Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Greens: Nuclear Royal Commission findings: It’s all about the dump!

Royal Commission bubble burst The tentative findings of the Royal Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, released this morning tell us what we already know, according to Greens SA Parliamentary Leader, Mark Parnell MLC.

As predicted when the Royal Commission was established – this process is all about softening South Australians up to be the World’s nuclear waste dump.

We’ve known for years that the uranium reprocessing market is “uncertain” and that there is “no opportunity for commercial development” [Royal Commission quotes]. We’ve also known for decades that nuclear power for SA is “not commercially viable … in the foreseeable future” [Royal Commission quotes].

“The outcome of the Royal Commission isn’t at all surprising.  The Greens knew that the most likely result of this process was to support South Australia becoming the World’s nuclear waste dump.

However, the Royal Commission’s tentative findings on the nuclear waste dump are based on dubious economics, heroic assumptions and a big dose of guess work.  The Commission has identified a problem that lasts hundreds of thousands of years and proposed a solution with income that lasts just a few decades, but with costs lasting virtually forever.  If anything goes wrong in the future – we’re on our own.

“The Greens are calling on the Weatherill Labor Government to protect our State’s reputation and not leave our descendants to deal with a toxic future as their legacy.

Previous State Labor Premier Mike Rann fought off a Liberal plan for a national nuclear waste dump in South Australia last decade.  The current proposals are far more sinister and dangerous because they involve South Australia taking the most dangerous radioactive waste on the planet.

South Australians will now need to ask themselves and their politicians: “Is this the best future that we can aspire to?”

February 15, 2016 Posted by | NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016, politics, South Australia | Leave a comment

Anna Skarbek tells #NuclearCommissionSAust hearing about the opportunities for renewable energy

scrutiny-Royal-Commission CHAINMR JACOBI:  Ms Skarbek is the chief executive officer and executive director of Climate Works Australia since its inception in 2009 and she’s been leading the organisations working in analysing emissions reductions opportunities and partnering with business and government in unblocking barriers to their implementation.  She’s also a director of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, a trustee of the Sustainable Melbourne Fund, a member of the Australian Government’s Energy White Paper Reference Panel, and the Grattan Institute Energy Program Reference Panel. …..

She’s principally to give evidence today in relation to a report published by Climate Works Australia in September 2014 entitled Pathways to Decarbonisation in 2005, How Australia Can Prosper in a Low Carbon World…….

Skarbek, Anna CEFCAnna Skarbek :  Extract of evidence given at Nuclear Royal Commission Hearing 9 Sept 15 “…Based on today’s estimates, the real question is:  what are the technologies that you need in the 2040s, after we’ve had the 2030s, where renewables have become the majority share?  What we find is that there’s still a little bit of coal in the system that you see.  It’s begun to retire by 2030, but it’s not all gone.  So then the question is:  what replaces that baseload?  What we find is that renewables can do more than half of the system, based on, if you like, current technologies and management.  So demand management, weather forecasting, allows the intermittent sources of electricity to be managed quite successfully for over half, up to around two‑thirds, of the electricity grid…….

it was striking to us in doing this work how blessed Australia is for options in terms of transitioning to a low carbon economy.

We’ve modelled these three scenarios because we could be a 100 per cent renewable powered economy if we wanted to be……..

I see from how rapidly renewable energy technology costs have fallen that they often outperform what the estimate of future costs on paper today says.  So it’s possible that renewable costs could fall further than what we have published in this report because past evidence has suggested that’s certainly been the case historically.  In that case, renewables would become more competitive than the nuclear and the CCS options that we’ve looked at, unless those technologies also fell further…..”http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/videos/climate-change-energy-policy-992015-11am/

 

 

February 15, 2016 Posted by | NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016 | Leave a comment

Kevin Scarce – nuclear power not viable now, but will be later?

Royal Commission in to nuclear power for SA says it’s not commercially viable for now The Advertiser 15 Feb 16 Business Editor Christopher Russell NUCLEAR power for Scarce blahelectricity in South Australia is not commercially viable at the moment, the royal commission says…….“It would be wise to plan now to ensure that nuclear power would be available should it be required.”…….

