Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

A warning to Australia on the nuclear cycle of destruction

The nuclear cycle of destruction , RedFlag, James Plested, 12 July 2019,  The hit HBO series Chernobyl portrays in chilling detail the horror of a serious nuclear accident and the scale of the destruction it can unleash. Predictably, the series has provoked a backlash from the nuclear lobby, which has sought to downplay the seriousness of the accident and spruik the potential of nuclear power as a “clean, green” alternative to fossil fuels.

Melbourne Herald Sun columnist and Sky News host Andrew Bolt has led the charge in Australia, questioning the results of research by the World Health Organisation and others about the scale of the Chernobyl casualties. According to the ABC’s Media Watch, in the first half of June more than a dozen articles in support of Australia developing nuclear power were published in the Murdoch press alone.

Bolt and Co. have some powerful backers. Writing at RenewEconomy, Jim Green points out that nuclear power has become something of a political talisman for those on the far right, with figures such as Clive Palmer, Tony Abbott, Cory Bernardi, Barnaby Joyce, Mark Latham, Jim Molan, Craig Kelly, Eric Abetz and David Leyonhjelm all expressing their support.

On one level, as Green argues, nuclear power is just another front in the broader “culture wars”, and as such is likely to remain marginal to the debate about Australia’s energy policy. But when you add the likes of the Minerals Council of Australia, the Business Council of Australia, the Institute of Public Affairs and conservative radio host Alan Jones – all strong advocates of nuclear power, and all closely linked to the recently re-elected Coalition government – the pro-nuclear club suddenly seems like a force to be reckoned with.

There is strong pressure coming from within the Coalition’s ranks to overturn the current ban on nuclear power. A group from Queensland, led by MP Keith Pitt and senator James McGrath, is pushing for a feasibility study of nuclear power in Australia, and environment minister Sussan Ley has said she’s open to reviewing the ban.

And nuclear power isn’t as unpopular as you might think. Recent polling by Essential found that 44 percent of Australians support it, an increase of 4 percent from their last survey in November 2015, while 40 percent oppose it (tellingly, however, only 28 percent report being “comfortable living close to a nuclear power plant”).

With any luck, the popularity of Chernobyl will help inoculate more people against the arguments of the nuclear lobby. But there can be no doubt that the push to develop nuclear power in Australia will continue. And there can equally be no doubt that nuclear power, far from being a clean, green alternative to fossil fuels, is an inherently dangerous and destructive technology that Australia, and the world, can do without.

The nuclear industry is like a crucible in which all the most destructive and irrational elements of capitalism have been melded into a single deadly alloy. It’s not just nuclear power itself that’s the source of the danger. It’s the whole nuclear cycle – from the mining of uranium, to the use of that uranium in nuclear power stations, the production of radioactive waste and, most threateningly, the production of nuclear weapons..……

Australian business heads and governments have long had an eye on further uranium mines. The anti-nuclear movements of the 1970s and early 1980s, as well as the later campaign against the proposed Jabiluka uranium mine (see article in this issue), kept this aspiration in check. In recent years, however, state and federal governments have renewed the push.

The South Australian government is supporting a proposal by BHP to expand massively the operations of its existing Olympic Dam mine – which contains the largest single uranium deposit in the world. And the day before the last election was called, the federal government abruptly announced its approval of a new uranium mine in Western Australia.

The next stage in the nuclear cycle is the use of enriched uranium in nuclear power plants. Supporters of nuclear power claim it’s the safest form of power generation. But this factors in only the most immediate and direct impacts. Take Chernobyl, for example. Andrew Bolt’s claim that fewer than 100 people died is based on the (by far) most conservative assessment – which focusses almost exclusively on deaths from radiation sickness in the first few months after the disaster – and massively downplays the long term increase in the rate of cancer among radiation-exposed populations.

A 2006 report by Greenpeace – involving 52 scientists using demographic data and cancer statistics from Belarus, Ukraine and Russia – found that total Chernobyl-related deaths are likely to reach into the hundreds of thousands.

