Taxpayers $100,000,000 to be spent up front BEFORE any decision on South Australia nuclear waste importing
Valdis Dunis Nuclear Fuel Cycle Watch South Australia 24 June 16
Last night on Adelaide ABC TV News, The Royal Commission’s Jacob Engineering Manager Tim Johnson was interviewed after his submission to SA Parliament yesterday. He stated for the government to be certain that a waste dump would be feasible technically and financially would – like any large technical engineering program – require detailed analysis, and given the complexity Jacob’s estimate is about A$100M that the State Government would have to spent upfront BEFORE we could confirm a yes/no to make sure it will work and make money for us.
Should we spend $100M on more nuclear analysis, or spend the money instead on renewables and other services in our state?
http://nuclearrc.sa.gov.au/…/2016/02/JOHNSON-Tim-489-496.pdf
http://www.abc.net.au/news/sa/
Australia joins the nuclear marketing push to India
Australia backs India to join nuclear supplier club, China hesitates http://www.smh.com.au/world/australia-backs-india-to-join-nuclear-supplier-club-china-hesitates-20160623-gpq1pq.html
June 23, 2016 Daniel Flitton Senior Correspondent Australia will formally back India to join the club of nuclear suppliers at a summit in Seoul on Friday, a move that will finally lay to rest a bitter stoush over selling uranium to the nuclear armed giant.
But China has signalled it could veto the bid because India has refused to sign the international treaty to stop the spread of atomic weapons.
The US is strongly backing India to join the 48-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group, seen as the last hurdle to allow international trade in nuclear materials to India.
The bid has been complicated by a late application from Pakistan to also join the group. India and Pakistan have each built atomic arsenals, but insist they only want access to nuclear materials to generate electricity. The potential sale of uranium to India has a long history and is seen as a test of great power rivalry in the region.
Australia fell out with India during the Kevin Rudd years after Labor junked a Howard-era deal to sell uranium to New Delhi on a promise the yellowcake would only be used for peaceful purposes. Mr Rudd insisted allowing India an exemption would weaken global rules, with an angry India insisting it had never spread nuclear technology.
A fierce debate later erupted within Labor after Julia Gillard decided to reverse Australia’s position and back the deal.
Labor’s national platform now calls for the export of uranium “only under the most stringent conditions” and to countries signed up to the non-proliferation treaty, which limits the number of nuclear armed nations and pledges to work toward disarmament.
But Labor has granted India an exception as “an important strategic partner for Australia” despite concern over an Abbott government deal that safeguards on uranium sales to India are too weak and parliamentary calls for additional controls.
Australian diplomats at the meeting in Seoul will “strongly support” India’s application but have yet to commit on Pakistan’s bid.
There is a wait-and-see approach to Pakistan on how it will control export of nuclear materials, given the record of the country’s former chief scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan in providing nuclear technology to Iran and North Korea.
Any country in the nuclear suppliers group effectively wields a veto as the organisation makes decisions only by consensus. China, one of five countries recognised as nuclear-armed nations under international law, has flagged its objection to allowing India into the group without signing the non-proliferation treaty.
But India has refused to sign on, given this would mean surrendering its nuclear weapons.
Australians have saved $4.4bn in a few years, with solar rooftops
the report estimated solar owners will avoid 6.3m tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions in 2016 – which they found is equivalent to taking a third of all trucks off Australian roads.
Solar Citizens found 80% of federal electorates have more voters with rooftop solar 
than would be required to change their sitting members. And of the electorates with the highest numbers of solar owners, seven out of the top 10 were now held by Coalition MPs.
Australians have spent almost $8bn on rooftop solar since 2007, says report https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/22/australians-have-spent-almost-8bn-on-rooftop-solar-since-2007-says-report Solar Citizens says since the 2012-13 financial year, rooftop solar owners have saved about $1bn on their household bills each year, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 22 June 16, Australian households and small businesses have invested more than $1bn a year in rooftop solar over the past five years, spending a total of almost $8bn since 2007, new calculations show.
In its latest State of Solar report, Solar Citizens – which campaigns for, and represents the interests of, solar owners – has for the first time estimated Australian’s out-of-pocket investment in rooftop solar, how much money it has saved consumers, and how much carbon it has abated. Continue reading
New South Wales leading the nation with large scale solar farms
NSW to double existing solar farm capacity with four new plants approved, SMH, Peter Hannam ENVIRONMENT EDITOR, THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD 23 JUNE 16 The Baird government has granted planning approval for four new large-scale solar plants, potentially more than doubling the existing capacity in the state.
