Production at Australia’s only nuclear medicine facility halted after ‘safety incident’
Production at Australia’s only nuclear medicine facility halted after ‘safety incident’ Production has ceased and an urgent investigation has been launched after two employees at a newly opened Australian nuclear medicine facility at Lucas Heights were exposed to an unsafe dose of radiation late last week.Just two weeks after it was granted a licence to enter into full domestic production, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (Ansto) has confirmed production at its new $168m nuclear medicine facility has been halted after “a safety incident” on Friday morning.
Ansto said three of its workers were “attended to by radiation protection personnel” after the incident, in which contamination was detected on the outside of a container holding 42 millilitres of the radioisotope molybdenum-99 (Mo-99).
Two of those workers received a radiation dose above the legal limit roughly equivalent to a conventional cancer radiation therapy treatment, an Ansto spokesman said……
Located at the Lucas Heights nuclear facility in Sydney’s south, the $168m nuclear medicine facility was announced by the federal government in 2012 with the goal of tripling Australian production of Mo-99, the parent isotope of Technetium-99m. …..
It is the second contamination scare at the Lucas Heights facility in only a few months.
In March three staff at the Lucas Heights nuclear facility were taken to hospital after they were exposed to sodium hydroxide when a cap came off a pipe in the nuclear medicine manufacturing building. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/24/two-workers-exposed-to-unsafe-radiation-dose-at-lucas-heights-nuclear-facility
Lithium is valuable for many clean devices, but we can’t just ignore the wastes from its mining
Enormous lithium waste dump plan shows how shamefully backward we are SMH, Emma Young, 25 June 19 Emma Young covers breaking news with a focus on science and environment, health and social justice for WAtoday. We are all – well, all of us who are privileged enough – existing on a spectrum somewhere between “concerned” and “downright panicking” about human impact on the environment.
Western Australia holds some of the world’s richest known lithium deposits and now has an emerging industry to process that lithium here, not just ship it to China as previously done.
It’s part of a plan to make us more than just the world’s quarry; a bigger player in an industry promising big money, and bring jobs and industry to the South West.
But we have run up against a reality, in the very recognisable area of the Ferguson Valley: a reality predictable, yet startling.
Lithium mining will leave its own scars on a landscape already littered with tens of thousands of abandoned mining voids, pits, equipment and piles of tailings – and create its own waste.
In WA’s South West, processing of spodumene ore from the Greenbushes lithium mine will result in 600,000 tonnes per year of waste material being dumped – or ‘stacked’, if you want the euphemism – only 3.5km outside the charming little town of Dardanup.
Let me repeat that: 600,000 tonnes per year.
The application has offended the residents who already put up with dust, rubbish and runoff from the existing and already enormous landfill site.
To them, it’s on the nose.
And it’s not just sand and dirt. It’s waste of a kind so new to Australia that they had to get samples from China to find out what to classify it as.
Cleanaway submitted to the EPA that it was inert and non-toxic waste.
Yet no sustainable market exists for its reuse.
“By storing tailings in dedicated storage cells, in the event a sustainable market for reuse was developed, the material might one day be recovered,” it submitted, optimistically, to the Environment Protection Authority considering its proposal.
Somehow, I find it hard to believe that it is any miner or processor’s priority to find or develop such a market.
Queensland’s nuclear cowboy MPs join One Nation’s Marlk Latham to push for nuclear power
Nationals MPs urge rethink on nuclear, THE AUSTRALIAN GRAHAM LLOYD, ENVIRONMENT EDITOR, 24 JUNE 19, Scott Morrison is being asked to support a full investigation of nuclear energy in Australia.
Queensland Coalition MPs Keith Pitt and James McGrath have drafted a letter to the Prime Minister together with proposed terms of reference for an inquiry, which will be delivered this week.
The letter will call for a review of advances in nuclear energy including small nuclear reactors and thorium technology, both of which could produce less radioactive waste than existing nuclear plants.
Commercial investigation of nuclear energy will require that a ban on considering the technology be removed from the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
Mr Pitt said that the nuclear issue was “a debate we are ready to have”.
“In our view the technology has moved on and small modular reactors and thorium need to be investigated,” Mr Pitt said.