And unlike other sorts of accidents, nuclear accidents have long-term effects, poisoning the earth and human health for decades afterwards and resulting in mass evacuations, with many people unable ever to return to their homes. ……… Continue reading →

July 13, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

Barnaby Joyce jumps on the Australian extreme right wing pro nuclear bandwagon

Barnaby Joyce to push for inquiry into nuclear power  https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/barnaby-joyce-to-push-for-inquiry-into-nuclear-power/news-story/eb626f6785e7ad90bbec9aa504615690Barnaby Joyce wants an inquiry into nuclear power. RICHARD FERGUSON, REPORTER, JULY 11, 2019

Former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce will use his position as the chair of a parliamentary committee to push for an inquiry into nuclear power, saying it is the only way to get to zero emissions.

Mr Joyce is the chairman of the House of Representatives standing committee into industry, innovation, sciences and resources and says his committee is better placed to look into nuclear power than the Senate.

The Australian reveals today that Scott Morrison was sent a draft terms of reference into a nuclear power inquiry by Coalition MPs last month.

Mr Joyce said this morning that he will push for a nuclear power inquiry in his committee and that those who want zero emissions but no nuclear option should “shut up.” Continue reading →

July 13, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

Australia’s security and self-reliance – there’s a better path than getting nuclear weapons

Defence: the appalling US corollary,  Crispin Hull, 12 July 19 The defence commentary that bloomed in the wake of the publication of Hugh White’s “How to Defend Australia” has largely failed to mention the appalling corollary to White’s wise assertion that Australia has to prepare itself for the possibility that the US would not come to Australia’s defence if attacked from without.The corollary is, of course, the question as to why, over the past decades, have we sucked up to the US, done all its bidding, and entered wars at its behest that really had nothing to do with us? Why did we expend so much blood and treasure when, now, at the critical juncture of the rise of an aggressive China we will not be able to expect the help we have relied upon from the US these past 75 years……..

the important point is what flows from that. White, one of Australia’s clearest statregic thinkers, says we should therefore be more self-reliant.

So far, so good. But his suggested options of meeting the challenge of being less reliant on the US displays a nation-state mentality which is quite outdated. ……

the question is not only how much money should be spent, but upon what it should be spent upon, to address our national security.

In the past two decades we have spent it in precisely the places which have reduced, not increased, our national security: Iraq and Afghanistan in particular. If we had stayed out, Australia would not have attracted the attention of jihadists and terrorists.

Spending money on a nuclear deterrent, which White does not rule out, did not help the US in its interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Lebanon etc……..

A better way is to make our forces responsive to Australian, not US, needs, as White suggests. But we do not have to spend a vast amount more. Rather than spend more on the military element of our national-security expenditure, we should spend more on the relationship-building expenditure – particularly foreign aid and the soft power of Australian TV and radio broadcasts into our region, and beyond – areas we have cut so stupidly against our national interest in the past two and half decades.

And surface ships which can respond to humanitarian crises, are critical. Submarines cannot do that.

The foreign-aid budget should be part of the defence budget. Australians have no idea how little we spend on foreign aid, so governments can get away with cutting it. The Lowy Institute (which, as it happens, I criticised last week on its inept polling on population) has done a first-rate job on exposing this. ……..

We can bluff our neighbours with a nuclear weapon that attacking Australia might or might not result in a painful rebuff. But the bluff might be called. On the other hand, if we build trade, educational and cultural exchanges and health, educational and economic aid with our neighbours they will never want to attack, and if they ever have totalitarian leaders those leaders will never be able to point to Australia as the wicked outsider deserving of attack.

To the extent we are no longer under the US nuclear umbrella, as White correctly points out, we should be grateful. The price has never been worth it. And Iran could well, one hopes not, prove the point yet again. ……..http://www.crispinhull.com.au/2019/07/12/defence-the-appalling-us-corollary/

July 13, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, safety | Leave a comment

New South Wales National Party formally adopts pro nuclear policy

NSW Nationals formally support nuclear power stations, The Northern Daily Leader, Jamieson Murphy  8July19

At the recent annual conference in Inverell, a motion to “support the use of nuclear power in Australia” was put forward by both the Orange and Narrabri Nationals branches, and passed unanimously.

