Exposing the vested interests of pro nuclear publicists like Oscar Archer
Dennis Matthews, 26 Feb 16 The Advertiser newspaper has been printing lots of Letters to the Editor on the nuclear issue.
Two pro-nuclear letters caught my attention.
One was by a writer (Oscar Archer) who is regular contributor to a pro-nuclear website, and who prides himself on having a PhD in Chemistry. The PhD, however, is in an area of chemistry not evenly faintly related to nuclear issues and is no basis for claiming any special insight. What is highly relevant however is that the supervisor of his thesis was Stephen Lincoln who, as a member of the board of SA Nuclear Energy Systems, has a vested interest in promoting the nuclear industry.
Another letter was written by a geologist (Sean Kennedy) who was one of the people acknowledged by Senator Edwards as contributing to his submission calling for an integrated nuclear industry in SA.
Noel Wauchope – Oscar Archer is a star publicist for the nuclear lobby. And – he really gave the game away in a talk on ABC Radio National “Ockham’s Razor” – in which he elaborated the plan of USA nuclear industry “new nukes” – their idea to set up a suite of experimental SMRs -Small Modular Reactors in Australia at their own expense. All Australia has to do to get these is to invite in the world’s radioactive trash. They don’t mention that SMRs need plutonium or enriched uranium to start the reaction – so Australia would have to import those, to get these reactors working.
Interesting that they just call them “SMRs” – leaving out that unpopular word “Nuclear”. As USA govt has difficult safety regulations for setting up new nuclear reactors, why not have Australia be the guinea pig?
Adelaide Advertiser poll – nearly all supporters of nuclear waste import had vested interests!
Dennis Matthews, It was heartening to see that in a survey stacked with vested interests (The Advertiser, 23/2/16), of those who had no apparent vested financial or professional interest only two people supported the importation of high-level nuclear waste into South Australia and one of those had imprecise information about Finland.
Stacking inquiries and surveys is a trade mark of the nuclear lobby.
I look forward to the day when we can trust the business community, media and politicians to be honest with the people of South Australia and to stop treating us as like idiots.
Naively, I thought this would have happened after the State Bank fiasco in 1991. Consecutive South Australian Premiers have clearly demonstrated that they have learnt nothing from past indiscretions.
It is now up to ordinary South Australians to keep South Australia free from exploitation by vested interests and incompetent politicians.
China criticises Australia’s ‘Cold War mentality’,in its planned $150 billion military spendup
Defence white paper shows Australia’s ‘Cold War mentality’, says China, February 26,2016 Philip Wen China correspondent for Fairfax Media
Shanghai: China has accused Australia of maintaining a “Cold War mentality” with its alliance with the United States, following the release of the Turnbull government’s defence white paper which criticised China’s role in rising tensions in the South China Sea.
At a regular press briefing in Beijing, Defence Ministry spokesman Colonel Wu Qian said China was “seriously concerned” about the contents in the white paper, and that it was “firmly opposed to the accusations against China’s construction activities on the islands and reefs in the South China Sea”.
“We urge the Australian side to cherish the hard-won good momentum of development in bilateral relations, and don’t take part in or conduct any activities that may compromise the stability in the region,” Colonel Wu said at Thursday’s briefing, alluding to pressure on Australia to join the United States in sailing warships within 12 nautical miles of China’s artificial islands in the sea in so-called freedom of navigation operations…….. http://www.smh.com.au/world/defence-white-paper-shows-australias-cold-war-mentality-says-china-20160226-gn4d6j.html#ixzz41PmdN1zf
Australia’s $150 billion Defence white elephant spending
Sub-standard plan for Defence, SMH, February 27, 2016 Michael West Business columnist After a welter of strategic press leaks, targeted with the precision of a laser-guided missile, the 2016 Defence white paper was finally unveiled this week.
Defence spending has the added allure of political expedience. Who can argue with a government bent on safeguarding its citizens from future unspecified invaders? Certainly not the opposition……
It may cost taxpayers $150 billion.
Although the cost to design and build each of the 12 submarines is mooted at $4 billion – just shy of a Medibank float – the cost of running them is far greater. They describe the submarine spend as the “largest defence procurement program in Australia’s history”.
