Politicians blame wind power for taking out electrical grid in South Australia, Mashable, BY ANDREW FREEDMAN , 30 Sep 16 In the wake of an unprecedented blackout that cut off an entire Australian state from electricity on Wednesday into Thursday, some politicians are vilifying renewable power sources, particularly wind turbines.
Had the state of South Australia, which includes Adelaide, a city of 1.2 million, not put so much emphasis on cutting greenhouse gas emissions by adding renewable energy facilities, these leaders say, the blackout during a rare, extreme storm would not have occurred.
Considering the rapid rise in renewables around the world, including the U.S., the political fight that has broken out in Australia is not an issue limited to one nation. In fact, it could foreshadow future fights if blackouts occur in the U.S. or Europe, two areas where renewable energy use has increased recently……..
However, ElectraNet, which owns transmission lines in South Australia, said the severe storm — which included powerful winds and tens of thousands of cloud-to-ground lightning strikes, damaged three out of the four transmission lines that connect Adelaide with northern parts of South Australia.
None of the politicians have proposed an explaination for how wind turbines could’ve caused such a widespread outage, a first in Australia’s history, whereas ElectraNet has done so.…….
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told reporters that the state’s aggressive push into renewables may have contributed to the unprecedented statewide blackout.
“The failure of the network was a weather event, pure and simple. Extreme weather knocked out 23 transmission pylons. Storms of this magnitude will knock out the power network no matter what the source of power is,” Bray told the newspaper.
A federal inquiry is likely to be launched into the cause of the more than 24-hour blackout, which may settle some of the debate going on now. Officials in states with a high reliance on wind power, such as Texas, will be closely watching the developments Down Under. http://mashable.com/2016/09/29/south-australia-blackout-wind-power/#KFHs2CKfmiqG
October 1, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy, politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
‘Ignorant rubbish’: PM under fire over renewables lecturing Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has lashed out at the prime minister, accusing him of peddling “ignorant rubbish” over renewable energy. SBS World News,
Source:
AAP Malcolm Turnbull has taken another swipe at the renewable energy policies of some state governments as he and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews exchanged angry words over the issue.
Mr Andrews lashed out at the prime minister, accusing him of peddling “ignorant rubbish” over renewable energy after South Australia was blacked out in ferocious storms this week……..
Mr Andrews told ABC radio on Friday Mr Turnbull was “peddling ignorant rubbish, lecturing people about things he knows nothing about and conflating an extreme weather event”.
“It seems like Tony Abbott is back.”
The prime minister had no credibility when he talked about establishing a national renewable energy scheme.
“We are the only jurisdiction in the developed world that had a price on carbon and got rid of it and had a renewable energy target and wound it back,” Mr Andrews said.
The only way Australia could reach the Commonwealth’s renewable energy target of 23.5 per cent by 2020 was through the ambitions of state schemes.
Queensland and South Australia are aiming for 50 per cent and Victoria for 40 per cent, although over longer time frames.
Queensland’s acting energy minister Leeanne Enoch said her state was sticking to its target.
“You never know which Malcolm Turnbull you’re going to get – are we going to get the renewable champion one day and then we’re going to get an almost climate denier the next day,” she said.
“It’s bizarre.”…….http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/09/30/ignorant-rubbish-pm-under-fire-over-renewables-lecturing
October 1, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy, politics |
Leave a comment
SA nuclear dump dreams just fool’s gold: senior Lib, The Australian, September 29, 2016, byMichael Owen http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/sa-nuclear-dump-dreams-just-fools-gold-senior-lib/news-story/a595649777c14703159a462c5d9cb34f
A senior Liberal has broken ranks in what had been a bipartisan approach to inquire into the potential for South Australia to host a repository for the world’s high-level nuclear waste, warning that taxpayers risked wasting money “on fool’s gold”.
Rob Lucas, a former state treasurer and the opposition’s Treasury spokesman, told parliament that intense political pressures would make it near impossible for there to be the required bipartisan support at both federal and state level for the necessary legislative changes to allow such a facility.
