Strategy for developing Australia’s renewable energy
In Australia, survey evidence has shown clearly that renewable energy is wildly popular (research and development on renewable and other low-emissions technologies also enjoys wide popularity across all climate-relevant segments of society), whereas fossil fuels, nuclear power, carbon taxes and increases in electricity bills are very unpopular. One conclusion from this evidence is clear: Labor’s renewable energy frame is likely to be appealing, and the Abbott Government’s fetishisation of coal is likely to be unappealing.The first post in this three-part series compared the energy plans of Australia’s major political parties with the rest of the world. The second post considered the economics of Australia transitioning to a renewables-based energy system. When it comes to the politics of climate change and renewable energy, it is relevant to consider both strategy and tactics.
Climate change is not going to be solved with a single giant global treaty and a perfect emissions trading scheme. Climate action is not, internationally or domestically, a ‘one shot game’. As such, agents of climate action, including policymakers, must take seriously the idea that decarbonising global and national economic sectors will require a strategic approach. Continue reading
#NuclearCommissionSAust: an overview of submissions published about Radioactive Trash
So far the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission has published 44 Submissions about Issues Paper 4 – Management, Storage and Disposal of Waste
Surprise surprise! They haven’t published Dr Helen Caldicott’s submission. They haven’t published mine, (written under my full name Noel Christina Wauchope)
Well, as the import of radioactive trash is the main purpose of this shonky Royal Commission, we can expect that they will give priority to the pro nuclear ones.
The tally for the published submissions? – 29 in favour of South Australia importing radioactive trash, 15 against.
Of the 29 in favour- well – they ALL have a vested or very obvious commercial or career interest in the radioactive-trash-import project.
- 9 are actually companies or nuclear associations.
- 2 are government agencies, – ANSTO and the Commonwealth Government.
- 14 Individuals – all with either direct connection to a nuclear /uranium company, or with a political/career motive
- Australian Workers Union – a sad standout? I guess they have bought the nuclear lobby mantra of “jobs jobs jobs”
Nuclear is the wrong direction for SA: Environment groups enter submission to Royal Commission.
Three leading environmental organisations – Conservation SA, the Australian Conservation Foundation and Friends of the Earth, Australia – have submitted a detailed joint submission to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission which forensically details an extensive series of nuclear myths and false assumptions.
“South Australia’s future lies in renewable energy, not nuclear. It’s cheaper, safer and quicker to roll out,” said Conservation SA Chief Executive Craig Wilkins.
“This week’s axing of hundreds of jobs from Olympic Dam should raise huge questions about growth potential in the nuclear industry.
“With renewables, we can be in charge of our own destiny, not dependent on decisions made in corporate boardrooms on the other side of the world,” he said.
“Much of the nuclear promotion in SA is premised on the idea of a global nuclear ‘renaissance’, said lead submission author Dr Jim Green. “In fact, the nuclear renaissance is stone cold dead.
“There are fewer reactors now than there were a decade ago. Nuclear fuel cycle markets for enrichment, conversion and fuel fabrication are oversupplied. And as the continuing job losses at Olympic Dam demonstrate, the uranium market is extremely weak and will remain so for years,” he said.
As well as highlighting the contested and constrained status of the current nuclear sector the 248 page report makes a compelling case that the industry’s future will be no brighter.
“So-called Generation 3 reactors projects such as the French EPR and Westinghouse AP1000 are in trouble, with multi-year delays and multi-billion dollar cost blowouts,” said Dr Green. “So-called Generation 4 reactors are decades away and, as a recent report by the French government concludes, safety claims made by Generation 4 advocates do not stand up to scrutiny.”
Many environment, public health and Aboriginal groups have expressed concern that the Royal Commission is being used by the nuclear industry as a Trojan Horse in an attempt to open national and international radioactive waste dumps in SA.
“Australia has yet to find a lasting, responsible solution to domestic radioactive waste so it beggars belief that some are promoting Australia as the solution to the world’s nuclear waste problems.
“Proponents of a deep underground nuclear waste dump in Australia have been coy about the fact that the world’s only deep underground nuclear dump – in the US state of New Mexico – has been shut down following a February 2014 explosion,” Dr Green concluded.
Attachment 1: Two page submission briefing.
Attachment 2: Joint submission to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission by Conservation SA, Australian Conservation Foundation, and Friend¬¬s of the Earth, Australia.
