Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

A farming perspective on the Nuclear Royal Commission waste import plan

South Australia nuclear toiletNuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Submission. Patricia  and Maxwell Jones

After having many years of dealing with Uranium Exploration on our Property, we feel we know more about Uranium than miners know about farming.

1* Uranium storage (dumping) LOW waste or HIGH waste, will have an effect on neighbouring properties. Just the name Uranium puts fear in people, had great effect on sheep sales from our property, people did not want to buy glow in the dark sheep. Did lower the value of our Merino wool, dust, (not Uranium dust) have had trouble getting through to miners that we are talking good old
fashion dust that is stirred up every time a vehicle passes by, caused lower yields in our wool, therefore devalued it. Lowered our returns.

2* The uranium waste will come via ship we assume, if ship is lost at sea, what happens to our seas. Once on land it travels by road or rail. There is only one highway across Australia, if an accident, will Highway be closed, Kimba, Low level waste is half way across Australia. Small towns have been totally closed
by paint spills before.

3* If it is as we are told very safe, why then is it not possible to store it in Adelaide? Lots of land there close to the sea not being used. Plenty of workers going to be needing jobs soon in Adelaide.

This is the only State not allowed to grow GM crops, because it could contaminate other crops (see court cases in WA etc;) and the stigma attached to GM, which upsets our Politicians. So what would South Australians and the rest of the world think is worse? The answer is obvious.

If in the polls or Royal Commission were to ask the South Australian people in their individual areas eg; (5th East, Riverland, Adelaide etc/) did they want a Uranium waste dump, we are sure the answer would be NO, not in our back yard.
If it’s so safe why, does it have to be sent to our Farming Land?  The only safe
place for URANIUM, is LEAVE IT IN THE GROUND.

May 6, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | Leave a comment

Nuclear Commission’s recommendations – a poisoned chalice for South Australia?

As a South Australian citizen, I am very concerned by what appears to be a disregard for the rule of law. This is particularly concerning as the nuclear industry across the world has a somewhat tarnished reputation when it comes to transparency and compliance with legal requirements. Any lack of confidence in the rule of law (whether perceived or real) will be extremely detrimental to this project and to South Australia as a democratic state. 

A high level nuclear waste dump is a permanent solution to a temporary problem. Voluntary importation of one of the deadliest substances known to humanity, with all of its intransigent problems (which no country in the world has yet managed to resolve) may indeed prove to be a poisoned chalice. Indeed, the x billions anticipated as revenue are minor in global economic terms, and definitely insignificant given the 240,000 year time frame of the proposal. 

Scarce poisoned chalice

Response to Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s Tentative Findings, Trisha Drioli  http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/app/uploads/2016/04/Drioli-Trisha.pdf   I have a large number of concerns arising from a proposal that seeks to store highly toxic waste in my home State for a period longer than the entire existence of the human species. Never-the-less, I restrict my submission to my some key points: Continue reading

May 6, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | Leave a comment

No true transparency in the machinations of the Nuclear Fuel Chain Royal Commission

secret-agent-Aust “Transparency” is a term when used in such context, makes a mockery of public consultation and decision-making. In an industry that is hidden within Legislative Agreements that prohibit “freedom of information” and with information locked up in inter-departmental exchanges that circumvent any public disclosure, there is no transparency. Local get-togethers do not equal public engagement. These are serious matters which are of National concern

Response to “Tentative Findings”  – Anne McGovern

Overview The subject of Nuclear Fuel production has been a matter of National discussion and investigation for the past 60 years in Australia. The people of this country have emphatically rejected the development of Nuclear Fuel production, from every stage of mining, milling, fuel fabrication and power generation, to any involvement in the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the world.
The Nuclear Power proponents, have at every stage despite persistant resistance, continued to force the Australian Public to defend the non-nuclear position. Here, we find ourselves again defending the right of our country to remain as Nuclear-Free as possible, considering we have already be encumbered with the legacy of numbers of Uranium Mines past and present, for a clean future in Australia.
These are serious issues which the Public does not take lightly. It is plain to see from these “Tentative Findings” that minimal consideration has been given to the concerns and objections raised in a range of submissions received.
The subject matter which the Commission has been charged to investigate, has been studied in a less than thorough or in depth manner.
The following comments are responses based on first- hand knowledge of the actions of the Nuclear Industry in South Australia as was my Submission.