The four plants approved for construction have a combined capacity of 175 megawatts (MW), and would generate another electricity for 56,000 homes if built. “NSW is Australia’s large-scale solar leader, with the country’s three largest solar farms and hundreds of megawatts of solar electricity capacity online and in the pipeline,” planning minister Rob Stokes said. Continue reading
Malcolm Turnbull backs importing foreign nuclear waste
Australia could store nuclear waste for other countries, Malcolm Turnbull says, Guardian, Daniel Hurst, 28 Oct 2015, PM tells Adelaide radio that he was sceptical Australia would ever build nuclear power stations, but a larger role in nuclear fuel industry was worth exploring Australia should “look closely” at expanding its role in the global nuclear energy industry, including leasing fuel rods to other countries and then storing the waste afterwards, Malcolm Turnbull has said…….Turnbull made the observations in a radio interview on Wednesday, a day after he named Dr Alan Finkel, a vocal advocate of nuclear power and the outgoing chancellor of Monash University, as Australia’s next chief scientist…..
“we’ve got the uranium [and] we mine it; why don’t we process it, turn it into the fuel rods, lease them to people overseas; when they’re done, bring them back – and we’ve got very stable geology in remote locations and a stable political environment – and store them?”
“That is a business that you could well imagine here.”…….
Turnbull is seeking to bolster the Liberal party’s popularity in South Australia, where the government suffered political difficulties after his predecessor, Tony Abbott, backed away from a pre-election promise to build 12 submarines locally……https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/28/australia-could-store-nuclear-waste-for-other-countries-malcolm-turnbull-says?CMP=share_btn_tw
Green preferences help Labor in the coming election: voting Green is not a waste
The Major Party Myth That Stops People Voting For The Greens https://newmatilda.com/2016/06/21/the-major-party-myth-that-stops-people-voting-for-the-greens/ By Lee Rhiannon on June 21, 2016There are hundreds of thousands of Australian voters who think the Greens have the better policies on issues such as climate change and refugees, but they end up voting for the Labor Party instead. They do this out of fears arising from a lack of understanding of the preference voting system used for the House of Representatives. This mindset also holds back the Greens’ Senate vote.
The crux of the unfounded fear for many progressive voters is the false belief that voting for the Greens ahead of Labor may somehow help the Liberal/National parties win the lower house seat and government.
Of course, if the Greens dropped out of the count and it came down to a contest between the Labor and Coalition candidates as it usually does, any voter who had given the Greens their number 1 vote and placed the Labor candidate ahead of the Coalition, would have their vote allocated to the Labor candidate at full value when Greens’ preferences were distributed.
There is no wasted vote in that. It is a safe way to send a message to Labor and help stop the Coalition candidate being elected. Continue reading
Clean Energy Finance Corporation now being used as Coalition election slush fund
How the Coalition is using clean energy financing as an election slush fund
Some in the sector fear the government is trying to defund the Clean Energy Finance Corporation by stealth. The truth may be a little more mundane, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 20 June 16
After trying in vain to dismantle the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the Coalition is now using Labor’s $10bn financing scheme as an election slush fund, throwing its money at the Great Barrier Reef, at “smart cities” and even at the steel industry in South Australia.
These announcements left some clean energy sector experts crying foul, saying the government was trying to squeeze the CEFC for every last drop, and defund it by stealth.
That might be the case but the truth could be more mundane. The announcements probably amount to little, leaving the spending pledges bereft of substance – but equally doing little to harm the CEFC.
By anyone’s reckoning, the CEFC has been a success. According to its 2015 annual report, it invested $1.4bn, financing projects worth a total of $3.5bn, which would reduce 4.2m tonnes of CO2-equivalent emissions annually. And it did all that while making a profit.
But under the Tony Abbott, who called the CEFC “Bob Brown’s bank”, the Coalition tried unsuccessfully to abolish it, tried unlawfully to stop it operating, and tried – also possibly unlawfully – to stop it investing in windfarms and small-scale solar.
When Turnbull became prime minister he conceded the government had failed to abolish the CEFC but stopped short of giving it his backing……
But now it is certainly playing a crucial role in Turnbull’s re-election campaign. Continue reading
Carbon dioxide hits record highs in Southern hemisphere
Science Daily June 21, 2016 Source: CNRS
- Summary:
- Last month, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) as measured at Amsterdam Island, in the southern Indian Ocean, for the first time exceeded the symbolic value of 400 ppm, or 0.04%. The CO2 concentrations recorded at the Amsterdam Island research station are the lowest in the world (excluding seasonal cycles), due to the island’s remoteness from anthropogenic sources. The 400 ppm threshold was already crossed in the Northern hemisphere during the 2012/2013 winter. In addition, the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere is speeding up, growing by more than 2 ppm annually over the past four years……..https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160621094250.htm
Indigenous and several other groups, nut just Greens, taking Adani to court
Green groups not the only ones taking Adani to court, Daily Mercury Emily Smith | 20th Jun 2016 GREEN groups may be copping the blame for Carmichael coal project delays, but Adani is tied up in three times as many court cases with resources groups.