#NuclearCommissionSAust plan rejected by the Australia Institute
Australia Institute rejects nuclear option for South Australia, International Business Times, By Vittorio Hernandez @ibtimesau on August 13 2015 The global debate on the safety of nuclear power continues, with South Australia joining the debate.
A plan by the state to set up either a nuclear waste dump or a nuclear power station was rejected by the Australia Institute due to major flaw in economic and technical assumptions for a domestic nuclear power industry. Richard Denniss, chief economist of the institute, points to lack of commercial scale of the technology being proposed as the most extreme assumption……..
Even nuclear power is not an option for the state, Denniss said, adding “Even if you totally dismiss issues like security, proliferation, safety, insurance and public opposition, nuclear energy is Australia is a very expensive and very slow option to implement.”
In its submission to the SA Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, the the institute said that if there was a way for other countries to profit from nuclear waste, it would have done so. It said the proposal would only “create a high level waste problem for ourselves in the hopes that we would be able to not merely solve it, but profit from it.”
The submission also cited experience of other countries that use nuclear power, such as France, which sources 80 percent of its electricity for nuclear plants. However, the 2014 net loss reported by Areva, the state-controlled nuclear power company, of 4.9 billion euro was even bigger than Areva’s stock market value of 3.7 billion euro.
The institute instead pushed for renewables such as solar and wind power, although Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott is also cold to the idea of wind power, particularly windmills which he considers ugly……. http://www.ibtimes.com.au/australia-institute-rejects-nuclear-option-south-australia-1460187
Nuclear power will be redundant, as renewables develop fast -Conservation Council of SA
SA told prioritise renewables, not nuclear 9 News, AAP , 13 Aug 15, Renewable energy should be prioritised over nuclear power, the Conservation Council of SA says.
Detailing its submission to South Australia’s royal commission into the nuclear fuel cycle, the council says the state’s future lies in renewable energy.
“It’s cheaper, safer and quicker to roll out,” the council’s chief executive Craig Wilkins said on Thursday.
“In the time it would take to develop an Australian nuclear power industry, it will be made utterly redundant by renewables.”…..http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/08/13/10/09/renewable-energy-makes-nuclear-redundant
Australia will have to improve on its inadequate greenhouse gas emission pledge
UN climate expert warns Australia’s emissions target should not be final offer, The Age, August 13, 2015 Nicole Hasham Environment and immigration correspondent Australia should not attend global talks in Paris refusing to budge on its greenhouse gas emission pledge, the UN’s scientific body on climate change has said, ahead of expected international pressure on the Abbott government to do better……….
In Canberra on Wednesday, Professor Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said the December talks in Paris were negotiations.
“No country can go to negotiations knowing or thinking, really, that the [emissions target] numbers cannot be touched,” he said. Professor van Ypersele said targets from each nation would be collated and assessed, adding the collective efforts may not be enough to keep warming below 2 degrees. That would lead to “a discussion on how to increase the level of ambition and who needs to increase it first”, he said.
While pledges from nations may not be formally negotiated at Paris, leaders will probably be urged to increase their ambitions, either during the conference or afterwards……….
On Wednesday Labor leader Bill Shorten said he would attend the Paris talks.
The Marshall Islands, a Pacific nation highly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, has decried Australia’s pledge as a “weak target” that erodes our international reputation.
Mr Abbott said the Minerals Council of Australia, which represents the mining industry, called the target is “ambitious”.
The target has been interpreted as an effort to placate climate sceptics in the community and the government, while doing the minimum needed to meet Australia’s international obligations.
Climate Institute deputy chief executive Erwin Jackson said Australia’s target was “not the end of the story”. “Countries in Paris will be under pressure to lift their ambitions,” he said.
“Both diplomatic and economic pressure is [also] going to build through time after Paris for countries to get in line with where the world needs to go, which is towards net zero emissions.” http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/un-climate-expert-warns-australias-emissions-target-should-not-be-final-offer-20150812-gixa98.html#ixzz3ijcqRmdX
My favourite Submission to South Australia’s Nuclear Royal Commission
suggestions for the Terms of Reference 16 Feb 2015 by Brett Burnard Stokes
That the Commission has come about because of a complex ongoing fraud, with
(a) false statements used in promotion of uranium mining
(b) false statements used in promotion of nuclear power
(a) theft from future generations
(b) spending of money by Government of South Australia
(h) false assurances of safety from exposure to radioactive poisons.
