement and cost economy – report
Cuts to climate modelling and measuring research contradict Australia’s pledge to strengthen commitments to climate science, the Climate Council says, Guardian Michael Slezak 21 Feb 16 Cuts to the CSIRO’s climate modelling and measuring research will breach Australia’s obligations under the recent Paris agreement and will result in huge costs to the economy, a report by Australia’s Climate Council has found.
The report adds to a chorus of eminent bodies and individuals criticising the move, which the CSIRO made after almost no consultation with its own scientists or other research institutions.
Earlier in the month it was revealed CSIRO would be cutting up to 350 staff from climate research programs over two years. Over the following weeks, the organisation’s chief executive Larry Marshallexplained that would result in a loss of about 50% of the staff working in climate modelling and measuring.
In a report titled “Flying Blind: Navigating Climate Change without the CSIRO,” the Climate Council said governments and businesses relied on the CSIRO’s climate modelling and measuring work to make billion-dollar decisions and if the cuts went ahead, would be relying on “guesswork”.
The report notes Australia and the rest of the world agreed to strengthen commitments to climate science at COP21 in Paris in December. “The recently announced cuts to climate science mean that Australia has already reneged on one of its obligations under the Paris commitments,” it concludes.
It cites a number of examples of decisions and industries that have relied on the modelling and measuring performed by the CSIRO:………
An open letter signed by more than 2800 scientists raised similar concerns. In response to the chorus of criticisms, Marshall initially said the response was more like religion than science, and compared climate scientists to oil lobbyists in the 1970s…….
It was revealed in Senate estimates that CSIRO executives did not consult with organisations like the Bureau of Meteorology who depend on CSIRO modelling until 24 hours before the cuts were made public.
Even Ken Lee, the director of the division that would take the brunt of the cuts was only told about the cuts four days before they were announced.
The Climate Council, which produced the new report, is a crowd-funded body that seeks to provide authoritative information on climate change to the community. It was created after the Abbott government cut the Climate Commission when it took government in 2013, and seeks to perform the same job. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/22/csiro-climate-cuts-will-breach-paris-agreement-and-cost-economy-report
Michele Madigan points out the National dangers of transporting nuclear wastes
Nuclear waste danger knows no state borders, Eureka Street Michele
Madigan | 09 February 2016 “……..It would be a mistake for anyone living outside of South Australia to think that the premier’s plan is just a South Australian problem. Transport and containment risks are hugely significant. State boundaries are no guarantees of safety.
Professor John Veevers of Macquarie University notes the ‘tonnes of enormously dangerous radioactive waste in the northern hemisphere, 20,000km from its destined dump in Australia … must remain intact for at least 10,000 years.
‘These magnitudes — of tonnage, lethality, distance of transport and time — entail great inherent risk.’
In 1998 when the federal government identified the central northern area of South Australia to be site for a proposed national radioactive waste dump, it was not only South Australians who were concerned.
In 2003 the mayors of Sutherland, Bathurst, Blue Mountains, Broken Hill, Dubbo, Griffith, Lithgow, Orange, Wagga Wagga, Auburn, Bankstown, Blacktown, Fairfield, Holroyd, Liverpool, Parramatta and Penrith — communities along potential transport routes — opposed ‘any increase in nuclear waste production until a satisfactory resolution occurs to the waste repository question’.
The NSW parliamentary inquiry into radioactive waste found ‘there is no doubt that the transportation of radioactive waste increases the risk of accident or incident — including some form of terrorist intervention’. Continue reading
ARPANSA: a not so independent radiation regulator
Jim Green 21 Feb 16 Bruce Wilson (from the federal government’s Department of Industry, Innovation and Science) and other governments reps were keen to talk up the role of the ‘independent’ regulator, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA). But ARPANSA has a troubled history. Its troubles began immediately: the government allowed ANSTO a direct role in selecting the founding CEO of ARPANSA, so ARPANSA’s independence was undermined from the start.
Here’s a more recent example of problems with ARPANSA, summarised in a 2011 ABC article:
“A review of Australia’s nuclear industry regulator, ARPANSA, has found an improper relationship with the main agency it monitors [ANSTO]. The Health Department’s audit and fraud control branch has been investigating how ARPANSA handled allegations of safety breaches and bullying at the nation’s only nuclear reactor in Sydney. Whistleblowers had alleged ARPANSA was too close to the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO), which runs the Lucas Heights research facility.”
ABC, 8 July 2011, Nuclear regulator ‘too close’ to ANSTO, www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/07/07/3264086.htm
An independent regulator could provide some confidence. But a not-so-independent regulator with a poor track record …
More information about ARPANSA:
- www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/issues/oz/arpansa
- ANSTO / ARPANSA whistleblower saga: www.foe.org.au/ansto-whistleblower-saga-2007-ongoing
Nuclear waste dump plan for Kimba – govt ignores relevant standards and codes
Jim Green 21 Feb 16 Some comments on the 18 Feb 2016 government ‘information session’ in Kimba regarding plans for a radioactive waste repository and above-ground ‘interim’ store for long-lived intermediate-level waste.
1. The government ignores and breaches relevant standards and codes when it suits.
As a Kimba resident noted at the meeting, the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NH&MRC) ‘Code of Practice for Near-Surface Disposal of Radioactive Waste in Australia (1992)’ states that “the site for the facility should be located in a region which has no known significant natural resources, including potentially valuable mineral deposits, and which has little or no potential for agriculture or outdoor recreational use”.
