#ScottyFromMarketing ‘s hypocritical ploy to do nothing effective against climate change
 The government’s sudden passion for climate technology is newfound and insincere, The call for technology before action is a specious distraction designed to paper over the plan to take no action Guardian, Simon Holmes à Court– @simonahac 21 Feb 2020
If you’re committed to the Paris agreement – to keep the increase in global average temperature to well below two degrees above pre-industrial levels, and pursue efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees – then at a minimum, logically, scientifically, you’re committed to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. So far, at least 77 countries have committed to the target, as has every state and territory in Australia. The fact that prime minister Scott Morrison is pushing back hard against the calls for such a target sends yet another strong signal that his government still denies the need to tackle climate change. Sensing it must be seen to do something, but committed to doing nothing substantive, the government is arguing that investing in technology is the superior pathway to… to… to what? Are billions of dollars of public funds about to be allocated to a strategy that delivers on an unspoken goal? This passion for technology is newfound and insincere. In truth, our government has a long history of undermining climate technologies. In the three years to 2016, the government ripped just shy of $1bn from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Arena), the body charged with helping early stage technologies through to commercial launch. The funding of a feasibility study for a coal power station in Collinsville and the foreshadowed gift of $11m to extend the life of the 42 years old Vales Point coal power station in the Hunter, demonstrate just how reluctant the Coalition is to let go of last century’s energy technologies. One of the most promising and critical new technologies is the rapid maturation of the electric vehicle, but who can forget the government’s pushback against EVs during last year’s election?…… Mike and Annie Cannon-Brooke’s Resilient Energy Collective is a case study for how far we’ve come. In just a handful of weeks the group has put together an emergency power product for restoring power to bushfire affected communities. The solar-powered, battery-backed system can be installed in a single day, and will be rolled out to 100 communities in as many days. The energy supply companies partnering in the project are stunned that the infrastructure is being rolled out in hours not months. Community members are amazed that they’re using solar power at night. ….. In reality, the call for technology before action is a specious distraction designed to paper over the plan to take no action. The greatest proponent of the frame is Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg, one of a small cadre of almost respectable climate obfuscationists. …… The first three years of the Coalition government focussed on tearing down climate policy. The next three used endless reviews that came to nothing – as intended. In July 2014, Tony Abbott finally made good on his promise to dismantle Australia’s carbon price mechanism, our most effective and efficient climate policy. In doing so, not only did he throw away the best tool we had, he cheated Australian farmers out of earning billions from exporting carbon credits to Europe. In 2015, Abbott managed to slash the renewable energy target – assisted in the background by Angus Taylor, the man now charged with reducing emissions – cutting future activity under the target by 40%…… In July 2014, Tony Abbott finally made good on his promise to dismantle Australia’s carbon price mechanism, our most effective and efficient climate policy. In doing so, not only did he throw away the best tool we had, he cheated Australian farmers out of earning billions from exporting carbon credits to Europe. In 2015, Abbott managed to slash the renewable energy target – assisted in the background by Angus Taylor, the man now charged with reducing emissions – cutting future activity under the target by 40%….. So here we are again. Another strategy to kick the can down the road……https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/21/the-governments-sudden-passion-for-climate-technology-is-newfound-and-insincere |
|
Frank Simpson warns against the pollution of Victoria’s agricultural land by thorium/uranium mining
Risk in contaminating a prime green food producing region of Victoria. (3) This implies all stages of the fuel cycle from exploration to waste repository storage.Greens in the Senate will oppose bill to storage nuclear waste at Kimba farm
 Greens to oppose bill to storage nuclear waste at SA farm, Queensland Country Life, Jamieson Murphy@jamiesonmurph18 Feb 2020, THE government may have to negotiate with the Senate crossbench to get through legislation that will transform a South Australian farm into a nuclear waste facility, after the Greens declared their opposition to the bill.
