Nuclear stillbirth for Australia and the world
No doubt Australian nuclear enthusiasts, such as Ziggy Switkowski and Barry Brook, will claim that Obama’s decision vindicates their nuclear advocacy. But really it deviates from their version of reality so far as to shatter it.
Nuclear? It’s just too expensive, for us and the rest of the world, Sudney Morning Herald MICHAEL R. JAMES February 26, 2010 Continue reading
Dr Caldicott’s message on nuclear health dangers
”That’s the ace up the sleeve of the nuclear industry,” she says. ”It’s a silent, cryptogenic disease that doesn’t denote its origin. You have to do big epidemiological studies like the German study to find out what’s going on.”
Why nuclear energy struggles to get private sector funds Sydney Morning Herald , Paddy Manning, February 20, 2010
People have forgotten – a younger generation perhaps never knew – what is scary about nuclear energy.
Anti-nuclear campaigners such as Dr Helen Caldicott are routinely disparaged nowadays. A quick trawl through the clippings yields choice descriptors: “inane”, “hysteric”, “rabid”, “ageing”, “anti-nuclear messiah” and “warrior princess”. Continue reading
Climate sceptics Monckton and Plimer have no scientific credibility
they should present this data, analysis and research in exactly the same way as other scientists do. They should publish it in peer-reviewed journals. They should subject their allegations to the rigorous scientific system
Hot air, cold air ABC The Drum Unleashed, by Alex Cook 29 Jan 2010 This week we have seen the travelling roadshow of Lord Christopher Monckton and Professor Ian Plimer spruiking their views on the climate change debate……We should have no issue with Ian Plimer and Christopher Monckton having something to say.
What is at issue is how they put their case. Science has a structure to resolve such issues. Continue reading
Ziggy continues to spruik “safe, Clean” nuclear power
“It is far too expensive, much dearer than wind power. It is unnecessary because Australia has enormous renewable energy resources and in the long term it [nuclear energy] becomes a medium-level carbon dioxide emitter,“.Dr. Mark Diesendorf
Australia debates plan to build 10 nuclear reactors The National Phil Mercer, SYDNEY December 30, 2009 Conservationists have reacted with dismay and bewilderment to a call by Australia’s atomic industry to build 10 nuclear power stations by 2030. ….. Continue reading
Ziggy Spinowski still spruiking “clean” “green” nuclear power
Christina Macpherson 18 Dec 09 Why does the media continue to give such a platform to the narrow views of a nuclear physicist obviously spruiking for his business? Is it because of some mindset that sees “hard” science (nuke physics, geology etc) as somewhow “real” scince, as compared to the “soft” sciences like ecology, environmental science, climatology?
It wouldn’t be so bad if Ziggy Switkowski showed that he had a clue about the ecological effects of radiation from uranium tailings, or the discharge of hot water into marine environments. He obviously doesn’t. Nor does he show any understanding even of the problems that will shut down nuclear plants as extreme weather events occur, and as sea levels rise.
But perhaps most of all, Ziggy Switkowski is right out of his depth on economics – as predictions of nuclear’s likely costs show not just the exorbitant construction costs, but also the running costs. As quoted today (by Tessa de Ryck) “a 2007 report that nuclear power will likely cost over $7,000 per kilowatt, Moody’s Investor Services is now taking an even more cautious view towards investment in nuclear power,”
A clean and green way to fuel the nation THE AUSTRALIAN , Ziggy Switkowski, 18 Dec 09 “………Cost. Nuclear energy has the highest capital cost, up to $4 billion to 6bn for our first 1000MWe reactor, but low running costs largely independent of the cost of uranium itself………………….
Big money in denying climate change
Dr Karl: ‘Something fishy about climate sceptics’ Adelaide Now CLARE PEDDIE December 17, 2009 CLIMATE change is a fact, sceptics are fishy, says Australia’s favourite scientist, Dr Karl Kruszelnicki.
Dr Karl is in town to promote his first game, Fact or Fishy?, and 28th book, Never Mind the Bullocks, Here’s the Science. Continue reading
Tim Flannery: – ‘Australia will never need nuclear power
Tim Flannery on ABC Radio National Breakfast 3 Dec 09
Fran Kelly: Does Australia need nuclear power in your view?
Flannery: No it doesn’t and it never will. There’s no way we’ll ever need nuclear power in this country. That’s just another delaying tactic I’m afraid……
Climate sceptic rails against “irrational” anti-nuclear movement
Climate change plan coul d”ruin Australia” news.com au AAP November 19, 2009 AUSTRALIA will go broke and become the laughing stock of the world if politicians ignore basic science on climate change, a leading global warming sceptic…..Adelaide University professor of mining geology, Ian Plimer, saidProf Plimer’s comments came as he delivered the annual Essington Lewis Memporial Lecture honour of a former chief executive and chairman of BHP. He is one of Australia’s most outspoken climate change sceptics and rejects the suggestion that increased levels of carbon dioxide are responsible for global warming. Continue reading
Is Ziggy Switkowski ignorant or what?