…….. Critics of nuclear energy claim it would be unable to compete economically with renewable energy and storage.
……. The Morrison government has been reluctant to consider changes to the EPBC Act on nuclear power. But the act in its entirety is up for statutory review this year.
……. The Nationals MPs expect a public review to take from 18 months to two years.
The call for a national inquiry coincides with a review into the potential of nuclear power in NSW, to include former federal Labor Party leader and newly elected One Nation MP Mark Latham.
Mr Latham has introduced a bill in the upper house of the NSW parliament to repeal the uranium mining and nuclear ban in the state.
A parliamentary inquiry will be held by the eight-member, multi-party Standing Committee on State Development of the upper house. Mr Latham will be a member of the committee.
An issues paper is being prepared by the NSW Parliamentary Research Service for public release. The committee will call for submissions and is likely to conduct public hearings as early as September. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/nationals-mps-urge-rethink-on-nuclear/news-story/4c5c90a4b49f890dba49a10444f1294d
Robert Parker still pushing the fantasy that nuclear power could be viable in Australia
Australian Nuclear Association vice-president Robert Parker joins Jane to discuss the future of the industry in Australia.
Australian States taking the lead on energy policy, as renewable energy generates more Queensland jobs than coal does,
It’s ironic, perhaps, that in an election cycle where a number of regional Queenslanders voted for the promise of blue-collar jobs, backing the party that backed the Adani coal project, renewables generated more than 13,000 actual jobs in construction, with a lot of that activity in north Queensland.
Liberal states in talks to revive Turnbull’s dumped energy policy In Canberra, a month on from Scott Morrison’s election victory, there is talk of feasibility studies for a new Queensland coal plant, and a nascent nuclear debate. But if we shift our vantage point to Adelaide, Australia’s near-term energy outlook looks very different.
Dan Van Holst Pellekaan, the Liberal energy minister, is talking about South Australia hitting 100% net renewables by the 2030s. When asked to explain what that means, he tells Guardian Australia “producing more renewable energy in South Australia than we need for our own consumption and exporting the surplus”.
There is no talk of coal, apart from the inevitability of its displacement.
The South Australian renewables export plan relies on a new interconnector with New South Wales. Van Holst Pellekaan says if the proposed interconnector is approved, there are opportunities to construct large-scale solar and wind farms in the north-east of the state, on pastoral land, adjacent to the transmission equipment. “Then we start to displace coal in NSW,” he says. “It’s not just about a bit of renewable energy making a difference … that’s where you start to get a really big win on emissions reduction.”
But pushing ahead with that kind of progress is much easier if there’s a national framework driving the transition. Post-election, Van Holst Pellekaan wants Canberra back at the table being collaborative, implementing a coherent energy policy.
What the South Australian doesn’t say, but is obvious to people who know how the Coag energy council works, is the states can force this issue if they choose to.
If they can agree among themselves about what needs to happen, they can create a framework setting out the rules of the road even if the commonwealth resists.
Liberal states drive energy policy reboot Continue reading
Climate change bringing sea-level rise to Victoria’s low-lying towns and suburbs
Rising sea, erosion to wreak havoc in low-lying suburbs: report, The Age , By Benjamin Preiss and Adam Carey
Other places at risk include areas around Queenscliff and Barwon Heads on the Bellarine Peninsula; the south-west Victorian towns of Port Fairy and Portland; and Tooradin, Lang Lang and Seaspray in the state’s south-east.
A report tabled in Victoria’s Parliament last week examines the myriad threats to the state’s fragile coastline, painting an alarming picture of damage to the environment and suburban Melbourne if no action is taken.
The Victorian Environmental Assessment Council report cites a 20-centimetre sea-level rise by 2040 and between 40 centimetres and one metre by century’s end.
Sea-level rise will lead to more frequent inundation of low-lying areas, loss of coastal habitat, cliff, beach and foreshore erosion,” the report says.
“Climate change will also put pressure on ageing coastal infrastructure and ultimately impact on feasibility of living in or developing some coastal locations.”
Increasing storm intensity, coupled with rising seas, will cause extensive erosion of the Victorian coastline by 2040, the report says.