The Kimba farm, which was voluntarily nominated and chosen after a four-year search, would store medical nuclear waste for 100 years. South Australian Senator and Greens nuclear spokesperson Sarah Hanson-Young said her party would work to block the “offensive” legislation. “The federal government wants to dump on South Australia and we won’t leave it to the community of Kimba to hold the line on their own,” Senator Hanson-Young said. “It is wrong to say there is broad community support. Traditional Owners have rejected the proposal. Once again the Morrison government and [former Resource] Minister Canavan haven’t listened. “A government minister from Queensland thinks South Australia is the place to dump and it’s deeply offensive to the people of SA. “Every South Australian should be concerned this government is more interested in building a radioactive waste dump than they are in investing in renewable energy and our growing potential for green industry.” Labor resource spokesperson Joel Fitzgibbon did not respond to questions about whether his party would support the bill. The recently appointed Resource Minister Keith Pitt introduced the legislation to the House of Representatives last week – just two weeks after the Kimba site was announced – where the government will have the numbers to pass the bill. With the Greens opposing the bill in the Senate and Labor not stating its position, the government will need the backing of either the Centre Alliance or One Nation to carry the bill. A spokesperson for Mr Pitt said the new minister was “working with other parties to deliver the outcome”. “Minister Pitt wants bipartisan support on the National Radiation Waste Management Bill,” the spokesperson said. “This bill has been 40 years in the making and the establishment of a national radioactive waste facility is a national priority.” South Australian Energy and Mining Minister Dan van Holst Pellekaan said the federal legislation would override SA’s state legislation….. https://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au/story/6635712/greens-to-oppose-bill-to-storage-nuclear-waste-at-sa-farm/?cs=4704&fbclid=IwAR17gRLqP-DpCp_Ya5UqDUHu0Tj7y3siBi04TWo1wktCu-ZqtuBRG-PVyaE |
|
|
Solar thermal energy the way forward for Australia- says nuclear expert
Dr Wilson described nuclear power as simply “too risky”.
He also said the cost factor was also a major deterrent from going nuclear.
“It’s not the cost of building it. They are expensive to build and they are expensive to run but it’s the cost of demolition when it gets to the end of its life,” he said.
“Nuclear is not cheap, it’s not safe, and will be destructive to key Queensland industries like agriculture and tourism.”
|
Solar thermal power the way forward for Australia despite hiccups, nuclear expert says
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-18/solar-thermal-power-should-be-major-export-expert-says/11971938?fbclid=IwAR3zjCStZwOvdHFGY0EtSWxu4oQ0i43QAgm6O9S5YNW5I3KKna370tb7KtQ ABC Radio Brisbane
By Rebeka Powell 19 Feb 2020, As the world looks to Germany as a shining example of how to shift away from polluting coal power, a Queensland-based nuclear expert says solar thermal power is the way forward for Australia. Key points:
Paul Wilson is an electrical and control systems engineer with almost five decades’ experience who has previously made submissions to the parliamentary inquiry into nuclear power. Dr Wilson told ABC Radio Brisbane’s Steve Austin he was disappointed Australia was not showing leadership or innovation in renewables. “We’re very good in Australia at innovation and at engineering and I think we should take a leaf out of the German book,” he told the Drive program. “And they’re basically trying to systematically close down their coal mining industry but they’re doing it by replacing jobs. So they’re deliberately setting out, for every job that is lost in coal mining, they’re trying to create another job. Continue reading |
Religious leaders urge ScottyFromMarketing to move Australia away from fossil fuels
|
Faith leaders press PM on climate action, Herald Sun Heather McNab, Australian Associated Press
February 20, 2020 Religious leaders have appealed to Prime Minister Scott Morrison as a “fellow person of faith” to heed climate science following the country’s catastrophic bushfire season. The open letter – signed by 18 Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and other faith leaders – urges Mr Morrison to show leadership and urgently transition Australia away from fossil fuels. The signatories include: Dr Peter Catt, the Dean of St John’s Anglican Cathedral in Brisbane, the Most Reverend Vincent Long Van Nguyen OFM, Chair of the Catholic Bishops Commission on Justice, Mission and Service Muslims Australia president Dr Rateb Jneid and Buddhist Council of NSW Religious leaders have appealed to Prime Minister Scott Morrison as a “fellow person of faith” to heed climate science following the country’s catastrophic bushfire season. The open letter – signed by 18 Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and other faith leaders – urges Mr Morrison to show leadership and urgently transition Australia away from fossil fuels. The signatories include: Dr Peter Catt, the Dean of St John’s Anglican Cathedral in Brisbane, the Most Reverend Vincent Long Van Nguyen OFM, Chair of the Catholic Bishops Commission on Justice, Mission and Service Muslims Australia president Dr Rateb Jneid and Buddhist Council of NSW president Dr Gawaine Powell Davies…. https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/faith-leaders-press-pm-on-climate-action/news-story/48ebb95e2fdee026ccc593583ea622ab |
|
Divisions within both Liberal and Labor parties over Coal
Both the Coalition and Labor are battling divisions over climate policy and the future of coal.
