Business South Australia’s Nigel McBride touts nuclear waste importing plan
Homer Simpson and nuclear politics as France shows the way for SA, Fin Rev 23 May 16 by Simon Evans Nigel McBride, the chief executive of Business SA, the organisation that oversees the interests of more than 46,000 businesses in South Australia, has just returned from Finland and France, where he researched the nuclear waste industry.
He is convinced there would be no detrimental impact to the image of prime wine regions such as the Barossa Valley, McLaren Vale, Clare Valley and the Coonawarra from having an underground storage facility elsewhere in the state.
“We’re not going to have any overt signs anywhere,” Mr McBride told reporters in Adelaide on Monday………
Mitchell Taylor, the managing director of Taylors Wines, which has operations in the Clare Valley, Adelaide Hills, McLaren Vale and the Coonawarra, said the most sensible thing would be to locate any future nuclear waste storage facility in arid lands hundreds of kilometres away from agricultural land.
“You wouldn’t put it close to agricultural land,” he said…….
From an overseas marketing viewpoint, Mr Taylor said he didn’t think it would have any impact on the image of South Australian wines and premium food, provided the two were kept separate.
“You’ve got to get politics out of it,” he said.
Mr McBride said the regulatory model in Finland was a good benchmark, and there had been too much simplistic criticism of a nuclear industry based on what he termed “The Simpson’s model” taken from the popular cartoon series where a hapless Homer Simpson works at the Springfield nuclear power plant.
A final report by royal commissioner Kevin Scarce in early May recommended the state set up a nuclear waste storage facility to generate $100 billion in profits over the project’s forecast 120-year life, with Mr Weatherill saying he would make a decision by the end of the year after an extensive community consultation process, on whether to proceed. http://www.afr.com/it-pro/homer-simpson-and-nuclear-politics-as-france-shows-the-way-for-sa-20160522-gp1851
More worrying aspects of the Nuclear Royal Commission’s Final Recommendations
There is no existing market to ascertain the price that a customer may be willing to pay for the permanent disposal of used fuel.(CH 5 p 93)
The Commission is very vague on the nature of the public- private partnership that will pay for the capital costs of AS 41$billion (Ch 5 p.100)
The revenue would be paid on delivery of wastes to a South Australian port. That will be after the 20 – 30 years it will take to construct the facility, plus 10 years after the project begins operation.-
“a pre-commitment before project commencement would provide added assurance that capital costs are fully covered before construction began” (But after a commitment 40 years before, a foreign nuclear company could have gone bankrupt” (Ch 5 p. 100 -102) Finland.http://yoursay.sa.gov.au/system/NFCRC_Final_Report_Web.pdf
Worrying financial aspects of the Nuclear Royal Commission Final Recommendations.
It looks as if the customers for the nuclear waste import business could be dodgy Asian and Middle Easter ones, with unstable politics. The Commission does not name any countries as potential customers, but DOES RULE OUT countries that will NOT be – i.e. United States, France, the United Kingdom and Canada, and countries which have national laws that prohibit their export of waste, such as Sweden and Finland.http://yoursay.sa.gov.au/system/NFCRC_Final_Report_Web.pdf CH 5 p.93.
Dr Andrew Allison assesses the FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS of South Australia’s Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission
Andrew Allison 23 May 16 Here is my assessment of “NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL COMMISSION – FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS Copied from Pg. 169 of the Commission’s final report, and republished here for the purpose of discussion.
Based on the findings set out in this report, the Commission recommends that the South Australian Government:
1. pursue the simplification of state and federal mining approval requirements for radioactive ores, to deliver a single assessment and approvals process
AA: The devil is in the detail for this one. The word “simplification” could be code for reducing environmental standards, or allowing corporations to avoid the consequences of their actions. I am suspicious.