“The most extensive area vulnerable to erosion by 2040 is the Gippsland coast,” it says. “Other coasts at risk include west of Portland, beaches in Port Phillip Bay between Mordialloc and Frankston, and the coast between Cape Paterson and Cape Liptrap in South Gippsland.”
Sydney City Council. Mayor Clover Moore to declare city climate emergency
Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore said Australia’s largest city needed to step up and show global leadership, especially given the failure of “successive federal governments (which) have shamefully presided over a climate disaster”.
Liberal Sydney Councillor, Craig Chung, one of two Liberal councillors who plan to oppose the motion, told The Australian while he supported action on climate change, he strongly objected to Ms Moore’s “hysterical, catastrophising” message.
“Language like climate emergency, climate catastrophe and extinction rebellion do nothing to further reasoned and rational debate,” Mr Chung said.
“If we learned one thing from the May 18 (federal) election, polarised fear mongering is not what the community want. The electorate expects us to take action, debate clearly and rationally about solutions, stop weaponising language and to deliver measurable and tangible outcomes for all Australians.”
Mr Chung said he would be proposing an amended version of the lord mayoral motion, stripped of all its “hysterical elements”.
Ms Moore said the nation was now experiencing such extreme weather “91 of the hottest places on Earth were in Australia”.
She said heatwaves across the country were now five times more likely, and “even more alarming — they start earlier, become hotter and last longer”.
“Seventy per cent of the world’s emissions are generated from cities, so the action city governments take is absolutely critical,” Ms Moore said.
Ms Moore has asked Council to call on the Federal Government to respond urgently to the emergency, by reintroducing a price on carbon to meet the Paris Agreement emissions reduction targets, and establishing a Just Transition Authority to ensure Australians employed in fossil fuel industries find appropriate alternate employment.
“Successive federal governments have shamefully presided over a climate disaster, and now we are at a critical juncture — we face a climate emergency,” she said.
“Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions have increased for four consecutive years. It is clear that the current Federal Government’s policies are simply not working and I call on council to declare a climate emergency, step up our efforts to hold the Federal Government to account. “With 96 per cent of NSW still drought affected, our farmers and rural communities are being decimated by drought, suffering from water shortages and extended bush fire seasons, witnessing unprecedented fish kills and the death of once mighty river systems.”
The Lord Mayor, outlining the City of Sydney’s action on climate change since 2008, committed to accelerate work in the development of its strategic plan till 2050.
“We set a goal to reduce our emissions by 70 per cent by 2030, and — following the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015 — we set a more ambitious goal to reach net zero emissions by 2050”, she said.
“We became Australia’s first carbon neutral council in 2007, and as of June 2017, we’d reduced emissions in our own operations by 25 per cent. By 2020, we will be powered by 100 per cent renewable energy, allowing us to meet our 2030 target by 2024 — six years early.”
According to the International Climate Emergency Forum, over 600 jurisdictions in 13 countries have now declared a climate emergency. The Climate Emergency Declaration campaign in Australia is supported by over 50 climate action groups, including the International Climate Emergency Forum, Extinction Rebellion, and Greenpeace Australia.
Environmental groups are now considering a legal challenge To Queensland’s approval of Adani mine
Queensland approval of Adani plan ‘unlawful’, say environment groups Activists consider legal challenge, saying rules related to source aquifer have been compromised, Guardian, Ben Smee@BenSmee 23 Jun 2019
The Queensland environment department may have acted “unlawfully” when it approved of Adani’s groundwater plan, in the process backing down on a longstanding requirement that the miner provide definitive proof about the source of an ancient desert spring.
Environmental groups are now considering a legal challenge to the approval, partly because the state’s Department of Environment and Science (DES) appeared to negotiate a last-minute compromise with Adani rather than applying strict conditions.
The DES insisted on Friday that it had not changed its position when granting approval for Adani’s groundwater dependent ecosystems management plan – the final hurdle that will allow the company to begin construction of the Carmichael coalmine.
But documents obtained by Guardian Australia, and an email sent by a DES spokesman on 9 April, indicate that the department softened its interpretation of a key requirement in the politically charged weeks before clearing the proposal.
