Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Kimba nuclear waste dump – a total mishandling of the truth from Australian government.

February 25, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, reference | Leave a comment

The Kimba nuclear waste dump will take a huge toll on the Murray River’s water

Annette Ellen Skipworth    No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia, 25 Feb 20
Where is the water coming from to compact the nuclear dump site and the 31 kms of dirt road to the dump site.
I spent some time as a remote road contractor and I learnt a little bit about roads and site works.
To take the weight of the truck load, a road has to be compacted to gain the strength to take the semi plus the load on the tray.
From asking questions and scouring internet sites, I have found out, the casks containing the high grade nuclear waste.. excuse me ..the intermediate nuclear waste are very very heavy.
Now when we were building a road for a mine where the loads were heavy, we used a huge amount of water so the road doesnt blow out.
It wasn’t advisable to use water that is very salty.. it rises to the top and makes the road slippery.
As Kimba’s only water supply comes from the precious Murray River, and the local underground water is salty and unusable.. where is the water needed coming from?
I think you lot in Kimba that want to host a nuke dump and think it will only affect Kimba are very naive..  https://www.facebook.com/groups/1314655315214929/

February 25, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, environment, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Whyalla urgently needs a policy to prevent becoming the radioactive trash port

Kazzi Jai shared a post. Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste In The Flinders Range· February 23 

“A question was asked to (Whyalla) council regarding potential use of the port for the transport of intermediate level waste. The response is on the council website under Council Meeting Minutes Monday 17/2/20. There is no current policy.

As a community we should have a policy. We should be standing up on behalf of the divided Kimba community and refuse the use of the port and surrounding roads and rail. It is the responsibility of the council to represent the community, not to bow down and take orders from the state government.” – Mr Andrew Williams.

Link source to Minutes: http://www.whyalla.sa.gov.au/…/council%20minutes%20-%20PUBL…

https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/

February 25, 2020 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, South Australia | Leave a comment

Bill in Aust Parliament names South Australia as the Nuclear Waste State

the Bill  makes provision for the Federal gov. to pass Regulations to name and over-ride specific State Laws.  For instance, it may be the case that the Federal gov. requires to pass a Regulation to name and over-ride the public interest protections in the SA “Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000”, and potentially to also do so regarding the SA “Aboriginal Heritage Act 1988”.

David Noonan, 24 Feb 20, Bill names SA as the Nuclear Waste State:

The Bill specifies South Australia as a nuclear waste dump state.

And specifies Napandee near Kimba as a Nuclear Waste Store – which effectively also targets Whyalla Port for multiple nuclear waste shipments.

The Bill has been to the HoRep’s and now goes to the Senate:

to enable the decision about the location of the facility to be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny”

(see the Bill Explanatory Memorandum Outline p.1).

See https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6500

For access to the doc’s and to speeches, and to Track the Bill – so as to receive e updates…

The Bill is expected to be Referred by the Aust Greens around Wed 26th Feb to a short Inquiry by the Senate Standing Economics Legislation Committee. The Bill may go to a vote in Senate in the last week of May.

If the Bill is passed, the Federal gov. then instigates a Licensing process on the NRWM Facility by the nuclear regulator ARPANSA, and in parallel makes a referral for environment assessment of the proposed NRWM Facility under EPBC Act.

ARPANSA are expected to conduct separate Licensing processes for the above ground interim Nuclear Waste Store, and for the so-called Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility. ARPANSA may require the Federal gov. to make separate Licensing Applications for the two types of waste facilities.

The Federal gov. can-not assume that both facilities will be approved by the regulator.

It is arguably likely that Licensing for the NRWM Facility, and in particular for above ground interim Nuclear Waste Store, should and will fail – leaving the amended Act stranded will a failed single specified site and no provision for consideration of any further siting elsewhere in SA or in other States / Territories.

However, the Bill is said by the Minister and the Department to provide ‘certainty’.

Notes on Bill:

“NATIONAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT (SITE SPECIFICATION, COMMUNITY FUND AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 2020”

The Bill names and specifies South Australia, and omits “the State or Territory”, for siting a NRWM Facility and to register acquired lands;

The Bill specifies Napandee as the NRWM Facility site and amends the 2012 Act to that effect as a single site;

The Explanatory Memorandum (EM, Outline p.2) says: “Additional land will not be able to be acquired to establish a second facility”;

The Bill “Notes on Clauses” p.22 states: “Once established, it is expected to be in operation for 100 years.”

The Bill “Notes on Clauses” p.14 claims: “there is broad support in the community for the project.”

