Let’s examine the pro nuclear Submissions to #NuclearCommissionSAust: here’s one
An example of pro nuke submission from an individual representing in a company. His theme is that waste import would be a great economic boon to South Australia, but only if it is part of a full nuclear fuel chain. He quotes some significant safety risks, but seems to dismiss them as not so serious. He is delightfully enthusiastic, but vague, on the economic benefits.
Henry Askin sent in a submission on Nuclear Waste (Issues paper4 ) http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/app/uploads/2015/11/Henry-Askin-24-07-2015.pdf )
Dr. Henry J Askin Director, U-SAFE PTY LTD U-Safe Pty. Ltd. was founded in 2006 to promote the construction and operation of a safe permanent storage and disposal repository for the radioactive by-products of the nuclear fuel cycle.
Askin’s conclusion is vague on the economic result of importing nuclear waste, by itself. But enthusiastic if it is part of the whole nuclear fuel chain:
“The economic benefits will depend on the extent of commitment to the full nuclear fuel cycle, the cost of studying and building the repository, the operating costs and moreover the extent of funding provided by the eventual client entities. Estimation of costs is highly problematic, since there are no equivalent benchmark projects available……
It is not practical to establish an enrichment and reprocessing facility in the state unless in conjunction with nuclear power generation as well. These processes are intensive in electricity consumption and would result in very significant greenhouse gas emissions if conventionally powered. On the other hand, if it were decided to establish a full nuclear fuel cycle industry necessarily including the adoption of nuclear power generation, the economic benefits would be incalculable.
Effects would spread directly throughout the various areas of transport, high technology processing and fabrication of fuel rods, material supply and construction and the initiation of tertiary specialist training in all aspects of nuclear engineering, and spill widely throughout the general service and retail economy.”
Economics. He starts with enthusiasm for the economic benefits of waste importing:
“It is without question that if a best in class ILW and HLW repository was accessible the electricity utilities operating the nuclear power stations and the reprocessing facilities would avail themselves of it. This is evidenced by the 1998/1999 campaign by Pangea Resources seeking to establish a deep subsurface repository in Western Australia. The company was created by British Nuclear Fuels, Golder Associates and Nagra, the latter being a Swiss radioactive waste management entity. Management of the public relations was a spectacular failure, with both WA and SA introducing legislation prohibiting the establishment of nuclear waste waste dumps in 1999 and 2000 respectively.
However Pangea, now known as ARIUS, continues efforts internationally.”
“Considering the increasing imperatives to remove HLW from vulnerable temporary storage in the vicinity of source reactors, safe disposal would not be expected to be price or cost sensitive. In fact, the generators of this waste would in all probability be prepared to fund the construction of the repository in addition to paying ongoing storage costs for the operation and maintenance of the facility.”
But it would really only be economic if Australia first had the full nuclear fuel chain:
“If the industrial capacity to conduct such full cycle processing were to be established in the state, the magnitude of the resulting economic benefits would go a long way towards the acceptance of international waste and the concomitant construction of the deep storage repository. “
On the safe storage/disposal of nuclear waste:
Within salt domes or mines ……….The most successful of these is the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), opened for business in 1999 at Carlsbad New Mexico. ( ha ha successful?)
Drigg is a surface storage facility (ha ha currently threatened by flooding in Cumbria)
He then lists the technical problems in geology for waste disposal
On security risks:
“The principal security risks would appear to be related to protest activities by anti nuclear groups and more seriously, terrorist action. The former would be unlikely to penetrate the perimeter of the surrounding exclusion zone, and be limited to hindrance of transport logistics for limited periods. There is abundant experience in managing this category of essentially nuisance behavior and is not considered to be of concern.