2. further enhance the integration and public availability of pre-competitive geophysical data in South Australia
AA: It depends who owns the data. If a corporation has collected the data then it is part of the intellectual property of that corporation. It is difficult to see how they could be forced to share it, by a state government. If the data were collected by the state government then one would have to ask why she state government is investing in prospecting for nuclear materials. This is in an era where state governments supposedly cannot operate water utilities, banks, gas companies, public transport etc etc…. Why are they breaking their own laws to prospect for nuclear materials?
3. undertake further geophysical surveys in priority areas, where mineral prospectivity is high and available data is limited
AA: This is a matter for the corporations, subject to regulatory approval.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/…/story-e6frg6n6…
AA: Readers may remember that Marathon resources breached environmental guidelines in The Flinders Ranges in 2012. We cannot allow this. I don’t see why the resources of the state should be spent prospecting on behalf of mining companies.
4. commit to increased, long-term and counter-cyclical investment in programs such as the Plan for Accelerating Exploration (PACE) to encourage and support industry investment in the exploration of greenfield locations
AA: Once again, this is a purely commercial matter. I don’t see why the state government should be investing money in this. There are much more efficient ways of carrying out counter-cyclical Keynesian investment, than exploring for nuclear materials. We could invest in schools, and hospitals and public transport infrastructure, for example.
5. ensure the full costs of decommissioning and remediation with respect to radioactive ore mining projects are secured in advance from miners through associated guarantees
AA: This seems to be very sensible to me. I ask the question: aren’t we already doing this? See the reference to marathon resources, above.
6. remove at the state level, and pursue removal of at the federal level, existing prohibitions on the licensing of further processing activities, to enable commercial development of multilateral facilities as part of nuclear fuel leasing arrangements
AA: In my view, the existing laws are in place to protect public safety and no good case has been made to overturn them. There is currently a glut of Uranium on the world market. The prices are low. To increase the supply of Uranium at this time would only depress the price further and affect the viability of existing producers.
7. promote and actively support commercialisation strategies for the increased and more efficient use of the cyclotron at the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI)
AA: The limited and controlled use of nuclear technology in medicine has been shown to be beneficial. I don’t see any logic in expanding the program, unless there is a demonstrated need that is currently not being met in South Australia.
AA: The use of cyclotrons should be carefully regulated, since they can be used to enrich fuel, leading to weapons proliferation:
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Iraq/Calutron.html
8. pursue removal at the federal level of existing prohibitions on nuclear power generation to allow it to contribute to a low-carbon electricity system, if required
AA: It is very doubtful that nuclear energy is “low carbon”, if one considers the entire fuel cycle.
9. promote and collaborate on the development of a comprehensive national energy policy that enables all technologies, including nuclear, to contribute to a reliable, low-carbon electricity network at the lowest possible system cost
AA: Of course, a centralized government energy policy that was oriented towards the needs of the people would be sensible. Unfortunately state governments were in a rush to privatize their energy assets (or to lease out monopolies on a long-term basis) so the control of the system has been relinquished to corporations, for the time being. The Royal Commission has admitted that there is no commercial basis for nuclear power, in Australia, for the foreseeable future.
10. collaborate with the Australian Government to commission expert monitoring and reporting on the commercialisation of new nuclear reactor designs that may offer economic value for nuclear power generation
AA: I will believe in “Generation IV” nuclear power stations when I see one actually operating. In the mean time, we do have to consider the opportunity cost associated with investing Australia’s limited research dollars on a technology that Australia does not even use, and will not use for the foreseeable future.
11. pursue the opportunity to establish used nuclear fuel and intermediate level waste storage and disposal facilities in South Australia consistent with the process and principles outlined in Chapter 10 of this report
AA: I am very curious to know why the Royal Commission is in such a hurry for South Australia to commit to a facility that may not even work, and will not actually hold any nuclear waste for over eighty years. I think that it would be much more prudent for South Australia to watch technological developments elsewhere in the world before committing to such a great an irreversible development as a nuclear waste dump. We should note that no country has yet completely solved the nuclear waste storage problem, not even the former nuclear superpowers, the USA and Russia.
