Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Barngarla Aboriginal people take legal action against Australian govt’s planned Kimba nuclear waste dump

February 24, 2020 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, legal, politics | Leave a comment

Immoral and illegal spying on Julian Assange and his lawyers – MP Andrew Wilkie calls on Australian government to act.

February 24, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, civil liberties, legal, politics international | Leave a comment

How will Julian Assange’s extradition case proceed in court?

February 24, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, legal, politics international | Leave a comment

No place for nuclear energy in Australia: Labor’s Josh Wilson spells it out

There is still no place for nuclear energy in Australia
Josh Wilson MP ‒ federal shadow assistant minister for the environment.
February 21, 2020

I find it astonishing that while our communities and ecosystems alike suffer through Australia’s first national climate change disaster there are politicians who seek to distract from the key challenges before us by jumping on the old nuclear hobbyhorse.

More than 10 years on from the Switkowski review, all the relevant considerations have tipped further away from nuclear power. It continues to be expensive, slow, inflexible, uninsurable, toxic, and dangerous at a time when renewable energy generation and storage is becoming faster, cheaper, and more efficient. And in the meantime we’ve experienced Fukushima, which has displaced 40,000 people, still leaks radiation into the sea, and will cost Japan more than $200 billion.

The clearest point made in evidence to the recent nuclear inquiry was that settling a national energy policy is our highest priority. Without this framework, Australia’s progress towards a decarbonised energy system with better co-ordination and lower prices remains stymied. Despite that call being made by Ziggy Switkowski, Ian MacFarlane, our energy regulators and various economic and energy experts, government members of the committee couldn’t bear to see this sensible recommendation in print. Why? Because they knew it reflected poorly on the government.

The hard conservative core of the Coalition doesn’t believe in climate change and sees renewable energy as a similarly “green-left” plot. This wild disconnection from science, economics, and public consensus is hurting Australia. Even the mild courage required to deliver their own National Energy Guarantee cannot be found within the current circus.

Instead, we get the rising hum of nuclear fairy tales and the wishful myths that go with them. Top of that list is the furphy that nuclear energy, while risky and poisonous and productive of waste that no one knows how to safely store, is somehow comparatively cheap. That’s just rubbish. The definitive analysis of energy costs in the Australian context is the recently updated AEMO/CSIRO GenCost report. It confirms under various scenarios that nuclear power simply cannot compete on cost with firmed renewables.

The latest darling of the ever-faithful nuclear fan club is the small modular reactor. SMRs, we are told, will be magically cheaper and safer. Such claims have been made by the nuclear industry about each new generation of technology right up to the point at which they turn out to be spectacularly untrue. At the moment SMRs simply don’t exist.

Myth number two asserts that as a matter of fact it is impossible to reach 100 per cent zero-emission energy without nuclear. Also wrong. Those making the claim are the same people who said that a 20 per cent renewable energy target for 2020 was reckless, and that a 50 per cent target for 2030 would be “economy wrecking”. Experts at the ANU gave evidence pointing to Australia’s potential as a renewable energy superpower with both generation and storage meeting our electricity needs and allowing us to export emission-free hydrogen.

The third myth is that Australia is missing out on the popular uptake of nuclear technology. In reality nuclear energy worldwide is in serious decline. The latest issue of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report shows that the nuclear share of electricity generation has dropped from its 1996 high of 17  per cent in 1996 to 10 per cent in 2018.

Countries that have relied on nuclear energy in the past are winding down their reliance. France has a target to reduce nuclear energy by a third. South Korea has decided it will no longer build nuclear. The UK is grappling with the costly implications of a new reactor that is years behind schedule and billions over budget, propped up by a 35-year power purchase agreement at double the current cost of electricity.

The most absurd myth of all is that we are being prevented from having a conversation about nuclear because of the current moratorium. Really? The claim is made in the report of yet another Parliamentary committee inquiry, which, in addition to receiving thousands of submissions, also involved public hearings in Brisbane, Melbourne, Sydney, Perth, Canberra, and Adelaide. Our inquiry followed the Switkowski review, the South Australian Royal Commission, and sits alongside a Victorian upper house inquiry.

There is nothing wrong with keeping an open mind on any topic but it shouldn’t be a blank mind. All the evidence shows there is no place for nuclear energy in Australia. Our policy paralysis is holding back our potential to be a renewable energy superpower. Those who agitate for an ongoing conversation on nuclear are spruiking a dangerous distraction.