Mr Lucas, a member of parliament’s joint committee on the findings of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission, also cast doubt on the potential economic benefits, warning it was not possible to verify “some of the financial estimates in terms of what the state might earn from this facility”.
The Scarce royal commission’s final report, delivered in May, found that building a nuclear waste dump in South Australia could bring in an extra $100 billion over 120 years.
South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill — who faces resistance from federal Labor and his own Left faction — has said cabinet would make a decision in November as to whether to progress the proposal, after extensive community consultation. Latest opinion polls show South Australians almost equally divided on the issue.
Last night, Mr Weatherill, who returned this week from touring the world’s first permanent nuclear waste storage facility in Finland, told The Australian he understood the complexities. “I do agree that this issue poses challenges, not the least for my party, but I feel duty bound to act in South Australia’s and the national interest in progressing this debate,” he said.
Mr Lucas said it would be a “courageous Liberal candidate or member in a federal campaign who would be out there campaigning hard to support Premier Weatherill on a nuclear waste dump or facility’’ in his state.
“At an upcoming federal election … (there will be) federal Labor candidates campaigning in South Australia against a nuclear waste facility in South Australia and potentially candidates from the Greens and the Nick Xenophon Team campaigning against a nuclear waste dump or facility (there). If there is not going to be the support of the federal Labor Party, then we, the taxpayers of South Australia, will be spending tens and maybe hundreds of millions of dollars on fool’s gold — fool’s uranium, fool’s nuclear waste dumps.”
September 30, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, business, politics, South Australia, wastes |
1 Comment
Is this a new low: politicians using a natural disaster to push a fact-free agenda?, Guardian, Matt Grudnoff, 29 Sept 16
Unburdened by evidence, anti-wind campaigners used the South Australian blackout to kick off a debate about renewables while others waited for facts Normally natural disasters are off limits to politicking, at least in the period straight after the event. So it was pretty awful watching politicians and commentators pushing their anti-renewables message on the back of aonce in 50 year storm that hit South Australia and knocked out the electricity grid.
These baseless claims led bulletins despite energy industry experts, upon actual analysis of the situation, reporting that there was no evidence that renewables are in any way linked to the power outage.
The outage is more likely to have something to do with the 80,000 lightning strikes and the winds that knocked over 22 transmission poles. Who knew violent storms could knock the power out?
It’s hard to imagine how coal fired power would have remained on without a grid for the electricity to flow through.
Just before the grid shut down, renewables were not offline. Wind energy was busy producing almost 1,000 Megawatts of electricity. The problem was not a lack of renewable power but a storm-ravaged grid that couldn’t get it to the consumers…….
Resilient renewables
The real irony is that an electricity system that has decentralised renewable energy with battery storage would be more resilient to these kinds of storms. Houses and businesses with their own batteries could have kept the lights on even when the grid went down.
In the past, renewables were more expensive – but those days are over.Renewable energy has fallen in price and battery storage is close behind. Change in how we produce electricity is coming and an anti-renewables campaign will only slow it and make the transition more difficult.
Rather than attack renewables, the government should be putting in place policies that help with the transition. The economics of renewable energy and the reality of climate change mean that it is inevitable that we will leave fossil fuel electricity generation behind. The question is how can we move to the new energy future in the smoothest way possible?
Renewable energy targets, system changes that make it easier to install battery storage, and a moratorium on new coal mines will all help.
Attacking renewables in the wake of a massive storm might help some people’s political agenda but it will do nothing to help South Australians build a reliable and resilient energy system.
Matt Grudnoff is the Senior Economist for The Australia Institute. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/29/is-this-a-new-low-politicians-using-a-natural-disaster-to-push-a-fact-free-agenda?CMP=soc_568
September 30, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy, politics, South Australia, wind |
1 Comment
Finland’s false hope for Australia’s nuclear future Independent Australia, 26 September 2016 Premier Weatherill is using Finland’s nuclear waste dump model as a benchmark for Australia but they are not comparable, says Noel Wauchope.
SOUTH AUSTRALIAN PREMIERJay Weatherill has gone to Finland to study their nuclear waste storage project.