That the Commission has a duty to find that
5- the Royal Commission on Nuclear needs to be wound up and replaced by a Royal Commission Into Cetacean Deaths, to include Port River Dolphins and Sperm Whales and all the recent cetacean deaths in South Australian waters.
Philip Adams – Late Night Live – gone over to the nuclear lobby?
I was astounded to hear ABC Radio National’s Late Night Live programme last night. Philip Adams’ guests were two spruikers for the nuclear industry. Ben Heard, (occupational therapy graduate,now doing his PHd all about nuclear power – tutored by Australia’s top nuclear propagandist Barry Brook), and Hayden Manning Associate Professor with the School of Social and Policy Studies at Flinders University. Not a surprise that he’s from Flinders Uni – that seem sto bde abit of a hotbed for nuke spruiking, and with Prof Pam Sykes funded by DOE to find out how ionising radiation is good for mice.
SBS uranium documentary – mixed messages and a soft sell for nuclear lobby?
A Critical Look at ‘Uranium: Twisting the Dragon’s Tail’, truthdig, Aug 9, 2015 By Stanley Heller A week or so before the 70th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, I watched a curious documentary on PBS. It was called “Uranium: Twisting the Dragon’s Tail.” You can see it here. The presenter was a physicist named Derek Muller. What’s odd is that Muller concludes that nuclear power is not the way to go, but the way the film was edited, the message is the opposite: that nuclear power is relatively safe and that its technical problems are at the point of being solved. Continue reading
Research finds gender divide on opinions on nuclear power versus solar
More men back nuclear, women like solar: climate change gender divide found, The Age, August 10, 2015 Nicole Hasham Environment and immigration correspondent If the climate change debate wasn’t polarised enough, another divide has opened up: the attitudes of men versus those of women.
Climate Institute research published on Monday confirms Australian men are more likely than women to believe climate change is not happening, and to prefer nuclear and coal as energy sources. Women, meanwhile, are more inclined than men to support wind and solar power, and take the view backed by the vast majority of the world’s scientists – that climate change is real.
Ian Dunlop, a former international oil, gas and coal industry executive who is now a director of not-for-profit think tank Australia21, said gender differences were a “fundamental issue” holding back climate action.
“The male incumbency in the business and political world have not been prepared to engage with that discussion,” he said, deriding a dominant culture of “macho short-termism”. “I think women on the other hand are actually more conscious of the … world we are heading into and [that] we need to start doing something about it.”………
The United Nations has previously said women in poor nations bear the disproportionate burden of climate change, but are largely overlooked in the debate about how to address effects such as rising seas, droughts and extreme weather.
The founder of 1 million women, Natalie Isaacs, whose organisation encourages women to act on climate change through the way they live, said protecting future generations “is a hot button issue for women”. She said women made 85 per cent of consumer decisions that affect a household’s carbon footprint.
Mr Dunlop, former chairman of the Australian Coal Association and former chief executive of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, said women were more likely than men to see climate change as an “existential issue”. “The male approach to this thing is [often] saying it is all nonsense, it’s all just alarmism,” he said.
It has been argued that advocates for climate action should frame their message around defending the status quo, to encourage more men to confront the problem. http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/men-back-nuclear-women-like-solar-climate-change-gender-divide-found-20150809-giv5vk.html#ixzz3iZgnCE00
Abbott snubs UN climate talks in December
Abbott won’t attend UN climate change talk http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/abbott-wont-attend-un-climate-change-talk/story-fni0xqi4-1227478782154 PRIME Minister Tony Abbott won’t attend the United Nations climate change summit at the end of the year.
INSTEAD, he will send Foreign Minister Julie Bishop to Paris for the talks to nut out a post-2020 global approach to dealing with climate change.
Labor says if world leaders like US President Barack Obama can find time to attend there is no excuse Mr Abbott can’t as well.
South Australian Premier critical of BHP as the company cuts even more jobs
“Our strategy has always been about the diversification of the South Australian economy and I think that we’ve been working on many fronts. Whether it’s education, health industries, tourism, defence … this is an economy of many moving parts,” Mr Weatherill said.