The email of 9 April says the department believed the CSIRO and Geoscience Australia had highlighted “uncertainties” about whether Adani had identified the source aquifer of the Doongmabulla Springs complex.
“Based on the CSIRO and Geoscience Australia report, it would appear that a number of uncertainties remain, including whether the (groundwater plan) definitively identifies the source aquifers of the Doongmabulla Springs Complex, which has always been a requirement for state approval,” the email says.
Four days after the federal election, the Queensland premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, insisted on a timeframe for DES to make a decision about the groundwater plan. When the clock ran out on 13 June, Adani’s plan was approved, and DES had subtly changed its language.
It said Adani had “sufficiently” identified the “main source aquifer”. The miner’s conditions require it to identify the “source aquifer(s)”……. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jun/23/queensland-approval-of-adani-plan-unlawful-say-environment-groups
Resources Minister Matt Canavan changes his tune – now REJECTS nuclear power !
What a waste: Minister’s question for nuclear inquiry, Courier Mail, 21 June 19, RESOURCES Minister Matt Canavan has shied away from backing an inquiry into nuclear power in Australia, as he warns a permanent home would need to be found for high-level waste first.
He said a facility to store low-level radioactive waste from medical facilities had not been agreed on, despite a 40-year search.
Some of his Queensland LNP colleagues, led by Member for Hinkler Keith Pitt and Senator James McGrath, are pushing for a two-year inquiry into nuclear power
Senator Canavan said he did not believe it stacked up financially and it could cost more to generate power than existing energy sources.
He said the British Government had recently underwritten a nuclear power station, guaranteeing a price of $140/megawatt hour, which is higher than the $100/megawatt hour price currently paid in Australia.
“I don’t think it’s the right choice right now for Australia, mainly from a financial and cost perspective,” Senator Canavan said.
“The Government’s focus has been on getting prices down in Australia.
“That’s why right now I don’t think the current technology of nuclear technology is a solution to that.”
Senator Canavan also warned that a facility for storing high-level radioactive waste would need to be found. “We have been trying for 40 years to find a long-term repository for radioactive waste that is produced at Lucas Heights (nuclear reactor in Sydney) and some legacy waste we have from other activities,” he said.
“If we can’t find a permanent home for low-level radioactive waste associated with nuclear medicines, we’ve got a pretty big challenge dealing with the high-level waste that would be produced by any energy facilities.”
But he said he welcomed his colleagues bringing forth significant policy issues, and would speak to them seeking further detail.
Senator McGrath and Mr Pitt said this week they would write to the Prime Minister seeking his support for an inquiry into nuclear power to go ahead, given it has been more than a decade since the previous investigation.
Australian Nuclear Association lobbies government with its “nuclear vision”
Australians urged to adopt nuclear power, World Nuclear News, 20 June 2019 The 
Australian Nuclear Association (ANA) has appealed to Australians to understand that nuclear energy is ready to make a valuable contribution to low emission dispatchable generation for Australia…… Although it is home to the 20 MWt Opal research reactor, nuclear power has been prohibited in Australia since 1998 under two Acts of Parliament: the Australian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Act and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.In a declaration yesterday, signed by ANA President Dr Mark Ho, ANA noted that nuclear energy supplies 10% of the world’s electricity “safely, reliably, cleanly and economically”…….
To achieve these benefits, Australia needs to do nine things, the declaration says.
These are: repeal long-outdated federal and state legislation preventing its proper consideration; initiate informed public debate towards achieving social licence while acknowledging concerns of safe waste disposal and radiation protection; commit to a genuinely technology-neutral long-term energy policy; focus on affordability, reliability and sustainability, accounting for total system costs in establishing the optimal mix of low emission technologies; enhance Australia’s internationally respected nuclear regulatory regime; facilitate supportive international technology exchange linkages; invite proposals to establish the business case; enhance research and development, drawing on ANSTO’s facilities and expertise; and support every level of education and training needed by emerging industries.
ANA “strongly encourages” the governments of Australia and its states and territories and industry to deliver this vision. “We will contribute to balanced and open public education and communicate constructively with the media on the benefits of nuclear power to help Australia develop a safe, reliable and cost-effective energy sector,” it adds.
