After Fukushima: Nuclear power’s deepening crisis -it’s never appropriate for Australia
Independent Australia By Dave Sweeney | 12 March 2019 Eight years ago the world held its breath as the Fukushima nuclear crisis unfolded in Japan. Today the lands are littered and the seas awash with the consequences of radioactive waste responses and the economic, human and environmental costs are severe and continuing.
Fukushima was directly fuelled by Australian uranium and in its aftermath, this contested trade remains hard hit, as is the wider global nuclear power sector. Globally, reactors are in recession and the promises of the promoters look increasingly hollow.
The nuclear industry is in crisis everywhere.
In contrast, worldwide renewable power generation has doubled over the past decade and costs continue to fall dramatically.
A record amount of new renewable power capacity has been installed worldwide every year over the past decade. Renewables accounted for over 26 per cent of global electricity generation in 2017, while the nuclear contribution languishes at ten per cent. Around our shared planet, over ten million people are employed in renewable energy industries and the trajectory is only going one way.
In January, Australia’s Climate Council, comprising leading climate scientists and policy experts, issued a policy statement concluding that:
‘Nuclear power stations are not appropriate for Australia — and probably never will be.
According to the Climate Council:
‘Nuclear power stations are highly controversial, can’t be built under existing law in any Australian state or territory, are a more expensive source of power than renewable energy, and present significant challenges in terms of the storage and transport of nuclear waste, and use of water.’
This view was reinforced by Federal Labor, at its national conference in December, when it committed to
“prohibit the establishment of nuclear power plants and all other stages of the nuclear fuel cycle in Australia.”
At this time, Shadow Energy Minister Mark Butler was scathing of nuclear advocates, telling ABC Radio:
“This is not a technology that has any opportunity for Australia, it is extraordinarily expensive power as well… we want to focus on renewable energy which is going to bring down emissions, bring down power prices, and power thousands and thousands of jobs.”
China ‒ long seen as the saviour for the industry ‒ has not approved a new reactor construction site for more than two years and is instead prioritising renewable energy. The number of countries phasing out nuclear power now includes Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Belgium, Taiwan and South Korea.
The British nuclear power industry is in free-fall …….
Nuclear lobbyists used to claim nuclear power would be too cheap to meter. Now, it’s too expensive to matter……. https://independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/after-fukushima-nuclear-powers-deepening-crisis,12459
Climate change is a key issue for New South Wales election
Climate change top of voters’ minds in NSW election SMH, By Alexandra Smith March 12, 2019 Climate change is a key election issue for most people in NSW, polling shows, as the environment emerges as a more pressing concern for voters than hospitals, schools and public transport.Exclusive Herald polling shows that 57.5 per cent of voters say they will be swayed by climate change and environmental protection when deciding who to vote for on March 23…….
Internal party research showed climate change played a major role in last year’s Wentworth byelection and is shaping up to be a key issue in former prime minister Tony Abbott’s seat of Warringah.
With climate change again looming as an issue at the federal election in May, Mr Abbott on Friday abandoned his call to withdraw from the Paris agreement to reduce carbon emissions, falling in to line with Prime Minister Scott Morrison on the key policy………
The three independents – Sydney MP Alex Greenwich, Lake Macquarie MP Greg Piper, and Wagga Wagga MP Joe McGirr – are demanding Labor and the Coalition take action on climate change.
The crossbenchers, who will hold the balance of power if the government loses six seats, wrote to the Premier and Mr Daley last week asking them to act on transitioning from coal mining to clean energy……https://www.smh.com.au/politics/nsw/climate-change-top-of-voters-minds-in-nsw-election-20190311-p513bb.html
Uranium tailings at Olympic Dam – radioactive for at least 10,000 years- must be SAFELY managed!
Initial Scoping – Olympic Dam Expansion Issues 22 Feb 2019 David Noonan B.Sc., M.Env.St., Independent Environment Campaigner“……….Radioactive Tailings Management
The 1982 Indenture places an onus on the SA Gov. to grant approvals on terms to facilitate mining.
Roxby Tailings Storage Facilities are to be covered and ‘disposed’ above-ground as final landforms.
Civil society must not accept continued downgrade of standards in Roxby uranium mine expansions.
A full comprehensive safety assessment to determine long term risks from radioactive tailings must be a core required part of this assessment AND apply the 1999 standards set at Ranger mine.