It’s a point Mackay Conservation Group’s Peter McCallum highlighted following a statement put out by Queensland Resources Council’s Michael Roche last week, that said it was a “relentless barrage of ‘lawfare'” from green acitivsts holding up the $16 billion coal mine.
Out of the 12 cases Adani is fighting in the Queensland courts at the moment, nine are with resources companies, two are with environmental groups and one is with an indigenous group.
Adani is also involved in another Federal Court case with the Australian Conservation Foundation.
“It shows the Queensland Resources Council and the company are just focussed on making us the bad guys,” Mr McCallum said.
“Really, the company is just as litigious as everyone else.”
Politicians have also called for government to introduce a time limit on how long environmental groups have to launch these court cases.
However, Mr McCallum believes new legislation would only make the approvals process “even more convoluted and entangled” than now, because rather than simply initiating a case, groups would first fight for the right to litigate.
“There will be even more litigation as people try and establish themselves as a litigate,” he said…..http://www.dailymercury.com.au/news/resources-companies-taking-adani-court/3048386/
Nuclear Citizens Jury South Australia Saturday, June 25 and Sunday, June 26
The first Jury of 50 South Australians has now been randomly selected with representatives from far and wide across the state ranging in age from 18 to over 65. The jurors will meet for the first time in Adelaide next Saturday, June 25 and Sunday, June 26 for a weekend of deliberations.
South Australians will have the chance to sit in and watch first-hand the deliberations and workings of a Citizens’ Jury. Ten randomly selected people will be able to attend selected sessions of over both upcoming Jury weekends.
To register for your chance to be offered an observer place at one of the Jury sessions, you must first be logged in or registered on the YourSAy Nuclear website, before filling out the application form.
The observers will be able to sit in during a morning or afternoon session. Each day there are between three and four sessions available. All open sessions will be streamed live on the YourSAy Nuclear website
Registration for the first two days of the Citizens’ Jury (Saturday 25 June and Sunday 26 June) will close at 5pm Wednesday 22 June, 2016.
Registrations for the last two days (Saturday 9 July and Sunday 10 July) will close at 5pm on Wednesday 6th July. All applicants’ names will be sorted into a random stratification process which will be
facilitated independently by newDemocracy Foundation. To allocate seats, a random number draw will be conducted.
Does the South Australian plan meet the BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR CITIZENS’ JURY ?
BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR CITIZENS’ JURY - Assurance that the participants are randomly selected from as wide a range as possible.
- Honorarium payment, crèche facilities, and easy-access jury locations, etc, every effort made not to exclude any person because of their situation.
- The selection of a truly neutral Advisory body, with equal representation from pro and anti nuclear witnesses.
- Moderators for the hearings also selected to be neutral.
- Questions well selected so as not to influence the response (this was one of the major failings of the Royal Commission)
- Complete video and audio of the hearings available to the public, (though not the private discussions of the participants)
The public availability of complete audio or video recordings of all jury hearings, (though not of “jury room” deliberations if participants would prefer privacy) is an important aid to transparency. Multiple sources of funding help to ensure that the jury’s organisers are not seen as having a financial interest in producing a verdict that supports the interests of a single funding body. To maximise the scrutiny they provide, the two or more funders should have somewhat opposing interests regarding the subject likely to be under discussion.
The moment in a citizens jury that is most important for its participants is the point at which they deliver their recommendations to those in power. A jury in which jurors are not only allowed to present their conclusions themselves at a press conference, but also undertake work towards ensuring that some of their conclusions are implemented, is a far more empowering process than one in which their verdict is merely extracted by researchers and written up without further input from the jurors. http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU37.html
| Iain Walker <iain.walker@newdemocracy.com.au |
but sub-contracted out to South Australia’s DemocracyCo
- – CEOs are Emma Lawson and Emily Jenke.
Principal Advisor is Ilka Walkley
- CONTACTS:
- 0421 098 355
- 0427 834 062
- Ilka Walkley
- 0409 961 902
- Vivienne Lambert
- 0417 084 475
- Note how the poisoned chalice is always given to women. They can then be blamed when it all stuffs up
David Noonan’s Nuclear waste security brief, in brief
Nuclear waste security brief by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner, June 16
“Proposed International nuclear waste storage exposes Australia to risks of terrorism”
An International nuclear waste storage agenda exposes Australia to a range of potential profound adverse impacts through nuclear insecurity as a target for terrorism.