With the premier are three stalwarts of the mining and nuclear lobbies: marketing man Bill Muirhead, chief executive of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Consultation and Response Agency (CARA) Advisory Board Madeleine Richardson and chair of CARA John Mansfield.
Unsurprisingly, they all seemed to have no anxieties about nuclear waste disposal.
Premier Weatherill waxed lyrical in The Advertiser about the Finland waste disposal site, describing it in operation:
There, spent nuclear fuel is placed in eight metre long iron canisters, encased in copper tubes … Inside the underground tunnels, the canisters are placed in deep holes.
Reading this, you would think that is actually happening in Finland. But no — that’s just the plan. The facility, in fact, has no nuclear wastes yet disposed of there. In fact, no wastes will be placed there until 2020, at the earliest.
Weatherill’s comments imply that the Finland project and the South Australian plan are pretty much the same kind of thing. Well, apart from some rather obvious differences in climate, which might matter, the whole plan is different.
South Australia’s nuclear waste import plan would need a dump substiantially larger than Finland’s waste dump:……..
Just for high level nuclear waste alone, it will require a waste dump 14 to 28 times the size of Onkalo (69,000 high level nuclear waste canisters). And for decades, half of the high level nuclear waste will be stored above ground in a temporary facility.
A perhaps even bigger deception is in Weatherill’s main theme, praising Finland for its transparency and community consent, since that is a subject of considerable dispute. ……
Sweden has the Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review. It is a coalition comprising five NGOs working with nuclear and radiation safety issues, advising the Government and informing the public. The coalition is financed by the Government’s Swedish Nuclear Waste Fund.
Finland has no such agency. That might account for the relative ease with which the Finnish nuclear industry gained public acceptance for the plan with no substantial criticism from the public. In Sweden, the nuclear waste burial project has not gone ahead, as there is much debate and opposition from some scientists and from a well-informed public.
Representatives from municipalities near the Finland repository construction site, Johanna Huhtala and Raija Lehtorinne, explained:
‘ … the locals trust the nuclear industry completely.’
I guess that the Finnish model for community consent is more to Weatherill’s liking than the Swedish one. I can’t see him setting up a South Australian NGO office for nuclear waste review. https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/finlands-false-hope-for-australias-nuclear-future,9518
September 28, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, secrets and lies, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
Weatherill hints at following suit on nuclear waste, MICHAEL OWEN, THE AUSTRALIAN September 20, 2016
Talks with countries looking to export their nuclear waste to Australia for permanent storage will begin next year if the South Australian Labor government decides to proceed with a bold plan to build a dump in the state to house high-level spent nuclear fuel.
Premier Jay Weatherill yesterday toured the site of the world’s first permanent disposal facility for nuclear waste in the Eurajoki region of southern Finland and gave every indication South Australia’s government would give the green light to follow suit…….
Under Finnish law, all nuclear waste the country generates must be handled and permanently stored in Finland.
However, its parliament has ruled out taking waste from other countries.
Mr Weatherill acknowledged Finland’s facility was a direct response to the problem of its own high-level waste, a problem his state did not have. However, he said, there was an economic opportunity for South Australia, which could safely store the world’s most toxic nuclear waste deep underground……..
“One thing that is really clear is that this is a long journey and that there will be a series of steps that the community will have to take before any final decision is taken,” Mr Weatherill said, noting it could be at least 10 to 20 years before construction started on a facility.
Mr Weatherill said Posiva was prepared to license its expertise to countries such as Australia…
The state government is conducting a final round of community consultation before cabinet decides in November if to move forward with plans for a facility.
Mr Weatherill indicated a facility for high-level international nuclear waste would be an election issue in March 2018.
“It needs bipartisan support and a state government that is prepared to advance it,” he said. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/weatherill-hints-at-following-suit-on-nuclear-waste/news-story/05a36a8bb24610eec0e4ec0c2138b222?from=public_rss
September 28, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
http://www.robinchapple.com/crisis-confidence-over-epa-uranium-mine-push 27 September
WA Greens Senator Scott Ludlam and Robin Chapple MLC have today questioned the EPA’s approval for preparatory works at the proposed Mulga Rock uranium mine, which is yet to be approved and currently subject to an appeal.