Far more serious is the possibility of terrorist attack with the objective of acquiring ILW and/or HLW for the assembly of devices capable of area denial in populated or strategic locations, the ‘dirty bomb’ strategy. Although the material would be potentially lethal for those involved, in this age of suicide bombing this is perhaps not an inhibition. However if a deep burial repository were to be established in a remote semi desert area of inland Australia unauthorized access would be a major challenge”
On transport:
“The greatest vulnerability would lie not with the repository itself but with the waste delivery transport chain” “Transport of waste to the repository could pose hazards but is unlikely to adversely affect the environment to any greater extent than normal transport” (ha ha what about the huge derailment of sulphuric acid transport, Queensland, in December?)
Planned New South Wales solar farm may have Aboriginal stakeholders
Wind company seeking Aboriginal stakeholders for possible solar farm development http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-13/wind-company-seeking-aboriginal-stakeholders-for-possible-solar/7086478 By Kerrin Thomas The company behind the White Rock Wind Farm, to be located in northern New South Wales, is considering developing a solar farm nearby and is seeking Aboriginal stakeholders to assist in preparing a heritage assessment.
Construction of Stage 1 of the White Rock Wind Farm is expected to start soon, at the site 24kms west of Glen Innes.
70 wind turbines will be constructed initially, expected to produce enough energy to power 75,000 homes a year.
The proponent, Goldwind Australia, has now engaged a company to conduct an assessment of the Aboriginal heritage impacts of a potential solar farm adjacent to the wind farm site.
The company is proposing a 20 to 25 MW facility that would occupy an area of about 50 hectares, with power to be exported through the wind farm’s substation.
NGH Environmental has been engaged to seek information from Aboriginal Stakeholders with cultural knowledge of the Maybole/Spring Mountain area. The purpose of the consultation with Aboriginal people is to assist the proponent in the preparation of the Aboriginal heritage assessment.
Those involved in the process will be required to assist in the determination of the cultural significance of any Aboriginal objects or places within the subject area.
Registrations close later this month.
Queensland could get huge boost for its solar industry
Queensland solar farms in the race for federal funding http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-solar-farms-in-the-race-for-federal-funding/news-story/54e6f7e5880087d774e2661f94898c12 January 15, 2016 JESSICA MARSZALEK The Courier-Mail THE Sunshine State could be set for a huge boost to its solar industry with 10 large-scale solar farms vying for $100 million in Federal Government grants.
The projects earmarked for Queensland, including in Dalby, Proserpine, Oakey, Hughenden, Longreach and Ipswich, are among 22 nationwide invited to make applications to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA).
Environment Minister Greg Hunt said that the projects together represented a potential $1.68 billion investment in solar.
“The shortlisted proposals were chosen from a very strong field, demonstrating Australia is ready to invest in utility-scale renewable energy options suited to the 21st century,” Mr Hunt said.
Large-scale solar photovoltaic power is in its infancy in Australia with only three projects commissioned and three more under consideration. It is far fewer than in comparable international markets, with ARENA hoping the technology becomes more competitive in the future as costs come down and government support won’t be necessary.
How can #NuclearCommissionSAust? know waste disposal costs, when France doesn’t?
from Antinuclear Australia Observer, 14 Jan 16 When the French don’t know the cost of deep geological disposal – even within 10 billion Euro’s of an estimate – how can the SA Nuclear Royal Commission claim to know…
Presumably the higher estimate herein of circa 30 billion Euro’s is more accurate and less dependent (ie less rigged) on claimed future ‘technical optimisations’ that may not ever come to pass and shouldn’t be assumed in cost estimates for proposals for SA to take on International High Level Nuclear Spent Fuel Wastes…
The South Australian Nuclear Royal Commission has been full of interest and proposals for Storage of SNF without serious commensurate attention to the cost and implications of Disposal – a multi decade undertaking – and the real risk that in taking SNF waste for Storage the proposed Disposal plans can fail – just as they have and did in USA over last few decades…
EDF already needs to borrow money just to pay its dividend and is set to spend tens of billions of euros on upgrading its ageing reactors, building new nuclear plants in Hinkley Point, Britain and buying the reactor arm of Areva.