Chance of attack is small
The white paper concedes there is but a remote chance of a military attack on Australian territory by a hostile foreign power. Further, it says Australia cannot afford to equip, train and prepare its military forces solely for the remote prospect of such a major attack.
This would leave the defence forces less capable of addressing the wide range of more likely threats Australia faced to 2035.
So the policy is therefore to devote unprecedented billions of dollars, the biggest defence outlay ever, to build submarines on the implausible chance of a foreign military attack.
China is not discussed much, though it is deemed by Defence to be the biggest threat. There are a few brief references in the paper though there is no discussion of what sort of force we would need if China were to attack.
And you don’t have to be a defence guru to work out that Australia would stand little chance of withstanding a Chinese military with its 70 submarines, 2.3 million frontline personnel and $US155 billion defence budget.
The white paper’s submarine analysis is flimsy. The first subs only become operational in the 2030s, at the end of the strategic environment which the paper addresses.
It fails moreover to establish why this weapon system is superior to far more agile, responsive and modern air and surface weapon systems for meeting the faint threat of invasion, or how the huge outlay is justified……
The public deserves better than for this critical issue of defence spending to be treated as such a sacred cow that there is no debate about it in Parliament and no more than feeble inquiry in the mainstream media.
You could select the tiniest thing on the share market and bet it would boast superior disclosures to Defence white paper 2016.
Rather than having cash thrown at them willy-nilly, the armed forces should undergo the same blow-torch as other institutions. You can bet there is a lot more fat in defence than the ABC (whose white paper coverage has also been lame).: http://www.smh.com.au/business/comment-and-analysis/substandard-plan-for-defence-20160226-gn4cx3.html#ixzz41PkqKAgL
Australian Senate passes motion calling on Western Australia to drop Anti-Protest Law
Federal Senate Urges WA Parliament To Drop Anti-Protest Law, New Matilda, By Thom 
Mitchell on February 24, 2016 The Federal Senate has passed a motion calling on the West Australian government to abandon “divisive and unnecessary” anti-protest laws which have been strongly condemned by the United Nations.
The motion, introduced by Greens Senator Rachel Siewert and passed on the voices, adds to a long list of institutions and individuals who are concerned about what Colin Barnett’s government is proposing.
Last week three separate United Nations Special Rapporteurs issued a joint statement condemning the anti-protest laws, saying it would have the “chilling affect of silencing dissenters”.
“It would go against Australia’s international obligations under international human rights law, including the rights to freedom of opinion and expression as well as peaceful assembly and association,” the three Special Rapporteurs said.
Hundreds of people protested against the bill at the West Australian Parliament yesterday, and a coalition of more than 80 community organisations, legal centres, and unions have signed an open letter opposing the bill. The Federal Senate this afternoon noted “the important role public protest and free speech have played, and continue to play in a healthy democratic society”. However that role may be dramatically curtailed by the time West Australia’s Parliament adjourns tonight.
The bill is being progressed in the lower house of the state Parliament this afternoon, having moved through the upper house last week.
The legislation will inevitably pass, because the Barnett Government controls both houses, but it faced nearly a year of staunch opposition from Labor and the Greens.
The anti-protest law creates two new criminal offences. Under the first, it will become illegal to physically and intentionally prevent a lawful activity being carried out. And under the second, it will become illegal to possess with the intent of using, or to use a “thing” to prevent a lawful activity.
On top of this extremely broad drafting, there is concern that the onus of proof is reversed for both new offences. The President of the West Australian Law Society, Mathew Keogh has previously said that the bill “may erode fundamental aspects of our criminal justice system”.
“The legislation is so broad that it is almost impossible to say how they may be applied down the track,” he said……..
Senator Siewart takes a different view, arguing “were it not for peaceful protest, awful projects such as James Price Point would have gone ahead”.
“The anti-protest laws that Colin Barnett is pushing through State Parliament attacks free speech, public protest and a healthy democratic society,” Siewart said.