“Today’s approval for preparatory works at Mulga Rocks exposes the sham of the assessment and appeals process; the EPAs decision today is at odds with the intention of the Environmental Protection Act 1986,” Mr Chapple said.
“There has been serious public backlash against the project reflected in numerous appeals being lodged against the project, including from Traditional Owners and people in the local community.
“There is a race on in WA to get uranium mines approved before the State election. This ambition is ridiculous given the widespread opposition to the industry and the market conditions which are prohibitive to new mines.”
“World-wide we’re seeing uranium mines close and others put in to care and maintenance. Vimy Resources may have some political influence and big benefactors like Andrew Forrest, but none of these things will make this mine profitable or socially acceptable,” Senator Ludlam said.
“The EPA’s response to Vimy’s aggressive approach to starting this mine is not just a demonstration of a poor and non-transparent process, it is a slap in the face for the public and local community that have engaged in good faith in a process which is in essence a fait accompli.
“While the process is broken, the resolve of communities to fight this project is very much alive and well.”
September 28, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, uranium, Western Australia |
Leave a comment
I knew that The Advertiser was the mouthpiece of the nuclear lobby, anyway, but their latest effort was really sick-making. A rave which portrays Premier Weatherill as some kind of democratic champion, and which is pushing the soft sell that the decision on nuclear waste importing will not happen soon, but be dragged on for years. (They don’t say this, but in the interim, the nuke lobby has time to get secret arrangements made – and money lent to South Australia, so that ultimately, it might all be just too committed to turn back.)
A Premier with any spine might make a decision, a soon decision, and a wise one, to say no to the whole noxious scheme, – send home the business lobbyists and the propaganda spruikers like Geraldine Thomas, put the lid on the shonky Nuclear Royal Commission’s biased report, stop the silly nuke spinning Forums, and get on with running South Australia properly. Such an opportunity that State has, as a world leader in renewable energy!
Lack of trust more toxic than nuclear dump notion: Daniel Wills, The Advertiser September 23, 2016 “South Australia is still at the stage where it needs reassurance about the science, as well as the competency and motivations of a government that would oversee its administration.
No site has been selected to house the world’s high-level international waste for profit, should the state choose to build one, nor any explanation of how one would be picked. The State Government is yet to overturn laws that ban public money being spent on investigating the establishment of a nuclear dump or even to pick up the phone to ask places like Japan what they would pay…….
The Finnish operators say they would jump at the chance to form an alliance with SA to build a dump here…..
Mr Weatherill is likely to confirm before Christmas that the Government will begin the serious work of developing a robust business case…….
Expect the Government to seek money from overseas to undertake a major geological survey that rules out places too unsafe for disposal to occur. At a cost of up to $1 billion, this is too expensive for SA to fund itself, but could have the benefit of doubling as a discovery tool for new mining deposits.
From there, it is likely the offer will be thrown open to communities to show an interest, and estimates made of what they could receive. Even on the most extremely rapid timeline, that point is unlikely to have been reached by the time voters head to the polls in March 2018.
This project is multi-generational, with a point of no return years away. But it is a doubtful and open question as to whether our politics are up to the job…….Mr Weatherill has framed this as a great test of our democracy’s ability to consider difficult questions and come to wise solutions. … http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/lack-of-trust-more-toxic-than-nuclear-dump-notion-daniel-wills/news-story/e927e455e6f244f35a8b6743bc791adb
September 24, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
Christina reviews, media, politics, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
Some comments on Weatherill’s article .( Jay Weatherill: South Australia can learn valuable lessons from nuclear waste facility at Eurajoki, Finland)
James, 23 Sept 16 We will certainly need to be right on top of our game to beat out all those other places fighting to become the world’s nuclear lavatory, right Jay?
Perhaps, if this is the best idea we have to ‘save’ our economy then we may as well turn the lights off now and hopefully save a few native species in the process. It doesn’t matter how it’s dressed up, whether it’s made of plastic, porcelain or gold, it’s still a toilet.