“This report is clearly negative for all nuclear operators, and most specifically for EDF and Areva”
EDF shares are down more than 44 percent in the 12 months,
EDF sinks to all-time low as nuclear waste cost estimate soars http://uk.reuters.com/article/edf-nuclear-waste-idUKL8N14W2RO20160112 PARIS | BY GEERT DE CLERCQ Jan 12 Shares in French utility EDF sank to all-time lows on Tuesday after the country’s Andra nuclear waste agency said that storage costs could be higher than EDF’s estimates.
Mirroring German utilities E.ON and RWE , which saw their shares hit decade lows late last year over worries about nuclear decommissioning costs, EDF fell as much as 7.3 percent before recovering to 4.1 percent lower.
A string of brokerage price target downgrades and French forward power prices falling to new decade lows only added to the gloom.
In a report released late on Monday, Andra said costs for the Cigeo deep geological storage project could be as high as 30 billion euros or as low as 20 billion depending on assumptions about different cost factors in coming years.
“There are different views on the calculation, more or less conservative, depending on estimates for future technological progress and optimisation,” Continue reading
ERA’s Ranger uranium mine – dead but ERA just won’t lie down
Did the Australian Labor Party get rid of Martin Ferguson as Minister For The Nuclear Lobby, only to replace 
him with Gary Gray -a new Minister For The Nuclear Lobby?
Opposition resources minister Gary Gray has said that a closure of Ranger would have “massive implications” for the economy of Arnhem Land and would be unfortunate for the uranium industry in Australia.
Energy Resources of Australia nears decision on future of Ranger uranium mine, SMH, January 12, 2016 Angela Macdonald-Smith Energy Reporter The future of the Ranger uranium mine in the Northern Territory hangs in the balance as owner Energy Resources of Australia nears a decision on a strategic review.
Rio Tinto-controlled ERA said on Tuesday it would update the market this quarter on the strategic review, which it kicked off in October after being advised by traditional owners that they oppose an extension of production at the mine near Kakadu.
The Mirarr traditional owners refused to back the miner’s bid to extend its processing permits beyond the current expiry date of January 2021.
ERA, 68 per cent-owned by Rio, warned then that it may have to write down its assets as a result. Some analysts calculate the impairment could reach several hundred million dollars. ERA, for whom Ranger is its only producing asset, is due to report its 2015 earnings on January 28…………. Continue reading
What if a nuclear waste train is derailed?
Derailed train in Queensland spills 200,000l sulphuric acid and diesel, Logistics Business Review 28 December 2015 Approximately 200,000l of sulphuric acid and diesel was spilled when all 26 carriages of a freight train derailed in Quarrells, 20km east of Julia Creek in mid-northern Queensland, Australia.
Emergency crews have started clean-up operation in heavy rain and three train staff sustained minor injuries in the accident. Following the incident on Sunday, Queensland Police declared an emergency situation covering a 2km exclusion zone around the crash site.
Queensland Rail said: “Emergency services attended the scene, however, Queensland Rail crews have been unable to access the site as the Flinders highway is currently cut off due to flooding in the region…….
Inland passenger services and freight trains have been affected in the region…… http://www.logistics-business-review.com/news/derailed-train-in-queensland-spills-200000l-sulphuric-acid-and-diesel-4763524
Train derailment sparks uranium transport fears http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-28/20111228-train-derail-chemical-spill-react/3749716 By Emma Masters An environment group says the derailment of a train carrying hazardous substances raises concerns about the transport of uranium through the Northern Territory.A freight train transporting containers of copper concentrate was derailed yesterday after flash floods damaged the railway track north of Katherine yesterday.
The Environment Department is investigating reports that containers may have spilled and washed into the Edith River.
Environment Centre NT director Stuart Blanch says the incident is a worrying sign. “This spill highlights a lack of due diligence by the owners of the railway and the people transporting this product,” he said.