12. remove the legislative constraint in section 13 of the Nuclear Waste Storage Facility (Prohibition) Act 2000 that would preclude an orderly, detailed and thorough analysis and discussion of the opportunity to establish such facilities in South Australia.”
AA: I argue that this legislation serves an important public safety purpose. A convincing case has not yet been made to remove this important piece of safety legislation. The “economic” analysis of the Royal commission is mostly based on the opinion of one consultant, in the Jacobs report. The assumptions that were made in this report are very generous to the pro-dump case.
Aboriginal group to take their protest against nuclear waste dump to Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg
Fears nuclear dump will end their story, MEREDITH BOOTH, THE AUSTRALIAN,MAY 23, 2016 Australia’s first registered Adnyamathanha storyline runs 70km from Hawker to Cotebina Spring through pastoral and indigenous lands between Lake Frome and South Australia’s picturesque northern Flinders Ranges, where it is emerging as a battleline between anti-nuclear activists and the federal government.
Its landmarks, 440km north of Adelaide, tell the origin of Pungka Pudanha spring, where it is said tears falling from a grieving husband merged with the birth waters of his buried pregnant wife — a story that teaches children about family relationships and provides the basis for deeper women’s business.
Custodian and elder Regina McKenzie, a descendant of the king of five clans known as the Adnyamathanha or “people of the rock”, said Pungka Pudanha was the first storyline in Australia to be registered with Aboriginal heritage authorities, in 2012.
But it was now at risk of destruction since pastoral neighbour Wallerberdina Station was named last month as the preferred site for the federal government’s low and intermediate-level nuclear waste dump.
If further technical and environmental testing proves the site suitable, five million litres, or two Olympic-sized swimming pools’ worth, of low radioactive waste will be stored in a warehouse and underground facility.
Ms McKenzie’s worry is mostly for the 25 tonnes of intermediate waste, spent fuel from Sydney’s Lucas Heights reactor returned from reprocessing in France and which requires handlers to wear protective clothing.
She said the Adnyamathanha didn’t want the risk of contamination of groundwaters that fed mound springs on the floodplain where Ms McKenzie brought groups to camp, drink from the spring, and hunt and cook kangaroo in traditional ground ovens and share stories.
“We want to share the culture so we can promote this region to the world,’’ she said.
“Nobody takes the Aboriginal belief systems seriously — it’s our belief system. I just wish that non-Aboriginal people will look and see the richness in our culture.’’
Ms McKenzie and her sister Vivienne, two of 13 children in the McKenzie clan and part of a wider 200 indigenous people in the area, will take their protest, supported by conservation groups, to federal Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg in Melbourne on Wednesday to stop a dump at Wallerberdina………http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/indigenous/fears-nuclear-dump-will-end-their-story/news-story/0bf29b3b919547bad0c797ac1b9a4631
Adelaide prize contest for new green businesses
ADELAIDE COULD BE FIRST ZERO-CARBON CITY IN WORLD WITH SOUTH AUSTRALIA’S NEW ENTREPRENEUR CONTEST http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/adelaide-could-be-first-zero-carbon-city-in-world-with-south-australias-new-entrepreneur-contest/?platform=hootsuite 15 MARCH 2016
LONDON: Adelaide has launched a low carbon contest with an AU$250,000 (~US$187,000) prize, which is open to innovative entrepreneurs who can help the South Australian capital become the world’s first carbon neutral city.
South Australia’s Low Carbon Entrepreneur Prize will transform groundbreaking ideas from around the world into real projects, and is the first initiative of the ‘Adelaide to Zero Carbon Challenge’ which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while stimulating opportunities for pioneering green businesses. Continue reading
First impressions of South Australian government’s “Citizens’ Jury”
Well, they will provide to the jury members meals, $500 compensation, travel assistance and accommodation if needed. This is all fair enough. If the jury members were not compensated in this way, we’d be likely to end up with a bunch of volunteered pro nuclear shills.