Continue reading

May 6, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | Leave a comment

Meg Backhouse’s fine Submission to Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission

submission goodRE: HIGH LEVEL and INTERMEDIATE WASTE STORAGE  http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/app/uploads/2016/05/Backhouse-Meg.pdf Meg Backhouse 
My major concerns are:  if Australia takes HLW from other parts of the world, that HLW will continue to be produced and that a safe answer to its disposal will be postponed by another 60 years or never be adequately addressed.  That the money to be spent over the 11-15 years to set up the repository, would be better spent on becoming leaders in the renewable boom that is taking place Worldwide.  That the eventual cost will fall in the taxpayers’ laps when/if an unforeseen incident occurs.
Previous attempt In 2001 Russia made it legal to import radio-active waste for storage, with the govern-ment citing hopes to generate $20 billion from importing spent fuel. Large scale move-ment of waste did not occur, and in 2006 Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom announced it would not proceed with taking any foreign-origin used fuel. “If Russia, with vast territory, a mature nu-clear power industry, and experience with their own stockpiles of waste, could not establish a waste dump for profit, what chance does Australia have of succeeding in such an enterprise?” http://www.tai.org.au/system/files_force/P181%20SA%20nuclear% 20royal%20commission%20submission%20FINAL_0.pdf?download=1. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle/Nuclear-Wastes/ International-Nuclear-Waste-Disposal-Concepts/ http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/apr/19/russia.ameliagentleman
CONTAINERS:  Both Finland and Sweden have been unable to arrest corrosion of containers to be buried in the deep geological repositories.

Continue reading

May 6, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | Leave a comment

Catholic Religious South Australia express duty to oppose Nuclear Commission’s import waste plan (extracts from Submission)

church-&-radCatholic Religious South Australia – response the the nuclear fuel chain Royal Commission’s ‘Tentative Findings’

Inline image 2

Inline image 1

Inline image 2

Inline image 3

 

May 6, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | Leave a comment

Major financial risks for South Australia are ignored by Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission

scrutiny-Royal-Commission CHAINThe proposal has major financial risks to taxpayers that have been ignored or played down in the Tentative Findings. These are sufficient grounds to reject the scheme. However, if the Royal Commission is determined to ignore or downplay the risks and recommend the proposed project, it should also recommend that 5 the substantial financial risks be taken by a private corporation or consortium, not Australian taxpayers
Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission
submission goodDiesendorf-MarkComments on the Cost Analysis, Business Case and Risks of Management for Storage and Disposal of Nuclear Waste in South Australia
Dr Mark Diesendorf Associate Professor in Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences UNSW Australia 18 March 2016
Introduction One of the Key Tentative Findings of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission (2016, p.3) is that:
The storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel in South Australia is likely to deliver substantial economic benefits to the South Australian community. An integrated storage and disposal facility would be commercially viable and the storage facility could be operational in the late 2020s.
The Tentative Finding summarised above is given in more detail in Findings 81- 94 on pp.17-20. These findings appear to be based to a large degree upon a report by Jacobs MCM (2016) that had not been available for public scrutiny until February 2016, around the time of the release of the Commission’s Tentative Findings. The following comments examine critically some of the assumptions underlying the Tentative Findings and Jacobs MCM (2016), especially the latter’s Paper 5. They also discuss the financial risks of the proposed project. The comments focus on the storage and management of high and intermediate level wastes.
Understanding the scenarios Continue reading

May 6, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | 3 Comments

Aboriginal award winner calls on Premier Weatherill to save Flinders traditional land from nuclear waste dumping

Weatherill glowPremier silent while Flinders Ranges threatened, INDAILY, 6 May 16 One of the traditional owners of the Flinders Ranges land earmarked for a low level nuclear waste dump, Regina McKenzie, writes about the significance of the site and why Premier Jay Weatherill should intervene…….

