Lucas Heights medical nuclear reactor is unnecessary, a fig leaf on dirty dangerous nuclear power
The nuclear lobby is sure working hard, globally, to improve its very unpopular image.
In Australia pro nuclear hypocrisy reaches a peak today, as Senator Chris Evans bleats out a whole lot of nauseous spin about expanding the role of ANSTO (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) and the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor. His media release is full of sanctimonious blather about the benefits to the sick, Australia having a leading role in the world, and wonderful Synroc ( a waste disposal technology that was discredited decades ago.
There are drawbacks – expense is one, – but these drawbacks can be overcome: research to this end is going on in Canada – scientific teams in Alberta Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Quebec.
The Alberta team was able to produce viable quantities of high-quality technetium-99m using a 19-mega-electron-volt cyclotron, a circular particle accelerator, said Sandy McEwan, a researcher with the University of Alberta and medical director with Alberta Health Services’ Cross Cancer Institute in Edmonton, in a news release.
“This means there is now a potentially valid alternative to reactor-produced medical isotopes,” he said. June 1012.
The real problem with medical isotopes such as those produced in Australia, at Lucas Heights, is that this really functions as a fig leaf over nuclear power. The ‘medical’ nuclear reactor is a foot in the door for the nuclear industry. It should be shut down, and replaced by a cyclotron. – Christina Macpherson, 20 Sept 12
Australia’s Institute of Public Affairs campaigning to deny climate change
IPA goes up the greasy Delingpole for cash http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/environment/ipa-goes-up-the-delingpole-for-cash/ 14 September, 2012 The IPA are grubbing for donations to fund their tireless campaign to stymie action on climate change — and are happy to fly out even the most obnoxious deniers from the UK to assist. Graham Readfearn reports.JAMES DELINGPOLE is a UK columnist waging a long personal jihad against wind farms, environmentalists and climate science.
A resident blogger and columnist at London’s Daily Telegraph, Delingpole is probably best known for being among the first mainstream columnists to declare – wrongly, of course – that emails illegally hacked from an influential climate research unit showed scientists were trying to con the public.
So he is the perfect person to be appealing for people to donate their cash to the Melbourne-based Institute of Public Affairs, a free market think tank which has been working for about 20 years on a campaign to mislead the public about climate science and the impact of carbon pricing.
In the appeal, Delingpole lauds the IPA’s campaign against climate science and action on climate change. Readers of the appeal might be forgiven for thinking the IPA is struggling for cash. Says Delingpole:
James Delingpole
‘Their budget is always stretched. If you don’t give them money they’ll go broke.’
Yet the IPA’s most recent financial returns to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission suggest that, rather than scrambling around for spare change, the think-tank is, in fact, in rude financial health.
For the year ending June 2011, the ASIC documents show the IPA declared a before-tax profit of $217,000 with an income of $2.42 million. In 2010, the IPA’s income was $1.72 million, with before-tax profit of $203,000.
The IPA’s executive director John Roskam refuses to declare where the IPA’s money comes from……
Professor Bob Carter, the IPA’s science policy advisor, is also an advisor to the GWPF (as well as at least seven other climate sceptic groups), alongside fellow Australian “sceptic” Professor Ian Plimer, who has also made personal appeals for people to hand over cash to the IPA.
As I revealed in a story for The Guardian in March, the only known funder of the GWPF is Michael Hintze, an Australian-born, UK-based, hedge fund manager, donor to the UK Tory Party, and a man with a personal fortune of $1.4 billion, according to Forbes.
The IPA also has close ties to the billionaire set in the form of Gina Rinehart, the coal and iron ore mining magnate and world’s richest woman. In an address to “IPA members and friends”, Rinehart recently declared her concern that Australia was becoming too expensive, given that “Africans want to work, and its workers are willing to work for less than $2 per day”. The comments prompted a Ugandan television personality to declare Rinehart was “removed from reality“.
The IPA is currently working in partnership with Rinehart’s lobby group Australians for Northern Development & Economic Vision, which wants a separate low-tax economic zone for the north of Australia to make it cheaper to run major mining projects.