 The Bill strengthens the Commonwealth powers to use the 2012 Act to over-ride State laws and to impose the NRWM Facility on unwilling communities;

The Bill specifically asks Senators to vote to approve a set of powers to over-ride any State law (or other Cth law), Continue reading

February 24, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Barngarla Aboriginal people take legal action against Australian govt’s planned Kimba nuclear waste dump

February 24, 2020 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, legal, politics | Leave a comment

No, Mr Baldock, our children do not deserve this dirty, long-lasting, nuclear trash dump

Paul Waldon  Fight To Stop A Nuclear Waste Dump In South Australia, 21 Feb 20, People leaving, property values dropping, large tracts of land hitting the market, children’s heritage being sold and/or eroded, a once strong community now divided, people happier to shop outside their community, these are the trademarks of a dying town with poor opportunities.

An aggressive social cancer fueled by a desperate and ignorant nuclear embracing dichotomy trying to grasp the doctrines of the indentured servitude bound nuclear coterie with a vested interest spouting factoids will surely fail to attract new business and people to the region.

Meanwhile Andrew Baldock, nuclear profiteer, social axe man has continued to state “We are doing this for the children!”

Well Baldock my children, my children’s children’s children don’t deserve this.   https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/

February 22, 2020 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, South Australia, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Correcting the propaganda: Australia’s nuclear medicine DOES NOT NEED a national radioactive waste dump

February 22, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, spinbuster | Leave a comment

Greens in the Senate will oppose bill to storage nuclear waste at Kimba farm

February 20, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

South Australia’s grain exports could be at risk, if Kimba nuclear waste dump goes ahead

Paul Waldon   Fight To Stop A Nuclear Waste Dump In South Australia, 17 Feb 20,
Guidelines set by ARPANSA may suggest concerns for radioactive waste in an agriculture environment. These concerns are reaffirmed with Dr Yury Bandazhevsky’s study where he reported the health impacts in children around Belarus after 1986, this is where he states that the biomagnification of radioactive food ingested at a rate of 10 becquerels per kilo of contaminated food daily over a period of 500 days will culminate in a reading of 1400 Becquerels per kilo of body weight.

Keeping in mind the safe standard for radioactive contaminated food in Australia is 1200 becquerels, which fails to keep up with the safer standards of Japan at only 100 becquerels per kilo. Not only is Japans standards safer than ours but Australia’s grain export to Japan is about $646 million per year, and that could be in jeopardy if the program to turn Kimba into a radioactive dump proceeds.

Dr Bandazhevsky’s study came with the added problem of finding children of Belarus free of contamination, there was also a health cluster in children now recorded and known as Chernobyl heart, a condition of multiple holes in the heart, due to radioactive exposure.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/

February 17, 2020 Posted by | business, Federal nuclear waste dump, health, South Australia | Leave a comment

History of Australia’s govt move towards importing nuclear waste

If the “low level” storage facility goes ahead in Kimba, it would only be a matter of time before it became a facility storing medium and high level waste creating untold risks for human life, Indigenous culture and heritage, flora and fauna, and agriculture. It must be stopped.

TERRA NUCLEAR  https://www.cpa.org.au/guardian/2020/1902/05-nuclear.html?fbclid=IwAR0oOmAw7IIbs9dERT6aUM6gKTG4eIIco6iEycpzr58GHwyPomOVyGh2jak  Anna Pha,16 Feb 2, Last week, the then Resources Minister Matt Canavan announced the site for an international nuclear waste dump on farmland in South Australia. The decision comes after two decades or more of wrangling over where to locate the facility.

The land is at Napandee in Kimba, on the Eyre Peninsula and is owned by a farmer who offered it to the government. He is set to receive compensation well above market value.

“The facility has broad community support in Kimba, but I acknowledge there remains opposition, particularly amongst the Barngarla People and their representative group,” Canavan said in a press release.

He omits to mention that the Barngarla People were excluded from a local vote on the question.

In addition, the opposition is not confined to the Barngarla People who fear the pollution of their land and waters, as well as the damage to their culture and sacred sites. Environmental and other groups as well as many individuals have not given up. They are determined to fight it to the end.

Denial of Danger

Just as the government refuses to acknowledge the dangers of inaction over climate change, Canavan plays down the deadly risks associated with radiation; “I am satisfied a facility at Napandee will safely and securely manage radioactive waste and that the local community has shown broad community support for the project and economic benefits it will bring.”

This is a hollow claim, which he cannot back with practice. How can anyone claim such a facility would be safely and securely managed for thousands or possibly hundreds of thousands of years that it would take for the radioactive material to breakdown?