While a majority of Labor MPs believe the opposition needs to stay the course on climate action, some in the party’s right argue the party needs to be more positive about the coal industry……. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/feb/19/anthony-albanese-backs-adani-coalmine-but-criticises-proposed-collinsville-power-plant
143 Anti-Nuclear, 10 Pro Nuclear Submissions (published) to Victorian Parliament
Submissions published so far to the Victorian Government’s Inquiry into Nuclear Prohibition are running strongly ANTI NUCLEAR https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/epc-lc/article/4348
There are currently 143 submissions opposing the nuclear industry.
There are 10 submissions favouring the nuclear industry. (You can bet that vested interests have sent in confidential submissions)
PRO nuclear
1. Don Hampshire ( with attack on ABC, The Age )
2 Robert Heron – vaguely
3 Terje- Petesen
116 Leah McDermott
122 Simon Brink
123 CFMMEU Mining and Energy Division 21 Azark 26 Buchanan, Bill 27 Murphy, Barry 28 Patterson, John
ANTI nuclear
4 Jessica Lawson 5 Pro Forma list of 122 contributors 48 Janet Nixon 49 Karen Furniss 63 Graeme Tyschsen 68 Barbara Devine 76 Vivien Smith
77 Lachlan Dow 81 RVS Industries 92 Alan Hewett and Joan Jones 103 Anne Wharton 106 John Quiggin vague 107 Amy Butcher 109 Nick Pastalatzis 112 Philip White 22 Friends of the Earth 23 Derek Abbott 24 Simpson, Frank 25 Wauchope, Noel 29 Wissink, Bart 30 Sharp, Robyn 31, Smith, Colin
Labor stays strongly against nuclear power, despite pro nuke push from one union
Labor bipartisanship on nuclear energy needed: AWU,Australian Financial Revieew Phillip Coorey – Political Editor, Feb 18, 2020
The Australian Workers’ Union has stepped up its call for Australia to embrace nuclear power by urging Labor leader Anthony Albanese to provide the political bipartisanship that is needed. …….
Like other pro-nuclear advocates, Mr Walton supports small modular reactors. He also accepts that if Labor were in government, nuclear power would not be an option for it.
In the Coalition, the Nationals are hardening against a proposal floated by Mr Morrison and Energy Minister Angus Taylor to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
On Monday, Mr Morrison was very cautious.
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/labor-bipartisanship-on-nuclear-energy-needed-awu-20200217-p541eh
Greens leader Adam Bandt seeks new deal with “renewable mining and manufacturing” sector
New Greens leader Adam Bandt will tour Australia’s mining regions to promote his plan to create a “renewable mining and manufacturing” sector and repair his party’s poor relations with resources industry workers. THE AUSTRALIAN , RICHARD FERGUSON FEBRUARY 16, 2020
New Greens leader Adam Bandt will tour Australia’s mining regions to promote his plan to create a “renewable mining and manufacturing” sector and repair his party’s poor relations with resources industry workers.
Mr Bandt — who started his tenure as leader saying big business was “killing people” — wants to shift the mining sector towards lithium and process materials such as iron ore in Australia to build a domestic “zero-carbon” manufacturing industry…. (subscribers only)
Australian government pushes on with nuclear dump, tramples on indigenous rights
 Kimba nuke decision dumps on Indigenous rights, https://indaily.com.au/opinion/2020/02/13/kimba-nuke-decision-dumps-on-indigenous-rights/ The federal government’s decision to place a a nuclear waste storage site at Kimba on SA’s Eyre Peninsula turned deaf ears to the opposition of the area’s native title holders, argue Jim Green and Michele Madigan.