Despite the evidence, THE AUSTRALIAN newspaper claims that wind power does not help reduce CO2 emissions
Wind power abates greenhouse gasses in the UK, why should we believe Lloyd and Cumming’s claims that, for some reason, it is not working in Australia. See Beyond the bluster: Why wind power is an effective technology by the UK Institute of Public Policy Research.
The Australian’s Graham Lloyd pushes hard against the winds of change Independent Australia 10 September, 2012 The Australian newspaper – and its environment editor, Graham Lloyd, in particular – have a vendetta against wind power, says Dave Clarke, who reviews their latest unbalanced report. GRAHAM LLOYD, the ‘environment editor’ for The Australian has got together with Hamish Cumming, an opponent of the proposed Mortlake Wind Farm, to write a creative and imaginative piece about wind power and carbon dioxide emissions.
An environment editor who has a grudge against one of the world’s most successful forms of renewable energy must be quite a rare bird. But for an employee of the Murdoch News empire it is probably a wise career choice. Opposing the huge and powerful fossil fuel/mining industry would not be good for Lloyd’s future prospects in that system.
Lloyd relies heavily on what he calls Cumming’s ‘two year analysis of Victoria’s wind farm development’, but does not say where or how this analysis has been published, nor can I find it on the internet.
They claim that, while Victoria’s wind farms have displaced a significant amount of Victoria’s coal-fired power, this has not resulted in any less greenhouse carbon dioxide being generated by said coal-fired power stations. Lloyd and Cumming claim that when the wind blows and Victoria’s wind farms are generating at a high level, the coal-fired power stations cut back their generation, but go on polluting the atmosphere at the same rate as they would at full power.
What they are implying, but not saying, is that the coal-fired power stations are so poorly designed, poorly managed, or simply so inherently inflexible that they cannot reduce their rate of pollution, even when they are generating less power!
Where Lloyd and Cumming get really creative and imaginative is in claiming that this is not any fault of the coal-fired power stations, but of the wind farms. Somehow we are to believe that the (alleged by Lloyd and Cumming) failure of Victoria’s coal-fired power stations to reduce their emissions in response to reduced demand on their generation is all to be blamed on the wind power industry. Continue reading
ABC Radio interview: Alice McCleary spruiks for nuclear power, nuclear waste dump in South Australia
Alice Mc Cleary from Uranium SA appears to not understand the question of toxic wastes. Hers is an extraordinary point of view, in the light of the continuing slide in uranium prices.
No surprise that Ben Heard, from the Barry Brook nuclear lobby cheer squad, appeared. Ian Henschke (ABC interviewer) seems unaware that in fact the Barry Brook clique are the ONLY environmentalists in Australia known to be pro nuclear.
I note with amusement that McCleary mentioned “emotion” three times in this discussion – that naughty feeling that we must eliminate. Hes is a point of view that would not go down well with many cancer victims, and with those who have recently visited Fukushima, or Chernobyl.
The silly part about it all is that the new nuke promoters are all for nuclear reprocessing, and Thorium reactors – and they need very little uranium.
Uranium fuelled nuclear reactors are so last century now.
BHP knew when to get out.
Should South Australia go nuclear? 13/09/2012 ABC Radio Adelaide, PM by john Thompson-Mills Despite safety fears and environmental concerns, would switching to nuclear power benefit South Australia in the long run? Alice McLeary is the chairman of Uranium SA and she says it is time South Australians had a rational debate about going nuclear.
891 Mornings host Ian Henschke spoke to Alice from the Royal Adelaide Show and took calls from some very passionate listeners.
Christina’s notes from audio:
Alice McCleary We need to start the debate. Include nuclear option. Let the market decide. At the moment nuclear power would not be economic in Australia. Carbon tax designed to eliminate fossil fuels. For baseload power nuclear should be one of those things to talk about. Uranium SA exploring South of Whyalla
Presenter doesn’t think that wind farms are particularly efficient.
McCleary There’s been a lot of emotion, a lot of scare mongering. No source of energy provides a free lunch.
Question: what is her position on nuclear waste?
Presenter: there are now nuclear power plants that have minimal waste?
McCleary: research being done to use 100% of enegy, (?no waste?) We can earn by creating a nuclear waste repositary in South Australia.