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

No, Mr Baldock, our children do not deserve this dirty, long-lasting, nuclear trash dump

Paul Waldon  Fight To Stop A Nuclear Waste Dump In South Australia, 21 Feb 20, People leaving, property values dropping, large tracts of land hitting the market, children’s heritage being sold and/or eroded, a once strong community now divided, people happier to shop outside their community, these are the trademarks of a dying town with poor opportunities.

An aggressive social cancer fueled by a desperate and ignorant nuclear embracing dichotomy trying to grasp the doctrines of the indentured servitude bound nuclear coterie with a vested interest spouting factoids will surely fail to attract new business and people to the region.

Meanwhile Andrew Baldock, nuclear profiteer, social axe man has continued to state “We are doing this for the children!”

Well Baldock my children, my children’s children’s children don’t deserve this.   https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/

February 22, 2020 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, South Australia, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Correcting the propaganda: Australia’s nuclear medicine DOES NOT NEED a national radioactive waste dump

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, spinbuster | Leave a comment

What was #ScottyFromMarketing planning, with U.S. military, at PineGap?

PRIME MINISTER’S PINE GAP VISIT RAISES EYEBROWS  NT NEWS, 21 Feb 20, 

The Prime Minister has made a visit to the secretive Pine Gap military intelligence base raising eyebrows about the potential involvement of the facility in ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran….. (subscribers only)

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Heavens to Betsy! Murdoch media suddenly discovers that wind and solar power are great for Australia!

How we’re riding a wind and solar wave to energy future,  PAUL GARVEY, THE AUSTRALIAN, FEBRUARY 21, 2020 A nationwide wave of wind and solar projects has Australi­a on track to become one of the world’s biggest users of renewa­ble energy, defying predictions a Canberra policy vacuu­m would make Australia a global climate laggard.

Such is the frenzy of new projects that parts of the electricity grid are struggling to accommodate the power now being generated, with a growing backlog of proposed developments waiting for grid infrastructure and battery technology to catch up…. (subscribers only)  https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/how-were-riding-a-wind-and-solar-wave-to-energy-future/news-story/18e3d0e0f69c81a14d3655a26e8914c3

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy | Leave a comment

Conflict in the COALition over climate change and emissions reduction

Coalition ministers at odds over emissions target after Labor commits to net zero by 2050

Mathias Cormann says Coalition will ‘finalise longer-term target in time for Cop26’ but Angus Taylor commits only to ‘long-term strategy’,  Guardian,  Paul Karp @Paul_Karp   – 21 Feb 20 Senior Morrison government ministers are publicly at odds about whether Australia will take a long-term emissions reduction target to global climate talks in November after Labor unveiled a target of net zero emissions by 2050.On Friday the finance minister Mathias Cormann confirmed the government “will be finalising a longer-term target in time for Cop26” but the emissions reduction minister would commit only to “a long-term strategy” despite repeatedly being asked about a new target.

As revealed by Guardian Australia, Anthony Albanese used a speech to a progressive thinktank on Friday to commit the ALP to adopting a net zero target by 2050 if it wins the next federal election, without the use of carryover credits from the Kyoto period.Senior Morrison government ministers are publicly at odds about whether Australia will take a long-term emissions reduction target to global climate talks in November after Labor unveiled a target of net zero emissions by 2050.

On Friday the finance minister Mathias Cormann confirmed the government “will be finalising a longer-term target in time for Cop26” but the emissions reduction minister would commit only to “a long-term strategy” despite repeatedly being asked about a new target.

As revealed by Guardian Australia, Anthony Albanese used a speech to a progressive thinktank on Friday to commit the ALP to adopting a net zero target by 2050 if it wins the next federal election, without the use of carryover credits from the Kyoto period.

Scott Morrison is holding off from making a commitment to carbon neutrality by 2050, partly because of an internal brawl within the Coalition and partly because the prime minister says Australia should not sign up to targets in the absence of costings.

Some in the government have noted publicly in recent weeks that Australia implicitly accepted the net zero pathway when the Coalition signed and ratified the Paris agreement, and Liberal moderates are now pushing to make net zero an explicit target beyond the 26-28% emissions reduction promised by 2030…..

Despite the Coalition criticism, business rode to Labor’s defence. Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said the net zero target “is increasingly widely supported by Australian businesses, industry advocates such as Ai Group, the wider community and governments of all complexions”.

“That growing consensus is important to guide and discipline the development of efficient, trade neutral and fair policies to get there,” he said.

“We shouldn’t underestimate the challenge of net zero, which goes well beyond generating cleaner electricity……

Every state and territory has expressed at least an aspirational objective of achieving net zero emissions by 2050, and Australia has been urged by the UK and its Pacific neighbours to sign up to that target.