Last year I was awarded the SA Premier’s Natural Resource Management Award in the category of ‘Aboriginal Leadership − Female’ for working to protect land that is now being threatened with a nuclear waste dump.

But Premier Jay Weatherill has been silent since the announcement of six short-listed dump sites last year, three of them in SA. Now the Flinders Ranges has been chosen as the preferred site and Mr Weatherill must speak up.

The Premier can either support us ‒ just as the SA government supported the Kupa Piti Kungka Tjuta when their land was targeted for a national nuclear waste dump from 1998-2004 ‒ or he can support the federal government’s attack on us by maintaining his silence. He can’t sit on the fence.

Regina McKenzie is a Yappala Station resident and member of Viliwarinha Yura Aboriginal Corporation. http://indaily.com.au/opinion/2016/05/06/premier-silent-while-flinders-ranges-threatened/

May 6, 2016 Posted by | politics, South Australia | Leave a comment

Legal battle ahead for The Australian govt’s plan to impose nuclear waste dump on sacred Aboriginal land

justicePlan for Flinders Ranges nuclear waste dump faces legal battle MEREDITH BOOTH, VERITY EDWARDS THE AUSTRALIAN MAY 5, 2016  Environmentalists and trad­itional owners say eight years of legal wrangling, which saw the withdrawal of Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory as a site for a nuclear waste dump, is a precedent for the fight they are prepared to wage against a dump planned in South Australia.Wallerberdina Station, part-owned by former Liberal senator Grant Chapman and adjoining Adnyamathanha sacred sites in the northern Flinders Ranges more than 550km north of Adelaide, has been chosen ahead of five others as the preferred site for a national low-level nuclear waste dump.

The decision was made independently of the state’s ­Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, which hands down its findings tomorrow and is expected to recommend that the state stores high-level radio­active waste from overseas.

Conservation Council of South Australia chief executive Craig Wilkins said he hoped the fight to stop the Wallerberdina dump did not reach court, but he was prepared to support a legal battle. “Muckaty Station was an eight-year campaign. We’re deeply hopeful that we don’t need to do that again,’’ he said yesterday. “Not only is it incredibly sacred country for the Adnyamathanha people, the land is subject to flash flooding and frequent earthquake activity.’’

Elder Regina McKenzie, who lives next to the station, said she was prepared to go to court to prevent a nuclear waste dump being built on burial areas and through a 70km storyline that was particularly sacred to indig­enous women.

“It’s desecration on all fronts, it’s an attack on our ­religion, it’s cultural genocide,” she said. “There are Aboriginal bones that have calcified and turned to stone and what right do they have to move those?”

Tweedle-NuclearThe Greens have slammed Labor and the Liberals for “teaming up” to defeat a ­motion calling on the government to acknow­ledge traditional owners’ oppos­ition to the dump.

Federal Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg said that a final decision had not been made.

May 6, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, legal, South Australia, wastes | Leave a comment

Dr Andrew Allison challenges The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s reckless Tentative Findings

exclamation-The proposal is that we should accept waste before the repository has been completely built and tested. This proposal is so reckless, as to be negligent. We would face the very real risk of being left with high-level nuclear waste, and no technology to properly handle it.
The plan [outlined in The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s Tentative Findings] seems extraordinary. It is proposed that we should give ourselves a waste problem in the hope that we, unlike everyone else, could solve it – like a person who takes up smoking just to prove they can quit.