The commission said nuclear power plants were “very complex systems designed and operated by humans, who can make mistakes”.

  It warns that there can be no guarantee there will never be an accident but goes on to say “the risk of nuclear accident should not of itself preclude consideration of nuclear power as a future electricity generation option”.

The commission considered the three major international nuclear accidents – Fukushima Daiichi in Japan in 2011, Chernobyl in the Ukraine in 1986 and Three Mile Island in the US in 1979. It said each accident had been thoroughly investigated, leading to lessons which have been applied to enhance safety.

Nuclear-marketing-continues

Commissioner Kevin Scarce said safety was paramount but successful risk management was not beyond SA’s capability. “We believe with the new technology developed since Fukushima, with appropriate regulatory oversight, that nuclear power should not be automatically ignored as a future generation technology,” he said.

In addition to receiving submissions and hearing from expert witnesses, the royal commission contracted two professional reports into the viability of nuclear power in SA.

Estimates of costs and a possible business case were studied by consultants WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff.Separately DGA Consulting/Carisway looked at how nuclear power plant in SA could be linked in with the national electricity market which is supplied by both fossil fuel and renewable sources.

The reports found demand in SA’s electricity market was in decline which would work against nuclear power……

The commission heard evidence about Generation IV reactors which use a different cooling mechanism and are able to take nuclear waste from earlier generation reactors……

Nuclear-WizardsThe PRISM – or Power Reactor Innovative Small Module – employs the latest technology but is still at an experimental phase.

Because this technology was currently unproven, the commission saw it as a future possibility and was not in favour of SA being the testbed or a first of a kind technology.  http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/royal-commission-in-to-nuclear-power-for-sa-says-its-not-commercially-viable-for-now/news-story/41b42ca6e2127a3f285005f1e3f61315

February 15, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016, South Australia | Leave a comment

BENEFITS OF SOLAR FAR OUTWEIGH THE RISKS OF NUCLEAR

 logo-Solar-Citizens- Solar Citizens calls on the South Australian Government to harness the sun to generate low-cost clean energy and kick-start jobs and economic growth rather than becoming a dumping ground for an expensive, toxic nuclear waste.

The findings come as new polling released today shows a majority of voters are more likely to give their vote in the upcoming election to a party supporting ambitious goals and innovation for solar”[1]

The preliminary findings of a Royal Commission into nuclear claim that

  • An expansion of uranium mining is “not the most significant opportunity” to develop  South Australia’s economy

  • “It  would not be commercially viable to generate electricity from a nuclear power plant in South Australia in the foreseeable future.”

  • Storage and disposal of nuclear fuel waste is “likely” to deliver economic benefits to the State.

“We welcome the Commission’s findings which shows that nuclear mining and power generation is not the solution for South Australia”, said Claire O’Rourke, National Director of Solar Citizens.

“The best way the South Australian Government can support clean energy is supporting households in making the transition to solar energy and reducing people’s power bills. The South Australian Government is leading other states with a target of 50% renewable energy by 2025 and has commissioned research which shows it can get to 100% renewable energy as part of its target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050 ”

“One in four households in South Australia now has rooftop solar and the power they generate from the sun supplies about five per cent of the state’s energy demand.

“These 190,000 South Australian solar homes are only the beginning of the global solar boom, as affordable, reliable home battery storage places lowering the cost of power bills in reach for the majority of households.

“It is important that the State Government makes sure it adopts policies that encourage further investment in renewables, and the jobs this will create.

“The state’s abundant solar resources have already caught the attention of US solar thermal giant SolarReserve, which in November made a bid to build Australia’s first-ever solar thermal plant with storage in Port Augusta.    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9kNVP3oyB-cQ2NQbnROWVlrUjIxbW1TaUhxTlpKZlNkNHNB/view?usp=sharing

February 15, 2016 Posted by | solar, South Australia | Leave a comment

Doctor travels 10,000km to speak at 6 sites shortlisted for radioactive trash dump

heartland-2Nuclear waste dump tour: Activists travel 10,000km to six shortlisted sites, meet community members, ABC News By Tom Maddocks  13 Feb 16 A doctor from Alice Springs has driven almost 10,000 kilometres to visit all six sites shortlisted for Australia’s first nuclear waste dump.