They apparently don’t assist with child care – probably eliminating young mothers from the jury.
The jury is asked to produce an independent guide to help every South Australian understand the recommendations raised by the Royal Commission’s report.
South Australia runs over 50% on renewable energy
South Australia runs mainly on renewable energy following coal 
plant closure, The Independent, Gabriel Samuels 12 May 16 Majority of energy comes from solar and wind but the transition has been fraught with difficulties South Australia now gets the bulk of its electricity from wind and solar power, following the closure of its last coal-fired power station.
The state, which includes the city of Adelaide, exclusively has gas generators, solar panels and wind turbines serving a population of 1.7 million.
More than 50% of the region’s electricity stems from wind and solar with the remainder coming from energy efficient combined cycle gas plants.
The final coal station still in operation in Port Augusta closed down on May 9 after operating for 31 years. It generated 520 megawatts of power from coal but failed to compete with the falling price of clean renewable energy. Its closure produced a brief faltering in wholesale energy prices across the state.
The RenewablesSA transition initiative was established by the state govenment in late 2009 with a promise of $10 billion invested in low carbon generation by 2025…….
The state plans to become Australia’s wind and solar capital and is working towards complete reliance on natural sources
The state’s leading electricity provider, SA Power Networks, yesterday announced it will undertake Australia’s largest trial of storage batteries in solar homes in a bid to defer a $3 million network upgrade.
Meanwhile, last week Portugal ran entirely on renewable energy for four consecutive days between Saturday and Wednesday, in a bid to become completely reliant on natural resources.
The Independent has contacted RenewablesSA for comment. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/south-australia-runs-entirely-renewable-energy-following-coal-plant-closure-a7037646.html
Parry Agius – founding member of Uranium lobby group – should not be on “independent” Nuclear Advisory Board.
The South Australian government will make the decision on whether or not to make that State become the world’s nuclear toilet.
However, they’ll still go through a process of informing and consulting the community, beforehand. That will be the job of the new Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Agency :-
It will “draw upon existing government expertise and expertise from the Royal Commission itself to to increase awareness of the Royal Commission’s report and facilitate the community consultation process.”
The other one, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Advisory Board, will oversee the Agency throughout the consultation process. That’s the one chaired by John Mansfield, and with Adjunct Professor Daniela Stehlik, Rebecca Huntley, Professor Deb White, and Parry Agius.
I don’t think that Parry Agius should be on this supposedly independent Board. He is a founding member of the Australian Uranium Association’s Indigenous Dialogue Group. He’s also been a member of the Resources Industry Development Board in South Australia.
South Australian Premier creates two new Nuclear Advisory Agencies
Premier Jay Weatherill, 17 May 16 Cabinet has approved the establishment of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Agency and the appointments to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Advisory Board…
Last week I announced that the Government would establish these two bodies, and today I confirm that Cabinet has approved the establishment of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Agency and the appointments to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Advisory Board.
The purpose of the new agency, which will draw upon existing government expertise and expertise from the Royal Commission itself, will be to increase awareness of the Royal Commission’s report and facilitate the community consultation process.
The independent Advisory Board will oversee the Agency throughout the consultation process.
The Board will be chaired by the Honourable John Mansfield, Member of the Order of Australia and retiring Justice of the Federal Court of Australia, who will commence the role immediately after his retirement from the Federal Court.
The other members of the board will be:
- Parry Agius, former Chief Executive Officer of the South Australian Native Title Service; – 3 –
• Adjunct Professor Daniela Stehlik, Griffith University, is one of Australia’s leading social scientists in the fields of sustainability, human services and social cohesion with a particular focus on families and communities.