Chad, 23 Sept 16 No mention of the massive cost blow-outs the Finns have experienced, then? The Finns do not need to transport it through rough seas and huge distances over remote roads, our transport risks are huge. The vast majority of the waste in fact comes from 800 metres up the road, at the Olkiluoto Nuke plant. Sweden is firmly against the dump, just 90km from it’s own coastline. The Swedish Royal Institute of Technology just released a report suggesting the privately sourced copper capsules are not actually corrosion-proof. Oh, and the Finnish dump will only be able to accept waste for 100 years! Then they’ll need billions of euros for a new hole.
It is not a good legacy to leave behind, Jay. 100,000 years is a long time for something to go wrong and you’ll be remembered for it, if it does.
Sanity, 23 Sept 16
@Michael well, actually the Fins haven’t. Not any radioactive waste at all. But they hope too! Probably some time next decade, unless things go wrong. But they are c̶e̶r̶t̶a̶i̶n̶ c̶o̶n̶f̶i̶d̶e̶n̶t̶ hopeful that it will be fine, that is why they want to sell it to us. Not for money, because it has cost them so much more than they expected and taken so much longer. No for altruistic reasons, sortof.
Of course they don’t trust it for foreign high level waste – I mean you never know what might be in there! No, only Finland’s waste! And they have tight laws about not importing anyone else’s waste.
Finland currently have two different types of operating reactors and the different fuel rods mean canisters are different for the two types of reactors they have. It also means that they drill different depth holes.
But Australia won’t be so lucky if SA imports high level waste from different countries because there will be all sorts of different reactors with many, many different fuel rod length and array dimensions. Lucky eh?
Well, that is if we stick to Finland’s quality KBS-3V system, and not try to sacrifice safety for price by using cheap steel and concrete vessels. When has safety ever been sacrificed for cost in SA? n̶R̶A̶H̶, R̶a̶i̶l̶ ̶u̶p̶g̶r̶a̶d̶e̶, s̶o̶u̶t̶h̶ ̶r̶o̶a̶d̶ ̶s̶u̶p̶e̶r̶w̶a̶y̶, a̶m̶b̶u̶l̶a̶n̶c̶e̶ ̶r̶a̶m̶p̶i̶n̶g̶…..
Pfffft! mere details, it only has to work without failure for 100,000 years!, http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/jay-weatherill-south-australia-can-learn-valuable-lessons-from-nuclear-waste-facility-at-eurajoki-finland/news-story/b8e2250210f4f2a3b0c6a60d9a8037d5
September 23, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
media, politics, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
23 Sept 16 In today’s Advertiser, Jay Weatherill writes about the Finland nuclear waste project.( Jay Weatherill: South Australia can learn valuable lessons from nuclear waste facility at Eurajoki, Finland)
Weatherill’s article completely ignores the negative side of the project – over time, over budget, possibly too small even for Finland’s requirements. Meanwhile he spouts deceptive nonsense about it being so similar to the South Australian plan. He implies that it is already functioning, which is not true. He praises the supposed “transparency” and “community consultation”, which is also incorrect. (See When haste makes risky waste: Public involvement in radioactive and nuclear waste management in Sweden and Finland http://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/radioactive-waste-and-spent-nuclear-fuel/2016-08-21710)
September 23, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, secrets and lies, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
Dan Monceaux to Nuclear Fuel Cycle Watch South Australia, 22 Sept 16 On his current delegation to Finland, Premier Weatherill has been accompanied by Bill Muirhead (Agent-General for South Australia), Madeleine Richardson (CE of CARA) and John Mansfield (chair of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Consultation and Response Agency (CARA) advisory board).
Muirhead is an advertising man with a political bend who has been busy promoting SA as a destination for defence and mining investment since his appointment as Agent-General in 2007.
September 23, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
Leon Ashton 21 Sep 2016
The government has the last say on the decision so as most people before me have said, no matter how many people are against it, the whole nuclear consultation process is a farce. The Know Nuclear displays tell half truths and make nuclear storage sound incredibly safe without adding any of the negatives. For a state which is struggling economically there seems to have been a helluva lot of money already spent in the name of nuclear. I don’t trust the government. We only need to look at the bungled RAH project and our useless desalination project to realize how inept the state government is. If SA becomes the world nuclear dumping ground, it will be the WORST decision an Australian government has ever made.