Hilary Tyler and fellow activist Meret MacDonald spent six weeks on the road, speaking to communities in the Northern Territory, South Australia, New South Wales and Queensland.

With a four-wheel drive and a basic camera, the pair documented their trip across the remote land where the Federal Government is planning on storing low-level and intermediate nuclear waste.

Both have been involved in the campaign against one of the proposed sites — a date farm south of Alice Springs.

Dr Tyler said they decided to do the “grand tour” because it was a national issue. “It was really interesting to talk to everybody because they’re worried about the same thing that people in Alice Springs are worried about,” Dr Tyler said.

“They’re worried about the really shonky process that the Government’s pursuing. People are worried everywhere about water. Australia is a dry country.” At Kimba, one of the three proposed sites in South Australia, dryland farmers said they were concerned about potential impacts on the agricultural industry.

“Through all this process it’s the wellbeing of our community, that’s the biggest concern at the moment,” farmer Peter Woolford said. “That has to be considered well in front of money.”

It was a similar feeling among residents at Oman Ama in southern Queensland, where some have been told the value of their land will plummet.”If those land values drop, the mortgage will be worth more than the land and that’s a tremendous worry to our community,” said local doctor Colin Owen, who runs an organic olive farm in nearby Inglewood.

A number of Oman Ama residents said there was a level of anxiety in the community……….

Another proposed site at the historic gold mining village of Hill End in New South Wales’ Central West wasruled out due to community opposition. Bruce Wilson, the head of resources in the Department of Industry, told a public meeting the Government had no intention of building a waste facility if there was no local support…….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-13/nuclear-dump-tour-takes-activists-to-proposed-sites/7166218

February 15, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Opposition to nuclear | 1 Comment

South Australian premier out on a limb, as national Labor dithers about nuclear policy

ALP IndecisionRoyal commission tipped to back radioactive dump REBECCA PUDDY, The Australian, Monday 15 February Australia could be a step closer to establishing a nuclear industry today when the interim findings of South Australia’s nuclear royal commission are handed down amid an increasingly favourable political landscape…… it is widely tipped to recommend establishing a high-level radioactive waste dump as a money spinner for the struggling state economy.

The findings are also likely to leave open the option of building a nuclear power reactor in the southern state………..

While Premier Jay Weatherill has committed to responding to the report before the end of the year, his response could be constrained by his party’s national platform. In July it was revealed that Labor had shelved a move to end the party’s opposition to nuclear energy through amending its national platform, which outlines the party’s opposition to nuclear energy.

Labor’s resources spokesman Gary Gray, who was leading the campaign to change Labor’s position, said at the time that the draft proposal to soften the party’s stance on nuclear energy had been set aside while the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission was under way.

The release of the commission’s findings will be accompanied by four technical documents commissioned by Rear Admiral Scarce, which will outline the costs and economic benefits of engaging in the nuclear fuel cycle.

Evidence provided to the commission over the course of its 34 sitting days included a business case that estimated an Australian nuclear reactor would cost between $3 billion and $6bn to build, with operations starting in 2030.

The findings will be released at 11am, with the first of a series of public meetings on the issue scheduled for tonight at the Adelaide Town Hall.

Environmental campaigner David Noonan said anti-nuclear activists would be present at the meeting but would be “deliberately polite”, to ensure the public’s focus stayed on the issue. He said neither of the major parties would advocate for a change in direction with nuclear power or storage until after the federal election, leaving the South Australian Labor government out on a limb.

“There’s a lot of caution there in the political landscape right now,” Mr Noonan said. “Josh Frydenberg will try to get his low-level radioactive waste site over the line before he moves on anything else.”

February 15, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, South Australia | Leave a comment

Dr Jim Green predicts that Nuclear Commission report will be a “foregone conclusion”

Friends of the Earth anti-nuclear campaigner Dr Jim Green said the contents of today’s findings were a “foregone conclusion” accusing the commission of bias.

“We expect that [the findings] will be mostly interested in the idea of making money out of importing high-level nuclear waste,” he said.