“What would have happened to the Edith if there was a spill of uranium oxide into the Edith River?
“That is a real concern, with a lot more uranium coming up from South Australia in the years ahead.”
Meanwhile, Chief Minister Paul Henderson says he is satisfied that copper concentrate was the only toxic substance being carried by the train.
Mr Henderson says it is not radioactive material from a uranium mine in South Australia. “What the environmental impacts may be, I have not been briefed as to what they may be,” he said.He says government officials are on site to carry out a monitoring program.
Voters in key Liberal Coalition electorates strongly support renewable energy
Strong Renewable Energy Support In Key LNP 
Electorates http://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-news/renewables-australia-lnp-em5288/
January 12, 2016 The passion for renewables in Australia isn’t waning, but support for coal appears to be – particularly when it comes to new mines. This is a continuing trend among voters of all political leanings.
72-77% of voters recently polled in conservative electorates support Australia becoming a 100% renewable energy powered nation by 2030.
A ReachTEL-conducted survey of thousands of residents across the federal electorates of New England, Page, Warringah and Dickson in December revealed just 14% to 18% opposed a renewables powered Australia.
The polling of these voters also indicated a global moratorium on new coal mines had strong support; at 50 – 57%.
It will come as no surprise that Labor and Greens voters indicated even stronger support.
“Renewable energy is popular across the political spectrum. Part of Tony Abbott’s undoing was that he placed himself at odds with the electorate on this issue,” said Ben Oquist, Executive Director of The Australia Institute said.“These results show politicians of any hue who undermine support for a 100% renewable future risk an electoral backlash.”
Mr. Oquist also stated construction of new mines in a struggling market is “a recipe for economic disaster.”
“China recently announced a 3 year moratorium on new coal mines. Malcolm Turnbull can and should show the same commitment to deliver on commitments made at the Paris climate meeting in December,” he said.
The chances of a moratorium? Late last year, Federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg claimed there was a “strong moral case” for coal. Also in October, the Federal Government granted Adani re-approval to build the massive and very controversial Carmichael coal mine
Back in 2014, the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) issued a wake-up call to investors, stating the global coal industry’s economic models were flawed. IEEFA said major coal projects with a reliance on export markets such as India constituted a huge financial risk.
The Australia Institute is actively campaigning against new coal mines in Australia and says a local moratorium will send the strongest political signal that the reign of coal is over.
NSW Farmers launch a renewable energy calculator for rural businesses
Renewable energy calculator launched for farmers http://www.northernstar.com.au/news/renewable-energy-calculator-launched-for-farmers/2896307/ 12th Jan 2016 NSW Farmers has developed and launched an online calculator to help households and small farm businesses to test the financial viability of investing in solar PV and batteries.
The online calculator was launched to coincide with Tesla’s announcement that Australia would be the first market to receive its PowerWall battery which, along with other battery products, is expected to significantly accelerate the penetration of renewable energy across Australia.
NSW Farmers energy expert Gerry Flores cautioned households and small to medium farm businesses to adopt a conservative approach to this new technology.
“It’s important for farm business owners to consider whether energy storage is right for them before they make any substantial investments,” he said.
Mr Flores, a photovoltaics engineer who developed the calculator, said it could estimate potential savings and the financial case for several scenarios in NSW.
To help households and farm businesses better understand and utilise the calculator, NSW Farmers will hold a webinar on Friday January 22 at 10:30am.
For further information or to register click here.
For more information about the calculator click here.
South Australian launch for Aboriginal owned solar energy storage system
The products are being launched at Tandanya Aboriginal Cultural centre in Adelaide on Wednesday 2 September. Ms Oberon said Adelaide was chosen for the launch because of the council’s Sustainable City Incentive Scheme, which provides up to $5000 towards the cost in installing solar PV storage across the residential, business, education and community sectors. Funding for the program also has financial support from the South Australian government.
“We felt it was important to acknowledge the South Australian government and the City of Adelaide for such a forward-looking and innovative scheme,” Ms Oberon said.