The federal government recently announced that it plans to establish a national nuclear waste ‘facility’ near Kimba on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula. It will comprise a permanent dump for low-level nuclear waste, and an ‘interim’ store for long-lived intermediate-level waste. Shamefully, the federal government has decided to move ahead despite the unanimous opposition of the Barngarla Traditional Owners, native title holders over the area. The federal government refused a request from the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC) to include traditional owners in a community ballot held last year. So BDAC initiated a legal action protesting their exclusion. The court case is ongoing and an outcome is expected soon. BDAC also engaged the Australian Election Company to conduct a confidential postal ballot. Not a single Barngarla Traditional Owner voted in favour of the dump. BDAC wrote to the government calling for the dump proposal to be abandoned in light of their unanimous opposition, and stating that BDAC will take whatever steps are necessary to stop it being imposed on Barngarla Country against their will. The National Radioactive Waste Management Act systematically discriminates against Australia’s First Nations. For example, the nomination of a site for a nuclear dump is valid even if Aboriginal traditional owners were not consulted and did not give consent. And the Act has sections which nullify or curtail the application of laws such as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984, and the Native Title Act 1993. The federal government recently announced that it plans to amend the Waste Management Act. While the Act is sorely in need of an overhaul, the planned amendments aren’t those that are needed. Clauses in the Act that dispossess and disempower traditional owners will remain untouched. The SA Labor Party argues that traditional owners ought to have a right of veto over nuclear projects given the sad and sorry history of the nuclear industry in SA, stretching back to the British atomic bomb tests. Deputy Leader of the Opposition Susan Close says that SA Labor is “utterly opposed” to the “appalling” process which led to the recent announcement regarding the Kimba site. Compare that to the federal government, whose mind-set seems not to have advanced from the ‘Aboriginal natives shall not be counted’ clause in the Constitution Act 1900. As Barngarla Traditional Owner Jeanne Miller says, Aboriginal people with no voting power are put back 50 years, “again classed as flora and fauna.” The current debate follows a history of similar proposals ‒ all of them defeated, with traditional owners repeatedly leading successful campaigns. In 2004, after a six-year battle, the Howard government abandoned plans for a national nuclear waste dump in SA. The Kupa Piti Kungka Tjuta ‒ a senior Aboriginal women’s council ‒ congratulated the government for belatedly getting their ‘ears out of their pockets’. In 2016, the plan to import high-level nuclear waste from around the world was abandoned after a Citizens’ Jury noted the lack of Aboriginal consent and concluded that “the government should accept that the Elders have said NO and stop ignoring their opinions.” And last year, the federal government abandoned plans for a national nuclear dump in the Flinders Ranges, a plan that was fiercely contested by Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners. SA Premier Steven Marshall is rightly proud of his record promoting the growth of renewable energy in SA. And he’s proud of his significant role in putting an end to the plan to import high-level nuclear waste from around the world. So where will the Premier ‒ whose portfolio includes Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation ‒ stand on this latest nuclear controversy? He needs, as the Kungkas put it, to get his ears out of his pockets and to respect the unanimous opposition of the Barngarla First Nation. Dr. Jim Green is the national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia. Michele Madigan is a Sister of St Joseph who has spent the past 40 years working with Aboriginal people across SA. |
|
Shrinking Antarctic ice shelf Pine Island Glacier sheds giant iceberg
Shrinking Antarctic ice shelf Pine Island Glacier sheds giant iceberg, ABC News, Digital Story Innovation Team By Mark Doman 14 Feb 20, In one of the fastest-changing areas of the Antarctic ice sheet, satellites have captured the formation of a giant, 300-square-kilometre iceberg.
Researchers monitoring satellite imagery of the Pine Island Glacier (PIG), in west Antarctica, first noticed two large rifts forming in the shelf in 2019.
Over the next few months, as the glacier moved out towards the Amundsen Sea, the rifts expanded, eventually leading to the splitting of the iceberg from the glacier on February 9.
Within a day, the iceberg had broken up into smaller pieces.
Only one of the pieces was large enough to be named (B-49) and tracked by the United States National Ice Centre.
It comes just days after a station on the Antarctic Peninsula logged its hottest day on record, registering a temperature of 18.3 degrees Celsius.
The peninsula, which juts out to the north-east of the Pine Island Glacier, is among the fastest-warming regions on the planet. Temperatures there have increased almost 3C over the last 50 years, according to the World Meteorological Organisation.
Last month, scientists also recorded unusually warm water beneath the Thwaites Glacier, a neighbour to Pine Island.
While the calving of icebergs from shelves such as the Pine Island Glacier is a natural process in the life of a giant glacier, the rate at which this glacier and others in the region have been disintegrating is a cause of concern for scientists.