Professor Ian Lowe: –  “if the royal commission sticks to the facts and what’s proven, I think they’ll inevitably conclude there’s not a strong case for South Australia getting heavily involved in the nuclear industry,”

scrutiny-Royal-CommissionNuclear dump tipped for South Australia amid ‘desperate’ times, ABC News 15 Feb 16 
South Australia’s nuclear royal commission is set to release its tentative findings this morning, with experts from both sides of the debate predicting an outcome in favour of a nuclear dump………
The issue has long stirred emotions in South Australia, with former premier Mike Rann and former prime minister John Howard at odds over a nuclear waste dump at Woomera for six years before the proposal was ultimately scrapped in 2004.

Current Premier Jay Weatherill is more receptive to the idea and set up the royal commission, saying there were economic opportunities in the mining, enrichment, energy and storage phases of the fuel cycle.

Flinders University associate professor of politics Haydon Manning said the Premier was looking for political gains as the state struggled with unemployment.

“If you understand the mood of South Australia, there is a degree of desperation,” Mr Manning said…….. Continue reading

February 15, 2016 Posted by | NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016 | Leave a comment

Tasmanian Greens stick up for civil liberties, and the right to protest

greensSmProtest laws under fire as Greens to attempt to have legislation banished from statute books  http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/protest-laws-under-fire-as-greens-to-attempt-to-have-legislation-banished-from-statute-books/news-story/a7eec43b2cea4197b229e2a28fbc7c35 February 15, 2016 THE Greens will launch a bid to overturn the state’s anti-protest legislation, which they say is being used to stifle the democratic right to protest.

Acknowledging the attempt had little chance of success in the Liberal-dominated State Parliament, Greens leader Cassy O’Connor said the legislation needed to be overturned

Ms O’Connor said the legislation — which carries maximum fines of $10,000 and mandatory jail terms for repeat offenders — was being used against citizens protesting logging operations in the Lapoinya Forest — contrary to government promises about its intent.

“In recent weeks up at Lapoinya up in North West Tasmania, we’ve seen the Government’s draconian anti-protest legislation actually target the very people that Paul Harriss said it wouldn’t — mum and dad protesters.

“This Bill is not only highly political and draconian it is unnecessary — there is already legislation in Tasmania for trespass and public nuisance and we want to see this Bill banished from the statue books. “I believe this law will not remain on the statue books in Tasmania forever. It may be subject to a High Court challenge. It really has no place in a civil and democratic society like ours.”

Tasmanian spokesperson for Civil Liberties Australia. Rajan Venkataraman, said the Bill was a severe infringement on the right to peaceful protest. “The provisions in this Act are quite unique to Tasmania,” he said.

“Around most jurisdictions in Australia and indeed many countries around the world, they have provisions regarding trespass and public nuisance and certainly violent protest … but this kind of Act specifically targets protesters and specifically peaceful protesters. “The offences created by the Act and the penalties imposed are extreme and not in proportion to penalties imposed under other statutes, even for quite serious and violent offences.”

Resources Minister Paul Harriss dismissed opposition to the laws.

“It says a lot about the Greens that at a time when the state is a facing a number of serious challenges, they are most concerned about changing the law to allow their mates to try to stop others from lawfully harvesting a regrowth forest.”

February 15, 2016 Posted by | civil liberties, politics, Tasmania | Leave a comment

World’s best-known climate crusader Al Gore urges Australian Government rethink on CSIRO cuts 

FORMER US vice president and climate crusader Al Gore has added to the chorus of protest at plans to cull CSIRO’s ocean and atmosphere research positions, of which as many as 193, or 80 per cent, are in Hobart..
http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/worlds-bestknown-climate-crusader-al-gore-urges-australian-government-rethink-on-csiro-cuts/news-story/feda0e3aaaea4aba128e540d5c4de015

February 15, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics international | Leave a comment

A Constitutional Lawyer examines the arguments for thye UN decision on Julian Assange

Whether or not you believe Mr. Assange is guilty of a sexual offence, whether or not you think he is a self-publicist deliberately resisting arrest, the fact remains that the authorities could use less restrictive means without compromising the initial investigation into the allegations regarding his sexual conduct in Sweden