Albanese noted on Friday that the Business Council of Australia is calling for it as well as major corporates including AGL, Santos, BHP, Amcor, BP, Wesfarmers and Telstra.

“Seventy-three countries, including the UK, Canada, France and Germany, many with conservative governments, have already adopted it as their goal,” he said. “Australia should too

Earlier, Labor’s climate change spokesman, Mark Butler, told Radio National the opposition would set out a detailed policy about how to achieve targets and its cost “well before” the next election.

Butler argued that the cost of reducing emissions should not be divorced from the cost of inaction and noted Melbourne University research had found actions to reduce emissions have a benefit cost ratio of 20 to one.  https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/feb/21/coalition-ministers-at-odds-over-emissions-target-after-labor-commits-to-net-zero-by-2050

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics | Leave a comment

Australia the ‘poster child’ for climate change inaction

Paris Agreement architect Christiana Figueres says Australia the ‘poster child’ for climate inaction

The bushfire crisis made Australia the “poster child” for climate change inaction – but the fires should force the world to act, the architect of the Paris Agreement says. https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/technology/paris-agreement-architect-christiana-figueres-says-australia-the-poster-child-for-climate-inaction/news-story/e1798a8339a817804c2330731f11775f, Tory Shepherd, State Editor, The Advertiser,  21 Feb 20 

Devastating bushfires have made Australia the “poster child” for climate change inaction and the world is weeping for us, the architect of the Paris Agreement says.

Christiana Figueres was the executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change when it brought almost 200 nations together to commit to the historic agreement in 2015.

The global goal is to reach net zero emissions by 2050 in order to cap temperature rises, and Ms Figueres’ comments come as federal Labor commits to that goal.

“Any time the word Australia is uttered outside of Australia we all have to contain our tears,” she told The Advertiser.

“This has been so painful, so deeply painful to witness in the news every day the destructive power of bushfires that have gone completely out of control despite the heroic efforts of the firefighters.”

Ms Figueres is coming to Womadelaide in two weeks to talk about her new book The Future We Choose: Surviving the climate crisis.

The lives lost – including a billion animals – and the destruction of the environment and property are just “completely irreplaceable”, she said.

“This is not normal. This is so tragic that Australia is now the poster child, the example of irresponsible management and of undue care on climate change measures.

“I think history will be (divided into) before the Australian fires and after the Australian fires.”

Despite those words, Ms Figueres is optimistic the world can meet the Paris targets, although she is still concerned it won’t happen fast enough.She welcomed Labor leader Anthony Albanese’s commitment to the 2050 target. In a major policy speech today, the Opposition Leader said Australia had always prided itself on pulling its weight.

“We have seen climate change be a factor in our devastating bushfires. We could see it, smell it, even touch it,” he said.

”Our amazing continent is particularly vulnerable, so we have a lot to lose. But the good news is we also have a lot to gain. Action on climate change will mean more jobs, lower emissions and lower energy prices.”

Ms Figueres said it had been “rather odd” that Australia had seemed to be stepping away from the agreement, as the Federal Government battles a split on the issue.

Energy Minister Angus Taylor says the government is not going to “commit to a target without costings and without a clear plan”.

She said Mr Albanese’s commitment was “the only responsible target”.

“It’s the target stipulated in the Paris agreement. The Paris agreement is science based,” she said.

The Federal Government is setting up a Royal Commission on the summer’s devastating bushfires.

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics international | Leave a comment

#ScottyFromMarketing ‘s hypocritical ploy to do nothing effective against climate change

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Frank Simpson warns against the pollution of Victoria’s agricultural land by thorium/uranium mining