Steve Charles 20 Sep 2016
The article in today’s Australian demonstrates that the consultation process is a farce. Weatherill decided long ago that he wanted to turn SA into the world’s nuclear waste dump, and the “consultation” that has been going on is all for show. We are all being led by the nose to a conclusion that he wants, and the taxpayer pays for it all. Weatherill should be treated with the contempt he deserves.
It would be a disaster for SA to have a nuclear waste dump here.
Jay Weatherill will never get consent to go ahead from the South Austrlain public, to consent to a nuclear waste dump in South Australia. We know better despite what the media is reporting about the statistics. He must lose his position as Premier if the rest of the Labour Party has any sense.
Peter Lazic > Kay Dl 18 Sep 2016
I agree, but hot to get him kicked out before he takes the next step down the path of a nuclear waste dump.
Steve Charles > Kay Dl 20 Sep 2016
The decision was made long ago. We are all being led like lambs to the slaughter. Weatherill must be stopped.
Looks as though ourgov has lost interest in this discussion board. Ourgov’s rep last commented on 15 Aug. Maybe we are being very dull and boring. Any suggestions on how to spice this board up a bit.
Mary-Ann Lovejoy > Steve Ingham 16 Sep 2016
September 23, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
ARENA Cuts Impact Renewable Energy Businesses 
Business investment in Australia’s renewable energy sector will take a direct hit, with up to $5 billion of private funding at risk, as a result of the federal government’s decision to cut half a billion dollars from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency. Pro Bono, Wednesday, 21st September 2016 Ellie Cooper, Journalist Future Business Council executive director Tom Quinn said the government’s decision to cut funding to ARENA in the budget savings bill could have run-on effects on matched private-sector funding for renewable energy.
ARENA was saved from a worse fate, with the Coalition originally planning to strip $1.3 billion from the agency. Negotiations with the opposition secured $800 million in funding over the next five years.
But Quinn said the damage to the renewable energy sector would still be significant.
“The cuts to ARENA are shaking business confidence even further in the renewable energy space. This is a boom sector of this century, Australia’s got natural advantages in this space,” Quinn told Pro Bono Australia News.
“But the one thing holding back the industry is policy uncertainty created by hostile government actions.”
He said demand for renewable energy technology was “enormous”, with $329 billion invested globally in the sector last year.
But he said the role of ARENA was critical in launching renewable startups, growing viable businesses, and attracting local and international investment.
“If we’re talking about innovation in any new technology then early stage investment is critical, and that’s really where government comes in. Government has the ability to invest where the private sector can’t, and all too often that’s where Australia has let down its innovators and entrepreneurs,” he said.
“We haven’t got a good track record of backing early-stage innovation, and this is where ARENA was critical…….https://probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2016/09/arena-cuts-impact-renewable-energy-businesses/
September 23, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, business, energy, politics |
Leave a comment
In an era where short-term populist thinking prevails, South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill is pushing forward a project that is not only ridiculously long-term but has proven to be political dynamite.
So, Mr Weatherill would have to pull off something that has never been done anywhere else, a project even Finland thinks is too hard, one that could prove a major political headache, all to dump hazardous spent radioactive fuel Australia does not even use?
Why Jay Weatherill is in Finland to investigate Australia’s nuclear future, ABC News ANALYSIS By Europe correspondent James Glenday In case you missed it, South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill is in western Finland.
Why?
To investigate whether his state should build a high-level international nuclear waste dump to store radioactive uranium deep underground for at least 100,000 years.
The industry aficionados call it a “final repository”, but basically it is a big tomb-like system of tunnels built into solid bedrock where spent fuel rods are encased in steel, copper and clay.
Why should you care?
In an era where outrage is the cheapest commodity and short-term populist thinking prevails, the Premier is pushing forward a project that is not only ridiculously long-term but one that has proven elsewhere to be political dynamite.