• Rebecca Huntley, Social researcher and former Director of The Mind & Mood Report, Australia’s longest running social trends report;
• Professor Deb White, Director of Cancer Research at the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI)
The outcomes of this community engagement process will help inform the government’s response to the Report, which I intend to deliver to the Parliament by the end of this year…. http://www.premier.sa.gov.au/images/speeches/NuclearFuelCycleRoyalCommission.pdf
South Australia sets up parliamentary inquiry on proposed nuclear waste importing
SA to set up inquiry into nuclear dump https://au.news.yahoo.com/sa/a/31626088/sa-to-set-up-inquiry-into-nuclear-dump/ AAP on May 17, 2016, The South Australian government will set up a parliamentary inquiry into whether the state should host a nuclear waste dump.
Premier Jay Weatherill says a joint select committee will help inform the government’s response to the nuclear fuel cycle royal commission, which recommended the state pursue building such a facility.
A citizen jury will also be selected by an independent panel to identify key questions about the issue, while a second jury will be asked to produce a report outlining community views.
Jay Weatherill could now be in a dither over nuclear waste dump proposal
Jay Weatherill: Nuclear waste and citizens’ juries, Independent Australia 17 May 2016 Jay Weatherill has announced the establishment of “citizens’ juries” to debate the Royal Commission’s recommendation in favour of a nuclear waste dump for SA— and angered both sides of politics in the process. Noel Wauchope reports.
NEITHER the Left nor the Right is happy with the South Australian Premier’s plan for “citizens’ juries” on the question of importing nuclear waste.
Jay Weatherill will surely be remembered as the quintessential flip flop Premier. In past years, Weatherill was a Labor Left faction opponent of the nuclear fuel cycle and a strong supporter of renewable energy. In the face of the collapse of the car industry in SA and the uncertainty around the shipbuilding and submarine contracts, he was enticed by the nuclear lobby to do an about turn on the nuclear industry.
He went off to the Paris climate summit, preaching about “low carbon electricity” — which is nuclear lobby code for nuclear energy, not “renewable” energy. However, he had earlier described nuclear power as not being viable.
Weatherill went on to set up the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, led by pro-nuclear Kevin Scarce and with a team in which nuclear power experts predominated. It produced – no surprises here – the recommendation for South Australia to set up a nuclear waste importing industry, in thewords of Kevin Scarce, ‘as soon as possible’.
So, the hasty programme for nuclear waste importing is underway. The first step is to be citizens’ juries. In a process run by New Democracy, 2,500 invitations are being mailed this week to potential participants — 50 will be selected for the first meeting in a month’s time and 350 for the next one in October. There are other initiatives too. The Government is launching an advertising campaign entitled, NuClear, with advertisements to be run on radio, television, print and social media. They also have a consultation website, YourSAy. All very good for the nuclear waste import plan.
But now, the plan does seem to be running into a bit of trouble.
The Advertiser ran a poll early last week was a negative result for the nuclear waste cause….
There must be sufficient anxiety in the South Australian Government and the Liberal Opposition to warrant consideration of a referendum on the subject:……..Previously, a referendum was not considered an option. …..
Meanwhile, the immediate trouble lies with this citizens’ jury plan.
Spruiking about citizens’ juries, Jay Weatherill sounds like an old style Liberal:…….In his press release about the nuclear waste plan, Weatherill said:
‘This first Citizens’ Jury will guide the debate by identifying the key issues that need to be considered during the state-wide consultation phase.’
This is not to the liking of today’sLiberals, nor today’s pro-nuclear Laborites, nor even the anti-nuclear camp.
The pro-nuke response was best expressed by Chris Kenny, in Adelaide Now:
‘Forget the citizens jury, Mr Weatherill — just make a decision. That’s what you were voted in to do!’
Liberal Opposition Leader Steven Marshall fumed:
‘This is the largest decision in the history of the state, and Jay Weatherill’s plan is to outsource it to 50 randomly selected individuals. It’s just outrageous.’…….
….. Meanwhile, on Facebook pages, and in some comments on other sites, the anti-nuclear people were up in arms, certain that the process would be stacked with pro-nuclear experts and participants would be brain-washed with nuclear advertising.
