Uranium mining companies are selectively buying off Indigenous people
Uranium Minefield: Middle Men Are Bleeding Aboriginal Land Dry, VICE May 11, 2015 by Jack Callil Buried in Australia’s soil is a third of Earth’s uranium, the largest reserve in the world. This means there’s big money in mining it. But standing on it are Indigenous Australians with native title rights to that land. The Martu people, only numbering only around 1,000, own around 136,000 square kilometers in Western Australia.
On the other side of the dispute is the world’s largest uranium company Cameco, which in collaboration with Mitsubishi, want to extend the Kintyre mine that was previously owned by Rio Tinto. It bears the name of an area cut out of the Karlamilyi National Park for mining in 1994.
Darren Farmer, a burly middle-aged Martu man, told VICE that “the Martu people do not want this uranium mine. Everybody has said no.” But that hasn’t stopped Environment Minister Greg Hunt, who last month gave Kintyre the green light.
This decision was made possible by the intricate mechanics of the Native Title Act. Indigenous Australians are forced to nominate a corporate body that represents them legally. In the case of the Martu people, theirs is the Western Deserts Land Aboriginal Corporation ( WDLAC). In 2012 WDLAC gave up Martu land for mining, and are nowworking with Newcrest Mining, Fortescue Metals Group, Reward Minerals—and Cameco.
WDLAC is currently under investigation for what VICE understands is the corrupt management of millions in mining profits. Continue reading
Australia IS obligated to take back wastes originating from Lucas Heights nuclear reactor
Why does the Australian government persist in the lie that the nuclear waste contracted to return from UK and France originated from medical/scientific research? The medical radionuclides are but a tiny, tacked on part of the Lucas Heights reactor, and they are short-lived and not requiring export for reprocessing. The returning high level wastes originated from the reactor’s own process.
Federal budget 2015: Why Australia’s nuclear waste legacy will cost $27 million May 13, 2015 Lisa Cox National political reporter The Abbott government will spend nearly $27 million over four years to return radioactive waste that has been treated in the United Kingdom to Lucas Heights.
The funding is part of an agreement with the UK to return one of two batches of Australian waste, which the government said was largely generated from scientific research and nuclear medicine over a number of decades.
The second batch of nuclear material was sent to a facility in France for processing and its return has been funded in budgets since 2010.
Australian Conservation Foundation nuclear-free campaigner David Sweeney said of the federal money: “We believe the waste coming back to Lucas Heights is the least worst way to manage it.”
“That is – it’s still not a good thing,” he said.
“But because of the expertise, security and the presence of a purpose built facility at Lucas Heights it is the most appropriate option for the nation.”……….http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/federal-budget-2015-why-australias-nuclear-waste-legacy-will-cost-27-million-20150513-gh0i49.html
We need a proper judicial investigation of wind farm danger claims
a judge should investigate the following:
1. ‘Abandoned homes’
How many Australian families have really “abandoned” their homes near wind farms,………
2. Medical records
The judge should request the medical records of complainants from periods both before and after the operation of wind farms……
3. Has there ever been a wind disease diagnosis?
Next, public notices should be placed in the press and publicised in the attempt to find any medical practitioner who has ever diagnosed even a single case of “wind turbine syndrome” in Australia.
4. Experimental tests
Claims made by prominent opponents of wind farms that wind turbines can rock a stationary car at 1 km, cause lips to vibrate 10km away, “bring some men to their knees when out working in their paddock” near wind farms and be heard 100km away could be easily subjected to tests under blinded experimental conditions……..
5. Magical mystery tour
Similarly, Senator Madigan may like to cooperate in organising a fully supervised experiment where those claiming to be adversely affected by wind turbines at distances up to 10km could have this claim experimentally tested……..
Let’s appoint a judge to investigate bizarre wind farm health claims The Conversation, Simon Chapman Professor of Public Health at University of Sydney 14 May 2015, On April 30, 2015, South Australian Family First Senator Bob Day published an opinion piece on his website titled Wind turbines’ inconvenient truth. In gotcha-style exuberation, Senator Day noted that wind turbine motors incorporate rare earths, which are often sourced from heavily polluting mining in inner Mongolia.
Highlighting in bold an excerpt from a 2011 Daily Mail report, Day emphasised:
Whenever we purchase products that contain rare earth metals, we are unknowingly taking part in massive environmental degradation and the destruction of communities.
The subtext was plain: green wind energy supporters are indifferent to the environment and suffering and so are massive hypocrites.
A small problem with this accusation is that by far the main use of rare earths are not in wind turbine motors, but in a wide range of electronics that include billions of mobile phones, computers, DVDs and fluorescent lights, all of which Senator Day uses himself.