A number of scientists believe a dump could be safely built and many economists think it could make South Australia $100 billion.
But it is also important to point out there is no pressing national need for this facility.
Australia does not produce high-level nuclear waste.
So, why is he in Finland?
Somewhat by chance, Finland is leading the world in the construction of a high-level waste facility 420 metres below Olkiluoto Island on the country’s west coast.
The company building it, Posiva, has been working on the idea since the 1970s, but quite reasonably assumed bigger nations like the United States, Britain, France, Sweden or Germany would come up with a solution they could copy.
But community opposition and controversy has killed, crippled or delayed plans for several radioactive dumps.
So, despite a couple of cost blow-outs, Finland has found itself at the front of the line.
And why do the Finns love the idea?
On a national level, opinion is actually mixed.
But around the “final repository”, the tax cuts, welfare increases, community facilities and jobs the nuclear industry has funded got the dump over the line.
Locals near Olkiluoto Island said, because they have benefited from nuclear energy, they also have a responsibility to safely manage the waste.
Currently, it is in a series of pools.
So, why not build an international dump then?
Ah, here is where we hit Finland’s “red line”.
According to Posiva executives, it would be “politically impossible”.
“Finland doesn’t want to become the waste dump of the world,” one said.
It is also against federal law.
Is it not also against Australian law?
Yes, it is.
But putting the politics aside, Posiva thinks it could help South Australia design and construct a high-level facility within 15 to 20 years.
Unsurprisingly, they are keen to try to sell their success to the world…………
OK. Is Jay Weatherill really likely to push on with this project?
He is likely to keep making positive noises, consulting and talking about how the waste facility discussion “must be led by the community”.
But the Labor Premier knows the biggest political threat to its development comes from his own side of politics…….
To realistically get a dump built in Australia, it will require the enthusiastic backing of a local community, industry, the South Australian Government and the Commonwealth for a period of at least 20 years, probably longer.
It is worth remembering proposals for many previous nuclear projects have proved controversial in Australia.
Also, you would have to convince a majority of people it is completely safe.
So, Mr Weatherill would have to pull off something that has never been done anywhere else, a project even Finland thinks is too hard, one that could prove a major political headache, all to dump hazardous spent radioactive fuel Australia does not even use? http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-20/why-jay-weatherill-is-in-finland-to-investigate-nuclear-future/7859812
September 21, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
politics, South Australia, wastes |
Leave a comment
Finland’s Onkalo nuclear waste disposal facility want to export the technology to South Australia, The Advertiser Daniel Wills, Helsinki, Finland, The Advertiser September 21, 2016 OPERATORS of the world’s most advanced nuclear disposal facility want to export the technology to South Australia and form an alliance to help the state develop its own commercial facility to take waste from around the world.
At a briefing with Premier Jay Weatherill at Finland’s Onkalo nuclear waste disposal facility, Posiva Solutions Oy managing director Mika Pohjonen said his company would be willing to licence intellectual property and engineering solutions to SA if it were to proceed with expanding the local nuclear industry.
Posiva is a joint venture owned by two of Finland’s biggest energy companies — Teollisuuden Voima Oyj and Fortum Power and Heat. It is set to become the first organisation in the world to bury a canister of spent nuclear fuel when they begin inserting them into the bedrock from 2020. Mr Pohjonen said SA could hope to move from site selection to burying canisters within about 15 years, less than half the time taken by Finland, because the Scandinavians had already undertaken the slow work of proving the technology………
The Onkalo disposal site is about 10 times smaller than that conceived by SA’s Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission.……
Mr Weatherill will by the end of the year declare a formal State Government position to Parliament on expansion of the industry………
“The next major step is a threshold question about whether we maintain our prohibition against a facility for spent fuel or whether we take a step to explore it further.”- Mr Weatherill said ….
….http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/finlands-onkalo-nuclear-waste-disposal-facility-want-to-export-the-technology-to-south-australia/news-story/5b26cc6e0bf9f342bac97fa5ba81c444
September 21, 2016
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
marketing for nuclear, politics, South Australia |
Leave a comment
Antinuclear 