“I urge Colin Barnett to consider the calls of the Senate, as well as the United Nations, and abandon these divisive and unnecessary laws,” she said. https://newmatilda.com/2016/02/24/federal-senate-urges-abandonment-of-anti-protest-law-as-wa-parliament-prepares-to-pass-it/
Australian govt’s new fossil fuel “growth centre” !
Coalition digs deeper into fossil fuels with new “growth centre” http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/coalition-digs-deeper-into-fossil-fuels-with-new-growth-centre-82395 By Sophie Vorrath on 25 February 2016
Part of the government’s $248 million Industry Growth Centres Initiative, the Oil, Gas and Energy Resources Growth Centre was unveiled on Wednesday by federal energy minister Josh Frydenberg and minister for innovation and industry, Christopher Pyne. The ministers said they hoped the facility – in which the Turnbull government is investing $15.4 million over four years – would help position Australia’s energy and resources sector for the next wave of investment.
It will be chaired by long-time oil and gas industry executive, Ken Fitzpatrick, with a board and management team drawn from across the oil, gas, coal seam gas, coal and uranium industries.
According to the website, the growth centre’s mission is to reduce industry costs, direct research to industry needs, improve work skills, facilitate partnerships and reduce regulatory burdens.
It will also have a particular focus on improving knowledge and techniques needed to unlock Australia’s marginal gas resources like coal-seam gas – a controversial and high-cost field of exploration and production that AGL Energy recently ruled out of its repertoire to focus, instead, on the “evolution” of the energy industry.
Pyne says the new growth centre – which will be known as National Energy Resources Australia, or NERA – will work closely with researchers from universities and the newly streamlined CSIRO, the irony of which was not lost on critics of the scheme.
“Pouring millions of dollars into research for the fossil fuel industry adds insult to injury for the CSIRO climate scientists who are set to lose their jobs under Malcolm Turnbull and his government’s watch,” said Greens energy spokesman Adam Bandt on Thursday.
“Not only is the Liberal government allowing the CSIRO to cut climate science, it’s making the scientists who don’t lose their job try to breathe life into the dying fossil fuel industries.
“(It) is pouring millions of dollars into a big hole in the ground, which is directly at odds with what the science tells us we must do,” Bandt said.
The Australian Conservation Foundation said the establishment of NERA amounted to another multi-million dollar subsidy to big polluting energy companies. “This money would be better spent extending the funding of the Australian Climate Change Science Program which is due to expire in June this year,” said ACF climate program manager Victoria McKenzie-McHarg.
“The world has changed since the Paris agreement. This budget the government should focus on supporting the science, technology and clean energy innovation of the future, not keep subsidising pollution.”
“Australia’s energy and resources sectors make a vital contribution to the Australian economy,” said Frydenberg in a statement on Thursday. “During this challenging time, the Growth Centre will drive collaboration and innovation, and direct research to industry needs, ultimately improving productivity to ensure Australia remains globally competitive.”
Aboriginal landowners shocked at plan for nuclear waste dump close to sacred site
Traditional owners in the Flinders Ranges say nuclear waste dump threatens cultural heritage ABC NORTH AND WEST MICHAEL DULANEY Traditional owners in the Flinders Ranges say a Federal Government nuclear waste dump could destroy significant cultural heritage and countless sacred sites around a permanent spring. The lush vegetation and birdlife along Hookina Creek, 30 kilometres north of Hawker in South Australia, stands out even among the imposing space and scale of the central Flinders Ranges. Its permanent waters are fed by aquifers that bubble up to feed ‘an oasis’ of reeds and large eucalypts bursting from the dry heat and dust of the pastoral landscape.It is an area integral to the lives of the Adnyamathanha people for generations and whose presence has left a rich cultural and archaeological record along the creek.
These waters are also just a few kilometres from Wallerberdina, a cattle station near Barndioota partly-owned by former Liberal senator Grant Chapman.
It is also one of six sites nominated to host Australia’s first nuclear waste dump.The Adnyamathanha people, who manage the Yappala Indigenous Protected Area which shares a boundary with Barndioota, said they were “shocked” by the prospect of storing Australia’s low and intermediate level nuclear waste so close to a significant cultural site.