The company is also hoping other state governments and councils will be encouraged to take up the idea of supporting the uptake of renewable energy storage.
The company’s core mission is based on the fundamental Aboriginal approach of stewardship of the earth and its resources. This means needing to shift out of high-emissions fossil-fuel derived energy.
Aboriginal-owned energy company one-upping Tesla By Willow Aliento, The Fifth Estate Friday 8 January 2016 The renewable energy storage game is about to be disrupted, with Australian Aboriginal-owned company AllGrid Energy announcing the launch of WattGrid, a new 10kWh solar energy storage system it says is around 30 per cent cheaper than the Tesla Powerwall.
Customers also don’t have to wait until 2016. Spokeswoman for AllGrid, Deborah Oberon, said the company expected to be making its first deliveries in the next two to three months.
The $11,999 WattGrid unit comprises an aluminium cabinet containing tubular lead acid gel batteries, and a hybrid 5kW solar inverter with battery management system that has load share capability with the grid and uninterrupted power supply capability.
The unit is also accompanied by a software app, WattsHappening, that allows users to view real-time information and interface with the system.
Beta testing has shown the unit can help solar owners maintain an energy supply profile that can be matched to the demand profile, potentially rendering drawing grid power unnecessary.
The Queensland-based company is also releasing another product it has developed, the PortaGrid. This is an independent unit comprising solar panels, storage, UPS, inverter and outlets that is suitable for remote and off-grid locations, as well as emergency situations.
The units can be supplied with an inbuilt weather station that will automatically close up the panels in the event of a severe weather hazard such as a cyclone. Continue reading
Popularity of Western Australia’s rooftop solar makes privatisation of electricity assets unlikley
WA’s rooftop solar so popular power privatisation not an option, says expert, Guardian, Calla Wahlquist, 6 Jan 16 Prof Philip Jennings, a renewable energy expert, says investors would be unlikely to be interested in unprofitable power networks Western Australia would not be able to privatise its electricity assets “even if they gave it to them for nothing” because the popularity of rooftop solar panels has made state-owned power stations unprofitable, a renewable energy expert has said. Continue reading
Leeton, New South Wales: plan for multimillion dollar solar farm
proposed for Wumbulgul http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-07/wumbulgul-solar/7072604 A $90m solar farm is proposed near Leeton in the New South Wales Riverina, to help power a new rail freight hub in the region. Photon Energy has been in discussions with Leeton Shire Council since 2012 about a solar development.
It’s now asked the state government to consider a proposal for a 100 megawatt plant, with the ability to double that output, next to the recently opened Western Riverina Intermodal Freight Terminal at Wumbulgul.
Documentation lodged with the Planning Department states the solar farm would be on a 140 hectare site on the Griffith Road and would take around a year to build.
Photon estimates the farm would have a life of around 30 years, after which infrastructure could be updated or the site rehabilitated.
The application says feedback from initial discussions in August is positive and a community consultation plan will be developed.
The Department is now preparing its requirements for the solar project.
Australia’s role in the big nuclear issues for 2016
Five big nuclear issues for 2016 — and Australia’s role in them, Independent Australia Noel Wauchope 5 January 2016, Nuclear issues got next to no discussion in Australia in 2015. That is sure to change in 2016 from five explosive factors, writesNoel Wauchope.
#1: Nuclear weapons “……….. In the event of nuclear war, Pine Gap makes Australia both a participant and a target.
What the experts call a “limited nuclear war” between India and Pakistan is always on the cards as both nations ramp up their nuclear weaponry. What does Australia do about this? The Turnbull Government, ignoring the advice of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT) and pro nuclear power expert Dr John Carlson, goes ahead with insecure uranium sales to India, thus contributing to that India-Pakistan arms race.
All these considerations will matter to Australia in a number of ways in 2016. An obvious example is in the diplomatic tightrope that our Government must walk in its relations with China — Australia’s largest export market.