submission goodResponse to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s Tentative Findings By Dr Andrew Allison, B.Sc. B.Eng. PhD. (Elec. Eng.) 17 March 2016

INTRODUCTION One of the Key Tentative Findings of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission is that: “The storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel in South Australia is likely to deliver substantial economic benefits to the South Australian community. An integrated storage and disposal facility would be commercially viable and the storage facility could be operational in the late 2020s.” [1]
I argue that this finding is open to challenge on technical, and economic grounds. I point out that no country has yet successfully operated a permanent high-level nuclear waste storage facility, without incident, for any substantial length of time. This includes technologically advanced nuclear nations, such as the USA, and Russia. These countries have been generating nuclear waste for over fifty years and yet they have still not solved the waste storage problem. It is stretching credibility to the limit to imagine that a non-nuclear country, like Australia, could succeed where the USA and Russia have failed.
No country has ever operated a high-level nuclear waste storage facility, as a commercial enterprise. It is doubtful that anybody ever will, because the service is impossible to price. No markets exist for this type of service. …….

Continue reading

May 4, 2016 Posted by | significant submissions to 6 May | Leave a comment

Flinders Aboriginal elders strong in their fight against nuclear waste dumping on their sacred lands

heartland-2Dumped-on Elders down but not despairing, Eureka Street Michele Madigan |  02 May 2016 “……..Outlining the numerous times that the Traditional Owners had asked the State Minister for the Environment and the Federal Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg to visit the site, she [Enice Marsh, Adnymathanha Elder/Traditional Owner for the Flinders Ranges area of SA.] could only conclude, ‘But all this has come to no avail — it’s all been totally ignored.’

On Friday Frydenberg managed to have it both ways, in what seems to be a now fashionable way to go about such announcements. ‘There is no final decision.’ And yet, there is only one site remaining from what was a ‘self selection’ offer by the original 28 property owners and the shortlisted six.

Frydenberg described the selection process to date as ‘rigorous’. However, as the follow up process will now include ‘technological, safety and environmental assessment’, an obvious question remains about just how ‘rigorous’ it could really have been.

In a repeat of the one of the Kimba owners’ comments some months back, Chapman seems to be quite ill-informed regarding what will actually be deposited on the property, quoting the usual presenting argument used in the former SA campaign of 1998-2004: that the dump will be for medical low-level waste from various hospitals and universities around the country.

No mention as usual that there is no need for this to be stored long term in the first place. No mention of the intermediate level radioactive spent fuel rods which arrived back from France in December, and are presently housed at Lucas Heights. One wonders when such news will be broken to the property owners and the Hawker community.

In contrast, the Adnyamathanha neighbours and other Traditional Owners are completely aware of this and decry the flawed, seemingly unscientific process where one person can offer their land with absolutely no consultation to the neighbours.

Their own Indigenous Protected Area expert research and eyewitness knowledge cites that as well as being a site replete with ‘countless thousands of Aboriginal artifacts and registered cultural heritage sites’, ‘There are frequent yarta ngurra-ngurrandha (earthquakes and tremors). We see the ground move and the hills move; we feel the land move. At least half a dozen times each year.

‘It is flood land. The water comes from the hills and floods the plains, including the proposed dump site. Sometimes there are massive floods, the last one on 20 January 2006.’

In stark contrast to the previous national dump campaign of 1998-2004 which was opposed by the state government, it seems that this time no member of the SA government has come to the defence of the extraordinary Flinders Ranges, a focal point for the tourism industry of South Australia. Wilpena is a famous tourist site of great beauty and heritage, popular with both national and international tourists.

Indeed the SA community next Friday will hear the royal commission’s final recommendation to import high-level radioactive waste into our seemingly politically disposable state — disposable, now, even to our own politicians…….

despair is a temptation but there is also ‘the distressing matter of indifference. Indifference can be lethal.’ And what pain it gives to those like Enice Marsh who care.