Nothing is free. Wind power has all sorts of issues. I’m calling for an unemotional debate about the options.
Caller: uranium mining is a crime against humanity. Everyone in Sweden was exposed. Grandkids, twins – dead in womb – autopsy found no apparent reason. I say – poison from Fukushima. I’m sorry to be emotional.
Presenter: talking about fallout – something much more deadly
McCleary ; those were very old technologies, Fukushima, Chernobyl. I’m trying to get some of the emotion out of it. We should look at the scientific evidence. Current pollution [from coal] is an issue.
Presente. David Evan{?} saying before 9 that manny in parliament agree with McCleary.
Caller, Ben Heard, for Decarbonise Australia. [one of Barry Brook’s pro nuke mob] Chernobyl and Fukushima pollution much less than existing coal plants.
In South Australia quite soon we have to make expensive choices.
In long run, nuclear will reduce the cost of power. Fuel is so cheap. As carbon price goes up, nuclear becomes cheaper. To make the right decision need all the options on the table.
Presenter: a lot of people in environmental movement are moving towards your point of view.
Asks McCleary about Abbott removing carbon tax. She doesn’t really know what Abbott would do… http://blogs.abc.net.au/sa/2012/09/should-south-australia-go-nuclear.html
How nuclear lobbyists like Barry Brook trivialise the health impacts of ionising radiation
Nuclear sector seeks to regain trust after Fukushima, Paul Langley’s NUclear History Blog, Sep 13, 2012“……..March 11 was an error,” said Ric Perez, president and chief operating officer of Westinghouse, also a leading nuclear company and majority-owned by Japan’s Toshiba.
…….Earlier this year, the was a public meeting held at the Walkerville Hall. Barry Brook of Adelaide University, passed around little sealed plastic bags containing uranium ore to the gathered crowd. Perfectly safe he said. True enough at the level of radiological laboratory Barry. People measured the gamma dose emitted by the ore, the gamma penetrating, largely unattenuated, the little plastic bags. The alpha radiation was not measured. It presents only as a severe internal hazard if taken into the body.
Barry, how many little plastic bags, glued to the shattered Fukushima reactors, will it take to seal the inside the reactors the radionuclides which have been venting and leaking from them since March 2011?
A rough number will do. What the hell were you thinking? That a broken reactor complex is anything remotely like a rad lab, the main aim of which is to keep its radioactive sources sealed?
A rad lab and a broken rank of reactors are two very different things Barry. So what was your point?
The idea of the myth of progress is to enable a false claim that present “mistakes” are not actually mere repeats of the deliberate crimes of the past.
That is why, sometimes, “progress” is indeed a myth.
Sometimes, the nuclear victims of the earlier nuclear escapades had children. And those children often remember precisely what happened to their parents, and sometimes, to themselves, as a result of nuclear “mistakes”.
The children of Fukushima will retain their memories for a long time, and will perhaps pass onto their children their recollections of what Mr Perez calls an “error”.
http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/fukushima-was-mistake-wetinghouse-chief-boy-he-thinks-its-still-1954/
“Stripped of emotion” Uranium SA’s chairman Alice McCleary wins Furphy Of The Year award
Uranium SA’s Annual Report 12 Sept 12, Alice McCleary, Chairman , “…..As all shareholders will be aware, 2012 continued to be challenging [that’s the understatement of the year!] for small companies. However, the Board maintains its great confidence [amazing!] in the future prospects of UraniumSA ….
Uranium is used for energy generation in proven and safe industrial processes that – stripped of emotion – have lower environmental footprints and higher sustainability than any competing established technology
Generation IV nuclear reactors are now being developed which consume 100% of the energy in the uranium
fuel, plus the depleted uranium from the enrichment process
These are exciting developments. As the world moves away from carbonintensive energy sources, uranium’s benefits will become more and more obvious to all….”
Nuclear spinner Ziggy’s gone quiet, but the Brook keeps babbling on
A curious silence lately, from Australia’s top nuclear salesmen – Ziggy Spinowski, and Michael Angwin. One can only assume that Ziggy, always one to be on the side of the winners, is quietly moving away from nuclear lobbying. Michael Angwin, CEO of the Australian Uranium Association, is now lying low, in view of the disastrous state of Australia’s uranium industry.