Ziggy Switkowski announces that Australia will be likely to be getting not 25, but 50 nuclear power plants, and one up and running by about 2020. And he says: ‘overseas experience will shape Australian thinking.”
Is Ziggy Switkowski fair dinkum? Has he not heard of current ‘overseas experience’ – Continue reading
Ziggy Switkowski spins again
Australia Out Of Step On Nuclear Power – ANSTO Chief –NASDAQ By Ray Brindal, Dow Jones Newswires 16 Nov 09 CANBERRA –(Dow Jones)- Australia is out of step with other advanced economies in not having an active nuclear power program Continue reading
France hungry to sell nuclear reactors to Australia?
France backs Australian nuclear power industry THE AUSTRALIAN AAP November 09, 2009 FRANCE, the world’s most nuclearised country, has backed a nuclear power industry in Australia.The French government’s environment ambassador Laurent Stefanini says nuclear power is a good fit for a country that has the world’s largest uranium reserves.
Mr Stefanini said that going nuclear is a reliable and useful way to avoid greenhouse gas emissions……………
Paid puppets spout ‘climate scepticism’
I know who I prefer to believe in debate TheAge Lynne Holroyd, 6 Nov 09
AL GORE is right when he points to the phoney war of the climate science ”debate”. On one hand is the scientific consensus and on the other are the loony theories financed by those with the most to lose if we cut carbon emissions.
The mouthpieces and puppets of the big polluters are just as hard at work in Australia as they are in the US, where there are four industry lobbyists working against climate change action for every member of the US Congress. Funny how the handful of ventriloquist dolls of Australia’s big polluters tend to be geologists who study rocks – not climate, atmosphere and oceans. Geologists are typically employed by big mining companies. Think the carbon lobby – coal, oil, gas – those fighting the Government-proposed carbon pollution bill tooth and nail.
On the other hand, warning us about the imminent dangers of climate change are the thousands of independent, disinterested climate experts of high repute who checked one another’s findings and published their report in 2007, a report signed off and agreed to by more than 100 countries. I know who I would prefer to believe.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/guilty-until-proven-innocent-20091105-i04s.html
ANSTO quickly backtracks on crooked opinion poll
After this morning (26/10/09)changing the wording on its nuclear opinion poll, so that it changed results from “Against nuclear” to “in favour” of nuclear, viewer reactions caused ANSTO to rethink this blatantly dishonest (and rather stupid) strategy Continue reading Pro-nuclear professor got his facts wrong
Lesley Kemeny’s inaccuracies – The Age, by Jim Green 17 Oct 09 Lesley Kemeny claims that 60 countries have ’embraced’ nuclear power yet a moment’s research shows that the figure is 31 (‘ Nuclear energy key to future’, The Age, Oct 14). He lauds Australia’s “superb” uranium mining industry. Yet a 2003 Senate References and Legislation Committee report found “a pattern of under-performance and non-compliance” in the industry, identified many gaps in knowledge, and concluded that changes were necessary “in order to protect the environment and its inhabitants from serious or irreversible damage”.
A shame no-one listened − the following year at the Ranger uranium mine in the NT, 150 workers were exposed to drinking water containing uranium levels 400 times greater than the Australian safety standard. Mining company ERA was fined $150,000 — a rare example of a uranium mining company being prosecuted for breaching operating conditions.
Mr Kemeny gives a figure of 5 grams of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of nuclear power, yet the Switkowski report puts the figure 12 times higher. The Switkowski report also demonstrates what a blunt instrument nuclear power is in the climate change battle − it found that building six nuclear reactors would reduce Australia’s emissions by just 4% if they displaced coal-fired plants, just 2% if they displaced gas, and nothing if they displaced renewables and energy efficiency measures.
Survey: Nuclear power NOT supported by Australians
Nuclear power: ACNielsen’s survey Mumble 15 Oct 09
Here is extract from Nielsen’s report:
Nuclear Power
Respondents were told ‘The introduction of nuclear power has been suggested as one means to address climate change’ and then asked ’Do you support or oppose the Federal Government considering the introduction of nuclear power in Australia?’.
Almost one in two voters (49%) said they supported the consideration of nuclear power while 43% were opposed. Six in ten (62%) of Green voters were opposed to nuclear power while 58% of Coalition voters were in favour.
“It is important to understand two things about this question. First, it was deliberately asked in the context of addressing climate change. Second, it asked whether voters felt the government should consider nuclear power, not introduce it. Even in this context, nuclear power failed to achieve support from a majority of voters and a significant minority (43%) remain opposed” said Nielsen Research Director, John Stirton.
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 