The minister cannot make any guarantees. In particular, as the plan is to hand the facility over to the private sector to manage, the risks and cover-ups become far more likely and serious Continue reading

February 17, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, history, reference | Leave a comment

Australian government pushes on with nuclear dump, tramples on indigenous rights

February 15, 2020 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics | Leave a comment

Nuclear waste dumping: as the Baldock family sells farming land, is the agricultural market for Kimba now stuffed up?

As the Baldock family anticipates the establishment of a nuclear waste dump on Jeff Baldock’s land,  they now sell a large chunk of their farming land, along with three other farming families that have made the same decision. (Reported in The Advertiser , 14 Feb 2020)

It looks as if they are  getting out fast, before the dirty nuclear waste news is widely known.

And here are some of the many comments on Facebook:

James Shepherdson It is actually about roughly 20ks from the site and has only just been added to the other land for sale. Read into it what you will , but if he’s planning to stay he’s sure sending the wrong message with this move .As far as being approachable, been there done that and got jumped on by council and the gov department and were accused of bullying . this will go down in history as the most undemocratic process in this country

K Bruun I can’t – but at the same time ‘can’ – believe this. I am amazed at how planned this has been. There must be something sociopathic about these people. I still don’t understand how Baldock could spend his nuffield scholarship learning how to keep families on farms together, yet does this. What is the psychology behind people like this? They have effectively harmed their entire community.

Joshua Jaeger Selling it before it becomes worthless.
Zac Eagle Rats didn’t take long to jump the sinking ship
Jillian Marsh As always the business people will pack up and move on because it’s a business venture. The Traditional Owners face another round of dispossession and destruction as their sovereign lands are RE-colonised and further desecrated. Very sad and sorry state of affairs …
Noel Wauchope Perhaps the Baldocks and others look to a “healthy”economic transition for Australia from an agricultural country to the world’s quarry and waste dump.
Paul Waldon How many children will this crumbling community lose from this and future sales of properties.

Kazzi Jai  Paul Waldon “It was sheer elation when I heard,” Baldock says. “I’m very, very excited about what lies ahead for Kimba. It gives me a great feeling of relief. I’m quite excited to have it on my property and see it develop, to have our kids around it and see some opportunities close to home.”
The Saturday Paper February 8th -14th 2020

 
Joanne Borchers Yeah nah! Good luck offloading that with what’s planned by the grubby government for the Eyre Peninsula… soon to be the worlds nuclear waste dumping ground. People be selling up in droves and government will pick it up for a song and make squillions in dirty money … a big F U to the people of SA… hate what’s happening 
Paul Waldon Zac Eagle I wouldn’t know myself, however the Baldock with his property on the market may trying to distance himself in an attempt to elude the stigma and a name that one day maybe synonymous with shame.

  Noel Wauchope Perhaps the Baldocks and others look to a “healthy”economic transition for Australia from an agricultural country to the world’s quarry and waste dump.

Paul Waldon Another casualty of a Radioactive dump, I presume.
Paul Waldon $31 mil not looking so good. 

Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste In The Flinders Range, https://www.facebook.com/groups/941313402573199/

February 15, 2020 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, South Australia | Leave a comment

Media coverage of Kimba nuclear waste dump is found wanting

February 15, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, media | Leave a comment

Controversial legislation for Kimba nuclear waste dump is tabled in Federal parliament

Nuclear legislation on the table, Whyalla News, Louis Mayfield  14 Feb 20  The federal government’s goal of establishing a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) at Napandee, Kimba is a step closer after key legislation was tabled in the Parliament on Thursday.

The controversial National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 will be subject to much scrutiny from the Senate crossbench and other stakeholders.

Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has already flagged that her party will move to block the legislation, claiming that government does not have broad community support.

“It is wrong to say there is broad community support. Traditional Owners have rejected the proposal. Once again the Morrison Government and Minister Canavan haven’t listened,” she said.

Centre Alliance Senator Rex Patrick has previously stated that his party would refer the legislation to a Senate Committee ‘where the decision made by the Government can be thoroughly scrutinised’.

“Whilst the decision by 62% of the community to back the facility being built must be respected, so too must the views of those who were under the impression that the facility would not go ahead without ‘broad community support’,” he said.

The bill will also allow the government to establish a $20 million Community Fund for Kimba, promising to support long-term infrastructure and development priorities for the town……. https://www.whyallanewsonline.com.au/story/6629280/nuclear-legislation-on-the-table/?fbclid=IwAR0Q46EnPyGMac0c6shR7o_dhPh5BQBhWwkN1FuCaq6zwJi_6lfc2qjS0SA

February 15, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

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

February 13, 2020 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, politics, South Australia | Leave a comment