Previously the ice shelf calved once a decade. By the early 2000s, it started calving once every five years. But since 2013, the glacier has calved five times, according to Stef Lhermitte, a remote sensing scientist from the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands……. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-13/antarctic-ice-shelf-pine-island-glacier-sheds-giant-iceberg/11957770
Risk that Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act could be changed to promote nuclear power
K-A Garlick at Nuclear Free WA, 12 Feb 20
The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act is currently under review and will look at how the Act has been operating, and any changes needed for Australia to support ecologically sustainable development into the future.
Currently, under the EPBC Act, nuclear power is banned and the ‘nuclear action’ triggers uranium mining and milling projects to be Federally assessed. This should remain.
There is a real threat that the EPBC Act could change to remove the ban on nuclear power and the ‘nuclear actions’ trigger, so that this dirty industry can push forward. We urge you and your organisation to make a submission to keep the ban on nuclear power and the ‘nuclear action’ triggers.
Don’t nuke the climate is a great new website with a ton of information to use for your submission including last years no nuclear power statement by a broad coalition of faith, union, environmental, Aboriginal and public health groups, representing millions of Australians, that clearly outlines our energy future is renewable, not radioactive. Click here to read the statement.
Submissions are due 17 April 2020. You can send submissions via email to epbcreview@environment.gov.au Or via post to: EPBC Act Review Secretariat Department of the Environment and Energy GPO Box 787 CANBERRA ACT 2601. Please complete and submit this cover page with your submission. All submissions that include this cover sheet will be considered by the review. For more information on the EPBC Act and submissions, click here.
Whyalla is targeted for nuclear waste shipments and should have a right to refuse untenable plans.
Whyalla is targeted for nuclear waste shipments and should have a right to refuse untenable plans.
Napandee Nuclear Store site nomination also targets Whyalla Port: Nuclear Brief (Feb 2020) by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner
Amidst rising controversy, a Federal Minister has nominated Napandee near Kimba on Eyre Peninsula as a Nuclear Store to take reactor fuel wastes and long-lived wastes from Lucas Heights.
The “Site Characterisation Technical Report: Napandee” (DIIS, July 2018, Proximity to ports p.150) named Whyalla Port to take shipments of nuclear fuel wastes, in the event Napandee is named as a Nuclear Store. Two shipments of reprocessed nuclear fuel wastes, in 130 tonne TN-81 casks, are intended within the first two years of operations of a Nuclear Waste Store at Napandee (p.152).
Some 100 x B-double 50 tonne loads of Intermediate Level Wastes (ILW) are also intended in the first four years of Nuclear Store operations at Napandee (p.152). The Report (p.157-158) states:
“It may be possible to have these containers shipped from Port Kembla to ports such as Whyalla”
However, the Federal government has conspicuously failed to consult the SA community on plans to impose multiple shipments of nuclear waste across SA, including potentially through Whyalla Port.
This flawed practice is in continued breach of advice of the Nuclear Safety Committee (NSC) to the nuclear regulator ARPANSA (Nov 2016) on the NRWMF, on transparency in decisions, stating:
“The ongoing requirement to clearly and effectively engage all stakeholders, including those along transport routes.” With the NSC stating that: “Such engagement is essential…
” Eyre Peninsula, Whyalla and transport route communities have so far been denied a say on these Federal nuclear waste plans and now face potential serious reputational risks and material impacts.”
The Australian Radioactive Waste Management Framework (DIIS, April 2018, p.4) reports total Intermediate Level Wastes at 1,770 m3 – with 95% (by volume) arising as Federal government wastes.
The Federal gov. plans to more than double Intermediate Level Wastes to produce a further 1,960 m3 over next 40 years, with 1,850 m3 (95%) of that arising from ANSTO Lucas Heights operations.
All these nuclear wastes are intended to go to Napandee for up to 100 years above ground storage.
Proposed indefinite above ground storage of nuclear fuel wastes at Napandee may compromise safety and security in SA and contravenes Nuclear Safety Committee advice. The NSC has stated dual handling in transport associated with interim storage “does not represent international best practice” and raises “implications for security”. These federal nuclear plans are also illegal in SA.
The previous SA State Liberal government prohibited the import, transport, storage and disposal of nuclear fuel wastes and reprocessed wastes under the Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000.
“The Objects of this Act are to protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of South Australia and to protect the environment in which they live by prohibiting the establishment of certain nuclear waste storage facilities in this State.”
ARPANSA states these nuclear wastes require isolation from the environment for 10 000 years.