Claims by the Nuclear Commission Findings Report (Feb 2016, p.16-20) that SA “offers a safe long term capability” for the storage and disposal of high level nuclear waste are contradicted by the fact that Australia will be exposed to significant and developing threats in terrorism over decades of proposed Nuclear port and above-ground waste storage operations.
The UK Nuclear Free Local Authorities are concerned a determined terrorist group could be able to pierce nuclear waste transport and storage casks in use around the world and states that transport of nuclear materials should be limited as much as practical, with safe on-site storage facilities developed instead.
The Nuclear Commission’s nuclear waste transport and storage plans face fast emerging and unexpected nuclear security threats as lethal technology gets ever more destructive. Rocket propelled grenades, demolition charges and innovative available technology like the use of small drones by non-state actors are of increasing concern.
Attacks could seriously compromise operations of a nuclear port or an above-ground nuclear waste storage facility and the extent of impacts could conceivably require the site to be abandoned.
For women, climate change is an election priority
Election 2016: Climate change – an election priority for women, ABC News, 19 June 16 By Erin Stewart Women care more about addressing climate change than men, doubtless because they suffer more from its effects, writes Erin Stewart. So why are the Coalition and Labor not prioritising it in their election campaigns?
In his capacity as the former minister for women, Tony Abbott claimed the best thing he did was repeal the carbon tax.
“As many of us know,” he said in December 2014, “women are particularly focused on the household budget, and the repeal of the carbon tax means a $550-a-year benefit for the average family”.
Aside from overstating his figures, Mr Abbott expressed the absurdly inaccurate view that women were more interested in domestic arithmetic than the world around them. In actuality, women care a great deal about climate change, and are more likely to suffer as a result of it.
Eighty-two per cent of female respondents to the ABC’s Vote Compass felt the Federal Government should do “much” or “somewhat more” to tackle climate change, compared with just 67 per cent of men.
These findings are in line with data from the Pew Research Centre which found 83 per cent of Australian women see climate change as a serious problem, compared with just 71 per cent of men.
Part of the reason for the climate gap is doubtless because women would be disproportionately affected if climate change was not effectively addressed. Chair of Population Health at Western Sydney University Professor Hilary Bambrick said extreme weather events killed more women than men globally because they were less likely to have the resources to survive.
They were also more likely to experience poverty and social restrictions, were less likely to be part of decision-making processes, and were also more likely to be exposed to mosquito-borne diseases in performing household tasks such as collecting water and harvesting food.
The reasons climate change was especially bad for women, Professor Bambrick wrote recently at the Conversation, was “largely because they are overrepresented among the world’s poor and are thus more exposed to these dangers”.
Australian women ‘financially vulnerable’ to climate change The threats are seen in Australia, too. Greens Senator Larissa Waters said she believed women were particularly financially vulnerable to climate change due to structural disadvantage and discrimination.
“With lesser financial means, it will be harder for women to recover from damage to their homes from extreme weather events driven by global warming, such as flooding, droughts or bushfires,” Senator Waters told ABC News…….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-18/election-2016:-climate-change-and-women/7489354
Security dangers in Nuclear Royal Commission’s plan
Nuclear Waste Brief (June 2016) by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner
Proposed International nuclear waste storage exposes Australia to risks of terrorism “In the event of a major nuclear accident, adverse impacts on the tourism, agriculture and property sectors could potentially be profound.” Nuclear Royal Commission Finding 155 Feb 2016, Impacts on other Sectors p.28
An International nuclear waste storage agenda exposes Australia to a range of potential profound adverse impacts in major nuclear accidents and in nuclear insecurity as a target for terrorism.
The SA Nuclear Royal Commission Final Report (9 May 2016, 16 Mb) flagged risks in proposed high level nuclear waste transport and storage and concluded that terrorist attack scenarios are conceivable and rocket attack has the greatest potential to cause a release of radiation from impacted waste transport and storage casks (Appendix L – Transport risk analysis p.312).
In an age of terrorism following the devastating September 11th 2001 attacks there is no room for denial on the real security risks society faces in nuclear and radiological terrorism. Continue reading
Policy of Australian Liberal Party on nuclear issues
Jobs and growth?
1 This month
Read the Public Inquiry Report, the Commissioners’ report, Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception is available to download for free at aukuspublicinquiry.com. Or just watch the replay of the National Press Club Luncheon.
4 November – Will AUKUS keep us safe – at what cost?
the Commissioners of the AUKUS Public Inquiry present their findings at the National Press Club of Australia in Canberra. iview.abc.net.au/show/national-press-club-address
Submissions to the federal government’s new draft framework close on the 13th November 2026.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
