Minister Greg Hunt did not impress David Attenborough, with his uninformed comments about the Great Barrier Reef
Greg Hunt rebuked by Attenborough film-maker after upbeat verdict on Great Barrier Reef http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/08/greg-hunt-rebuked-by-film-maker-after-great-barrier-reef-verdict
Environment minister told to ‘watch the series’ after saying David Attenborough documentary is evidence reef is safe, Guardian, Melissa Davey and Steph Harmon, 8 Apr 16 Enamoured by stunning footage in David Attenborough’s latest documentary series, the Australian environment minister, Greg Hunt, took it as proof that theGreat Barrier Reef remained an untouched beauty.
But he might have been better off waiting to see the whole series before commenting.
“The key point that I had from seeing the first of the three parts is that, clearly, the world’s Great Barrier Reef is still the world’s Great Barrier Reef,” Hunt told theCourier Mail.
The documentary was one of “profound importance” that “Australia would rightly be proud of”, he continued, and was evidence that the reef was not facing the death that climate change scientists and environmentalists feared.
Hunt made the comments after seeing part one, which airs on the ABC on Sunday night. Had he watched the full series, however, he would have seen footage of coral bleaching and heard Attenborough describe, in the final part of the documentary, how “the Great Barrier Reef is in grave danger”.
“The twin perils brought by climate change – an increase in the temperature of the ocean and in its acidity – threaten its very existence,” Attenborough says.
“If they continue to rise at the present rate, the reefs will be gone within decades. And that would be a global catastrophe. About a quarter of the species of fish in the world spend some part of their lives in the reefs. If the reefs go, the fish will also disappear. And that could affect the livelihood and diet of human communities worldwide.”
The producer of the Great Barrier Reef series, Anthony Geffen, responded to Hunt’s comments, encouraging him to “watch the series, you know”.
“It’s like watching one of those Hollywood movies when everybody’s happy at the front and everybody’s dead at the end, and saying, ‘Well I think the family was really happy and everybody’s really good’, but you haven’t got to the end of the movie, where his whole family is lying on the floor dead,” Geffen told Guardian Australia.
Geffen said the series captured “horrific” levels of coral bleaching, which occurs when rising sea temperatures destroy the tiny marine algae that live inside corals’ tissue and provide up to 90% of the energy corals require to grow and reproduce.
“It was horrific and, obviously, we’ve been very much still in touch with the scientists and some of the areas we’ve just filmed in have been devastated by bleaching,” he said.
“And, in fact, scientists were asking for our footage so they could compare what had disappeared, which is quite extraordinary. I mean [the documentary] is only just coming out in Australia and already the footage is being used as archives to [document] the destruction of the reef.”
However, Geffen described the series, which has already aired in the UK, as “bigger than” and “above” politics.
“This series has gone out to, I think by the end of the year, a billion people or something – that’s what people should be reflecting on,” he said. “And I hope it doesn’t get hacked over by political means and ends, because it shouldn’t.”
Greens lock in behind new push to ban nuclear weapons
9 Apr 16 The Australian Greens today launched a campaign calling for Julie Bishop to support a global treaty to ban nuclear weapons.
In December last year, 138 countries voted at the UN General Assembly in favour of supporting a humanitarian pledge for the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons. Australia did not support this vote.
Greens co-deputy leader and nuclear spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam said nuclear weapons are the most destructive on earth.
“In 1972 the world banned biological weapons, in 1993 we banned chemical weapons, in 1997 we banned land mines, and in 2008 we banned cluster munitions. This campaign calls for Australia to join 138 countries in the UN General Assembly to prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons,” he said.
“The risks are real and the consequences are catastrophic. The best protection against nuclear war is eliminating nuclear weapons.
“At this year’s UN Working Group on Nuclear Disarmament, Australia has an opportunity to stand with the majority of other countries and call for a global treaty banning nuclear weapons.”
Fact Box:
- There are more than 15,000 nuclear weapons belonging to just 9 countries
- In December 2015 the UN General Assembly voted on a Humanitarian Pledge for the prohibition and elimination of nuclear weapons. 138 countries voted in favour, 29 voted against and 17 abstained. Australia voted against the motion.