Narrabri chair David Scilley said the motion was born out of frustration with the nation’s energy debate.

“If they’re not going to let us have a new coal-fire power station, we have to look at nuclear power,” Mr Scilley said.  “Renewables work when the winds blows and the sun shines, but they’ve got no back up. We need to cover base-load power.”

Mr Scilley said it was up to the regions to lead the controversial debate.

“People out in the country are more practical – people in the city don’t realise where their food comes from or what it takes to produce it,” he said “The government needs a push in the right direction. The biggest problem is minority groups get too much of a say.” Mr Scilley believes the majority of Australians would support nuclear power “if it meant a lot cheaper power”.

New England Nationals chair Russell Webb was singing off the same hymn sheet…..

“I think if we take emotions out of it and face the topic realistically, we can see that this nation has some fantastic resources, ones that can supply either fuel for coal-fire power stations or nuclear power.” Mr Webb said it was “foolish” for Australia to think of an energy future without a secure base-load supply. Nuclear power stations, which are used across the world, are one great solution for that,” he said.

NSW Nationals leader and Deputy Premier John Barilaro recently said Tamworth or Armidale could be the site of a new nuclear power station. Mr Barilaro said modern nuclear power technology means small scale plants could be established in parts of regional Australia. “If you want to get away from coal, well nuclear energy, there’s a real chance for it because of the new technology, the new small modular reactors that are now on the horizon,” Mr Barilaro said.

The Deputy Premier said these were not as water hungry as traditional nuclear power plants, because they use air or sand to cool the core…….. https://www.northerndailyleader.com.au/story/6262310/nats-go-nuclear-and-formally-support-controversial-energy-source/

July 9, 2019 Posted by | New South Wales, politics | Leave a comment

The raid on journalist’s home by armed federal police

AFP emails shed new light on media investigations, show officers were armed during raids, SMH, By Kylar Loussikian and Bevan Shields, July 5, 2019 The Australian Federal Police initially classified its investigation into a high-profile national security leak as “routine” and of “low value”, according to a cache of documents that also reveals police were armed when they launched two recent raids on the media.

Emails obtained by The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age under freedom of information laws also offer fresh evidence that Annika Smethurst, a senior member of the Canberra press gallery, could be prosecuted for publishing secret government information.

The AFP is expected to be called before a parliamentary inquiry to explain the chain of events leading to raids in early June on Smethurst’s Canberra home and the Sydney headquarters of the ABC over separate stories based on sensitive and secret government information.

The search warrants sparked a major debate over press freedom, with media chiefs lobbying the Morrison government over recent days for swift legal changes to better protect whistleblowers and journalists………

Other documents reveal officers were armed when they entered Smethurst’s home as well as the ABC’s headquarters in inner Sydney. ……

Nine chief executive Hugh Marks, ABC managing director David Anderson and News Corp corporate affairs director Campbell Reid met with the Attorney-General at Parliament this week but were not given a guarantee that the journalists would be spared prosecution……https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/afp-emails-shed-new-light-on-media-investigations-show-officers-were-armed-during-raids-20190705-p524kc.html

July 8, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, media, politics, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

News Corpse comes out with a weird pro nuclear ramble

(salient bits of the long, rather weird ramble)

The nuclear energy option   A new paper undermines the claim it’s more about culture wars than electricity generation. THE AUSTRALIAN , By GRAHAM LLOYD , 4 July 19,   “……….. A discussion paper prepared for the union-backed Industry Super Australia provides a blueprint for patient capital in the energy sector.

……….The view globally is that nuclear power provides the best emissions-free hedge against a failure of renewables to satisfy more than about one-third of a nation’s energy requirements.

Ed. the view globally –   whose view exactly?

The Prime Minister is being urged to give his blessing to a review of the potential for nuclear energy in Australia.

Queensland MPs Keith Pitt and James McGrath have proposed terms of reference for an inquiry that will review advances in nuclear energy including small nuclear reactors and thorium.

The NSW parliament will conduct its own review.