It looks as if Jay Weatherill started out on all this in socialist mode — with political and technical experts running the show. Then he aberrated into old “wet” style Liberal mode, towards participatory democracy. In the process, he seems to have pleased nobody…..https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/jay-weatherill-nuclear-waste-and-citizens-juries1,8998
Global nuclear waste dump for South Australia is opposed by women and Labor voters
Women and Labor voters opposed to international nuclear waste dump in South Australia, poll finds, Adelaide Now, March 21, 2016 PETER JEAN, POLITICAL REPORTER The Advertiser PREMIER Jay Weatherill will need to win the support of women and his own Labor voters if the State Government decides to back the construction of an international nuclear waste storage facility in South Australia.
The results of a new opinion poll show almost 60 per cent of women and most Labor voters are opposed to a global nuclear waste facility being located in the state.
The ReachTEL Poll of 1077 SA residents conducted on March 10 found that 37 per cent of voters supported of voters supported an international nuclear waste dump, 48.5 per cent were opposed and 14 per cent were undecided….
Australia Institute executive director Ben Oquist said South Australians were increasingly aware of the risks posed by the project, including the damage it could do to the state’s reputation.
“I think people are increasingly wise to the projects that are jobs-rich, versus those that are expensive, likely to involve a large upfront government subsidy and won’t produce long-term jobs,’’ Mr Oquist said.
“Those industries that are jobs-intensive are potentially put at risk by South Australia’s brand being threatened by a global nuclear waste dump.’’….. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/women-and-labor-voters-opposed-to-international-nuclear-waste-dump-in-south-australia-poll-finds/news-story/35d4ad38cadbaae4798ca89e91c74f5f
Nuclear waste dumping in South Australia – an act of cultural genocide
Nuclear dump protesters warn of ‘cultural genocide’ in South Australia, ABC , 17 May 16 By Claire Campbell Building a nuclear waste dump in South Australia would be “cultural genocide”, an Indigenous Australian says, as a campaign against a potential facility in South Australia ramps up.
Flinders Ranges Adnyamathanha woman Candace Champion was among unions, community groups and traditional landowners who today launched an alliance to protest the dump if it goes ahead.
Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commissioner Kevin Scarce made a recommendation earlier this month that SA build a used-nuclear fuel and intermediate level waste storage facility as an economic opportunity.The State Government has not committed to building a dump and said community engagement would be pivotal before a proposal was considered.
But the alliance believes going ahead with such a facility would ignore Aboriginal rights and put public health, the environment and the state’s finances at risk. It includes the Australian Nursing Midwifery Federation, Conservation Council, Maritime Union of Australia and the Uniting Church.
“This proposal and the proposals of nuclear dumps right around Australia is a threat to Aboriginal culture and society and it is cultural genocide,” Ms Champion said.
“As a young Adnyamathanha woman, I can tell you that my family will be affected by this nuclear dump. It is bringing back a lot of anxiety, a lot of anxiousness and a lot of mental health issues within my family and my community.”
Premier Jay Weatherill in February said it was important that everybody was “afforded an opportunity to have their say” and believed an emotion-charged debate was required.
“In a sense, this is a test of our democracy,” Mr Weatherill said……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-16/nuclear-dump-protesters-warn-of-cultural-genocide-in-sa/7419406
South Australia – “base load” power from wind and solar – Giles Parkinson
Wind and solar become new “base load” power for South Australia http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/wind-and-solar-become-new-base-load-power-for-south-australia-99364 [good graphs] By Giles Parkinson on 16 May 2016
This is expected to be the pattern of the future, as energy systems with high renewable energy penetration rely first on variable energy providers such as wind and solar, and then on “flexible” or “dispatchable” energy from the likes of gas, but ultimately hydro, solar towers with storage, and emerging technologies such as geothermal and ocean energy and battery and other energy storage. Continue reading
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 