Traditional owner Regina McKenzie said the facility would jeopardise their links to a place important for the present — a place where her children have learnt to swim and the family comes to camp — as well as the past, as seen in the tools, paintings and storylines that mark the area.
“The emotional stress we’re feeling is off the charts,” Ms McKenzie said. “We’re still the custodians here; we’ve always looked at it that way.”
The Adnyamathanha people are also worried about the risk from large floods known to hit the area, and elder Enice Marsh pointed out damage around the creek caused by the last flood a decade ago.
Ms Marsh said she feared the loss of her people’s heritage in the region if rising flood waters mixed with radioactive waste. “If we’re going to have that poison stuff here, even if it’s a low-level situation, it’s just absolute madness to put something like this near somewhere that’s so special,” she said.
“It’s everything; it’s a type of importance that you would never be able to describe. “The connection to this land for Adnyamathanha people is their culture, their customs; it’s their identity.”…….
With a final decision from the Government due by the end of the year, Ms McKenzie said the Adnyamathanha people would continue to oppose the expansion of the nuclear industry into their traditional lands.
“We’re feeling as though we’re being forced to do something we don’t want to do,” she said. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/traditional-owners-flinders-ranges-fears-on-nuclear-waste-dump/7195030
Aboriginal cultural heritage threatened by plan for nuclear waste dump in Flinders Ranges
Flinders Ranges communities divided over whether to host Australia’s planned nuclear waste dump , ABC News, By Nicola Gage 23 Feb 16 Communities in South Australia’s Flinders Ranges remain deeply divided over whether the nation’s nuclear waste should be stored locally.
Wallerberdina Station, north-west of Hawker, is one of six locations being considered by the Federal Government to house low-level waste…… Meetings have been held in the region recently and Flinders Ranges Council Mayor Peter Slattery said there were mixed feelings in the community…….
Traditional owners vow to fight against waste dump For the Adnyamathanya people of the Flinders Ranges, their land is filled with songlines and sacred sites.
Traditional owner Regina McKenzie said she wanted to send a strong message to the Federal Government that her people did not want a dump built locally. “We’re just hoping that it’s not going to be here,” she said. “The amount of archaeology and the amount of heritage that’s in this area is way, way too high. “It’s actually the site of our first storyline that runs 70 kilometres from Hawker right down to Lake Torrens, so it’s a very significant place for us.”
Adnyamathanya man Tony Clark helped successfully fight against a nuclear dump being built at Woomera a decade ago.
He said he would fight with the same vigour against any proposal to store nuclear waste in the Flinders Ranges.
“This is a pristine area and represents a dreaming story that we want to preserve,” Mr Clark said.“The white man preserves ancient things in museums, this part of our land is our museum.“So our great-grandchildren can come along with their great-grandchildren and show people.”
The Federal Government is expected to make a final decision on a site by the end of the year. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-24/flinders-ranges-communities-divided-over-nuclear-waste-dump/7194592
Senate motion today on nuclear waste dumping and community opposition
22 Feb 16 NOTICE OF MOTION
I give notice that on the next day of sitting I shall move that –
The Senate –
- Notes that
- the Australian Government has initiated a voluntary site selection process for a
national radioactive waste facility; - consecutive Ministers have confirmed that a such a facility would not proceed against the wishes of host communities;
- six sites have been selected for further assessment for shortlisting, including Hill End in New South Wales, Omanama in Queensland, Hale in the Northern Territory, Cortlinye, Pinkawillinie and Barndioota in South Australia;
- strong local opposition clearly exists at all six sites currently under consideration, and;
- Calls on the Government to:
- Acknowledge the opposition and lack of community support at all six sites
- Respect previous commitments on non-imposition and the importance of community consent and remove all six sites from further consideration
- Initiate a genuinely independent inquiry to investigate long-term stewardship options for spent fuel, reprocessing wastes, and other categories of radioactive waste, including drawing on international examples and experience;
- Investigate options for active waste minimisation, including increased use of non-reactor based methods for radioisotope production, and;
- Clearly reaffirm policy and legislative prohibitions on the importation and disposal of international radioactive waste.