Liora Lazarus: Is the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Decision on Assange ‘So Wrong’? UK Constitutional Law Association 13 Feb 16 The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention handed down its decision on Julian Assange on Friday 5 February 2015 (A/HRC/WGAD/2015/54). It has been met with almost universal ridicule from a line of British officials, legal academics and the press. The decision has been described as ‘ridiculous’ by the UK Foreign Secretary, Phillip Hammond, and former Director of Public Prosecution Ken MacDonald argues that describing Assange’s conditions as ‘arbitrary detention’ is ‘ludicrous’. The press is equally incredulous. ………

This point of this piece is to correct the imbalance of coverage on this decision, which consistently fails to explain the arguments which persuaded the Working Group in the first place.

Julian Assange UN Ruling – Geoffrey Robertson QC Joseph Kotrie-Monson interviewed

Factual background

Mr. Assange is wanted for questioning in Sweden to answer allegations of sexual assault. The Swedish prosecutorial authorities have issued a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) which the UK authorities are bound to implement. Mr. Assange, after arrest of 10 days and house arrest thereafter, was granted asylum by Ecuador after his appeal against the EAW failed. This is when he took up residence in the Ecuadorian Embassy in 2012. Assange argues that he fears ultimate extradition from Sweden to the USA on the grounds of his involvement in Wikileaks.

This is obviously no small fear, given the sentencing and treatment of Chelsea Manning in the USA, and the decision of Edward Snowden to take up asylum in Russia. The Swedish authorities refuse to grant Assange any guarantee of non-refoulement to the US, and his right to asylum has also not been recognized by the UK or Sweden. ……..

Mr. Assange argues that he is not free to leave the Embassy; he would have to accept the conditions of his immediate arrest, his extradition to Sweden and his subsequent questioning there. He would have to undertake the risk that he would be extradited to the US, and the subsequent risks to his rights were that to happen.

The mandate of the UN WGAD and the test for ‘deprivation of liberty’ Continue reading

February 15, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, civil liberties | Leave a comment

Nuclear Royal Commission Special

Scarce wastes money
On February 15 the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission announced its “tentative findings”

a-cat-CANAnd guess what – Surprise Surprise!

After many months of such IMPORTANT pro nuclear persons getting paid large amounts of money to trip around the world, getting expert advice from the likes of France’s near bankrupt AREVA, and the crooked Canadian  nuclear hierarchy  –   they came out with the conclusion that they had already decided upon at the beginning:

AUSTRALIA SHOULD BECOME THE WORLD’S RADIOACTIVE TRASH TOILET!

The subservient media and corporate controlled governments of the rest of Australia have just shut up about this for nearly a whole year, in the pretense that “It’s only a South Australian matter”. They left it to the likes of the nuclear lobby’s puppet “The Adelaide Advertiser” to give information on this purely State matter.

text-cat-questionIs it just a State matter? Or is Australia as a whole interested in the Scarce plan for this nation to become the only place in the world to invite in the global nuclear industry’s radioactive poo?

And the only nation foolish enough to think that this will make us prosperous!

February 15, 2016 Posted by | Christina reviews, NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016 | 1 Comment

South Australian nuclear waste import plan simply cannot succeed

Given the wildly optimistic price for waste modelled by the mid-scenario, not to mention the 56,000 tonnes of waste left over with no costed solution, and with all the uncertainties in developing the new technologies required, the simple conclusion is that this plan is simply all risk with no reward.

No-one else will line up to take advantage of this “once in a lifetime opportunity”, because the opportunity does not exist. The plan simply cannot succeed.

Royal Commission bubble burst

The impossible dream Free electricity sounds too good to be true. It is. A plan to produce free electricity for South Australia by embracing nuclear waste sounds like a wonderful idea. But it won’t work.  THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE Dan Gilchrist February 2016

“……NO GOOD OUTCOME The free energy utopia depends on two new, as yet unproven technologies: PRISM reactors, and cheap borehole disposal. The Edwards plan appears to rely on these technologies not only being successfully developed, but remaining entirely in Australian hands. Competition is certainly not addressed in the plan.