Risk in contaminating a prime green food producing region of Victoria. (3) This implies all stages of the fuel cycle from exploration to waste repository storage.
The Act should not be amended to permit exploration for or the mining of uranium and thorium (derived from monazite or thorianite). . Such activities need to be prohibited.
Excerpts from Submission to Victorian Nuclear Prohibition Inquiry from Frank Simpson no 24 
“……Water‐related risk management 
In the event of a serious accident, such as an overheated reactor, a nuclear power plant is required by federal regulation to have an emergency supply of water that can continue to cool the plant for at least 30 days. These water sources, called Ultimate Heat Sinks (UHS), are used to cool the reactor, which will continue to produce heat long after it is turned off. During an accident, a UHS may need to supply 10,000 to 30,000 gallons of water per minute for emergency cooling. A UHS can be the same water source used for power plant cooling (lake, river, or ocean) or it can be a separate, dedicated water supply.
When nuclear plants draw water from natural water sources, fish and other wildlife get caught in the cooling system water intake structures. While this is an issue for all power plants with water‐cooled systems, a study completed in 2005 in Southern California indicates that the problem is more acute for nuclear facilities. The study investigated impacts from 11 coastal power plants and estimated that in 2003, a single nuclear plant killed close to 3.5 million fish‐‐32 times more than the combined impact of all of the other plants in the study. …….
  Waste storage  
  There are no Economic, environmental and social benefits for Victoria,in including those related to exploration and mining;of uranium & thorium because : Risks In Mining Uranium http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/longstaff1/ Uranium mining facilities produce tailings that generally are disposed of in near surface impoundments close to the mine. These tailings pose serious environmental and health risks in the form of Randon emission, windblown dust dispersal and leaching of contaminants including heavy metals and arsenic into the water. [5] Historically in many countries around the world these risks have been politicized as they have disproportionately affected low income and minority populations. For example, from 1944‐1986 the United States extracted 4 million tons of Uranium ore from and left 500 abandoned mines in native Navajo territories. In that time the rates of lung cancer and other diseases effecting Navajo living near the mine rose drastically. [5] While the Navajo eventually were able to ban mining on their land these problems still exist within other communities today and should not be overlooked in considering the future of Uranium mines.
  Water Usage https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/water‐nuclear Mining – Uranium mining consumes one to six gallons of water per million Btus of thermal energy output, depending on the mining method.[6] Mining uranium also produces waste that can contaminate local water sources, and which can be especially dangerous given the radioactivity of some of the materials involved. Processing – Uranium processing consumes seven to eight gallons of water for every million Btus of thermal output.[7],[8]
Milling – The milling process uses a mix of liquid chemicals to increase the fuel’s uranium content ; milling leaves behind uranium‐depleted ore that must be placed in settling ponds to evaporate the milling liquids.[9] Enrichment – The next step, enriching the gaseous uranium to make it more effective as a fuel accounts for about half of the water consumed in uranium processing. The conventional enrichment method in the United States is gas diffusion, which uses significantly more water than the gas centrifuge approach popular in Europe[10],[11] Fuel Fabrication – Fabrication involves bundling the enriched uranium into fuel rods in preparation for the nuclear reactor.
  Risk in contaminating a prime green food producing region of Victoria. (3) This implies all stages of the fuel cycle from exploration to waste repository storage. Victoria does not need o participate in the nuclear fuel cycle.for the reasons given in 1 & 2 above plus waste repository storage risks as per https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/nuclear‐waste are: Nuclear fuel remains dangerously radioactive for thousands of years after it is no longer useful in a commercial reactor. The resulting waste disposal problem has become a major challenge for policymakers as the search for a repository site has stalled, with no resolution likely in the near future. The Union Of Concerned Scientists opposes reprocessing because it increases proliferation and terrorism risks while actually adding to the waste problem rather than reducing it. https://greentumble.com/nuclear‐waste‐storage‐and‐disposal‐problems/
in reality there is no such thing as a safe exposure to nuclear waste and the poisonous radiation it produces. Because of its tremendous toxicity, which will make it lethal for tens of thousands of years or longer, high‐level nuclear waste is not fit for conventional disposal. It must be stored in safe, secure locations, in durable containers that won’t crack, leak, or be vulnerable to damage from bombs, earthquakes, or high‐powered weapons used in military or terrorist attacks.
Conclusion   based upon the above facts The Act should not be amended to permit exploration for or the mining of uranium and thorium (derived from monazite or thorianite). . Such activities need to be prohibited.   ……. …https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/epc-lc/article/4348

February 20, 2020 Posted by | politics, Victoria | Leave a comment

Greens in the Senate will oppose bill to storage nuclear waste at Kimba farm

February 20, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Solar thermal energy the way forward for Australia- says nuclear expert

Dr Wilson described nuclear power as simply “too risky”.

He also said the cost factor was also a major deterrent from going nuclear.

“It’s not the cost of building it. They are expensive to build and they are expensive to run but it’s the cost of demolition when it gets to the end of its life,” he said.

“Nuclear is not cheap, it’s not safe, and will be destructive to key Queensland industries like agriculture and tourism.”

February 20, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy, politics | Leave a comment

Religious leaders urge ScottyFromMarketing to move Australia away from fossil fuels

February 20, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics, religion and ethics | Leave a comment