So – it is left to Barry Brook now – Australia’s lone pro nuke spruiker to carry that pernicious torch . He’s not awfully good at it – but the nuclear lobby must rejoice that Brook keeps at it, anyway.
Congratulations to Ludwig Heinrich, for nailing Brook’s arguments so convincingly.
And also – to Independent Australia for providing that Brook video, reminding us of the repetitive and rambling Brook. I am indeed reminded of the poem “The Brook” – “I chatter, chatter as I go to join the brimming river, for men may come and men may go, but I go on forever”.
And Brook sure does go on forever – telling us:
– that the tsunami caused the Fukushima disaster, (when it now has been shown that it was set off by the earthquake, before the tsunami arrived.)
– that the Fukushima accident “hasn’t significantly damaged any person” (mmm throat lesions, leukaemia – not significant?)
– that “in the past renewables have not been able to replace fossil fuels”. (What about the present, and the future?)
– that we “need to overcome fear of radiation” (!!!!)
– that he’s morbidly fascinated that people have ignored other disasters – petro chemical industries. (but then, as Brook thinks that increased ionising radiation is fine, then, to him, a nuclear accident is at the same level as any other accident.)
Above all, Brook says that “we already have really safe nuclear power plants”
That statement really shows up Brook’s ignorance of risk analyis. In calculating risk , you weigh up the probability of the risk against the seriousness of the consequences if an accident happens.
That’s exactly what insurance companies all over the world have done, in relation to nuclear power. They’ve found it an unacceptable risk because – although the probability of accident is small, the consequences of a nuclear accident are huge.
Barry Brook just doesn’t get it. – C.M
Flinders University participates in USA Department of Energy’s pro nuclear propaganda
Christina Macpherson 3 Sept 12, 18 months after the Fukushima nuclear accident, the truth is filtering out, about the continuing release of radiation from the crippled reactors, as radioactive water seeps into the ground below them, and radiation levels linger in the Fukushima area. The Chernobyl disaster’s health effects on the Ukrainian population are becoming widely known, but the evacuation following the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident was managed more swiftly, and permanently, than the Fukushima evacuation.
How important is the impact of continuing low level radiation on children’s health? We have our answer already in the high rate of thyroid disorders among Fukushma’s children.
It is shameful that an Australian university should participate in the USA’s Department of Energy’s propaganda to promote nuclear power, and whitewash the reality of ionising radiation’s harmful effect on human health:
Radiation response a meltdown in reason Flinders University News, July 14th, 2011 Published by FU Marketing and Communications. The possibility that low doses of radiation may prevent or delay the progression of cancer is being explored by a Flinders University research team led by Professor Pam Sykes in a move that runs counter to the widely held perception that exposure to any radiation is harmful.
Professor Sykes, recently appointed to the University’s Strategic Professorship in Preventive Cancer Biology in the Flinders Centre for Cancer Prevention and Control says the public panic in response to nuclear accidents such as that at Fukushima in Japan is the result of a general ignorance about radiation.
“…….. radiation is not the poison, the dose is,” Professor Sykes said……. “It’s now been accepted that they should not have evacuated so many people because the biggest detriment from Chernobyl was that they were dramatically disadvantaged, both economically and socially. Many suffered depression thinking they were going to die of cancer…..
Professor Sykes’ research, which involves doses of radiation that are up to three orders of magnitude lower than those used by other investigators, has been funded by the US Department of Energy Low Dose Radiation Research Program for almost 10 years…… Studies in Canada and Japan have also shown that low doses of radiation given to mice delay the onset of cancer, and reduce the symptoms of diabetes and atherosclerosis, improving the span and quality of life of the affected animals.