ANA is an independent incorporated scientific institution made up of people from the professions, business, government and universities with an interest in nuclear topics. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Australians-urged-to-adopt-nuclear-power
Veteran of Chernobyl nuclear clean-up: HBO TV episode was very accurate
Chernobyl Episode 4 Scene | HBO | Graphite Clearing
This man knows what it’s really like shovelling radioactive debris on top of Chernobyl’s reactor ABC News , 21 June 19
Key points:
- At age 32, Jaan Krinal was forced to go to Chernobyl and clean the roof of the reactor
- He says men were initially enthusiastic to help eliminate the radiation
- One-third of the men of his town he served with in Chernobyl have died
When he left his wife and two children on May 7, 1986 and went to work, Jaan Krinal didn’t know he would be one of those people.
The 32-year-old was working on a state-owned farm in Soviet-occupied Estonia.
Because he’d been forced to complete the Soviet military’s retraining a year before, he was confused when officers surprised him at work and said he’d been called up again — immediately.
Jaan and 200 other men were taken to a nearby school. Once they’d walked through the door, no-one was allowed to leave.
The men’s passports were seized before they were loaded onto buses and taken to a forest, where they were told to slip into brand new army uniforms.
“That’s when I first questioned what’s really going on here,” Jaan recalls………
Workers told radiation could have health benefits
It all happened fast.
Hundreds of men boarded a Ukraine-bound train on May 8. By the next evening, they were setting up camp on the edge of Chernobyl’s exclusion zone.
They were just 30 kilometres away from the site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster — the still-smouldering wreckage of a reactor torn apart by a series of explosions and spewing radiation in a plume across Europe.
Jaan was among the first group sent to clean up in the aftermath of the catastrophe.
Tasked with hosing down radiation on the houses in nearby villages, he was thrown into the thick of it……
Despite the apparent uselessness of the job, they continued to work 11-hour days without a day off until the end of June. After that, they had two days of downtime a month.
As the weeks rolled on, suspicions grew.
“We started to have doubts. But all the officers said, ‘Why are you fretting, the radiation levels aren’t that high.”
In a cruel irony, the commanders told the men that being exposed to radiation would actually have health benefits.
“They joked that whoever has cancer can now get rid of it — because the radiation helps,” Jaan says.
Men unaware of deadly reason behind roof time limit
By the end of September, whatever enthusiasm the men initially felt had faded.
As many developed a cough, concerns grew about whether they were being lied to about the radiation being harmless. The respirators the men were given wouldn’t stay on because of the heat and were used until they got holes in them.
Later they found they should have been replaced every day…….
A rumour had it that the very last leg of the assignment was going on the roof of the reactor to clean up as much debris as possible.
Humans were going to be given a task that remote-control robots had previously attempted, but failed. The machines simply stopped working due to the unprecedented levels of radiation.
“When they told us, ‘You have to go to the roof’, we thought, ‘Oh, this means we can go home soon’,” he says.
On the day, he changed his army uniform for a protective suit, glasses and a gas mask, and a metal groin guard.
“We were all lined up and told, ‘who doesn’t want to go on the roof, step forward’. But only a couple of us did,” he says.
“There was no mass rejection. Most people went up there.
“It had to be done. We couldn’t just leave it. I think everyone realised the longer the reactor would have stayed open, the more dangerous it would have become.”
Jaan was shown on a small screen exactly which piece of debris he had to pick up with a shovel and throw off the roof of the reactor, but strictly warned against going too close to the edge.
He had two minutes to complete the assignment — a bell would ring to tell him when to run back.
The two-minute timeframe was to limit exposure to radiation, which could kill a man.
But this wasn’t communicated to the men at the time.
Jaan says the roof-cleaning scene depicted in HBO’s mini-series Chernobyl mirrored real life events…….
A staggering one-third of the men of his town who went to Chernobyl have died.
The average age of death has been 52.
“Over the past couple of years, just a couple of us have died. But not too long ago it was around 10 men a year,” he says.
“There have been cancers. There have been suicides too, but thankfully not too many.”……
he hopes tourists won’t start flocking to the ghost city.
“I hope they’ll never start sending large groups of tourists there. It’s still a dangerous zone,” he says.