The most recent assessment of Radioactive Tailings Management at Roxby granted Federal and SA Gov. Approvals (Nov 2011) to vastly increase tailings production (from the now lapsed open pit mine proposal) prior to actually carrying out this type of safety study on the long term risks from tailings.
The 2011 Roxby Approvals downgraded the key 1999 standards applied to Ranger uranium mine.
Instead of Federal Gov. required final disposal of tailings (in to a pit) “in such a way to ensure that:
- i)The tailings are physically isolated from the environment for at least 10,000 years;
- ii) ii) Any contaminants arising from the tailings will not result in any detrimental environmental impact for at least 10,000 years;” Olympic Dam Condition 32 Mine Closure (Nov 2011) defers a Mine Closure Plan and only applies unstated environmental outcomes: “that will be achieved indefinitely post mine closure”, and:
“c. contain a comprehensive safety assessment to determine long term (from closure to in the order of 10,000) risk to the public and the environment from the Tailings Storage Facility and Rock Storage Facility.”
Requiring outcomes to “be achieved indefinitely” does recognise that tailings risks are perpetual.
However, rather than specific high standards of outcome set at Ranger for at least 10,000 years, this 2011 approval has unstated outcomes and only references 10,000 yrs as a period of modelling study.
In April 2013 Condition 32 was amended to further defer the safety risk assessment, from “within two years of the date of the approval”, to: “prior to the construction of the Tailings Storage Facility”.
A “No Uranium Recovery” alternative leaves all uranium & associated radioactive decay products in the tails. Roxby mine extracts approx. 2/3 of the uranium from the ore, with 1/3 left in the tailings.
In current mining practice, tailings retain some 90 per cent of the radioactivity in the ore (given the decay product radionuclides remain, thorium & radium ect). Deporting all uranium to the tails doesn’t affect the public interest requirement, in any case, to isolate tailings for over 10,000 years.
Note: BHP “Tailings Facility Update” (19 Feb 2019) claims a review shows “no significant deficiencies” at Olympic Dam Tailings Storage Facilities and says: “BHP supports calls for greater transparency in tailings management disclosure”. The BHP “Dams and Tailings Management” page cites “establishment of independent Tailings Stewardship Boards to undertake reviews”, and says: “A trial of the stewardship program has been completed at our Olympic Dam asset in SA”. https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Noonan-Olympic-Dam-Expansion-2019.pdf
Defence Minister Christopher Pyne sadly admit’s that there’s no chance of Australia developing a nuclear industry
Defence minister’s nuclear industry wish https://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/defence-ministers-nuclear-industry-wish/news-story/fbaeea83b802155c34460a23ce1b5aba
Defence Minister Christopher Pyne wishes Australia established a nuclear energy industry in the 1950s, but he cannot see it happening in the future, Daniel McCulloch ,Australian Associated Press, MARCH 8, 2019
Defence Minister Christopher Pyne believes it’s unrealistic to suggest Australia will ever establish a nuclear energy industry.
Mr Pyne cannot see the overwhelmingly negative community attitudes towards nuclear power shifting in the foreseeable future.
He made the assertion after fielding questions about why Australia’s new fleet of submarines, which are currently under construction, will be powered by diesel rather than nuclear energy.
The minister said Australia would have been the only country in the world with nuclear-powered submarines and no domestic industry to back them up.
“I wish we’d had a nuclear energy industry from the 1950s onward and then this wouldn’t even be an argument,” Mr Pyne told a Sky News defence summit on Friday.
“Bob Hawke said the same thing, but I think the horse has completely bolted.”
My Pyne described the debate around nuclear energy as a “parlour room” discussion.
“Which prime minister of any political persuasion is going to say, ‘I know what we’re going to do, we’re going to start a nuclear energy industry’?
“We have the most, in some respects, irrational debate occurring around the Adani mine but people think we’re going to have a new debate around nuclear energy? I mean, it’s just not real world.”
BHP wants the South Australian government to further weaken standards at Olympic Dam uranium mine
Initial Scoping – Olympic Dam Expansion Issues 22 Feb 2019 David Noonan B.Sc., M.Env.St., Independent Environment Campaigner “……… Mine Expansion Assessment – to drive down Standards?