One Nation MLC Mark Latham has legislation before parliament to legalise uranium mining and nuclear facilities.

“The climate change challenge is real but a renewables fetish can’t solve it,” he says.

NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro has called for a national vote to end the ban and says the northern cities of Tamworth or Armidale could be the site of a new nuclear power station.

Scott Morrison says he won’t oppose nuclear if the economics stack up but no one is offering to build a reactor in Australia.

Advocates of the nuclear option are playing a long-term game.

In April, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency director general William Magwood made his first official visit to Australia. He met the energy ministry, the Australian Safeguards and Non-proliferation Office, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation and the Energy Policy Institute of Australia……

Magwood’s discussions highlighted uranium resource issues but also focused on NEA analyses related to the decarbonisation of electricity systems and radioactive waste management.

While Australia has no plans to build nuclear plants, in 2016 the country joined the Generation IV International Forum, for which the Nuclear Energy Agency acts as technical secretariat.

Ed note: Let us not forget that nuclear industry law-unto-himself Dr Adi Paterson signed Australia up to this with no Parliamentary discussion and no government authorisation . A month later a senate committee ratified this – still no parliamentary discussion, despite the fact that Australa has laws against constructing nuclear reactors.

Magwood’s talks with Australian authorities included the latest research and development on advanced nuclear systems………

One of the themes of the discussion paper is that mainstream thinking on the energy market may be misleading in many areas…….Ultimately, there is the prospect that some wind and solar projects themselves may become stranded assets.

The problems of intermittency are at the heart of global concerns. Federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor is trying to address the issue with a reliability obligation for generators………

nuclear has advantages that intermittent sources of energy cannot provide.

And a recent OECD report assesses the levelised cost using a 3 per cent interest rate at $US100 per megawatt hour for commercial solar, $US70 per megawatt hour for onshore wind and $US50 a megawatt for nuclear………..

Ed. note. Really – source?

Australia lagging

It was noted that Australia is one of the few First World economies without nuclear power and experience in managing a nuclear plant…….

Ed note.  Along with Austria, Denmark, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Malta, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, and Portugal. Belgium, Germany, Spain and Switzerland are phasing-out nuclear power

Not considering nuclear puts Australia in the minority of First World economies. It is also lagging several Second and Third World economies in our region and elsewhere such as Argentina, Mexico, Bangladesh and Turkey and geographical neighbours such as ­Indonesia and Vietnam…….

Based on the Tesla battery in Adelaide, achieving 1½ days’ energy storage would cost $6.5 trillion, enough to build about 1000 nuclear reactors.

For household batteries, it would cost about $US7000 per household every 10 years to provide back-up for 36 hours……..

One important step would be to build some capacity to operate a nuclear facility.

This would provide insurance against failure in alternative options or rapid change in technology.

It says a single reactor would be a relatively small investment.

Ed note:  really? https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/report-argues-for-the-nuclear-energy-option/news-story/f3faf4befb3d68cedc01c6735d467976

July 4, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, media, politics | Leave a comment

Former Environment Minister rejected department advice and approved uranium mine day before election called

Melissa Price approved uranium mine knowing it could lead to extinction of 12 species  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/melissa-price-approved-uranium-mine-knowing-it-could-lead-to-extinction-of-12-species?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other  Former environment minister rejected department advice and approved Yeelirrie mine day before election called. Lisa Cox,  4 Jul 2019  The former environment minister Melissa Price acknowledged that approval of a uranium mine in Western Australia could lead to the extinction of up to 12 native species but went ahead with the decision anyway.

The admission is contained in a statement of reasons signed by the minister before she approved the Yeelirrie uranium mine, 500km north of Kalgoorlie, the day before the federal election was called in April.

The document also shows the environment and energy department recommended conditions that would require the developer, Cameco, to ensure the project would not result in the extinction of up to 11 stygofauna, which are tiny groundwater species.

But Price instead adopted a weaker set of conditions aimed at reducing the risk to groundwater species but which the department said contained “significant uncertainties” as to whether or not they would be successful.