But still there is resilience, and still there is hope. Not only are the Adnyamathanha determined to fight on, the five other communities that are now off the shortlist have pledged their solidarity in a continuing fight against ‘this flawed process’.

Who knows the power of such leadership to break the bonds of our own indifference and despair. http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=47266#.VylNVdJ97Gh

May 4, 2016 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, South Australia | Leave a comment

South Australia Aboriginal land again targeted, for probably unnecessary radioactive trash dump

The Flinders Ranges site was nominated by Grant Chapman but he has precious little connection to the land. Conversely, the land has been precious to Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners for millennia. The fact that the government is once again targeting a ‘remote’ Aboriginal site is beyond comprehension and creates a lot of frustration and hurt.

“Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners weren’t consulted about the nomination. Even Traditional Owners who live next to the proposed dump site at Yappala Station weren’t consulted. The proposed dump site is adjacent to the Yappala Indigenous Protected Area.

radioactive trashSA once again targeted for nuclear waste dump,   http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18200Anica Niepraschk, 2 May 16

Last Friday the government announced its preferred site for a national radioactive waste dump, near Hawker in South Australia’s Flinders Ranges. The site was nominated by former Liberal Senator Grant Chapman, who holds a long-term lease over the Barndioota station, and his nomination has been endorsed by the Liberal government in Canberra.

The latest process to find a dump site follows 20 years of failed attempts trying to force a dump on Aboriginal communities in SA and later the Northern Territory. Continue reading

May 2, 2016 Posted by | aboriginal issues, South Australia, wastes | Leave a comment

New submarines chosen as prelude to nuclear submarines

exclamation-submarine,-nuclear-underwatBusiness SA says Future Submarine fleet could include nuclear-powered versions once local atomic industry is established, Adelaide Now April 30, 2016  State political reporter Daniel Wills, Paris, France, Sunday Mail (SA) AUSTRALIA’S future submarine fleet could be transitioned to include a potent mix of both intelligence gathering diesel boats and rapid, fast-moving nuclear-powered vessels once the state develops a sophisticated atomic industry based around storage, Business SA says.

The Federal Government is facing calls from across the strategic policy and business communities, as well as from an outspoken SA Senator, to strongly consider the nuclear option.

Premier Jay Weatherill visited DCNS’ Cherbourg shipyard last on Friday Adelaide time, just hours after SA was chosen as the likely site of a low-level nuclear waste dump and as former governor Kevin Scare puts the finishing touches on a Royal Commission due for release within days.

Business SA chief executive Nigel McBride, who joined the Cherbourg tour to observe the construction of a nuclear Barracuda sub that will become the template for Australia’s diesel fleet, said there was strong national defence reasons for having a mix of the two…..

Mr McBride told the Sunday Mail that building community confidence behind nuclear storage was crucial before the question of expanding the industry into defence capabilities.

“As we’ve gone around Europe and looked at their nuclear cycle, and take into account the likely final recommendations from the Royal Commission in regards to the storage of waste, we will as a nation and state soon come to a decision about if we participate or not,” he said…….

Mr McBride said storage was a “starting point” in a discussion about other applications.

The first future sub is set to hit the water in the early 2030s, about the time when Mr Scarce says the state could have a storage industry up and running if it moved to do so immediately……

“We walked around a facility today which had a significant nuclear threat, nobody even blinked. We walked around and took it for granted that it would be professionally contained,” Mr McBride said……

Senator Day said there was “no escaping” the strategic need for nuclear subs…….

“The winning DCNS bid links SA with a French nation with nuclear subs and nuclear power. This opens up great opportunities for SA to learn how to embrace all facets of the nuclear fuel cycle.”…….

Mr Thomson said diesel subs were valuable in “certain, specific circumstances”.