BHP will shortly release a formal Application to the SA Gov., the SA State Planning Commission & Mines Minister will decide the level of assessment and reporting requirements, and the SA Gov. release “Guidelines” to the EIS. Public consultation & NGO input should occur on draft Guidelines.
These Guidelines to the EIS are crucial to the credibility of the mine expansion assessment and this process is likely to be conducted before the Federal election and to be near binding thereafter.
There are a range of reasons for concern over this Roxby mine expansion project and assessment:
- Public interest appraisal of this 2019 project needs to draw on analysis of BHP Roxby operations from 2005-06 and expansion proposals, process, decisions & conditions to 2013;
- The outdated 1982 Indenture imposes extraordinary legal privileges and vested interests of the proponent, including over Aboriginal Heritage, that are intended to continue to apply;
- A new SA Mining Act currently before Parliament to apply updated standards to all other mining projects in SA is not proposed to apply to SA’s largest mine: BHP Olympic Dam;
- Roxby is also governed by the Mine Works and Inspection Act 1920 which solely provides the powers for Mine Inspectors to enter & inspect and to make Orders, however the Depart has sought to repeal this Act and roll these powers over Roxby into the proponents Indenture;
- The SA Gov.’s Major Project Declaration has sought to impose serious limitations on this assessment, contrary to the standards, coverage, analysis and transparency that are required to inform good public interest decisions and conditions in this case
; · Successive SA Gov.’s have failed to secure a Rehabilitation Bond over the Olympic Dam mine. This process must now do so, requiring a new appraisal of liabilities over all mine operations: existing, enabling 200 000 tpa, and proposed expansion works and impacts; ;
- Olympic Dam should be subject to a statutory mandated 100 per cent Bond applying the ‘most stringent conditions’ over estimated Rehabilitation Liabilities to ensure full costs in radioactive ore mining are secured in advance. See D Noonan submission (April 2017) to the Federal Inquiry on Rehabilitation of Mining (due to report 20 March
- 2019): https://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=3ecf8af6-a640-47d9-96c0-22c03df14728&subId=510447
- Radioactive Tailings Storages at Roxby are designed and operated to leak liquid wastes, with inadequate lining to cut costs. The BHP open pit expansion proposal was also designed to leak. This 2019 expansion project is highly likely to be designed to leak and to cut costs by failing to require physical isolation of tailings from the environment for at least 10 000 years;
- This assessment should include a range of alternatives to the proponent’s vested interest preferences, including that the ‘No Uranium Recovery’ option to only trade in copper and other non-radioactive products should be assessed across all Roxby operations;
- The SA Gov. has a significant conflict of interest in this case and the ‘one stop shop’ Bilateral Assessment Agreement Clause 8.1, c (ii) seeks to constrain the coverage of Conditions applied by the Federal Minister. In practice, this Federal Liberal Gov. failed to impose Conditions on Radioactive Tailings Management in granting uranium mine Approvals in WA;
- The next Federal Gov. must apply the ‘most stringent conditions’ on all uranium mining operations & reject ‘clearly unacceptable impacts’ on MNES under EPBC including on the fragile Mound Springs, as the State of South Australia can-not be relied upon to do so……. https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Noonan-Olympic-Dam-Expansion-2019.pdf
Olympic Dam: Uranium responsibilities and alternative ‘No Uranium Recovery’
“Olympic Dam Mega-Expansion Without Uranium” Report Launch
Initial Scoping – Olympic Dam Expansion Issues 22 Feb 2019 David Noonan B.Sc., M.Env.St., Independent Environment Campaigner “………..Uranium responsibilities and alternative ‘No Uranium Recovery’
Since opening in 1988, Roxby mine has produced toward 80 000 tonnes of uranium oxide and left toward approx. 200 million tonnes of radioactive tailings to remain above ground on-site for-ever.
While this Roxby project is assessed in 2019-20 to a cited BHP Board decision in late 2020, the RioTinto Ranger open pit mine will close and go onto rehabilitation, leaving BHP’s Roxby mine and General Atomics Beverley 4 Mile mine in SA as the only operating uranium mines in Australia.