Price acknowledged the department had recommended tougher conditions but said in the statement that if they were imposed there was “a real chance that the project would not go ahead”.

“In making this recommendation, the department considered only the environmental outcomes, and did not weigh the environmental risks against the social and economic benefits of the project,” she said.

“Rather, as the department’s briefing noted, this balancing exercise was for me to do”.

Price wrote that she “accepted that there was a risk” that species could be lost but that the department’s advice was this was not “inevitable” if the project went ahead.

The statement of reasons also notes that the project could lead to the wipeout of the entire western population of a species of saltbush, known as the Atriplex yeelirrie.

The saltbush has just two distinct populations, the western and eastern population, both of which are found on Yeelirrie station.

The statement of reasons says the western population occurs entirely within the proposed area for the mine and there is a risk the development would clear all of it.

The Australian Conservation Foundation, which requested Price’s statement of reasons, described the document as “an extraordinary piece of decision making”.

July 4, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, environment, politics, uranium | Leave a comment

Nuclear enthusiasm from Australia’s right-wing MPs – the triumph of quackery over substance

Minister Sussan Ley could open the door to overturning Australia’s nuclear power ban, news.com.au, 27 June 19    There are some very good reasons why the push to reverse Australia’s ban on nuclear power is a bad idea. Malcolm Farr@farrm51

in numerology.   That pretty well sums up the new enthusiasm for nuclear power within Government ranks — a triumph of quackery over substance.  The nuclear proponents and their media cheer squad seem so determined to see Australian uranium dug up and used to light up the nation, they have diminished the scientific realities of the exercise.

Minister Ley has said she is open to a review of the ban on nuclear power plants.

This isn’t as easy as her turning Susan into Sussan because, as she explained in 2015, “if you add the numbers that match the letters in your name you can change your personality”.

It is a matter of introducing a power source which would be expensive to build, expensive to run, and expensive to turn off. Plus it would be dangerous.

Make that “very dangerous”.

We have a National Wind Farm Commissioner — created by Tony Abbott when PM — overseeing the largely mythical health hazards caused by turbines generating electricity.

If we do that for a few hundred windmills, imagine the huge bureaucracy monitoring the health effects of a nuclear power plant.

Little of which is being addressed by the new gushing tribe of nuclear fans.

It is unfair to load all of this on Ms Ley, but she does administer the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which contains the nuclear ban.

It says, “Nuclear action will require approval if it has, will have, or is likely to have a significant impact on the environment. Nuclear actions should be referred to the Minister and undergo an environmental assessment and approval process.”

The pressure for change is coming from a wide range of political figures including One Nation’s new NSW Legislative Council member Mark Latham. And within the Government the pro nuclear voices have included that of Queensland Nationals federal MP Keith Pitt who told The Australian this month, “In our view, the technology has moved on and small modular reactors and thorium need to be investigated…….

If the pro-nuclear MPs are so confident of safety they would have to accept a reactor in their own neighbourhoods, assuring voters they would not become the next Chernobyl, Fukushima or Three Mile Island….

If not, maybe they would accept nuclear waste being buried in their patch, where it would contaminate for thousands of years.

Neither opportunity is likely to embraced by them.  https://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/minister-sussan-ley-could-open-the-door-to-overturning-australias-nuclear-power-ban/news-story/2c6214dd0abf15c02f7f9c6dc62fbf11

June 27, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

Australia’s escalatede defence spending, Christopher Pyne and his convenient advice to Ey defence consulting

Pay Day: Christopher Pyne’s Defence bonanza a fee fillip for EY  https://www.michaelwest.com.au/pay-day-christopher-pynes-defence-bonanza-a-fee-fillip-for-ey/, Jun 27, 2019  It dwarfs all other government spending. It is secretive. A huge chunk of it does not even go out to tender. The lion’s share goes to foreign multinationals who pay no tax in Australia. It is defence spending. Michael West reports on the explosion in defence spending which has tripled to more than $60 billion in one year since the Coalition took office, and since Christopher Pyne became Minister for Defence Industry on July 19, 2016.

Christopher Pyne switched up portfolios from Defence Industry to Minister for Defence on August 28 last year, a role in which he remained until April this year.