Senator Day, who has no training or experience in assessing medical evidence, also wrote to The Australian recently that he had heard “compelling” evidence about the adverse effects of wind turbines on humans and animals. Continue reading
Sea level rise a serious consideration for Mid North Coast councils
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-13/mid-north-coast-councils-advised-to-take-sea-level-rise-serious/6465684 One of the authors of a new study into sea level rise is advising Mid North Coast councils not to cave-in to landholder concerns about property values.The study has found sea levels are rising faster than previously thought, and appear to be accelerating.Coastal councils, coastal planners, do need to take account of sea level rise in the 21st century – Dr John Church, CSIRO
It found seas have risen faster since 1993, compared to previous decades, and its observations are in line with projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
CSIRO Fellow, John Church, was among the authors and said the findings have major implications for coastal planning. Continue reading
Australia’s budget trashes action on climate change
There is hardly any mention of climate change in the budget documents, apart from the Coalition’s continued determination to remove the phrase from the government’s lexicon, and to dismantle the remaining initiatives of Labor’s clean energy package, presumably when (and if) it wins the election in late 2016/17.
spending for the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Climate Change Authority will be halted in fiscal 2016/17.
The Australian Renewable Energy Agency…— will also be absorbed back into the department and defunded.
Budget losers: climate agencies up in smoke, Crikey GILES PARKINSON | MAY 13, 2015 Like true conservatives, the Coalition’s leadership team thinks the best environmental strategy is to defund every climate science body but boost spending for a bunch of people to pick up litter.
Just a few months ago, the newly constituted and Republican-dominated US Senate was asked to vote on a motion that “human activity significantly contributes to climate change”.
They voted against it. By a slim majority, 50-49, the senior conservative legislators in US Congress collectively declared that, well, climate science is crap.
In Australia’s ruling Coalition, that view is noisily shared by Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s closest advisers, such as Maurice “it’s all a UN plot” Newman and Dick “I’m not a climate sceptic, I just don’t accept the science”Warburton, and of course some rogue members of Parliament such as Barnaby“it’s cold down here” Joyce.
Abbott, the man who made the climate science “is absolute crap” phrase his own, doesn’t like to repeat it 
so much in public these days. Indeed, he has in environment minister Greg Hunt a man whose principal role seems to be Minister for Saying That The Coalition Really Takes Climate Change Seriously, despite its policies that suggest the opposite.
The budget handed down on Tuesday night by Treasurer Joe “I don’t like wind turbines” Hockey continues the recent trend of Coalition policy documents that sweeps the idea that Australia should be acting — urgently or otherwise — on climate action under the carpet.
As CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology warn on extreme weather, Budget ignores climate change
Budget 2015: An assault on Australia’s climate programs http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/business/oyster-creek-nuclear-plant-offline-for-fifth-straight-day/article_bff63088-f7e9-11e4-98a9-1bde50cc13e9.html JOHN CONNOR LAST NIGHT’S BUDGET IGNORES THE GLOBAL REALITY THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS HAPPENING AND OTHER COUNTRIES ARE MOVING TO ADDRESS IT. IT’S A LIABILITY FOR OUR FUTURE.
AS THE TREASURER was finalising his Budget speech yesterday, the World Bank released a report onDecarbonising Development: Three Steps to a Zero Carbon Future (pdf) and our announced that El Nino was back — a big problem for Australia as global warming puts our already extreme weather on steroids.
These are hardly ‘radical’ organisations. Yet the Treasurer’s speech made no mention of policies to modernise and decarbonise our economy. There was no mention of climate costs and the physical impacts of climate change that CSIRO has now repeatedly warned are happening now, and will only grow. The Treasurer did laud the truly awesome power of our fossil fuel exports — sufficient to power Mumbai, Tokyo and Singapore, apparently.
Last night’s budget highlights a number of problems with the government’s approach to climate and economic policy. Continue reading
Climate Council exposes Bjorn Lomborg’s climate fallacies
The low down on Lomborg BY CLIMATE COUNCIL 13.05.2015 Last week’s announcement that the University of Western Australia would no longer house Bjorn Lomborg’s ‘Consensus Centre’ was a fantastic outcome for science. However, the fact that the Centre is still trying to establish itself in Australia is deeply troubling.Misinformation is harmful. Just as false information about the ‘benefits’ of tobacco misled the public and damaged health, so false information about climate change and its impacts can mislead the public and decision-makers, delaying much needed action to stabilise the climate system. Here are the top four reasons why Lomborg’s arguments about climate change are flawed. Continue reading
Victoria wants its own renewable energy target, in light of Abbott govt’s anti climate policies
Victoria demands government let it establish its own renewable energy target, Guardian 14 May 15 State wants federal legislation changed to remove barriers to establishing schemes similar to the national RET Victoria has demanded the federal government allow it to establish its own system to drive uptake of renewable energy, following a year of national inertia in the clean energy industry.