So the government has breached the NH&MRC Code of Practice by short-listing the Kimba sites.
Following the so-called clean-up of the Maralinga nuclear test site in the late 1990s, nuclear engineer Alan Parkinson wrote: “The Department has claimed that burial is a safe disposal method consistent with “the [NH&MRC] Code.” This was the first time that the Code had been mentioned in relation to the Maralinga project. When three of the five authors said that it was not applicable (the other two were Commonwealth public servants and would not comment), the Department claimed that it did not have to follow the Code but had chosen to do so. It made this statement despite the fact that not a single requirement of that Code was satisfied.”
(Alan Parkinson, “The Maralinga Rehabilitation Project: Final Report”,
http://www.ippnw.org/pdf/mgs/7-2-parkinson.pdf)
So the government ignores relevant standards and codes when it suits, and the government breaches relevant standards and codes when it suits. Why would anyone trust the government to safely operate a radioactive waste facility in the Kimba region in those circumstances?
Alan Parkinson summarises the problem (keep in mind that he is pro-nuclear and a nuclear engineer): “The disposal of radioactive waste in Australia is ill-considered and irresponsible. Whether it is short-lived waste from Commonwealth facilities, long-lived plutonium waste from an atomic bomb test site on Aboriginal land, or reactor waste from Lucas Heights. The government applies double standards to suit its own agenda; there is no consistency, and little evidence of logic.”
(Alan Parkinson, 2002, ‘Double standards with radioactive waste’, Australasian Science, www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/issues/oz/britbombs/clean-up)
Next steps in the push for South Australia as world’s nuclear toilet
Friends of the Earth 20 Feb 16 The ‘Tentative Findings’ report is posted at: http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/tentative-findings/
The deadline for written submissions responding to the interim report is March 18 (see the Royal Commission website for details).
The final report will be published in May 2016. http://www.foe.org.au/royal-commission
9 News 19 Feb 16 The report is due on May 6 and the state government will not make any decisions before the end of the year.
That could include putting the issue to a referendum at the next state election, due in 2018
Nuclear Semioticians (sign experts): how to warn future generations of the wastes danger
they established the field of nuclear semiotics……. an “atomic priesthood”
The message walls would have the faces as well as simple messages
Temple of Doom: How do we warn the future about nuclear waste?, Triple J Hack, by James Purtill, 19 Feb 16 This week the South Australian Royal Commission released “tentative findings” recommending the state take more than 100 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste and store it in the desert for hundreds of thousands of years.
……..If the facility goes ahead, the designers may consider a problem that has baffled linguists and semioticians (sign experts): how to tell the distant future don’t dig up the dump?
Atomic priesthoods and ‘ray cats’
In 1991, the Department of Environment hired linguists, scientists and anthropologists at a cost of about $1 million to answer what is basically a conundrum of labelling. How do you warn far-off civilisations or scattered bands of post-apocalyptic survivors that invisible beams of energy emanating from the earth could kill them, and this was not a trick, there’s no buried treasure?
The report runs to 351 pages and has the (rather dry) title: Expert Judgement on Markers to Deter Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Wasteland Isolation Pilot Plant.
Here’s some of the problems they identified:
- Languages evolve too fast to communicate with the future: Few English speakers understand Old English, which was spoken about 1000 years ago.
- The meanings of symbols is too ambiguous: For example, the physicist Carl Sagan was invited to join the researchers, couldn’t make it, and wrote to suggest they simply use the skull-and-crossbones symbol to signify danger. But this symbol has only been current for a few hundred years, has meant ‘poison’ for the last 100, and is no longer very threatening. It’s on ‘pirate theme’ drink bottles.
- Even if they understand the warnings, future trespassers might not believe them. Curses associated with the burial sites of the Egyptian Pharaohs did not deter grave robbers.
Maralinga tipped for the site of Premier Jay Weatherill’s nuclear waste site fantasy
Planning 500 years ahead makes nuclear storage a difficult road, AFR, Simon Evans 20 Feb 16, It’s the first 500 years that bring the biggest worries about radioactivity when it comes to spent nuclear fuel rods.
After that, most of the radioactive elements have decayed, but they still need to be isolated from the environment in a deep underground nuclear storage facility for many hundreds of thousands of years. Everything in the nuclear waste industry has an enormously long outlook, including the promise of a $257 billion pay-day for South Australia . Correct, billion. That is if it’s able to traverse a difficult political road and build a sophisticated nuclear waste facility 500 metres below ground to operate over a projected 120-year commercial life……….
DEEP-BELOW-GROUND STORAGE
political considerations collide with the economics of the proposed plant. He says the $33 billion cost of the underground facility is so vast it would need to be shared between the state and federal government, which also needs to change legislation to allow it to proceed. Federal Resources and Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg gave cautious support to the plan if a political and community consensus can be developed……..
One submission to the royal commission by a private company called SA Nuclear Energy Systems has proposed the Maralinga atomic bomb test sites about 850km north-west of Adelaide as a good spot for an underground facility. Maralinga was used by Britain to test atomic bombs in the late 1950s, with the site later becoming embroiled in controversy because of the long-term health effects on the Aboriginal owners of the land and on military personnel who had been present. http://www.afr.com/business/energy/nuclear-energy/planning-500-years-ahead-makes-nuclear-storage-a-difficult-road-20160216-gmvchl#ixzz40e9J9qEw
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 