#2: Indigenous rights……. For 2016, governments must have learned that Indigenous Australians are a force to be reckoned with and that non-Indigenous might join in that anti nuclear struggle. State governments, particularly Western Australia, have sought to strengthen the resources industries’ power to fight Aboriginal land rights. This has to be an issue for uranium mining in 2016 — whether mining developments can continue to ride roughshod over traditional Indigenous traditional land.
#3: Energy technologies Renewable energy is here to stay. ….. Australia leads the world in rooftop solar, with the highest portion of residential buildings with rooftop photovoltaic power. Despite government policy uncertainty, important solar research continues, community solar projects are developing, large scale solar projects are taking off, for example, in New South Wales. Wind power is now also taking off and has long shown its success in South Australia.…….. The nuclear lobby would have everyone believe that nuclear energy is the answer. But even they know that this is not a practical choice for Australia. In February, the South Australia Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission will be announcing its recommendations. Its chief, Kevin Scarce, has already indicated that it is not likely to recommend nuclear power.
In 2016, Australia still has the opportunity to become a leader in truly clean renewable energy technologies, as energy storage systems become a reality…….With 2016 as an election year and with the ALP’s policy of a 50 per cent renewable energy target by 2030, renewable energy developments form a challenging issue.
#4: Australia as the world’s nuclear waste dump….. the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission and all that will ensue from its recommendations. Commission head, Kevin Scarce, will no doubt cover his back with worthy statements about proceeding only if there is a social licence, but we can be pretty sure that this expensive year-long Royal Commission is not going to turn its back on its central idea — importing nuclear wastes. Meanwhile, in 2016, the ALP will have to face the push within its ranks to change its existing anti nuclear policy.
#5: The propaganda war….. there will be pressure on Australia’s academic and health authorities, as well, of course, on the mainstream media……. https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/five-nuclear-issues-for-2016–and-australias-role-in-them,8544
Only a small fraction of Lucas Heights radioactive waste is of medical origin
The incessant references to nuclear medicine to ‘sell’ the proposed radioactive waste repository/store amount to nothing more than emotive propaganda
10-20% of the current stockpile would be the plausible range for medical waste − closer to 10% if measuring by radioactivity (because spent reactor fuel is such a large contributor to total radioactivity) and closer to 20% if measuring by volume.
Nuclear medicine and the proposed national radioactive waste dump http://www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/issues/oz/nontdump/med Jim Green National nuclear campaigner – Friends of the Earth, Australia December 2015
To download a 2-page paper addressing these issues right-click here.
“As health organisations, we are appalled that access to nuclear medical procedures is being used to justify the proposed nuclear waste dump. Most waste from these procedures break down quickly and can be safely disposed of either on site or locally.”
− Dr Bill Williams, Medical Association for the Prevention of War
“Linking the need for a centralized radioactive waste storage facility with the production of isotopes for nuclear medicine is misleading. The production of radioactive isotopes for nuclear medicine comprises a small percentage of the output of research reactors. The majority of the waste that is produced in these facilities occurs regardless of the nuclear medicine isotope production.”
− Nuclear Radiologist Dr Peter Karamoskos
Summary
Proponents of a national radioactive waste facility (a repository for lower-level wastes and a co-located store for higher-level wastes) claim or imply that nuclear medicine would be jeopardised if the facility does not proceed. There is no basis to such claims – they amount to dishonest scare-mongering.
Proponents claim that most or all of the waste that the federal government wants to dispose of or store at a national repository/store arises from medicine, specifically the production and use of medical radioisotopes. However, measured by radioactivity, the true figure is just 10-20%. Measured by volume, the figure may be within that range or it may be higher than 20% − but it takes some creative accounting to justify the claim that most or even all of the waste is medical in origin.
In any case, the fact that some waste is of medical origin doesn’t mean that a national repository/store is the best way to manage the waste.