Just two months out of Cabinet, and with well over $100 million a year in Defence fees already going to global consulting firm EY, Christopher Pyne and EY announced yesterday the former minister was signing on with the firm to “ramp up its defence capabilities”.

The response on social media was immediate and rabid, forcing EY straight into defence mode, insisting just three hours later that Pyne would not be lobbying the government on behalf of EY and its clients. Centre Alliance Senator Rex Patrick called on Prime Minister Scott Morrison to censure Pyne for breaching the code of ministerial standards, tweeting:

“Mr Pyne has current knowledge of the broadest affairs of Government and intimate details of every significant matter in respect of the Defence portfolio. He cannot un-know what he knows when forming up advice for EY. Inappropriate and a new test for Scott Morrison”.

When Christopher Pyne headed up Defence Industry in 2016, this was the first year in which government spending on defence surpassed all other agencies combined at 57 per cent of all contract fees. It was even higher the next year at almost 60 per cent.

What sort of contracts are we talking about here? Advice. EY billed the government $17.2 million in one contract for “change management services” for the Department of Defence.

The chart below [on original]shows the Big Four global accounting firms fees over the two years 2016-17.

Defence is by far the biggest item of public spending, yet it attracts almost no media attention, partially because of the secrecy, also because both major parties are loathe to be wedged on national security and so never make a fuss about it – even as billions are being squandered on questionable projects with very little visibility or accountability.

The ABC attempted to shed some light on it two weeks ago, obtaining documents which showed the Government was keeping its “projects of concern” hidden from the public. The documents it found using Freedom of Information, were heavily redacted on “national security” grounds.

Apparently, taxpayers who fund this mountain of government expenditure do not deserve to know how their money is being spent.

Since 2004, and up to 2015, the Department of Defence spent (according to contracts in AusTender) $5 billion to $21 billion. Then, in 2016, it tripled to almost $60 billion and has continued at two to three times pre-2016 spending rates for the last three full years. According to data analyst, Greg Bean, running this year at $16.5 billion for 5.5 months, it will end up at around $36 billion by year’s end.

“That’s at this rate,” says Bean. “It’s just a simple projection of current trend so it’s primitive, but still not trivial.”

June 27, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, business, politics, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

Christopher Pyne – Defence Minister in May – Defence Industry Lobbyist in July

The Fixer in a fix over EY move https://www.afr.com/business/accounting/the-fixer-in-a-fix-over-ey-move-20190626-p521cj Edmund Tadros and Tom McIlroy  26 June 19 Former defence minister Christopher Pyne is under fire for taking a role at big four advisory firm EY that will see him consult to companies in the defence sector.

Despite the lion’s share of the defence sector stemming from federal procurement, EY said the former minister, who retired from politics at the election, would not be lobbying or meeting with MPs or the Defence Department.

The ministerial code of conduct requires cabinet members to wait for 18 months after leaving office before advocating or having business meetings with members of the government, Parliament, public service or defence force on any matters on which they have had official dealings.

Outgoing ministers cannot take personal advantage of information to which they have had access or which is not generally available to the public.

Mr Pyne’s two most recent ministerial roles were as minister for defence and minister for defence industry. He issued a short statement about the job on Wednesday after it was revealed by The Australian Financial Review: “I’m looking forward to providing strategic advice to EY, as the firm looks to expand its footprint in the defence industry.”

A spokeswoman for the Office of the Prime Minister, which administers the code of conduct, did not comment when asked if the role breached the code of conduct

“The rules for former ministers are clear and we refer you to the statements made by Mr Pyne and EY on his new position,” the spokeswoman said.

EY at first described Mr Pyne’s role in the context of “ramping up its defence capability”, but later clarified that Mr Pyne would only deal with the “private sector side of the business”.

“He will not be lobbying or meeting with public sector MPs, public service or defence force in his EY role. He is supporting the private sector side of the business,” the EY spokeswoman said.

Pyne to ‘lead conversations’

EY’s defence leader Mark Stewart said: “Christopher Pyne is also here to help lead conversations about what states need to do to meet the challenges and opportunities this huge defence investment will bring.”