Professor Sykes and her team are currently examining low dose radiation therapy in reducing or preventing prostate cancer
How Australia’s top nuclear expert, Ziggy Switkowski, trivialised Fukushima nuclear disaster
Threat from meltdown only minor: Ziggy Switkowski, fmr head, ANSTO, Paul Langley’s Nuclear History Blog, 1 Sept 12, Comparing the bullshit at the time with the reality….. http://www.smh.com.au/environment/threat-from-meltdown-only-minor-ziggy-switkowski-20110314-1btch.html Threat from meltdown only minor: Ziggy Switkowski March 14, 2011
The impact of any meltdown in Japanese nuclear reactors damaged by the recent earthquake will be small compared to the devastation caused by the quake itself and the subsequent tsunami, Australia’s best-known nuclear power expert says.
Ziggy Switkowski, who was chairman of the the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) until a few months ago, says a significant build-up of radiation is unlikely.
“The contribution, if any, to this [disaster] from the nuclear fleet, I expect even under worst case scenarios is going to be small,” he told Fairfax Radio Network today……..
Contrast with reality:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16334434 BBC 26 Dec 2011 Fukushima accident: disaster response failed – report……. http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/08/31/threat-from-meltdown-only-minor-ziggy-switkowski-fmr-head-ansto/
Australia’s uranium industry gearing up for a propaganda pitch
Both in Australia, and internationally, the nuclear industry is gearing up for a last ditch battle to “educate” the world’s 
public – C.M.
one of the issues that really dogged the industry across Australia for a number of years; there wasn’t great community engagement in terms of education about the industry but that’s now changing.”
Uranium miners push ahead despite turbulence ABC News, By Kathryn Diss Aug 15, 2012…....Development hurdles
Uranium prices haven’t regained much lost ground which the industry says is hindering the development of new projects in WA and overseas.
Prices are sitting at about $50 a pound, almost half what they were before the disaster.
Mr Keane says the current price isn’t high enough to incentivise companies to bring the next wave of projects online.
“Since Fukushima, there has been a continual deferral of mega projects, such as Cameco’s Kintyre project and BHP’s Yeelirrie mine in WA,” he said.
“Effectively big companies, which have assets in other commodities, are standing back and seeing what plays out from Fukushima.”…. Mr Khaliqi says the figures clearly show the disaster only damaged the industry’s image in the short-term….. one of the issues that really dogged the industry across Australia for a number of years; there wasn’t great community engagement in terms of education about the industry but that’s now changing.”
Paladin Energy’s Matthew Keane also believes change is occurring.
Australia’s Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) – home of climate change denialism
Science denial tourism, sponsored by the IPA Want to a free trip
around Australia, all expenses paid? It’s easy, just publish a book
denying climate change (scientific credentials not required) then
contact the Institute of Public Affairs — they’ll take care
everything. Graham Readfearn from DeSmogBlog.com reports on the IPA —
Australia’s home of anti-science……
http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/environment/science-denial-tourism-sponsored-by-the-ipa/
Australia’s mental health problem about wind farms
There are two main anti-wind farm groups in Australia busily fomenting anxiety and opposition. One is the Waubra Foundation, a group of mainly wealthy individuals, none of whom live in or near the town of Waubra, near Ballarat. Several of them, NIMBY style, have opposed turbines near their own properties elsewhere. They are led by an unregistered doctor, Sarah Laurie, and a wealthy mining investor, Peter Mitchell who also has connections to the Landscape Guardians. Despite their name, the Guardians have never attempted to guard our landscape from over-zealous residential developers, open cut coal or coal seam gas mining. They only target wind farm developments. All three – Waubra, the Guardians and Mitchell’s mining investment company share a South Melbourne post office box.
Wind turbine syndrome: a classic ‘communicated’ disease , by Simon Chapman https://theconversation.edu.au/wind-turbine-syndrome-a-classic-communicated-disease-8318?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+20+July+2012&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+20+July+2012+CID_be7f8aff1000afd17cabaf558b629431&utm_source=campaign_monitor&utm_term=Simon+Chapman+investigates At the beginning of this year I started collecting examples of health problems some people were attributing to wind turbine exposure. I had noticed a growing number of such claims on the internet and was curious about how many I could find. Within an hour or two I had found nearly 50 and today the number has grown to an astonishing 155.
I have worked in public health on three continents since the mid 1970s. In all this time, I have never encountered anything in the history of disease that is said to cause even a fraction of the list of problems I have collected.