The Nuclear Free Movement & allies have a responsibility to contest this BHP Roxby mine expansion:
- Australian uranium (from both Roxby & Ranger mines) fueled the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011, always produces intractable nuclear waste, and present’s ongoing dual-use nuclear weapons risks and untenable nuclear accident risks. Australia’s uranium sales deals are also marked by secrecy;
- Australian uranium is routinely sold to nuclear weapon states failing to honor their NPT nuclear disarmament obligations, to non-transparent regimes in China (and previously Russia), and is intended to go on to unstable regions: to the UAE in the Middle East, to Ukraine, and to India – outside of the NPT and in a nuclear arms race with Pakistan.
This BHP Roxby expansion is intended to increase and to ‘lock in’ Australia’s complicity in untenable nuclear risks & impacts, rather than the needed phase out of uranium mining and export sales deals.
In response to the prior BHP Olympic Dam open pit mine plan, the Australian Greens released a report by academic Dr Gavin Mudd “The Olympic Dam Mega-Expansion Without Uranium Recovery” (Dec 2010), with no uranium and only non-radioactive products to leave the Roxby mine.
In the public interest, this technically viable alternative mine configuration – with significant reduced water usage, should be re-appraised in light of this 2019 Roxby mine expansion plan, see the 2010 Report at: http://users.monash.edu.au/~gmudd/files/Odam-Cu-only.pdf
As Senator Scott Ludlam & SA Greens MLC Mark Parnell have said, this is a challenge to BHP and to the SA & Federal gov’s to assess credible alternatives with better environmental outcomes – both here & overseas, see the Report Launch at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qAVtPYcNmU
Note: Uranium has declined over time as a share of Olympic Dam revenue to less than 20 per cent.
ACF/ D Noonan have campaigned for ‘No Uranium Recovery’ at existing & any expanded Roxby mine…….”. https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Noonan-Olympic-Dam-Expansion-2019.pdf
BHP’s grand plans for Olympic Dam uranium mine, using old legislation for open slather on water, Aboriginal rights, environment
Initial Scoping – Olympic Dam Expansion Issues 22 Feb 2019 David Noonan B.Sc., M.Env.St., Independent Environment Campaigner The BHP Roxby ‘Major Project’ Copper & Uranium Mining Proposal: ‘Olympic Dreams: Major step for $3 billion, 1800-job North mine expansion’ (15 Feb, p.1 promo The Advertiser) as SA Gov. grant’s “Major Project” status to assess BHP’s latest expansion plan, to:
- Increase copper production from 200,000 tonnes per annum to 350 000 tpa, with an increase in ‘associated products’ – uranium oxide: from 4 000 to approx. 6 000 tpa;
- Use the outdated 1982 Roxby Downs Indenture Ratification Act to control this EIS assessment under the Mining Minister, with the Indenture over-riding other SA legislation and subjecting Aboriginal Heritage to a constrained version of a 1979 Act across BHP Olympic Dam operations in the Stuart Shelf Area (covering 1 per cent of SA) – rather than the contemporary standards, process and protections in the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988;
- Use a since replaced 1993 Development Act and “Major Project” status Sec. 46 (1) that excludes Appeals regarding the Environment Impact Statement (EIS) process and outcomes;
- Use a ‘one stop shop’ Bilateral Assessment Agreement leaving the SA Gov. to conduct the assessment, including on Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES)under the Commonwealth Environment Protection legislation (EPBC Act 1999), on nuclear actions and on the fragile Mound Springs Endangered Ecological Community – reliant on GAB waters;
- Use the SA Gov. Declaration to “Exclude” existing mining and “enabling activities” up to 200 000 tpa Cu & associated products and resultant impacts from this EIS assessment, “such as: waste treatment, storage and disposal, including but not limited to, Tailings Storage Facility 6, Evaporation Pond 6, additional cells for the contaminated waste disposal facility, and development of a low-level radioactive waste storage facility”;
- And to increase extraction of Great Artesian Basin fossil water “up to total maximum 50 million litres a day annual average” (above the volumes last assessed in 1997 and set at a max of 42 Ml/day) and give BHP rights to take GAB water – potentially up to 2070, with “any augmented or new water supply pipeline from the GAB along with any other wellfield”;…… ……. . https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Noonan-Olympic-Dam-Expansion-2019.pdf
Environment minister Melissa Price and energy minister Angus Taylor lying to the public on Australia’s carbon emissions
Australia’s energy policy is a tangled mess built on a foundation of lies, Guardian,
Last week, environment minister Melissa Price and energy minister Angus Taylor once again hit the airwaves, lying to the public on Australia’s carbon emissions, claiming that emissions are falling.