If the plan for a national repository/store does not proceed, medical waste will continue to be stored at the Lucas Heights reactor site operated by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) and, in much smaller volumes, at hospitals. Some waste is used in hospitals and then sent back to ANSTO (e.g. molybdenum ‘cows’ that have been ‘milked’ of the daughter radionuclide, technetium-99m − by far the most commonly used medical radioisotope). That is no problem since ANSTO and hospitals continue to produce radioactive waste and thus they have an ongoing need for on-site waste stores and waste management expertise regardless of the options for periodic off-site disposal.
Nuclear medicine is not being adversely affected by the absence of a national radioactive waste repository/store. Nuclear medicine will not benefit from the creation of a national radioactive waste repository/store. Continue reading
MP Bruce Scott now has “deep reservations” for Oman Ama as nuclear waste site
MP reveals “deep reservations” for nuclear waste site http://www.warwickdailynews.com.au/news/scotts-oman-ama-vow/2890770/ Jayden Brown | 6th Jan 2016 MARANOA MP Bruce Scott has weighed in on the proposed nuclear waste facility at Oman Ama, admitting he has “deep reservations” about the issue.
The outgoing Federal MP has been neutral on the issue since the small community, west of Warwick, was announced as one of six sites shortlisted for a nuclear waste dump.
Mr Scott has vowed to make sure the Oman Ama site does not go ahead if that is the wish of the community. “I believe a decision of this magnitude needs to be made by the local community, giving consideration to the impacts the proposed facility may have on the region’s farming potential,” he said.
“The proposed nuclear waste facility is dependent on broad community support. “If local residents and concerned neighbours do not support the proposed location, I will work with my ministerial colleagues to ensure the Oman Ama site does not go ahead.”
The comments come as Senate candidate Belinda Marriage called on both Mr Scott and Southern Downs MP Lawrence Springborg to represent the views of the community.
A vocal opponent of the facility, Ms Marriage said she had attempted to contact Mr Scott several times to express the feelings of the community, to no avail.
Ms Marriage, who runs a free-range pork property at Karara, said it was clear the people of Oman Ama had spoken.
“Mr Springborg, the Queensland state representative, needs to represent this community,” she said.”The overwhelming majority of the community are saying no to the dump. “How much clearer do they have to make it?”
Mr Springborg was unavailable for comment yesterday, however, in the past he has declared he had an “open mind” on the issue.
For those opposed to the facility though, the case is already closed. Ms Marriage said it was time to bury the Oman Ama proposal. “With the strong support against having a nuclear dump in our agricultural region, I urge the ministers to listen to our wishes and desist in trying to bully us into having a dump built in our rich agricultural history,” she said.
“The community wants to go back to doing what they do best, raising families and growing clean food, crops and fibres for the people of Australia.”
Mr Scott is encouraging concerned community members to have their say before the consultation period ends on Friday, March 11, at 5pm. Visit http://www.radioactivewaste. gov.au/proposed-sites#3.
Australian Ethical Superannuation finds the nuclear industry to be an unacceptable risk
Australian Ethical Super Dr Stuart Palmer, Head of Ethics Research at Australian Ethical. 6 Jan 16
We agree that the nuclear energy is a complex issue given the need to transition globally to low-emissions power. However, Australian Ethical has a strong negative screen on nuclear power for a range of reasons including:
· frequent association with nuclear weapons manufacture;
· radioactive pollution from uranium mines;
· the intractability of radioactive waste;
· the potential for catastrophic failure of nuclear power stations;
· security risks associated with the operation of nuclear power stations, and with the transport and storage of nuclear waste.
In our view these concerns outweigh the potential climate change benefits of nuclear power. Even with new generation nuclear plants we still consider the level of risk to be unacceptable, particularly given rapid advancements in renewable energy and storage technology.
I hope this information is helpful in explaining our approach.
–tinyurl.com/Nuclear-Uranium
1 This month.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
Australians deserve the truth
about AUKUS
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 