He said EY was “ramping up its defence capability ahead of a surge in consolidation activity and the largest expansion of our military capability in our peacetime history … Large domestic defence players are actively looking for mergers to bulk up to deliver on the government’s $200 billion integrated investment program”.

June 27, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

Australia a top G20 leader in subsidising the coal industry

Australia leads the G20 nations’ pack in aid for coal-fired power, SMH Peter Hannam, June 25, 2019 Subsidies for coal-fired power production almost tripled in the three years to 2016-17 among G20 nations, with Australia providing among the largest support, an international study has found.The report by UK think tank, the Overseas Development Institute, found aid for such power stations soared from US$17.2 billion ($24.7 billion) in 2013-14 to $US47 billion in the most recent year. It’s in contrast to pledges made by the 20 biggest economies in 2009 to phase out subsidies to reduce the risks of climate change……

The highest amounts of total support to coal consumption were identified in Indonesia at US$2.3 billion per year, Italy and Australia, both about US$870 million, the US at US$708 million, and the UK with US$682 million, it reported.

“These tens of billions of dollars a year of G20 support to coal are not just locking in the high-carbon
economy and leading to stranded assets, they are also a missed opportunity to support a clean energy transition and to achieve other sustainable development objectives,” the study said……

‘Ecological crisis’

Jamie Hanson, head of campaigns at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said Australia was in an “ecological crisis driven by climate change”.

“Coal is the primary cause of the climate damage that is causing extinctions all over the country, drought and fire that has torched ancient rainforests, and that has killed half the Great Barrier Reef in the last five years,” he said.

“Climate-destroying government handouts to the coal industry defy all logic – especially now, when we know that clean renewable energy is the cheapest form of new power.”

Separately, Australia’s climate ambassador Patrick Suckling has argued at a United Nations conference in Bonn, Germany that the country’s carbon reduction efforts were “having a positive effect”.  https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/g20-nations-aid-for-coal-fired-power-triples-in-three-years-report-20190625-p5213r.html

June 27, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics | 1 Comment

Ignorance of the Morrison Government on the scientific and medical aspects of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

Fukushima, the ‘nuclear renaissance’ and the Morrison Government  https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/fukushima-the-nuclear-renaissance-and-the-morrison-government,12834

By Helen Caldicott | 25 June 2019 Now that the “nuclear renaissance” is dead following the Fukushima catastrophe, when one-sixth of the world’s nuclear reactors closed, the nuclear corporations – Toshiba, Nu-Scale, Babcock and Wilcox, GE Hitachi, Cameco, General Atomics and the Tennessee Valley Authority – will not accept defeat, nor will the ill-informed Morrison Government.

Fancy giving the go-ahead the day before the 2019 Federal Election was announced for the Yeelirrie Uranium Mine in Western Australia, with no time for rational and informed input or debate! The fact is that Canadian Cameco, the world’s largest uranium miner and processor, wants to mine this uranium. Our alliance with spurious organisations clearly leads us astray.

To be quite frank, almost all of our politicians are scientifically and medically ignorant and in an age where scientific evolution has become extraordinarily sophisticated, it behoves us – as legitimate members of democracy – to both educate ourselves and our naive and ignorant politicians for they are not our leaders, they are our representatives.

Many of these so-called representatives are now being cajoled into believing that electricity production in Australia could benefit from a new form of atomic power in the form of small modular reactors (SMRs), allegedly free of the dangers inherent in large reactors — safety issues, high cost, proliferation risks and radioactive waste.