SENATOR SCOTT LUDLAM
Australian govt lies about medicine and nuclear waste
Government information on nuclear waste is misleading and omits important facts. Failure of informed consent? Medical Association for Prevention of War – health professionals promoting peace 22 February 2016 – MELBOURNE:
Nuclear medicine has been highlighted as a key reason to have a nuclear waste repository. MAPW President, Dr Margaret Beavis observes that ‘The Commonwealth government fact sheet: Information for communities- Key questions answered’ is a gross misrepresentation and reads more like a puff-piece for the nuclear industry. The recently released brochure states “One in two Australians – everyone who has ever had a broken bone, heart scan or cancer diagnosis – will need nuclear medicine at some point in their lifetime.”
“This is very clearly misleading in all three areas” said Dr Beavis . “X Rays for a broken bone rarely require nuclear medicine, the vast majority of heart scans are done by ultrasound, and most cancers are treated by surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, none of which use radioisotopes. Even the assertion the half the population needs nuclear medicine is not credible.”
In addition ANSTO continues to insist that using reactors to produce radioisotopes is the only option. In January 2015 Canada – the world leader in radioisotope commerce – had a successful pilot project for commercial cyclotron production. Current regulatory testing and expansion will likely make Canada self-sufficient through cyclotron generation in 3-5 years. “Cyclotrons are a more reliable, safer and cheaper source of radioisotopes than nuclear reactors, and produce no long term waste, but ANSTO has not mentioned this” said Dr Beavis
Nor is mention made of ANSTO’s plans to increase reactor production (from previously 1%) to supply 25-30% of world markets, vastly increasing Australia’s waste from the generation of medical radioisotopes for international sales. “We already have more waste than we know what to do with” said Dr Beavis “We need community debate before massively increasing radioactive waste production.”
Earlier this month it was reported that ANSTO would stop making radioisotopes next year if a waste repository site was not found. Subsequently in Senate Estimates hearings it emerged this was sourced from a previous document and was not the case. These alarming claims have yet to be widely rebuffed by ANSTO, despite requests to do so.
Finally, the telephone information hotline for communities has been very poor. “Comments such as suggesting televisions and microwaves are radioactive when used are clearly wrong.” said Dr Beavis.
If the government is sincere about informed consent it needs to do much better than this.
South Australia”destined to be locked in to nuclear industry” – Adelaide Advertiser
The Adelaide Advertiser – mouthpiece of the nuclear lobby advises that we should all just give up – “see the light’ and let South Australia just roll over like a tame dog, and let the nuclear juggernaut roll over it.
we hosted the British nuclear bomb tests at Maralinga in the 1950s, and we have the world’s largest uranium mine at Olympic Dam.
So we are destined to be locked in to the nuclear fuel industry for decades to come. – Chris Kenny, The Advertiser 21 Feb 16
National Radioactive Waste Management Act overrides any local opposition to nuclear waste dump
Overriding opposition, Jim Green 21 Feb 16 Bruce Wilson said it would be unlikely that the federal government would override state/territory government opposition to a repository. But that’s exactly what the federal government did the first time round (1998– 2004). And that’s exactly what the federal government did in the NT (2005– 2014). As Wilson acknowledged, the government retains the power to override state/territory governments in order to impose a radioactive waste repository/store. The government should amend the legislation so it no longer has that power.
Wilson said the National Radioactive Waste Management Act is consent-driven ‘world’s best practice’ legislation. In fact, it gives the federal government extraordinary powers to override state/territory governments, councils, communities, Traditional Owners and anyone else.
A government rep said the government gave up on the Muckaty / NT site when it realised that community support was lacking. That’s false. The government knew that a majority of Traditional Owners opposed the proposed repository/store in 2006/07 but only gave up in 2014.
Kimba residents are all too aware of the distress and division that the radioactive waste issue has created in the past six months. Muckaty Traditional Owners endured the same problems for the best part of a decade. “We’ll probably have one of the first good sleeps we’ve had in eight years,” Marlene Bennett said when the government finally stopped its thuggish attempt to impose a radioactive waste repository on an unwilling community.