“Seasonally adjusted, weather normalised” emissions for the September 2018 quarter did fall by a little over 1%. However, this cherry-picked data point deceptively obfuscates the true message that Australia’s emissions have risen year on year since Tony Abbott and Greg Hunt gleefully despatched the carbon pricing mechanism in mid-2014 and replaced it with the emissions reduction fund (ERF) the next year.
The ERF, however, has demonstrably failed to arrest Australia’s growing emissions. Continue reading
Julian Burnside, Greens candidate will take on Treasurer Josh Frydenberg on climate change
Burnside says Greens would not block Labor’s climate change policies, Guardian, Paul Karp, @Paul_Karp,5 Mar 2019
As Greens candidate for Kooyong, Julian Burnside sets up a four-way contest with Josh Frydenberg, Liberal-turned-independent Oliver Yates and Labor The human rights lawyer and refugee advocate Julian Burnside will run as the Greens candidate for Kooyong at the next election.
At a media conference on Tuesday the prominent barrister said he would take on the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, in the blue-ribbon Liberal seat because he believes the “political system is broken”, with major parties listening to their donors not their constituents.
In an interview with Guardian Australia, Burnside suggested the Greens would “not treat the perfect as the enemy of the good” by threatening to block Labor’s climate change policies.
The comment suggests the candidate is keen to avoid a repeat of the Greens blocking Kevin Rudd’s emission trading scheme in favour of an interim carbon price that was later repealed by the Abbott government……… https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/05/julian-burnside-takes-on-josh-frydenberg-as-greens-candidate-for-kooyong
Climate experts warn the Australian government about the nations climbing greenhouse has emissions
Coalition’s climate armour takes beating, SBS, News 4 Mar 19, A group of climate experts has issued a joint statement to the government, calling for a 45-to-65 per cent emissions reduction target on 2005 levels by 2030. A group of climate science experts has warned the government Australia needs more policies to cut greenhouse gas pollution in line with international obligations.
“Climate change is becoming an economic wrecking ball and it’s already having an impact,” the Climate Council’s Will Steffen said on Monday, calling for an emissions reduction target of 45-to-65 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, instead of 26-to-28 per cent.
The joint statement was released after the government’s emissions data revealed last week showed a 0.9 per cent increase on levels in the September quarter compared to the previous year.
While emissions are declining in the electricity sector, this progress is outweighed by rises in transport and industrial energy, fuelled by a 19.7 per cent increase in LNG exports.
Climate Council spokesman and former head of BP Australasia Greg Bourne says the government’s recent policy announcements – including $2 billion for the Climate Solutions Fund – are unlikely to make a significant difference.
“Pollution has increased year on year under the government’s recently re-badged Emissions Reduction Fund,” he said.
“This is a failed policy because it does not effectively tackle pollution from fossil fuels, which contribute the lion’s share to the climate problem.”……. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/coalition-s-climate-armour-takes-beating
Australia’s Energy Minister, Angus Taylor, lying about Australia’s greenhouse emissions
Angus Taylor again falsely claims Australia’s greenhouse emissions are falling, Guardian, Amy RemeikisIn an interview with the ABC program Insiders, Angus Taylor repeatedly stated emissions had decreased by 1% repeating the line first said by the prime minister, Scott Morrison, that Australia would meet its Paris commitments in “a canter”……. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/03/angus-taylor-again-falsely-claims-australias-greenhouse-emissions-are-falling
New South Wales election – 3 Independent MP’s gather strength for climate action
NSW election roundup: independents join forces on climate changeThree possible kingmakers write to premier and opposition leader. Plus: the key promises made this week , Guardian, Josephine ToveyPolls have consistently suggested the main parties are locked in a dead heat, and a Coalition minority government is widely regarded as a likely outcome of the 23 March election.
Greenwich said that whatever the outcome, he would work with either of the major parties to deliver his priorities, with a strong focus on climate change and homelessness……. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/02/nsw-election-roundup-independents-join-forces-on-climate
Unique to Australia – the use of climate funding for upgrading COAL -FIRED plants !!
Green finance experts say Australia is out of step with World Bank, Europe and the US, which are using funding to combat global warming
Australia is the only developed country that allows climate change funding to be used to upgrade coal-fired power plants, green finance experts say.