“But if you had to choose between 12 nuclear or 12 conventional subs, it’s a no-brainer. You’d have the nuclear subs every time…

Australian law currently bars the use of nuclear subs………http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/business-sa-says-future-submarine-fleet-could-include-nuclearpowered-versions-once-local-atomic-industry-is-established/news-story/9ae30cb1933a6119182944f6dbdcf09c

April 30, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, South Australia | Leave a comment

The Adnyamathanha people will not be bribed: they will fight the nuclear waste dump plan

handsoffAdnyamathanha to fight federal government’s nuclear dump planned Barndioota location.Transcontinental, Port Augusta,30 Apr 16 ADNYAMATHANHA traditional owners are vowing to fight the federal government’s plans to house a nuclear waste facility Wallerberdina Station near Barndioota in the Flinders Ranges.

The call comes as the site was shortlisted by the federal government as the possible location of Australia’s first facility of its kind on Friday morning

Adnyamathanha Traditional Owner Regina McKenzie, who lives at Yappala Station near the proposed dump site said the Adnyamathanha were not consulted about the nomination.

‘Even Traditional Owners who live next to the proposed dump site at Yappala Station weren’t consulted,” Ms McKenzie said.

“The proposed dump site is adjacent to the Yappala Indigenous Protected Area. On the land with the proposed dump site, we have been working for many years to register heritage sites with the SA government.”

Ms McKenzie said the Arngurla Yarta (spiritual land) holds special significance to her people and the proposed dump site features countless thousands of Aboriginal artifacts.

“Our ancestors are buried there,” Ms McKenzie said.

“The nominated site is a significant women’s site. Throughout the area are registered cultural heritage sites and places of huge importance to our people.”

“We call on the federal government to withdraw the nomination of the site and to show more respect in future. We call on all South Australians − all Australians − to support us in our struggle.

“Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners and Viliwarinha Yura Aboriginal Corporation will fight the proposal for a nuclear waste dump on our land for as long as it takes to stop it.”

Member for Grey MP Rowan Ramsey said the Hawker community would benefit if Barndioota became the site of the low and intermediate nuclear waste repository.

“The open mindedness of the Hawker community on this issue is to be admired and I am very pleased a community in my electorate stands to benefit substantially from this investment. …….

Mr Frydenberg stressed the federal government’s decision was not final. http://www.transcontinental.com.au/story/3879196/adnyamathanha-to-fight-nuclear-dump-plan/

April 30, 2016 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, South Australia, wastes | Leave a comment

Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners will fight nuclear waste dump plan

handsoff  29 Apr 16, The federal government has announced that the Flinders Ranges has been selected as the preferred site for a national nuclear waste dump. The land was nominated by former Liberal Party Senator Grant Chapman and his nomination has been endorsed by the Liberal government in Canberra.

Adnyamathanha Traditional Owner Regina McKenzie, who lives at Yappala Station near the proposed dump site and is a member of Viliwarinha Yura Aboriginal Corporation, said:

“Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners weren’t consulted about the nomination. Even Traditional Owners who live next to the proposed dump site at Yappala Station weren’t consulted. The proposed dump site is adjacent to the Yappala Indigenous Protected Area. On the land with the proposed dump site, we have been working for many years to register heritage sites with the SA government. The area is Adnyamathanha land. It is Arngurla Yarta (spiritual land). The proposed dump site has countless thousands of Aboriginal artifacts. Our ancestors are buried there. The nominated site is a significant women’s site. Throughout the area are registered cultural heritage sites and places of huge importance to our people.

“There are frequent yarta ngurra-ngurrandha (earthquakes and tremors). At least half a dozen times each year, we see and feel the ground move. It is flood land. The water comes from the hills and floods the plains, including the proposed dump site. Sometimes there are massive floods, the last one in 2006.

“We don’t want a nuclear waste dump here on our country and worry that if the waste comes here it will harm our environment and muda (our lore, our creation). We call on the federal government to withdraw the nomination of the site and to show more respect in future. We call on all South Australians − all Australians − to support us in our struggle. Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners and Viliwarinha Yura Aboriginal Corporation will fight the proposal for a nuclear waste dump on our land for as long as it takes to stop it.