The list of 155 problems includes “deaths, many deaths”, none of which have ever been brought to the attention of a coroner. It includes several types of cancer, and both losing weight and gaining weight. You name it. Haemorrhoids have not yet been named, but nothing would surprise me. Continue reading
Australia’s carbon tax – dispelling the scare campaign against it.
the great tragedy of this is the groups behind this ludicrous scare campaign – the Minerals Council of Australia, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Australian Coal Association, and the Housing Industry Association – will never be brought to justice for the misleading conduct they’ve engaged in over the last two years.
One working week down, sky still above, Climate Spectator, 6 Jul 2012, Tristan Edis One working week after doomsday and as usual the media is still running tripe about the carbon pricing package. Gerry Harvey has realised that the carbon tax will actually be good for retailers like him. And finally some people are being brought to justice for scaremongering by the ACCC (ACT Renewable Energy and Polaris Solar), if only their powers extended to industry associations…… Continue reading
Australia’s nuclear priesthood, Barry Brook etc, dazzle us with science about Integral Fast Reactors
It will be great pity if Australians let themselves be mentally paralysed and muzzled by the nuclear technocrats into thinking they can’t understand nuclear issues. Frankly, events like Fukushima show ordinary people probably have a much better grasp of issues surrounding the environment, economics, safety, nuclear radiation, and weapons proliferation than the nuclear hierarchy does.
IFRs needs plutonium or enriched uranium as fuel. So, to have fast reactors, Australia would need to import these, or set up nuclear reprocessing or uranium enrichment here.
In dispraise of Integral Fast Nuclear Reactors Independent Australia, 5 July 12, Can only nuclear technocrats discuss nuclear issues — leaving the great unwashed out of the debate? Noel Wauchope considers the latest – but not necessarily the greatest – nuclear gizmo — Integral Fast Reactors. “….. the nuclear priesthood is pretty safe in all this. They keep the argument narrowly technical, with pages and pages on the various technicalities of cooling systems, reprocessing of fuel systems, passive safety systems and so on; in other words, they induce in the public a kind of mindless torpor as they dazzle us with science.
At the same time, the nuclear priesthood, like some gifted but autistic child with specialist knowledge in just one area, seems to have little grasp of other issues concerning nuclear power — blinkered as they are in their apparent view that the technicalities are the whole story. This is the case with their latest propaganda for the ‘Integral Fast Reactor’ or IFR. Continue reading
Australia’s Institute of Public Affairs promotes climate denialist lies to schoolchildren
what might it mean that Plimer’s views are rejected outright by 97-98% of climate scientists and major scientific organisations across the world? Might his extreme and nastily expressed views have something to do with vested interests – given that he is the interim chairman of one mining company and director of at least one other – in the context of a looming carbon tax?
Teaching critical thinking in this context would also look at the concept and role of peer review and relevant credentials when deciding on the worth of conflicting statements.
How the IPA feeds kids lies about climate change, Independent Australia, 12 June 12, The Institute of Public Affairs, a lobby group funded by big business, miners and the tobacco industry, is sending schools misleading and inaccurate books about climate change. Frances Quinn from the UNE reports. Two recently published books suggest that the public – and school children in particular – are being fed lies about environmental issues such as climate change. The books – “How to Get Expelled from School: A guide to climate change for pupils, parents & punters” by Ian Plimer and “Little Green Lies: An expose of twelve environmental myths” by Jeff Bennett – clearly demonstrate how important it is to have a scientifically literate Australia.
The distorted and selectively reported science in these books highlights some of the challenges that Australian teachers face in teaching science, and how important it is that they are supported in this task.
The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (DCCEE) has condemned Plimer’s book as misleading and inaccurate. However the free market think tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) is apparently sending copies of Plimer’s misleading fringe book to Australian schools. The Executive Director of the IPA John Roskam is, incidentally, on the editorial board of the publishing house of these two books.
Plimer’s book tells school students that they are being “conned” and “fed propaganda” if their teacher “waffles” on about issues such as human-induced global warming, sea level rise and the IPCC. He deplores this as “environmental activism”. This is despite the overwhelming evidence for human induced climate change accepted by a vast range of climate scientists and scientific organisations. Continue reading
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 