Nuclear waste can pose serious Safety, Accident and Security Risks:
“In the event of a major nuclear accident, adverse impacts on the tourism, agriculture and property sectors could potentially be profound.”
SA Nuclear Royal Commission: Tentative Findings, Risks and Challenges, Impacts on other Sectors (Feb 2016, p.28)
Key questions on safety and security in nuclear fuel waste transport and storage remain unanswered (see D Noonan submission to Minister Canavan, p.11-12). These wastes must not be allowed into SA.
The UK Nuclear Free Local Authorities “Briefing: Nuclear security concerns – how secure is the UK civil nuclear sector?”
(NFLA, May 2016) highlights key security threats including the risks from potential malicious attack on a nuclear waste transport or on a nuclear waste storage site. NFLA (p.8) cites the views of nuclear engineer Dr John Large on safety as at the heart of its concerns:
“Movement of nuclear materials is inherently risky both in terms of severe accident and terrorist attack. Not all accident scenarios and accident severities can be foreseen; it is only possible to maintain a limited security cordon around the flask and its consignment; … terrorists are able to seek out and exploit vulnerabilities in the transport arrangements and localities on the route; and emergency planning is difficult to maintain over the entire route.”
NFLA Recommendations (p.15) call for real discussion on the aftermath of a nuclear security incident given the major emergency response issues that arise. That belated debate is yet to be heard in SA.
SA is arguable unprepared for the consequences of nuclear fuel waste accidents or security events. Hundreds of Police were required for security at a 2018 nuclear waste shipment out of Port Kembla.
Whyalla is targeted for nuclear waste shipments and should have a right to refuse untenable plans.
In “Nuclear port potential” (Whyalla News, 3 rd August 2018, p.1) the Mayor said Federal gov. plans to use Whyalla’s port for nuclear waste: “would require significant community consultation”, noting:
“In the past Whyalla has opposed any nuclear or radioactive shipping in this region”.
DIIS’s Napandee Site Characterisation Report refers to potential “occurrences of complete shutdown” (p.154) in Iron Triangle Cities during nuclear waste shipments. This is unacceptable.
These are fundamentally State issues and the SA public have not given consent to proposed nuclear waste transport and storage. Under the leadership of Premier Steven Marshall the SA State Liberal government has a responsibility to protect the public interest and to uphold the law in our State.
The Marshall gov. must protect all SA regional communities and reject a Nuclear Waste Store in SA. For further Information, see: https://nuclear.foe.org.au/waste
Senate opens the door for nuclear developments
Senate opens the door for nuclear developments: From ENuFF[SA]
https://www.facebook.com/sanuclearfree/–13 Feb 20
February 11 2020
Senator HANSON-YOUNG (South Australia) (16:12): I move:
That the Senate:
(a) affirms its commitment to a complete moratorium on nuclear energy, as expressed in the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999;
(b) notes the devastating and lasting impacts of the nuclear disasters in Fukushima, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island; and
(c) call on all Ministers to commit to Australia being a nuclear-free zone.
========================
DIVISION:NOES 35 (6 majority) AYES 29 PAIRS 6
Question negatived.
========================
Rex Patrick voted No
P Wong paired
https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A“chamber%2Fhansards%2Fc220a265-e5aa-42c9-8cd9-19390fabb066%2F0127”
#ScottyFromMarketing ‘s bushfire inquiry studiously ‘ignores’ carbon emissions
 PM’s bushfire inquiry ‘ignores’ carbon emissions, Barr says, Canberra Times, Dan Jervis-Bardy 11 Feb 20,
Chief Minister Andrew Barr has criticised the scope of Scott Morrison’s proposed royal commission into the summer bushfire crisis, saying it overlooks the role that cutting carbon emissions plays in combating climate change and future fire threats.
How the Prime Minister responds to Mr Barr’s concerns will determine if the ACT supports the national inquiry. Mr Barr wrote to the Prime Minister on Tuesday with his feedback on draft terms of reference for the royal commission into the bushfire disaster.
The Chief Minister wants a national inquiry into the horror fire season, but has repeatedly said that any review would be inadequate unless it thoroughly examines the effect climate change has had on the length and ferocity of bushfire seasons…… In his letter to Mr Morrison, the ACT Chief Minister said the inquiry also needed to look at strategies to tackle climate change, such as cutting carbon emissions.
|
|
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 