“Last year I was awarded the SA Premier’s Natural Resource Management Award in the category of ‘Aboriginal Leadership − Female’ for working to protect land that is now being threatened with a nuclear waste dump. But Premier Jay Weatherill has been silent since the announcement of six short-listed dump sites last year. Now the Flinders Ranges has been chosen as the preferred site and Mr Weatherill must speak up. The Premier can either support us or he can support the federal government’s attack on us by maintaining his silence. He can’t sit on the fence.”

Adnyamathanha Traditional Owner Enice Marsh said:

“Vulnerable communities are suffering from lack of vision from our government and industry ‘leaders’ and should not be the government’s target for toxic waste dumps. This predatory behaviour is unethical and is an abuse of human rights. An Indigenous Protected Area is a Federal Government initiative, but it seems that in the case of Yappala this means nothing to the government. We ask you to honour this commitment to protect, not pollute and damage our land. This facility will cause immeasurable damage to the whole area which is covered with thousands of artefacts, home to people, animals, birds and reptiles. The building of this facility will cause widespread damage. It will scar the area and break the spiritual song-lines like never before in the 60000+ years of human occupation. We don’t want this waste in our country, it’s too toxic and long lived.”

Adnyamathanha Traditional Owner Jillian Marsh said:

“The First Nations people of Australia have been bullied and pushed around, forcibly removed from their families and their country, denied access and the right to care for their own land for over 200 years. Our health and wellbeing compares with third world countries, our people crowd the jails. Nobody wants toxic waste in their back yard, this is true the world over. We stand in solidarity with people across this country and across the globe who want sustainable futures for communities, we will not be moved. We challenge Minister Josh Frydenberg on his claim that this waste is just “gloves, goggles and test tubes” – the intermediate-level waste is much more toxic so why not talk about it? What about the damage to the area that construction of this site will cause? You can’t compensate the loss of people’s ancient culture with a few dollars.”

April 29, 2016 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, South Australia, wastes | Leave a comment

Nice little bonanza for former SA Liberal Senator Grant Chapman in choice of nuclear waste dump site

uranium-enrichmentMr Frydenberg said Barndioota, owned by former SA Liberal Senator Grant Chapman, had been chosen ahead of others because of broad community support

If Barndioota is chosen, Mr Chapman and his business partner would get four times the land value for the 100ha excised for the repository from the 6357ha section of their station which has been nominated.

National low-level nuclear waste dump earmarked for Barndioota, near Wilpena Pound  April 29, 2016   The Advertiser

 A CATTLE station west of Wilpena Pound has been earmarked as the site for a national radioactive dump for medical and laboratory waste. In a surprise pre-election move, federal Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg will on Friday reveal that South Australia’s Barndioota has been pinpointed for the dump ahead of five other voluntarily nominated sites.

Mr Frydenberg emphasised that the short-listing was not a final decision to put the national facility at Barndioota, 35km northwest of Hawker, but it now represents the only option.

In a significant development, Treasurer Tom Koutsantonis said the State Government was supportive of the site’s short-listing and he called the process rigorous.

Overwhelming state and community opposition in 2004 forced the-then prime minister John Howard to abandon plans for a similar national radioactive waste dump near Woomera.

Mr Frydenberg, who will face voters at a July 2 double dissolution election, said he would make a final decision on the site within a year — after design, safety, technical, environmental and indigenous heritage assessment at Barndioota. He had previously been expected to nominate two SA sites — one near Kimba and Barndioota — on a shortlist of two or three ahead of a final decision later this year.

Traditional land owners say the site, near the Flinders Ranges and the famed Wilpena Pound, is home to countless sacred sites and culturally important landmarks that would be destroyed by a radioactive waste dump……. Continue reading

April 29, 2016 Posted by | South Australia, wastes | 1 Comment