 It would be more realistic to assume that other countries would act on the same opportunities, if indeed they arose.
To implement the Edwards plan, Australia would need to spend around $10 billion to set up temporary storage, a reprocessing plant, and a pair of PRISMs. We would also need to import and store spent fuel.
 Furthermore, the importation of spent fuel would likely require a dedicated port and a fleet of specialised ships, and this is not costed in the plan.
The plan calls for spent fuel to begin to be imported and loaded into the dry-cask facility six years after the commencement of construction. It plans for the first PRISMs to be completed four years later. We could reasonably expect to have good data on the costs and methods of borehole storage well within this ten-year timeframe – as would any potential customers.
Having spent $10 billion (not including the cost of shipping or a new port) and ten years, and with several thousand tonnes of spent fuel in storage,42 there are, broadly speaking, two foreseeable outcomes:
1. If borehole and PRISM technologies, having been piloted commercially by Australia, are found to be as cheap and effective as hoped, other countries will have the opportunity to either use them themselves, or undercut our vast profits. It is not realistic to believe that Australia would continue to be paid five to ten times the cost of permanent storage alone. 43 Even if the hoped-for customers were nations that couldn’t use borehole or PRISM technology, a number of other countries could.
 2. If either technology is found to be too expensive for commercial deployment, or to have unforeseen safety problems, Australia will have locked itself into an expensive method of electricity generation with perhaps no longterm solution for the acquired waste.
In short: either the technology works and we face stiff competition, both from other countries and the low costs of the technologies themselves – in which case the numbers in the plan are completely wrong; or the technology doesn’t work as expected – in which case the numbers in the plan are completely wrong.
And in either case, the plan has still failed to cost a permanent solution for 56,000 tons of high-level waste – over 90 percent of the material taken in. The profits from the scheme would be spent in the early decades to subsidise the reactors and lower taxes, leaving future generations with a massive problem, and no plan or money left to deal with it.
There is no good outcome here.
Even if the technology succeeds, the business plan is fatally flawed. It is, in effect, a self-defeating plan. If it works, our customer base and commodity price dries up, killed by the very technologies we would have piloted at our own risk and at great expense.
Given the wildly optimistic price for waste modelled by the mid-scenario, not to mention the 56,000 tonnes of waste left over with no costed solution, and with all the uncertainties in developing the new technologies required, the simple conclusion is that this plan is simply all risk with no reward. No-one else will line up to take advantage of this “once in a lifetime opportunity”, because the opportunity does not exist. The plan simply cannot succeed. https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/conservationsa/pages/496/attachments/original/1455085726/P222_Nuclear_waste_impossible_dream_FINAL.pdf?1455085726

February 13, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, NUCLEAR ROYAL COMMISSION 2016, reference, South Australia, Submissions to Royal Commission S.A., wastes | 7 Comments

Northern Territory Mine Regulator gives a free pass for uranium mining companies to pollute

regulatory-capture-1What is a regulator for again? http://linkis.com/greensmps.org.au/1cNkL 12 Feb 2016 The Northern Territory mine regulator is inviting uranium companies to ignore any environmental safeguards with their refusal to prosecute Energy Resources Australia, the Australian Greens said today.

“After more than two years, the NT regulator has given ERA a pass. The Ranger mine leaked nearly 1.5 million litres of radioactive acidic sludge into the plant area, and could have got people killed,” Australian Greens Deputy Leader Senator Scott Ludlam said today.

“Under estimates questioning we were told that the report into the leach tank spill was kept from the public while a decision was made about whether or not to prosecute. It’s hard to envisage a scenario that warranted the application of the full force of the law more than this one.

“The regulator failed to prevent the spill, they took years to deliberate, and came up with nothing. They’ve essentially announced to mining companies in the NT that there are no legal consequences for catastrophic negligence,” Senator Ludlam said.

“We urge the NT government to reverse this decision immediately and force ERA to be accountable.”

February 13, 2016 Posted by | Northern Territory, politics, secrets and lies, uranium | 1 Comment

No charges over radioactive spill! How nice for ERA!