Experts say allowing Vales Point coal-fired power station to register with the Morrison government’s emissions reduction fund, rebadged this week as a “climate solutions” policy, puts Australia out of step with the World Bank, Europe and the US, which have all rejected using climate financing for coal power retrofits.
The World Bank has issued US$13bn in green bonds since 2008 to stimulate spending to combat global warming.
China has used green bonds to help build new coal-fired plants to replace older, dirtier stations on the grounds it reduces nitrogen-based emissions causing the country’s oppressive air pollution. But it announced in Decemberit would no longer consider “clean coal” plants – which still emit significant amounts of greenhouse gas – investments in green technology.
Sean Kidney, chief executive of the London-based Climate Bonds Initiative, says China’s shift leaves Australia out on its own.
“If you were committed to meeting the goals of the Paris climate agreement, which the Australian government says it is committed to, this is just lunacy,” Kidney says.
“No investors in the western world will accept any green bonds that incentivise anything like coal station retrofits. From an investor’s perspective, coal is a dead duck.”
Emma Herd, chief executive of the Investor Group on Climate Change, says Australia is moving across the trend by considering giving taxpayer support to coal. In addition to the potential support through the climate solutions fund, the government is considering underwriting the cost of building new coal-fired power stations.
In the past fortnight, mining giant Glencore has said it will cap coal production in response to pressure from shareholders, while Rio Tinto stressed it was the only large mining company with no fossil fuel investments, having sold its final coal assets to Glencore last year……..
Even if Vales Point is not successful, critics such as the Australian Conservation Foundation say there is nothing preventing other coal-fired plant owners from applying for a climate subsidy. Major companies are being paid from the fund for other fossil fuel projects: South African miner Gold Fields is getting $1m for a gas-fired plant the company says it would have built regardless; Rio Tinto has received $2m for a diesel-fired power plant at a bauxite mine.
With prime minister Scott Morrison announcing the Coalition would top up the $2.55bn fund with an additional $2bn over a decade, economists and environmentalists have called for emissions from fossil fuels to be dealt with through different policies and for the fund to focus on projects that restore or protect natural habitat……..https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/mar/01/out-on-its-own-australia-the-only-country-to-use-climate-funding-to-upgrade-coal-fired-plants
Matt Canavan, Minister for Resources (not very bright) , got very flustered about nuclear waste dump safety issues
Economics Part 3 NRWMF 20190221
I did enjoy watching Australia’s not very bright Minister for Resources, Matt Canavan, floundering about as he tries to cover up his ignorance of the subject! I did enjoy Matt Canavan triyng hard to shut up Senator Rex Patrick with his inconvenient questions about risks of nuclear waste – risks explained by Dept of Defence!Hansard extract of Estimates Hearing on 21 February 2019 radioactive waste. [20:46]
Senator Canavan :….. we do have the uncertainty of a court case at the moment, the government hasn’t made any decision around future steps to test support for a radioactive waste facility at Kimba or Hawker. ……
the Commonwealth in the selection process? I note that both of those sites were recommended as a possibility in this very extensive report.Senator CANAVAN: hang on, Senator—our security. You’re running a political campaign on a local community issue, but now you’re trying to bring in security issues unannounced, unaired. I don’t think that is appropriate behaviour. …… http://www.mossmusic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Hansard-extract-of-Estimates-Hearing-21_2_19.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0RVyvtH_U2Csq0XvSfz4sV1oDJTLC9dbwhXrOO-YEfSzEyRf0GBw07mQs
Climate and Energy Policies – Liberal/National versus Labor
Libs v Labor: climate and energy policies, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/libs-v-labor-climate-and-energy-policies
A comparison of the climate and energy policies of the Morrison government and the Labor Party.
Liberal-Nationals
– $2 billion boost to the Emissions Reduction Fund over 10 years, rebranded as the Climate Solutions Fund.
– The Paris agreement target for emissions of 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.
– Continuing to fund the Australian Renewable Energy Agency until 2022, and investing what’s left of the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
– Default market prices for energy.
– Underwriting new generation plan to inject more energy into the network.
Labor
– $10 billion for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation over five years.
– $5 billion to set up an independent Energy Security and Modernisation Fund.
– $31 million for an Energy Productivity Agenda.
45 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030.
– 50 per cent of power from renewables by 2030.
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 