The Victorian government wants federal legislation altered to remove barriers to states establishing schemes similar to the national renewable energy target (RET).
Victoria has criticised the federal government’s attempts to slash the RET, which requires that 41,000 gigawatt hours of Australia’s energy comes from renewable sources by 2020, for stymying jobs and investment.
Allowing a “top up” Victorian RET would allow projects in Ballarat, Ararat, Warrnambool and Port Fairy to go ahead, according to the state government. Victoria gave up its own renewables target in 2009 to join the national arrangement.
Victoria’s energy minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, said the government wanted a 2020 renewables target of “at least 20%”. Victoria currently derives 13% of its energy from clean sources.
“Tony Abbott has put a strong bipartisan position on the national RET into the dustbin,” D’Ambrosio told Guardian Australia. “We’ve said enough is enough, Tony Abbott needs to get out of the way and allow us to provide industry confidence and facilitate billions of dollars in investment.
“If the target was, for example, 20%, it would create 1,400 construction jobs in Victoria. There’s too much at stake here, too much at risk. We’ve already forgone too many dollars and jobs. We were elected to create jobs and this is one sure way, along with our other policies, to get action happening.”
D’Ambrosio said she’d be happy to talk to states such as New South Wales andSouth Australia that might be interested in their own schemes to overcome what she called the prime minister’s “stubbornness and ideological zeal” over renewables………
South Australia has a goal of a 50% renewables share by 2025, while the Australian Capital Territory wants 90% of electricity to come from clean sources by 2020. However, these are aspirational targets, whereas Victoria wants a binding system to ensure renewables uptake.
Under current laws, a corporation “need not comply with any law of a state” that is similar to the national RET. Victoria wants this stipulation scrapped………….http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/14/victoria-demands-government-let-it-establish-its-own-renewable-energy-target?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=dlvr.it
Canadian nuclear manufacturer to make submission to #NuclearCommission SAust
The Australian pro nuclear Thorium lobby has asked the Canadian firm Terrestrial Energy to put in a Submission to the South Australian Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission. This company is trying to market the Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSR).
Australians need to be aware of the agressive marketing methods of the purveyors of these new, untested highly expensive nuclear gimmicks.
One Western Australian speaks out against radioactive waste dumping
Ben 14 May 15 As a resident of the midwest and has lived and worked on and around the area of Badja Station, I am totally against this idea in our back yard.
I as a former employee, have contributed to the success of GML during the exploration stages of the Karrara mining operation.
Thanks to that I got to see and feel this country and now regret the destruction that has already occurred
So I as one individual totally reject GML nominating this area as a facility for radioactive waste storage which will inevitably lead to establishing a much larger facility to accommodate international nuclear waste for avery handsome $$ profit to those involved.
NO PANGEA HERE !!! Please.
I hope and wish the Widi people are successful in their claim of native title of this area. It is beautiful country, surrounded by at least six vibrant, active towns / communities well within a 150km radius of the proposed radioactive waste dump as well as numerous exploration (because of the mineral wealth) and tourist activities in the area, not forgetting those living off and trying to protect this area
I object to, and will support anyone against, this proposal.
Crystal ball-gazing in South Australia’s Nuclear Commission ISSUES PAPER No. 3
Dennis Matthews, 13 May 15 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE (sic) ROYAL COMMISSION ISSUES PAPER THREE
ELECTRICITY GENERATION FROM NUCLEAR FUELS
Once again we have an issues paper full of pro-nuclear conjecture and crystal ball-gazing with statements like “research has been undertaken”, “under development”, “are proposed”, “soon to demonstrate”, “could potentially”, “could, if commercialised”, “may be”,” might encourage” and “could have”. The history of the nuclear industry is a history of overstated optimism. Policy makers would do well to stick to the facts rather than optimistic forecasts from vested interests.
Ionising has been constantly dropped from “ionising radiation”, especially in the section on operational health and safety. At best this is sloppy science but given the history of the nuclear industry, it might well be considered mischievous.
The word “nuclear” is frequently dropped especially when talking about nuclear reactors. This demonstrates the sensitivity of the nuclear industry to its image. Ironically, the nuclear industry appears to be loathe to admit that it has anything to do with its own scientific and technical foundation. Continue reading
Issues Summary: SOUTH AUSTRALIA’S NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL COMMISSION
SOUTH AUSTRALIA’S NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL COMMISSION ISSUES- SUMMARY -May 2015 Prepared on behalf of the Conservation Council SA by Dr Jim Green, Friends of the Earth, Melbourne. The Conservation Council of South Australia (Conservation SA) is the peak environment group in the state, representing around 50 non-profit environmental organisations.Australian govt turns from Northern Territory in search for vulnerable communities to host nuclear wastes
Nuclear waste dump unlikely in NT after land councils, stations refuse to nominate site ABC News, 11 May 15, By Anthony Stewart The Northern Territory appears unlikely to house the Federal Government’s proposed radioactive waste dump after major land holders fail to nominate a site.