Julie Bishop, Christopher Pyne, Bill Shorten do their bit for the pro nuclear dance
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has indicated he is open to the idea as long as there is community support, an economic benefit, and reassurance of environmental protection….
Overall Ms Bishop is optimistic that public opinion is in favour of more engagement with the nuclear fuel cycle………http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/australia-the-ideal-location-for-nuclear-waste-dump-says-julie-bishop/news-story/c2655249dd4f655d05bf809d6d1795c8
Australia breaches Paris climate agreement, damages economy, by cutting CSIRO climate modelling
CSIRO climate cuts will breach Paris agreement and cost economy – report
Cuts to climate modelling and measuring research contradict Australia’s pledge to strengthen commitments to climate science, the Climate Council says, Guardian Michael Slezak 21 Feb 16 Cuts to the CSIRO’s climate modelling and measuring research will breach Australia’s obligations under the recent Paris agreement and will result in huge costs to the economy, a report by Australia’s Climate Council has found.
The report adds to a chorus of eminent bodies and individuals criticising the move, which the CSIRO made after almost no consultation with its own scientists or other research institutions.
Earlier in the month it was revealed CSIRO would be cutting up to 350 staff from climate research programs over two years. Over the following weeks, the organisation’s chief executive Larry Marshallexplained that would result in a loss of about 50% of the staff working in climate modelling and measuring.
In a report titled “Flying Blind: Navigating Climate Change without the CSIRO,” the Climate Council said governments and businesses relied on the CSIRO’s climate modelling and measuring work to make billion-dollar decisions and if the cuts went ahead, would be relying on “guesswork”.
The report notes Australia and the rest of the world agreed to strengthen commitments to climate science at COP21 in Paris in December. “The recently announced cuts to climate science mean that Australia has already reneged on one of its obligations under the Paris commitments,” it concludes.
It cites a number of examples of decisions and industries that have relied on the modelling and measuring performed by the CSIRO:………
An open letter signed by more than 2800 scientists raised similar concerns. In response to the chorus of criticisms, Marshall initially said the response was more like religion than science, and compared climate scientists to oil lobbyists in the 1970s…….
It was revealed in Senate estimates that CSIRO executives did not consult with organisations like the Bureau of Meteorology who depend on CSIRO modelling until 24 hours before the cuts were made public.
Even Ken Lee, the director of the division that would take the brunt of the cuts was only told about the cuts four days before they were announced.
The Climate Council, which produced the new report, is a crowd-funded body that seeks to provide authoritative information on climate change to the community. It was created after the Abbott government cut the Climate Commission when it took government in 2013, and seeks to perform the same job. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/feb/22/csiro-climate-cuts-will-breach-paris-agreement-and-cost-economy-report
Michele Madigan points out the National dangers of transporting nuclear wastes
Nuclear waste danger knows no state borders, Eureka Street Michele
Madigan | 09 February 2016 “……..It would be a mistake for anyone living outside of South Australia to think that the premier’s plan is just a South Australian problem. Transport and containment risks are hugely significant. State boundaries are no guarantees of safety.
Professor John Veevers of Macquarie University notes the ‘tonnes of enormously dangerous radioactive waste in the northern hemisphere, 20,000km from its destined dump in Australia … must remain intact for at least 10,000 years.
‘These magnitudes — of tonnage, lethality, distance of transport and time — entail great inherent risk.’
In 1998 when the federal government identified the central northern area of South Australia to be site for a proposed national radioactive waste dump, it was not only South Australians who were concerned.
In 2003 the mayors of Sutherland, Bathurst, Blue Mountains, Broken Hill, Dubbo, Griffith, Lithgow, Orange, Wagga Wagga, Auburn, Bankstown, Blacktown, Fairfield, Holroyd, Liverpool, Parramatta and Penrith — communities along potential transport routes — opposed ‘any increase in nuclear waste production until a satisfactory resolution occurs to the waste repository question’.
The NSW parliamentary inquiry into radioactive waste found ‘there is no doubt that the transportation of radioactive waste increases the risk of accident or incident — including some form of terrorist intervention’. Continue reading
1 This month
Help Aunty Sue Protect Her Land and Sacred Sites From Destructive Rocket Testing.
.
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