Ranger tank collapse 13ERA radioactive slurry spill: NT Government won’t lay charges against miner A uranium miner has avoided charges over a 2013 spill of 1,400 cubic metres of radioactive slurry at its Ranger mine in the Northern Territory. ABC News 12 Feb 16 

Key Points:

  • Report focuses on radioactive spill from 2013 at Ranger Mine near Kakadu NP
  • NT Government says not in public interest to lay charges
  • Mining company Energy Resources Australia welcomes findings

The spill at the Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) Ranger uranium mine, which is surrounded by Kakadu National Park, saw a holding tank collapse on December 7, 2013. Workers discovered a hole in the side of the tank and were evacuated before the tank burst and the slurry escaped.

ERA said no-one was injured and no uranium leaked off the site into Kakadu.

The NT Government on Friday released the findings of its Completed Investigation Into Failure of Leach Tank 1 Ranger Uranium Mine.

Department of Mines and Energy chief executive, Ron Kelly, explained in the report that he accepted the “admission of fault by ERA to the unauthorised spill as a result of the failure of Leach Tank 1”.

“However I have decided that it is not in the public interest to lay a charge against ERA under Section 33 of the NT Mining Management Act [MMA],” he said……..

EDO blames ‘lack of political will’ for failure to prosecute

Principal lawyer with the non-profit Environmental Defenders Office in the NT, David Morris, said the Government did not need to show that ERA intended for the spill to occur to successfully prosecute the miner.

“The reason they are not bringing this prosecution? I think, lack of political will,” Mr Morris said.

“What this decision does is send a message to the Northern Territory community that we are not going to hold companies to account for a really poor standard of quality control on their mine sites,” Mr Morris said.

He said being forced to shut down the site was not a penalty.

“That is the cost of doing business when you do business poorly.” http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-12/era-avoids-charges-over-radioactive-slurry-spill/7163560

February 13, 2016 Posted by | Northern Territory, politics | Leave a comment

Independent Australia cracks the mystery of “international award” to (Anti) Environment Minister Greg Hunt

Hunt-direct-actionMystery explained: Hunt’s award handed out by the oil industry, Independent Australia  Lachlan Barker 12 February 2016, MANY THIS week, myself definitely included, were gobsmacked by Greg Hunt receiving an award for – get your sick bags ready everyone – “Best Minister in the World“.

When I first saw this, again like so many of you, I thought it was satire, perhaps done by that excellent SBS site The Backburner. I’ve repeatedly been taken in by this site, so plausible are their funny stories and so appalling is our federal government.

But no, when we all got off the floor, the stories were indeed real and Hunt had, indeed, been given this award.

However, I knew there was something rotten here and so I thought I better find out how this bizarre occurrence came about. So I went to the site of the organisation that gave out the award, the World Government Summit. There on the home page is a link to “Partners“, so I clicked on that and discovered that the intriguingly entitled ‘Entrepreneurship Partner’ is the Abraaj Group.

So I clicked on that and we come to the Abraaj page and discover their portfolio. Among them are such heartwarming industries as Chemicals, Metals and Industrials,PharmaceuticalsConstruction and Manufacturing and of course Energy, Mining and Utilities.

[Author lists the companies, with their logos]

One company, Auro Mira Energy is focussed on renewables; they pursue hydro and biomass power generation in India.

However, the rest is largely fossil fuels……..

 

So there you have it mystery solved, Greg Hunt’s award was sponsored in large part by the energy industry, most prominently oil.

Once I found this out, it kind of made Hunt’s award make sense.

The award was for “Best Minister in the World” and so if you are going to pick a minister who does more than any other to enable the continued and increased use of fossil fuels, then clearly Greg Hunt is your man………

Greg Hunt is the best at enabling ongoing and increasing use of fossil fuels, against all financial and global ecological sense. So they can give him an award, as long as it’s for “Most Destructive Environment Minister the Earth has ever Known”.

Lachlan Barker blogs at cyclonecharlie88.blogspot.com.au. You can follow him on Twitter at@cyclonecharlie8https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/mystery-explained-hunts-award-handed-out-by-the-oil-industry,8672

February 13, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, politics international, spinbuster | 2 Comments