SA Premier Jay Weatherill refuses to explain BHP Billiton’s ‘bad news’ after jobs cut announcement 891 ABC Adelaide , 11 Aug 15,
Mr Weatherill said the company needed to “front the media” after its announcement this week that jobs would go at the mine, including those of technicians, scientists, engineers and supervisors.
It follows on from the loss of 230 positions in South Australia earlier this year.
Mr Weatherill defended the Government’s record on embracing the mining industry and BHP’s expansion plans for the mine. Continue reading
Australian govt’s emissions target is flimsy, but Abbott has no intention of meeting even that
Never mind the target – can the government actually deliver? No.
The government plans to meet the 2030 target essentially on a wing and a prayer. There were graphs galore at today’s media conference, but the crucial one from Greg Hunt committed the government to extending Direct Action all the way out to 2030……..That’s the sort of obfuscation we’ve come to expect from the Abbott government when it comes to climate. This is a government viscerally opposed to meaningful action on climate change on any level beyond the symbolic.
To see why, judge the government not by its words, but by its actions.
Tony Abbott Has No Intention Of Reaching His Flimsy Emissions Target, New Matilda, Ben Eltham, 11 Aug 15 The combination of policies being deployed by the government will not help them achieve even the weak target announced today, writes Ben Eltham.
The news that the Abbott government has settled on an emissions reduction target for Australia out to 2030 heralds a new turn in climate politics in this country. The target, announced by Prime Minister Tony Abbott today, is a 26 per cent reduction on 2030 levels compared to 2005. It would put Australia at the back of the international pack – offering less than Canada, the United States or Europe. Only Japan is offering a smaller target.
On the one hand, of course, this target is manifestly inadequate. Continue reading
Winda-Mara – Aboriginal success stories that we just don’t hear about
Stories like Winda-Mara’s need to be told—they show how Aboriginal communities are more than capable of creating their own forms of livelihood, if given space to do so. Winda-Mara’s diversity has been key to its success—rather than being just a “health” or “employment” program, it approaches issues holistically, asserting that cultural heritage protection and community health are fundamentally linked. Now that my eyes are open to it, I’ve realised that other Aboriginal communities across the country have similar stories. Let’s find and share these stories, and support these communities in articulating their own visions for their futures.
The Indigenous Australia We Don’t Talk About http://honisoit.com/2015/08/the-indigenous-australia-we-dont-talk-about/
By Andy Mason on August 8, 2015 It’s not very often that most of us hear success stories from Aboriginal communities. The overwhelming majority of the mainstream media treatment of Indigenous issues focuses on the (very real) problems which affect Aboriginal people, problems which can seem so complex and entrenched that imagining solutions usually seems impossible. In a society still dominated by a collective denial of our violent past and oppressive present, a society which hides behind empty sloganeering about ‘progress’ as it continues to punish Aboriginal people whenever they articulate their desire for control over their own lives, any coverage at all can seem like a blessing. But I wonder if only ever hearing the negative stories helps to reinforce an understanding of the situation as intractable and hopeless—if it perhaps leads us away from imagining and articulating alternatives.
A couple of weeks ago, my partner and I were privileged to be able to visit Winda-Mara, an Aboriginal co-operative run by local Gunditjmara people in Heywood, south-western Victoria. Winda-Mara was established in 1991 as an Aboriginal health organisation with the aim of providing culturally appropriate healthcare to the community. Since then, the organisation has expanded to also include housing, education, employment, and environmental and cultural heritage management. Continue reading
Solar power is top choice for Australians, nuclear is last
Solar Power Still The Preferred Energy Choice Of Australians http://www.energymatters.com.au/renewable-news/climate-institute-solar-em4980/ August 10, 2015
The Climate Institute has released Climate of the Nation 2015, its annual review of public attitudes on climate change and its solutions.Even in the face of stinging attacks from the Coalition, renewable energy has become even more popular with the Australian public – and fossil fuels less so.
Among all energy sources, solar power leads in popularity at 84 per cent, up 2 points on last year. Women turned out to be the strongest supporters of solar energy; with 86% ranking it their most preferred choice, compared to 81% of men.
Solar power is followed by wind at 69% (up 5 points on last year).
The popularity of both gas and nuclear crashed 7 points to 21 and 13 per cent respectively; making nuclear and coal tied as least preferred energy sources. Continue reading
1 This month.
20 September –National Day of Action in Melbourne on the International Day of Peace
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
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 