He hasn’t seen the mini-series, but welcomes the attention Chernobyl disaster is getting — he thinks it acts as a warning to the human kind. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-22/chernobyl-what-it-was-really-like-on-top-of-reactor/11223876
Extinction Rebellion activists occupy four Australian cities protesting Adani,
Extinction Rebellion activists occupy four Australian cities protesting Adani, Protesters are ramping up anti-Adani demonstrations – tonight taking over four major CBDs – as works on the controversial mine get underway.
SBS BY CHARLOTTE LAM
The Carmichael Coal Mine received its final environmental approvals to begin work on the central Queensland project, after nearly a decade of opposition and debate.
Queensland’s Environment Department last week approved the mine’s groundwater management plan, ultimately giving it the final go-ahead.
Around 60 people have begun construction activity that includes work on the mine access road……https://www.sbs.com.au/news/extinction-rebellion-activists-occupy-four-australian-cities-protesting-adani
“Chernobyl” miniseries is scary, but the dis-economics of nuclear power for Australia is scary, too
What’s more chilling: watching Chernobyl or cogitating on the cost of going nuclear? Michael West Investigative Journalism Jun 20, 2019, The sudden push by the Murdoch media and Coalition right-wingers to overturn Australia’s nuclear power ban ignores the chilling economic cost — huge public subsidies, storing radioactive waste for thousands of years, the heavy costs of decommissioning and, potentially, radiation-related health costs. Veteran nuclear writer Noel Wauchope reports on the popular TV series, Chernobyl, and the economics of nuclear power.
THE frightening TV miniseries “Chernobyl” could put a few Australians off the idea of nuclear power but nuclear economics might turn out to be the bigger scare.
It is bad news for the Minerals Council of Australia and nuclear lobbyists, that Chernobyl has now arrived on some Australian TV screens, but pro-nuclear advocates are continuing to push their campaign anyway.
The miniseries “Chernobyl” has just finished in Europe and USA, outdoing “Game of Thrones” in popularity. HBO’s Chernobyl topped film and TV database IMDB’s list of the greatest 250 TV shows of all time. The first episode was screened on 12 June, 2019 in Australia, on Foxtel.
The series has had a big impact. It was highly praised by numerous reviewers but criticised by pro-nuclear lobbyists, and infuriated some Russian politicians. ………
The Coalition’s renewed push for nuclear power
In March this year, 11 Coalition MPs (Andrew Broad, James Paterson, Tony Pasin, Tim Wilson, Chris Back, Craig Kelly, Eric Abetz, Andrew Hastie, Warren Entsch, Bridget McKenzie and Rowan Ramsey) urged then Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull to put nuclear power on the table as an electricity source for Australia. That call is now repeated by Queensland and Coalition MPs calling for an inquiry into the feasibility of nuclear power in Australia.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison said he is open to considering nuclear power if it can stand on its own two feet. Energy Minister Angus Taylor told The Guardianon 12 June 2019 he wouldn’t rule out revising Australia’s nuclear ban “when there is a very clear business case which shows the economics of this can work”. Two days later, Environment Minister Sussan Ley also told TheGuardian she was open to the review considering a removal of the ban.
But — are the economics of nuclear power viable for Australia?
When even Australia’s former top nuclear promoter has doubts, it doesn’t look promising……….
How viable is nuclear power elsewhere?
Nuclear economics in America is really a tale of woe. You hardly know where to start, in trying to assess how much this industry is costing communities and tax-payers. There are the attempts to save the nuclear industry via subsidies. There are the continuing and ever-increasing costs of radioactive wastes. There are the compensation payments to workers with radiation-caused illnesses, $15.5 billion and counting, and the legal battles over where to put the wastes. Needless to say, really, America is not initiating any new nuclear “big build”. The much touted “Small Modular Nuclear Reactors” are turning out to have no market and little prospect of being economically viable……
The UK nuclear industry is in the doldrums with repeated postponement of new projects – Hinkley Point C, Wylfa Newydd, Moorside, Sizewell C, Oldbury B and Bradwell B……The 2018 forecast for future clean-up of Britain’s aging 17 nuclear power stations has blown out to £121 billion which has had to be spread across the next 120 years……
France’s Flamanville nuclear project is taking years, remains bogged down with costly problems. Electricite de France (EDF) has financial woes but hopes to save itself by switching from nuclear to renewables. France’s former nuclear giant AREVA went bankrupt and has changed its name to Orano and Framatome — and French tax-payers are still caught up in Areva/Orano costly legal corruption scandals.