- In 2016 there will be three meetings of the UN Working Group on Nuclear Disarmament where there will be a push to develop a global treaty banning nuclear weapons
- In Janurary 2016 the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists kept the doomsday clock at 3 minutes to midnight – citing the growing threat of terrorism, climate change and nuclear weapons as the core reason for the threat rating. The Doomsday Clock was at 3 minutes to midnight at the height of the cold war.
- This week the International Coalition to Abolish Nuclear Weapons has launched the “Black Mist White Rain” tour with Aboriginal women from South Australia and the Marshall Islands to discussing the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons.
See the campaign page here http://grns.mp/ban-the-bomb
Paris climate agreement to be signed by Australia
Australia to sign Paris agreement on climate change, ABC News 7 Apr 16 By environment reporter Sara Phillips Australia will be among the first countries in the world to sign the Paris agreement on climate change, with a “very senior” representative being sent to a signing ceremony in New York later this month, according to government sources. Continue reading
Ignorance about radiation, in the self styled “Pro Nuclear Environmentalists (PNEs)”
Australian ‘ecomodernist‘ academic Barry Brook says the Chernobyl death toll is less than 60. Ben Heard, another Australian ‘ecomodernist’ (in fact a uranium and nuclear industry 
consultant), claims that the death toll was 43.
Evidence of PNE ignorance abounds. For the most part, PNEs had a shaky understanding of the radiation/health debates (and other nuclear issues) before they joined the pro-nuclear club, and they have a shaky understanding now.
the WHO, IAEA and other UN agencies estimated 9,000 deaths in ex-Soviet states in their 2005/06 reports, and more recently UNSCEAR has adopted the position that the long-term death toll is uncertain.
Radiation harm deniers? Pro-nuclear environmentalists and the Chernobyl death toll, Ecologist, Dr Jim Green 7th April 2016 “……….the self-styled pro-nuclear environmentalists (PNEs). We should note in passing that some PNE’s have genuine environmental credentials while others – such as Patrick Moore and Australian Ben Heard – are in the pay of the nuclear industry.
James Hansen and George Monbiot cite UNSCEAR to justify a Chernobyl death toll of 43, without noting that the UNSCEAR report did not attempt to calculate long-term deaths. James Lovelock asserts that “in fact, only 42 people died” from the Chernobyl disaster.
Patrick Moore, citing the UN Chernobyl Forum (which included UN agencies such as the IAEA, UNSCEAR, and WHO), states that Chernobyl resulted in 56 deaths. In fact, the Chernobyl Forum’s 2005 report (p.16) estimated up to 4,000 long-term cancer deaths among the higher-exposed Chernobyl populations, and a follow-up study by the World Health Organisation in 2006 estimated an additional 5,000 deaths among people exposed to lower doses in Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. Continue reading
Queensland pioneers electric car chargers – free for public use
Queensland’s first solar-powered electric car chargers available and free for public use http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-07/qld-first-solar-powered-electric-car-chargers-free-for-public/7307430 By Lexy Hamilton-Smith Queensland’s first solar-powered electric vehicle chargers have been installed on campuses of the University of Queensland at St Lucia and Gatton.
They charge 10 times faster than a home charger and will be free for public use. About 15 minutes of charging can provide a range of up to 70 kilometres.
UQ manager of Energy and Sustainability Andrew Wilson said it was a game changer.”The first inter city charger in Queensland enabling long distance electric vehicle travel outside of the city,” he said.”Hopefully this is the start of an electric vehicle highway throughout the state.”
Energy Minister Mark Bailey said sales of electric cars were currently slow, but said the Government would look into how it could develop the sector. “It is a bit like the chicken before the egg,” he said.
Electric cars start from around $50,000 but one sport version is selling for more than $400,000.
Tritium, which designed and built the Veefil charger in Brisbane, said the initiative would kick-start the electric vehicle revolution in Queensland. “It allows easy inter-city electric vehicle travel between Brisbane and Toowoomba,” chief executive David Finn said.
Mobile solar system – a boon to off-grid users
the combination of the financial and carbon benefits of solar with the flexibility and modularity of conventional diesel or gas power was “music to the ears” of off-grid electricity consumers. Systems can be provided on offtake agreements as short as five years
Mobile solar to take on diesel power http://www.smh.com.au/business/energy/mobile-solar-to-take-on-diesel-power-20160406-go0cbe.html April 8, 2016 Angela Macdonald-Smith Energy Reporter
Laing O’Rourke has successfully piloted a mobile solar-diesel project and is set to roll it out commercially under new subsidiary SunSHIFT, writes Angela Macdonald-Smith. Making solar power a realistic economic option for short-term projects that would otherwise wholly rely on polluting diesel energy is the mission of a new mobile solar system to be commercially rolled out by construction company Laing O’Rourke.
Outback mining sites, remote communities and disaster relief projects are all potential users of the system, which has been developed with the help of funding from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.
The Australian arm of UK-based Laing O’Rourke has successfully piloted the moveable solar system, which it combined with diesel power back-up, and has set up a new clean energy business, SunSHIFT Pty, to commercialise it.
Plans for the launch of the system on the market are to be officially announced on Friday and Laing O’Rourke said it had already fielded inquiries for “multi-megawatt” systems, including some from 
emerging overseas economies.
ARENA chief executive Ivor Frischknecht said the plant’s ability to be rapidly set up, relatively cheaply moved and easily scaled up made it suitable for many off-grid applications where power was needed for only a few years. Continue reading
Science for The Public Good: if not CSIRO – then who?
If the CSIRO won’t do research for the public good, who will?, The Age, April 7, 2016 Les Field
Australian society will be the biggest loser if the organisation is forced to abandon its blue-skies work. Scientists in Australia’s universities and research organisations are responsible for ground-breaking inventions such as the world’s first effective influenza drugs; smart mathematics that enabled superfast Wi-Fi and the bionic ear. These have also been resounding commercial successes, and show that local discoveries can be profitable.
Government policy emphasises the importance of commercially focused research and rightly encourages researchers to fully capitalise on their discoveries. But, in our focus on innovation geared towards commercialisation, have we overlooked the tremendous value to our community of research done in the public interest?
It is in this context that the emails sent between CSIRO executives revealed this week are worrisome. The email trail suggested that, in early stages of planning, there was a contemplation of removing all public-good climate research from CSIRO – that “public good” was not considered to be sufficient reason for CSIRO to be carrying on research. While it is important to realise that CSIRO’s priorities will rightly change from time to time to reflect the challenges facing Australia, this sentiment does raise some difficult questions about its role in Australia’s overall science and research effort.
Some of the most critical challenges our society faces – such as combating epidemics of chronic disease or finding ways to better predict natural disasters, or improving our ability to live the good life while caring for our environment – have almost no prospect of generating a commercial return. Yet every Australian would attest to their importance, and recognise that research in these areas contributes greatly to the welfare of the community………
The larger question that must be asked is that if CSIRO is no longer to consider public-good research as a valid endeavour, then who does? Australia’s science and research effort is made up of many players, who all have distinct roles. A substantial contribution to public interest research is made by our universities, who produce much of the fundamental knowledge that innovations are based upon. However, most university researchers work on relatively short projects, dictated by grant cycles……
It is also important to consider that, in the absence of co-ordinated public-interest research, who will investigate uniquely Australian problems? Without the knowledge and expertise of CSIRO’s animal health laboratories, would we today have the vaccine to the Hendra virus that can prevent its passage from bats to horses and then to humans? Who could provide us with a picture of the sustainable limits of water use in the Murray-Darling river system? Who can tell us about the likely impacts of long-term climate change on our coastal cities and our vital agricultural industries? http://www.theage.com.au/comment/if-the-csiro-wont-do-research-for-the-public-good-who-will-20160407-go0p4r.html#ixzz45GxrXlQX
BHP Billiton in the Panama corruption papers
BHP Billiton And Wilson Security Linked To Panama Papers 04/04/2016. BHP Billiton, Wilson Security and a major electricity company in Australia are now targets of the Australian Tax Office, after leaked documents linked all three companies to a law firm in Panama and the British Virgin Islands. http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/04/04/bhp-biliton-wilson-security-panama-papers_n_9607990.html
Panama Papers: Australian companies BHP, Wilson security caught up in tax probe April 5, 2016. More than 800 wealthy Australians are being investigated by the Australian Taxation Office over their dealings with a secretive Panama-based law firm used by the rich to hide money.
BHP Billiton and a security firm that guards major government buildings are among hundreds of Australian names linked to a Panama law firm that helps the rich hide money. …
Four Corners claimed that BHP used Mossack Fonseca offices in the British Virgin Islands to register five companies linked to its aluminium, diamonds, steel and finance arms. http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/04/04/panama-papers-australian-companies-bhp-wilson-security-caught-tax-probe
Panama Papers Update: Law Firm Mossack Fonseca Listed BHP Billiton’s Two British Virgin Islands Companies As ‘Mandatory High Risk’ April 4, 2016. Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca, which is at the center of a massive leak, assessed BHP Billiton Ltd.’s two companies in British Virgin Islands as “mandatory high risk” after the Anglo-Australian mining giant authorized the businesses to receive huge sums of money, the Guardian reported Monday. The exposé related to Mossack FonsecaSunday revealed widespread international corruption connected to offshore tax shelters. http://www.ibtimes.com/panama-papers-update-law-firm-mossack-fonseca-listed-bhp-billitons-two-british-virgin-2347746
The Panama Papers: BHP Billiton’s face-off with Mossack Fonseca April 4, 2016. A financial representative for BHP Billiton threatened to fire notorious Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca if it went ahead with a due diligence investigation. http://www.afr.com/news/policy/tax/the-panama-papers-bhp-billitons-faceoff-with-mossack-fonseca-20160329-gntasr
BHP-owned companies triggered ‘high risk’ alert at Panama law firm April 4, 2016. Mossack Fonseca flagged concerns about two of mining giant’s companies in British Virgin Islands because ‘authorised capital is higher than the norm’ http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/04/bhp-owned-companies-triggered-high-risk-alert-at-panama-law-firm
Panama Papers: ATO investigating more than 800 Australian clients of Mossack Fonseca April 4, 2016. The Australian Taxation Office is investigating more than 800 high net wealth Australian clients of the controversial Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca, which is the focus of an unprecedented leak of tax haven records released globally.
More than 11.5 million documents have been leaked from Mossack Fonseca’s files, revealing the secrets of hundreds of thousands of clients – including several thousand Australians – covering a period over almost 40 years, from 1977 until as recently as last December.
The release of the documents on Monday follows a 12-month investigation by media groups including The Australian Financial Review, led by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) in Washington. http://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/panama-papers-ato-investigating-more-than-800-australian-clients-of-mossack-fonseca-20160403-gnxgu8.html
Australian companies, taxpayers exposed after Panama Papers leak April 5, 2016. Australian companies BHP Billiton and Wilson Security are among those named in the massive document leak, detailing tax dealings of companies and people from around the world.
The cases are part of a leak of 11.5 million documents from Panama-based firm Mossack Fonseca, which reveals how the rich, including political leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, hide their money. https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/31269205/australian-companies-taxpayers-exposed-after-panama-papers-leak/
Australian companies BHP Bilton and Wilson Security among those named in Panama papers leak exposing the use of offshore tax havens
- Australian Tax Office is investigating dealings of 800 high net individuals
- It follows massive leak of Panama papers from law firm Mossack Fonseca
- Secret documents show how law firm allegedly helped clients evade tax
- Treasurer Scott Morrison says government is cracking on tax avoidance
The Australian Taxation Office is investigating more than 800 Australians after a massive leak of financial data revealed how 12 current or former world leaders, a host of celebrities and the global rich are using offshore tax havens to hide their wealth.
Australian-linked organisations and business leaders named in the huge leaks include BHP Billiton, Wilson Security, Gold Coast based company director Ian Taylor, and Hong Kong’s richest man and Australian energy market owner Li Ka-Shing, ABC’s Four Corners reports. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3522798/Australian-companies-BHP-Bilton-Wilson-Security-named-Panama-papers-leak-exposing-use-offshore-tax-havens.html
Carmichael coal project – the whitest of white elephants
Adani’s Carmichael mine is just not going to happen, The Age, April 5, 2016 Michael West Business columnist Adani is not going to happen; the construction, that is, of the leviathan Carmichael mine, the world’s largest thermal coal mine in the hinterland of the Great Barrier Reef.
Much is the wailing and gnashing of teeth at the move by the Queensland government to approve the project but this approval is entirely political.
The evidence is compelling. Carmichael is the whitest of white elephants.It is all about the appearance of commitment to jobs, jobs that will never occur unless the coal price doubles, and it is about the government not getting bashed up by the opposition for being anti-jobs and abandoning its election commitments.
Even Adani is coy. No sooner had the Indian conglomerate been granted approval than it deferred the project for another year. Buried in the detail of its press release was this: “opportunity for final investment decision and construction in 2017”.
Reaching “final investment decision” would require willing financiers with a cool $10 billion just for Phase One. But Adani’s bankers have long since fled the scene.
There would be no taxpayer support nor “dredging [of the reef] at Abbot Point [port] until Adani demonstrates financial closure,” said Resources Minister Anthony Lynham.
The head of the world’s biggest power provider, chairman Liu Zhenya of China’s State Grid Corporation, recently told a US energy conference the ramp-up of renewable energy and ongoing integration of wind and solar power projects into the grid were gathering pace.
“A fundamental solution [to address power needs and climate change] is to accelerate clean energy,” Liu told his audience of energy executives. The eventual aim was “replacing coal and oil”.
The Panama Papers: The files reveal the darker side of the BHP Billiton merger
The Panama Papers: The files reveal the darker side of the BHP Billiton merger
The Mossack Fonseca files raise questions about the 2001 merger between South African miner Billiton Plc and BHP Ltd— beginning with how dependent the British arm of the big miner has become on tax-free profits from its Singapore marketing hub to pay dividends. (subscribers only)
http://www.afr.com/news/policy/tax/the-panama-papers-what-the-files-reveal-about-the-billiton-merger-20160404-gny1fo#ixzz44tblBLDa
Roundup of news on the Panama global financial corruption scandal
Panama Papers: Mossack Fonseca labels leak a ‘crime and attack’The revelation of the Panama Papers detailing the off-shore structures of many wealthy clients is a “crime” and an “attack” on Panama, the law firm at the heart of the scandal has said.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/mossack-foncesa-says-panama-papers-a-crime-and-attack/7296858
Panama Papers: FIFA officials, Lionel Messi, Michel Platini named in secret offshore files Disgraced FIFA officials, suspended UEFA chief Michel Platini and Barcelona superstar Lionel Messi were amongst the names found the Panama Papers — leaked documents which reveal offshore financial dealings of the world’s rich and famous.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/fifa-officials-and-lionel-messi-named-in-offshore-files/7296140
Panama Papers leak: Australian security company Wilson linked to Hong Kong corruption scandalLeaked documents have revealed that two brothers embroiled in a massive Hong Kong corruption scandal were ultimately in control of an Australian security company that earned roughly half a billion dollars in lucrative government contracts.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/australian-company-wilson-linked-to-hong-kong-corruption-scandal/7291178
Panama Papers: Tax office investigating 800 Australians identified in financial record leak The Australian Tax Office (ATO) is investigating 800 Australian residents named in a massive leak of tax and financial records known as the Panama Papers. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/tax-office-investigating-800-australians-in-panama-papers-leak/7296512
Panama Papers: Iceland PM Gunnlaugsson urged to resign amid Mossack Fonseca data leak By International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and ABC staffPressure is mounting for Iceland’s Prime Minister to resign after an unprecedented leak of data revealed accusations he used an offshore company to hide millions of dollars in investments in Iceland’s major banks.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/iceland-pm-urged-to-resign-amid-panama-papers-scandal/7295742
Panama Papers: Vladimir Putin associates, Jackie Chan identified in unprecedented leak of offshore financial records An unprecedented leak of more than 11 million documents has revealed the hidden financial dealings of some of the world’s wealthiest people, as well as 12 current and former world leaders and 128 more politicians and public officials around the world.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-04/unprecedented-leak-of-offshore-financial-records-exposes-secrets/7293524
The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ): The Panama Papers: Exposing the Rogue Offshore Finance Industry Leak of more than 11 million documents show heads of state, criminals and celebrities using secret hideaways in tax havens.https://panamapapers.icij.org/
Panama Papers: Greens call for Wilson Security to be stripped of contracts after corruption scandal links exposedThe Greens have called on the Federal Government to strip Wilson Security of its contracts for offshore immigration detention centres after revelations the company has links to a Hong Kong corruption scandal. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-05/greens-call-for-wilson-security-sacking/7299736
Panama Papers: Here’s who has been caught in the fallout of the Mossack Fonseca leak The unprecedented leak of more than 11 million documents from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca has revealed some of the hidden financial dealings of the world’s rich and powerful.
Here’s a look at some of the more high-profile people feeling the heat after the scandal broke.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-05/who-has-been-caught-in-the-panama-papers-fallout/7299666
Panama Papers: Iceland PM Gunnlaugsson refuses to resign over tax leaks; protesters take to streets Iceland’s Prime Minister is refusing to resign after leaked tax documents known as the Panama Papers revealed accusations he and his wife used an offshore firm to allegedly hide million-dollar investments. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-05/icelandic-pm-refuses-to-resign-over-panama-papers-leak/7298944 (Actually I think that he has now resigned)
Panama Papers: Fraudsters, former tax officials among Australians identified in Mossack Fonseca leak Convicted fraudsters, directors banned by the corporate regulator and former Australian Tax Office (ATO) officials are among hundreds of Australians linked to companies incorporated by Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-05/australians-identified-in-mossack-fonseca-panama-papers-leak/7297964
(Read more about this investigation by ICIJ journalists and more than a hundred other media partners at:https://panamapapers.icij.org/about.html – and check out the videos and reading list.)
Medical education now addressing radiation risk with medical imaging
30376 – Radiation protection of the patient, RACGP March 16 GplearningMany medical imaging procedures involve exposure to ionising radiation. The immediate and long-term benefits of these procedures are widely understood. However, in clinical settings, both referring and radiological medical practitioners often have limited awareness of the actual doses of radiation and risks involved.
While risk associated with any single procedure is likely very small, the cumulative effect of frequent, often repeated and potentially inappropriate radiographic imaging presents a real public health concern for risks such as radiation-induced cancer.
This activity will cover the measurement of radiation associated with medical imaging; the effects of radiation exposure; the radiation associated with specific imaging procedures; and issues in clinical decision making, including evidence based medicine and risk communication.
The premise of justification is simple: the benefit of the test must outweigh the harm. In clinical practice, the process of justification is often less clear.
GPs are responsible for more imaging referrals than any other group. Most of these referrals are justified (the benefits far outweigh the risks) however, recent reviews suggest that between a significant number of medical radiation exposures may be unnecessary.
This activity will discuss the radiation associated with specific imaging procedures; and issues in clinical decision making, including evidence based medicine and risk communication. …….http://www.racgp.org.au/education/courses/activitylist/activity/?id=32177
Bureau of Meteorology might be able to take over CSIRO’s lost climate research
Bureau of Meteorology plan to take over CSIRO climate change research, The Age, April 5, 2016 Adam Morton, Peter Hannam, The Bureau of Meteorology has offered to save climate research that CSIRO plans to axe under a plan that would see long-term programs and dozens of jobs transfer between the two national science agencies.
The proposal, discussed at a meeting convened by chief scientist Alan Finkel last month, is the most concrete of several ideas thrown up by the scientific community in a bid to retain internationally respected climate researchers and data collection.
Scientific agencies were taken by surprise when CSIRO chief Larry Marshall announced in February that the organisation would stop climate data collection as it re-positioned itself as an “innovation catalyst”, focusing on work that was financially attractive to government or private partners.
The recasting of the century-old Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, initially linked to about 350 job cuts including up to 100 climate scientists, has drawn criticism from some research institutions in Australia and overseas.
It is understood the Bureau of Meteorology put forward two proposals that would see it hire either 40 or 50 CSIRO scientists as it took on more climate measurement and modelling – but was contingent on additional funding to pay for them. CSIRO is yet to respond in detail……….. Continue reading
Traditional Owners Wangan and Jagalingou condemn Queensland’s decision to approve Carmichael coal mine
QLD Mines Minister Lynham’s Adani mine approval shows gutless and morally bankrupt approach of Government to Traditional Owners’ rights Wangan & Jagalingou Family Council 3 April 06:
“Minister prefers Adani’s misleading and inflated jobs figures to respect for the law and human rights, say Wangan and Jagalingou people
The Wangan and Jagalingou (W&J) people today responded to the announcement by QLD Mines Minister Anthony Lynham that he is issuing mining leases to Adani for the Carmichael coal mine. The coal mine is the biggest proposed in Australian history and if built will permanently destroy the W&J’s vast traditional homelands in the Galilee Basin.
W&J spokesperson and traditional owner Adrian Burragubba said, “This is a disgraceful new low in the exercise of Government power at the expense of Traditional Owners’ rights. Minister Lynham and Premier Palaszczuk should hang their heads in shame. History will condemn them.
This is the wrong mine, at the wrong time, on the wrong side of history. Their actions are reckless and dishonourable. “In October 2015 Minister Lynham confirmed in a letter to our legal counsel that he would await the outcome of our Federal Court action against the mine before considering issuing the leases. Late last year and again this year he said he would wait for the matters before the courts to be resolved so as not to run the risk of having his decision invalidated.”
Mr Burragubba’s legal representative and human rights lawyer,
Benedict Coyne of law firm Boe Williams Anderson, said…http://wanganjagalingou.com.au/gutless/
Political terms versus environmental time-lines – the South Australian nuclear waste folly
Saving the Environment or Centralized Control of a Monopoly in Power (Electricity)? Pan Chemistry, Gareth Lewis 03/03/15 “………Political terms versus environmental time-lines 
This section raises an important point with environmental issues or challenges: the short duration of political terms (often three to six years) limits the amount that can be done in the field of environmental protection. This means that global problems, such as air pollution and global warming that have no geographic boundaries and are likely to be long-term challenges may not be attempted. Even ‘smaller’ challenges like preserving the Great Barrier Reef and ensuring the viability of water supply and usage along the River Murray cannot be addressed in any one political term (nor have they been): there’s just insufficient time and funds to do so. Additionally, the political fallout from such ventures may not ensure the duration of the political term (a political paradox). A case could easily be argued that such issues should be written into Federal politics and once initiated they should go ahead regardless of the social and political climate.
The proposed nuclear industry and global radioactive nuclear waste dump in South Australia is similarly a complex issue and will affect many generations to come. However, given the comparatively simple challenge of managing water supply and usage along the Murray River how likely is it that a proposed nuclear industry would be managed efficiently? I am not being overly ‘emotive’ here, I’m simply saying this: any proposed nuclear industry will ‘outlive’ a Royal Commission, a State and Federal Government and all of us! So; very careful consideration is needed, not only for the current generation of Australians, but for future generations who will not have a say in the decision making process that will determine the cleanliness and viability of ‘their’ environment………
Is the notion of establishing a nuclear industry in South Australia really about centralized control in the creation and distribution of energy (electricity)?
A skeptic 
could easily argue that the use of nuclear energy has nothing at all to do with ‘saving the environment:’ but that it’s really about centralized control in the production and sale of electricity in a monopoly system. After all, it’s easy to control a centralized supply and demand system, and it’s exactly what we have in place today in the world-wide production and sale of fossil fuels.
This notion of ‘centralized control’ is a whole topic in itself and is beyond the scope of the original question: ‘should a nuclear industry (uranium mining, sale of uranium and storage of global radioactive nuclear waste) be established in South Australia. My personal opinion (emphasis) and answer to this question at this time is no. I believe we have sufficient solar energy and land mass in Australia to develop and perfect the solar cell industry and such technology could then be licensed and sold overseas. Besides, the success of this approach has been clearly demonstrated in other countries, many of which have far less sunshine and land mass than Australia.
Additionally, the inherent risks of initiating what may be an untethered proliferation of nuclear (fission) power plants has also been demonstrated in the past at Chernobyl and Fukushima, with close calls in Long Island. However, what has not been demonstrated (thankfully) is what could happen to our environment (groundwater and surrounds) if global radioactive nuclear waste was compromised in transit or in storage by man-made or natural means. It remains to be seen whether the proposed Royal Commission will make the ‘right recommendation’ to the government in South Australia that will benefit and protect not only the current generation, but also of many future generations of Australians: so; fingers crossed :-\ 😉 http://www.gareth-panchem.com/347345675?pagenum=2
1 This month.
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
Antinuclear 