The Federal Government began a renewed searchfor a site to store Australia’s intermediate-level nuclear waste and dispose of low-level waste in March this year. A formal application process closed on the May 5.
The ABC confirmed the Northern Land Council, Central Land Council, and Northern Territory Government had not nominated any land. Gilnockie and Supplejack Downs Stations also decided against participating in the process.
In a statement, the Federal Government refused to confirm whether any other organisation had nominated land.
“Details on nominations will be made public following the close of the nomination process and consideration by the Minister for Industry and Science. On current timeframes, this is expected in July 2015,” the statement read………
Anti-nuclear campaigner Lauren Mellor said it was the end of a long fight against nuclear waste in the Territory. “It’s very good news. We have spent the last decade with residents and traditional owners of the Northern Territory fighting a nuclear dump process,” she said. “The Federal Government has pulled out of the trenches in the Northern Territory.”
She said the fight had been pushed to other parts of Australia. “Unfortunately our concern is they will go and target another vulnerable community as they’ve done many times before to try and push them to house a national or even international dump,” Ms Mellor said.
Several organisations in both South Australia and the Western Australia have indicated they have nominated land under the process. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-11/nuclear-waste-dump-unlikely-in-nt/6461078
Iron ore miner in Western Australia applies to host low level nuclear waste facility
Gindalbie applies to host nuclear waste facility in WA’s Mid West By Emily Piesse Iron ore miner Gindalbie Metals has confirmed it has nominated part of its land holding in WA’s Mid West as a potential site for a low level radioactive waste dump.
The site, on Badja Station in the Shire of Yalgoo, has been put forward by the company under a national tender process by the Federal Government. The nuclear waste facility, which would be a national repository for low level waste, would be the first of its kind in Australia.
Most low level waste is stored in hospitals, universities and other private facilities but this would act as a central storage centre.
The Shire of Leonora in WA’s Goldfields has also confirmed it has supported an application to have the nuclear waste dump on a pastoral station’s freehold land between Leonora and Malcolm.
A spokesperson for Gindalbie confirmed the miner had submitted Badja Station to be assessed, but said it was too early to comment as the Government was yet to finalise its shortlist of sites.
Badja Station is currently the subject of a native title claim by the Widi people.
Widi spokesperson Clayton Lewis said he had no prior knowledge of Gindalbie’s proposal.”It was a bolt out of the blue … [we’re] just amazed that it’s going to happen or potentially going to happen in our country,” he said.
“We think if we can get a decent body of support at this early stage we can certainly contest it.”
A spokesperson for federal Industry and Science Minister Ian Macfarlane would not confirm whether Badja Station was under consideration, but said initial site assessments had begun.
Under the selection process, states and territories will not have the right to veto the Government’s site selection.
A shortlist of nominated sites is expected to be made public in July.
World Bank warns Malawi not to re-open Paladin Australia’s uneconomic uranium mine
Malawi warned against reopening uranium mine http://www.ventures-africa.com/archives/62631 May 12, 2015 – The World Bank has warned Malawi against reopening its only uranium mine, saying the project should be put on hold until global prices improve.
Australia mining company, Paladin Energy, is developing Malawi’s only uranium mine, the Kayelekera uranium mine, in Karonga, northern Malawi. The project was initial suspended in 2014 because of the then unfavourable price climate, but there are indications that the company plans to resume operations in the coming months. “Whether or not the mine at Kayelekera eventually resumes operations will depend primarily on future prospects for global uranium prices, for which the immediate outlook is uncertain,” the World Bank told Malawi in its latest report.Uranium from mining is used almost entirely as fuel for nuclear power plants.
In 2013, Malawi was ranked as the third largest producer of uranium in Africa and tenth in the world. It is behind Namibia and Niger in Africa.
Last year, uranium global prices crashed to $36, from $51 per pound. This posed a major setback to Paladin Energy Africa, having invested heavily on the premise that prices will climb to $70. The Kayelekera uranium deposit was discovered by UK’s CEGB firm and a feasibility study was subsequently undertaken in the 1980s. Paladin acquired the deposit in 1997, accepted a Bankable Feasibility Study early in 2007, and, following environmental approval, undertook a $220 million development. The mine was opened in April 2009.
Paladin Energy (Africa) Ltd holds Paladin’s 85 percent interest following the Development Agreement with the Government of Malawi in control of the remaining 15 percent. Kayelekera production commenced in mid-2009, and in 2012 production reached 1103 tU, followed by 1134 tU in 2013.
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 