Canada is up for increasing costs for managing its nuclear wastes. Interestingly, Canada abandoned its nuclear project for producing medical radioisotopes and now leads in non nuclear production of these isotopes.
India had grand plans for nuclear power, but has cut these back, and recently cancelled 57 reactors. It continues to have problems and many outages, at its huge Kudankulam nuclear station. ….
Russia keeps offering “generous” funding to the buyer countries. But will those countries end up with big debts? Reuters reports that in China, “No new approvals have been granted for the past three years, amid spiralling costs” ………….. https://www.michaelwest.com.au/whats-more-chilling-watching-chernobyl-or-cogitating-the-cost-of-going-nuclear/
Liberal and National party MPs mistaken. Nuclear power WAS investigated in 2015, and found to be uneconomic
Robyn Wood, 20 June 19, The Liberal and National party MPs are mistaken when they say that nuclear power hasn’t been investigated since nuclear physicist Ziggy Switowski. They need to be aware that the South Australian government had a Nuclear Royal Commission in 2015/6. The majority pro nuclear power members found that nuclear power was not economic compared to renewables. Renewable technology is rapidly improving and the price dropping, while nuclear power plant costs are rapidly escalating and plants being shut down across the world. The report is available online. Even Mr Switkowski said in 2018 “the window for gigawatt-scale nuclear has closed”. Now is not the time to waste precious taxpayer’s money but to get on building renewables that are cheaper than even coal.
GOLD Coast-based Federal MP Karen Andrews OK with nuclear power, but exactly where on the Gold Coast?
Gold Coast nuclear plant in the mix: but where would you put it on the tourist strip? , Gold Coast Bulletin, 19 June 19
GOLD Coast-based Federal MP Karen Andrews has been challenged on where she would want a nuclear plant on the Glitter Strip after not ruling out the energy option.
Ms Andrews, the Member for McPherson, was on Sky News today when asked about nuclear energy following the release of CSIRO’s Australian National Outlook report.
The report compares two versions of the Australia in 2060, and predicts the nation will enter a “slow decline” if challenges are not met head on.
The Industry, Science and Technology Minister was asked about the findings including that Australia could reach zero emissions by 2050.
But she admitted coal would be “part of the energy mix for some time in the future”.
Asked about nuclear energy, Ms Andrews replied: “I don’t have an issue with it being considered.”
Opposition climate change and energy spokesman Mark Butler seized on the comments saying it was another senior Liberal backing nuclear.
“We know nuclear power plants need to be built near water so would Minister Andrews, the Member for McPherson, like the nuclear power stations in her electorate, lining the Gold Coast,” he said.
“Would the Minister prefer the nuclear plant in Coolangatta, Robina, Burleigh Heads or Palm Beach? Scott Morrison needs to make his position clear.”
Mr Butler said the Prime Minister last year had indicated “where something can stack up and can actually bring the prices down, well I’m all for it.”
“Just last week, Energy Minister Angus Taylor told would not rule out nuclear power either saying, ‘If there is a clear business case there is a clear business case’,” Mr Butler said.
“The pressure is now on Scott Morrison to take real action to end the energy crisis that emerged under the Liberal Government. “So far, all the Liberals are promising in energy is expensive new coal-fired power stations and a growing pressure from Morrison’s backbench for Australia to pursue even more expensive nuclear power.”
1 This month
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
19 May – Webinar- Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-05-19 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-05-19 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
20 May – Webinar – The dangerous world of AUKUS, US, military occupation and suppression of dissent
National Webinar, 20th May, 2026, 6.30pm AEST. Confronting laws restricting/suppressing protest speech and action
Speakers: Former Sen. Rex Patrick, Lawyer Nick Hanna ,Arthur Rorris ,Jorgen Doyle, Sen David Shoebbridge,
Facilitator Kelley Tranter.
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 