But these claims are fallacious, for the reasons outlined below. Continue reading →

June 25, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics, technology | Leave a comment

BHP’s Olympic Dam uranium mine: tailings dump to larger than Adelaide and up to 30 metres high

David Noonan shared a link. No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia  https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/    June 22 19
BHP Olympic Dam Tailings dump to be larger than the CBD of Adelaide AND to be up to 30 metres high at the centre of the tailings pile – around the height of a 10 story building.
All BHP Olympic Dam radioactive toxic mine tailings waste must be isolated from the environment for over 10,000 years…
Please consider making a submission to the federal government who are inviting comments on the BHP Olympic Dam Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) 6 project – but only up to cob Friday 28th June, with no extensions (scroll down for info). Tell the fed’s they must not just approve this TSF 6 on the basis of the vested interest BHP Referral documents.
Key Recommendations are provided along with two Briefing papers prepared for Friends of the Earth Australia (FoEA) and available on-line:
“BHP seek a Toxic Tailings Expansion without a full Safety Risk Assessment” (DN, June 2019, 3 pages)
https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/ODM-Tailings-Briefing-22June2019.pdf
and
“Migratory Birds at Risk of Mortality if BHP continues use of Evaporation Ponds” (DN, June 2019, 3 pages)
https://nuclear.foe.org.au/wp-content/uploads/ODM-Migratory-Birds-BHP-Evaporation-Ponds-22June2019.pdf
A set of Key Recommendations on these issues to put to the federal government:
1. The Olympic Dam operation be assessed in its entirety with the full range of project impacts subject to public consultation
Given that uranium mining at Olympic Dam is a controlled “nuclear action” and Matter of National Environmental Significance (NES) under the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), the integrity of environmental protection requires that the entire Olympic Dam operation be subject to impact assessment so that regulatory conditions can be applied “to consider impacts on the whole environment”. Continue reading →

June 25, 2019 Posted by | Olympic Dam, politics, South Australia, uranium, wastes | Leave a comment

Queensland’s nuclear cowboy MPs join One Nation’s Marlk Latham to push for nuclear power

Nationals MPs urge rethink on nuclear, THE AUSTRALIAN GRAHAM LLOYD, ENVIRONMENT EDITOR, 24 JUNE 19,   Scott Morrison is being asked to support a full investigation of nuclear energy in Australia.

Queensland Coalition MPs Keith Pitt and James McGrath have drafted a letter to the Prime Minister together with proposed terms of reference for an inquiry, which will be delivered this week.

The letter will call for a review of advances in nuclear energy including small nuclear reactors and thorium technology, both of which could produce less radioactive waste than existing nuclear plants.

Commercial investigation of nuclear energy will require that a ban on considering the technology be removed from the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

Mr Pitt said that the nuclear issue was “a debate we are ready to have”.

“In our view the technology has moved on and small modular reactors and thorium need to be investigated,” Mr Pitt said.

…….. Critics of nuclear energy claim it would be unable to compete economically with renewable energy and storage.

……. The Morrison government has been reluctant to consider changes to the EPBC Act on nuclear power. But the act in its entirety is up for statutory review this year.

……. The Nationals MPs expect a public review to take from 18 months to two years.

The call for a national inquiry coincides with a review into the potential of nuclear power in NSW, to include former federal Labor Party leader and newly elected One Nation MP Mark Latham.

Mr Latham has introduced a bill in the upper house of the NSW parliament to repeal the uranium mining and nuclear ban in the state.

A parliamentary inquiry will be held by the eight-member, multi-party Standing Committee on State Development of the upper house. Mr Latham will be a member of the committee.

An issues paper is being prepared by the NSW Parliamentary Research Service for public release. The committee will call for submissions and is likely to conduct public hearings as early as September. https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/nationals-mps-urge-rethink-on-nuclear/news-story/4c5c90a4b49f890dba49a10444f1294d

June 24, 2019 Posted by | New South Wales, politics, Queensland | Leave a comment

Robert Parker still pushing the fantasy that nuclear power could be viable in Australia

Robert Parker on nuclear energy in Australia, 23 June 19 HTTPS://WWW.6PR.COM.AU/PODCAST/ROBERT-PARKER-ON-NUCLEAR-ENERGY-IN-AUSTRALIA/  JANE MARWICK

 As the nuclear debate reignites in Australia and the viability of a national nuclear power industry is back on the agenda, Australians are starting to raise questions about what a nuclear future could look like.

Australian Nuclear Association vice-president Robert Parker joins Jane to discuss the future of the industry in Australia.

June 24, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, politics | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »