Indonesia to deny nuclear waste ship access to Indonesian waters
Nuclear Waste Ship will be Denied Entry to Indonesian Waters http://www.globalindonesianvoices.com/23422/nuclear-waste-ship-will-be-denied-entry-to-indonesian-waters/ 05 Nov 2015 By : Leo Jegho
“Our investigation has found that the vessel had ever entered our seawaters when sailing to France. And now we are monitoring its travel back to Australia,” Bakamla Chief Vice Admiral Desi A Mamahit told reporters at his office in Jakarta, according to Detik.com.
Transporting the nuclear waste is BBC Shanghai, an Antigua & Barbuda-flagged general cargo ship. Admiral Desi mentioned two reasons why Indonesian authorities disallow BBC Shanghai passing through Indonesian waters on its way to Australia. The first reason is that the Indonesian seawaters are not part of the routes allowed for foreign vessels traveling from Europe to Australia and vice versa. The second reason is that BBC Shanghai carries nuclear waste.
BBC reported that BBC Shanghai is due to reach Australia by 27 November and that it is now in Africa. France-based nuclear company Areva sent the nuclear waste back to Australia.
The waste reportedly derives from the spent nuclear fuel sent from Australia to France in 1990s and early 2000s. French law obliges such nuclear waste to be sent back to Australia.
Forget climate change spin: Nuclear lobby’s aim is South Australia as radioactive trash dump
But the main game according to recent statements by Turnbull is to establish South Australia as a permanent waste dump for the world’s 350,000 tonnes of spent fuel containing more than 100 isotopes including plutonium-239 which lasts 250,000 years – one millionth of a gram is carcinogenic, americium, more toxic than plutonium and strontium-90 and caesium-137 lasting 300 years .
Increased uranium mining and more radioactive waste would be bad news for Australia http://www.theage.com.au/comment/increased-uranium-mining-and-more-
radioactive-waste-would-be-bad-news-for-australia-20151103-gkpyp3.html November 4, 2015 Helen Caldicott
The nuclear industry may advocate in Paris that nuclear power is the answer to global warming. When Malcolm Turnbull mooted the question about storing radioactive waste in Australia, I felt that I finally understood the aim of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission being conducted in South Australia. Then I wondered whether the nuclear industry is going to propose in Paris that nuclear power as the answer to global warming.
A curious situation is developing in South Australia that will have serious health ramifications, especially
for Aboriginal communities, and will also severely impair the state’s reputation for its superb wine and food. Continue reading
Fact-checking Senator Sean Edwards’s claim on future nuclear bonanza
FREE ENERGY – WITH NUCLEAR? http://www.factsfightback.org.au/free-energy-with-nuclear/ November 4, 2015
The claim
Senator Sean Edwards claimed that an expansion of the nuclear fuel 
cycle in South Australia could provide low or even no cost electricity, create a generation of high-paying jobs and do so without any subsidies from government. His plan is to take spent fuel from older nuclear power plants from around the world, and reprocess them for use in fourth generation reactors here in Australia. We could be paid to take waste which we then turn into fuel, providing free electricity.
The facts
So called fourth generation reactors are not yet commercially available but are predicted to become available sometime in the 2030s. If these reactors become commercially available they will be able to take spent fuel rods(currently treated as nuclear waste) from older nuclear reactors and use them to generate electricity. This effectively turns a waste source into a valuable commodity.
The claim that low or no cost electricity can be produced comes from the idea that other countries would pay South Australia to take their nuclear waste. This would mean that not only will South Australia pay nothing for its fuel costs but it would generate an additional revenue source from taking other countries waste and turning it into a commodity.
We will address his argument as three linked claims:
- Other countries will pay Australia to take nuclear waste for storage.
- Australia can build fourth generation reactors to use this spent fuel to generate electricity.
- This will result in free electricity, and perhaps even earn sufficient profit for the state that it will allow a reduction in taxes.
Claim 1
The expert advice to the South Australian Royal Commission into expanding the nuclear fuel cycle gave a time-frame of 25 years to complete a long term waste storage facility. The Generation IV International Forum expects fourth generation reactors – capable of using existing waste stockpiles as fuel – to be commercially deployed in 2030-2040. This means that any waste storage facility that South Australia develops is likely to be completed at about the same time as fourth generation reactors become commercially available. It is likely that South Australia’s own waste storage business would need to compete with other countries’ fourth generation reactors. Spent fuel will cease to be waste, and will become a commodity. Why would anyone pay South Australia to take a commodity?
Claim 2
The circular reasoning is clear. If fourth generation reactors work as hoped, no-one will pay South Australia to take their spent fuel. Further, if fourth generation technology proves to be expensive and difficult to maintain, South Australia would have locked itself into expensive electricity generation, having set up a waste import industry. In either case, countries with existing stockpiles of spent fuel have a clear competitive advantage over South Australia. It makes more financial sense for them to build fourth generation reactors next to existing stockpiles than it does to transport it half-way around the world. There is no good outcome for South Australia.
Claim 3
According to the US Energy Information Administration, fuel represents less than 15% of the cost of generating electricity with advanced nuclear power plants. Most of the cost is in the initial capital expense and maintenance of the reactor. Even if Australia received “free” fuel – a wildly optimistic hope – the cost of building reactors is still great. Wind and solar have no fuel costs, but no one thinks renewable electricity is free. Furthermore, the cost of setting up an international waste storage component would be extreme large. The Pangea proposal which looked at setting up a nuclear waste disposal facility in the late 1990’s included port facilities and a fleet of specialised ships. It showed that any waste facility would be very expensive.
The first ton of waste that Australia received would require a gamble of many billions of dollars.The findings
Perhaps the cheapest way to take a gamble on nuclear power might be to create temporary storage facilities now, use this brief window before fourth generation reactors are deployed commercially to get paid to take waste, and be among the first in the world to build the reactors which can use our newly acquired waste for fuel.
However, the risks are obvious. If fourth generation reactors turn out to have high costs of operation, we would be locked into expensive electricity. If they can’t be made to work commercially at all, we would have given ourselves a high-level waste problem for tens of thousands of years, a problem that may not have a solution. And if they are cheap and effective, most countries could build their own and bid for the fuel we are so generously taking for a fee. If we can plan ahead for fourth generation technology, so can everyone else.
Even at best, if everything goes just as hoped, the payoff for our gamble is paltry. A 15% reduction in energy costs from nuclear reactors, which already have a higher cost per unit of energy than new wind and solar generators, is far from “free” electricity. A waste industry, costing billions to set up, which will see its revenues killed off – in as little as ten years – by the very technologies we hope to champion, can hardly be said to provide “generations” of high-paying jobs. And we will inherit a nuclear waste storage problem that must be solved for at least hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of years.
The most risk for the least reward is not a smart business plan. Free electricity is no more than a pleasant dream.
Christopher Pyne joins Australia’s pro nuclear dance troupe
In February Mr Pyne said he did not support either a nuclear enrichment industry or nuclear waste storage in South Australia. “I don’t support a nuclear waste dump in South Australia,” he told the ABC.
Now, he has softened his stance, saying he will have a look at proposals to start an industry.
“I’m looking forward to the royal commission’s findings and if Kevin Scarce can convince the Australian public through his Royal Commission that we should go down the track of investing in a nuclear industry, well I’m interested in having a look at it. I’m not convinced but I’m happy to look at it,” he said,……
Mr Pyne signalled he may be open to nuclear waste storage, a politically explosive issue in the state.
“There are countries around the world which have managed to solve the issue of the storage of nuclear waste, so I think that is a bit of an old-fashioned argument,” he said.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull last month said Australia should consider getting involved in the nuclear fuel cycle of production, export and storage and Assistant Science Minister Karen Andrews said that developing a nuclear waste disposal industry was an option…….
Earlier this year Mr Pyne had cautioned of the political dangers of dredging up the issue. http://www.afr.com/news/christopher-pyne-signals-turnaround-on-nuclear-20151104-gkqgkc#ixzz3qeTZQrA1
Iluka Resources to subdivide West Victoria land with radioactive trash tomb
Miner Iluka Resources gets Horsham Council approval to subdivide Douglas mine land http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-04/miner-iluka-gets-nod-to-subdivide-douglas-mine-land/6910420 Horsham Council has approved an Iluka Resources’ application to subdivide land at its Douglas mine in western Victoria.
The approval is subject to a range of planning and environmental conditions.
“The mineral sands miner said it did not need some parts of the site, including Pit 19 where radioactive mining by-product was buried.
The council’s planning committee has been reviewing the application for the past month and it has now been approved with conditions. Future activities on the land deemed sensitive will trigger an environmental audit and previous use of the land would be disclosed to any future buyer.
The conditions require a plan which clearly outlines land previously used for mining purposes and the disposal of radioactive by-product.
Trans Pacific Partnership fails the environment, ignores climate change
Climate change missing from full Trans-Pacific Partnership text, The Age November 5, 2015 Gareth Hutchens “…….this is the first time Australians have had a chance to see what the federal government has been negotiating on their behalf for over five years.
Matthew Rimmer, Professor of Intellectual Property and Innovation Law at the Queensland University of Technology, told Fairfax Media it looks like US trade officials have been “green-washing” the agreement.
“The environment chapter confirms some of the worst nightmares of environmental groups and climate activists,” Dr Rimmer said.
“The agreement has poor coverage of environmental issues, and weak enforcement mechanisms. There is only limited coverage of biodiversity, conservation, marine capture fisheries, and trade in environmental services. The final text of the chapter does not even mention ‘climate change’ – the most pressing global environmental issue in the world.”
Controversially, the deal includes a clause giving foreign companies the right to sue Australian governments if they introduce laws they say have harmed their investments.
Dr Patricia Ranald from the Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network said the “safeguards” Mr Robb claimed he had won to prevent foreign tobacco companies suing Australian governments for pursuing anti-smoking policies do not appear strong enough.
“The general ‘safeguards’ in the text are similar to those in other recent agreements which have not prevented cases against health and environmental laws,” Dr Ranald said.
“Public health groups have influenced governments to include in the text the option of more clearly excluding future tobacco control laws from ISDS cases, which is important and has angered the tobacco lobby. But this also begs the question of how effective are the general ‘safeguards’ for other public health and environmental laws.”
Dr Rimmer also criticised the investment chapter, saying it was one of the most “labyrinthine” in the agreement……..http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/details-of-transpacific-partnership-finally-released-20151105-gkrivo.html
Even Westinghouse gives cost of nuclear reactor as $17.5billion
Global energy giant Westinghouse says an Australian nuclear power plant would cost $17.5bn November 5, 2015 ……..Ms Bowser, Westinghouse’s vice president of new plant project advancement, said construction of the company’s AP1000 model would take four years but deciding a site and various necessary approvals would take longer.
Big companies urge action on climate change (but beware of BHP’s nuclear lobbying
This sounds good, and it IS good. At the same time BEWARE of BHP Billiton. They are part of the nuclear lobbying to get nuclear accepted as the cure for climate change
Paris 2015: Australian corporate giants sign up for action on climate, SMH November 5, 2015 Peter Hannam Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald More than a dozen of Australia’s largest companies including BHP Billiton, Westpac and Origin Energy, have signed up to take long-term action on climate change.
The firms have joined more than 250 global corporations, boasting more than $US5.6 trillion ($7.7 trillion) in annual turnover, that have agreed on steps such as putting a price on carbon and buying 100 per cent of their electricity from renewable sources.
The pledges by companies, which also include ANZ, Commonwealth Bank, AGL, Infigen and Brambles, come just weeks before delegates from almost 200 nations meet in Paris to negotiate a global climate treaty aimed at keeping temperature increases to within 2 degrees of pre-industrial levels…….http://www.smh.com.au/environment/un-climate-conference/paris-2015-australian-corporate-giants-sign-up-for-action-on-climate-20151104-gkqk2c.html
#NuclearCommissionSAust THE APPEARANCE OF BIAS – NOT A GOOD LOOK
THE ROYAL COMMISSION INTO THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE: Thursday 5th November, 2015
Today the Royal Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle will be hearing oral evidence from London based insurance company Nuclear Risk Insurers, on the subject of insuring against a nuclear accident. On October 2015, Dr Timothy Stone, member of the Royal Commission’s Executive Advisory Committee, was appointed director of this company.
“How critically will evidence given by this company be treated, when a member of the Executive Advisory Committee is also one of its directors?” asked Nectaria Calan of Friends of the Earth Adelaide.
On Friday 30th October GE Hitachi gave oral evidence to the Royal Commission on their new PRISM reactor design. GE Hitachi is a global nuclear alliance between General Electric (US) and Hitachi (Japan). Hitachi is the parent company of Horizon Nuclear Power, a UK energy company developing new nuclear power stations, of which Dr Stone is also a director.
“Dr Stone’s connections with these companies highlights the broader issue here, which is his direct involvement in the nuclear industry, regardless of whether companies he’s employed by are giving evidence. He also owns Alpha-n Infrastructure, an elusive company with a partially built website which promotes nuclear power. This interest has not been disclosed by the Royal Commission on its website,” said Ms Calan.
Dr Stone is not the only Royal Commission member directly involved in the nuclear industry. Julian Kelly, its Technical Research Team Leader, is currently the Chief Technology Officer of Thor Energy, a Norwegian company focusing on the use of Thorium in nuclear reactors.
“If you’re directly involved in the very industry the Royal Commission is considering expanding, you potentially stand to gain something if a recommendation is made that this industry expand. At the very least there is an appearance of bias here that will undermine the credibility of the Royal Commissions findings,” said Ms Calan.
Cameco’s uranium plans in Western Australia stalled indefinitely by low prices
Uranium miner Cameco to move in WA when demand lifts for nuclear energy, Perth Now
October 28, 2015 North American uranium miner Cameco plans to advance its WA projects when demand picks up.
The company says it is frustrated by roadblocks to uranium mining in WA, particularly from the WA Labor Party, which may stop new uranium mines from going ahead if elected.
Cameco Australia managing director Brian Reilly said uranium miners would need access to more Australian ports to export its products in the future……..http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/uranium-miner-cameco-to-move-in-wa-when-demand-lifts-for-nuclear-energy/news-story/cb93a50d83666159909dfa00d4b94c7c
Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg expresses nuclear lobby’s religious belief in future uranium boom
Uranium will rebound: Frydenberg The West Australian, 3 Nov 15 New Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg has backed WA’s fledgling uranium industry to climb off the canvas as Australia works towards a free trade agreement with yellowcake-hungry India…….
WA is yet to mine any yellowcake, with uranium prices depressed since the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.Before the disaster the uranium price was above $US70 a pound, today it is $35/lb….
Australian media continues to confuse return of Lucas Heights wastes with plan to import world’s radioactive trash
Why does the media continue to confuse the return of nuclear waste to Lucas Heights (permitted due to contracts, in Australian law) with the ill conceived plan to invite the world’s radioactive trash in, as a supposedly $squillion dollar industry – (which is illegal in Australia)
WA site ‘ideal’ for nuclear dump https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/29976367/wa-site-ideal-for-nuclear-dump/ Andrew Probyn | Federal Political Editor | Canberra November 3, 2015, The man behind WA’s only short-listed site for a radioactive waste dump says the mulga scrub near Leonora would be ideal home for the world’s spent nuclear fuel rods.
Glenn Baker, who owns 100ha submitted by Leonora Shire Council for low and intermediate level radioactive waste dump, said the area had the stable geology, environment and remoteness necessary for a world repository of high level nuclear waste.
The South Australian Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission has been told the industry could be worth $28 billion over the next three decades, such is the global demand for nuclear waste storage.
Mr Baker’s property “Waarmba” is one of seven sites short-listed for a federal radioactive waste management facility to dispose more than 4200 cubic metres of low-level waste from hospitals and universities, and store almost 700 cubic metres of intermediate waste from Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney. Continue reading
Council approval for central Queensland solar farm near Baralaba
Solar farm proposal near Baralaba in central Queensland gets Banana Shire approval, ABC News, 2 Nov 15 By Jessica Lodge and Jacquie Mackay The Banana Shire Council has given approval to the solar energy company FRV to develop a solar farm near Baralaba in central Queensland. In September, the Central Highlands Regional Council gave the same company approval to develop solar operations at Tieri.
Banana Shire Mayor Ron Carige said the project could create up to 200 jobs during the construction phase.”It’s a great opportunity for not only for the shire but for the community around Baralaba itself,” he said.
“So it’s right near the substation at Baralaba and the total area is 730 hectares but the panels will take up approximately 660 hectares, so it’s quite a large project.”
Councillor Carige said it was a great opportunity for the region moving forward………..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-02/green-light-for-solar-farm-near-baralaba-in-central-qld/6904428
The Balunu Foundation’s healing programme of green energy with Aboriginal people
Australian insurance companies must come clean about climate change
Australian insurers keep customers in the dark about climate risks, report finds, Guardian, Lenore Taylor, 3 Nov 15 A WWF study shows Australian insurers tell customers far less than overseas insurers about the risks climate change could pose to their businesses Australians are in the dark about the risks climate change poses for the local insurance industry because Australian insurers don’t disclose enough information, a new report claims.
Climate change poses risks for the insurance industry through increased claims and potential impacts on investments held by the insurer to pay on future claims, and could cause premium increases so steep that homes in some fire, flood or cyclone prone areas could become uninsurable.
A study presented to the Actuaries Institute last year, “Can actuaries really afford to ignore climate change?” found claims were likely to rise but that it was difficult to predict by exactly how much. Bushfire claims were calculated to rise by between 29% and 116% by the end of the century, cyclones by up to 230% and river flooding by between 7% and 54%.
“Global warming will have significant impacts on the insurance industry through increased claims, reputational damage, decline in insurance affordability, and an increase in uninsurable sectors or geographies,” WWF spokeswoman Monica Richter said.
“Without full public disclosure of their climate-related risks and management strategies, Australian consumers and shareholders are left vulnerable to unexpected costs and regulatory shifts.”…….http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/02/ausralian-insurers-keep-customers-in-the-dark-about-climate-risks-finds-report
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 