Cabinet papers: Radioactive soil from UQ dumped at Mary Kathleen mine http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-government/cabinet-papers-radioactive-soil-from-uq-dumped-at-mary-kathleen-mine/news-story/9bad4b01ffb900f38233aa87474d0cfd January 1, 2017 A HUGE amount of radioactive soil – enough to top-dress a football oval – from the University of Queensland was dumped in the disused Mary Kathleen open-cut uranium mine north of Mount Isa in June 1986 with the approval of the Bjelke-Petersen government.
Cabinet papers released today after 30 years reveal a submission in August 1986 from then mines minister Ivan Gibbs, outlining how 330 cubic metres of contaminated soil was trucked to the mine site and unloaded into the water.
The submission said that in 1984, the UQ Experimental Mine at Indooroopilly was found to have radioactive material from uranium ore samples taken at the Anderson Lode (14km west of Mount Isa).
“Officers of the Health Department carried out a detailed survey of the site and concluded that the pilot plant tailings had caused contamination of the soil under and around the stockpile area, the total mass of contaminated material required to be moved amounting to about 330 cubic metres,” Gibbs’ submission said.
“Discussions were held with officers of my department to identify a suitable site for disposal of the material and I approved for it to be dumped into the abandoned open cut.
“Expert advice has been received that seepage will not take place from the open cut to the surrounding rocks, and studies have shown that the water level in the open cut will stabilise at least 40m below the overflow level.’’
Gibbs said the soil was classed “low specific activity material’’ under the code of practice for the safe transport of radioactive substances. A convoy of trucks transported the soil to the open-cut mine and dumped it below water level. “The access ramp was sealed with large rocks,’’ Gibbs said. “Each truck was washed down and checked for zero radioactive contamination.”
The submission stated that the government was satisfied that material in the abandoned mine would not have any effect on surface or groundwater in the area.
Gibbs said local National Party MP Bob Katter and Mount Isa mayor Tony McGrady objected to the disposal and sought assurances that no more soil would be dumped there.
Gibbs said: “Although it is highly unlikely that the cost of transporting any radioactive material to Mary Kathleen would be justified in future, the possibility of using the abandoned open cut for special cases should not be totally excluded.’’
A small town on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula is again in the frame as a site for Australia’s nuclear waste despite being ruled out of consideration less than one year ago because of deep community concern and opposition to the plan.
Yesterday federal Resource Minister Matt Canavan formally accepted two revised site nominations and initiated a 90 day process to measure community views on a planned facility for the disposal of low level and extended storage of higher level radioactive wastes. Last April two previously nominated sites in the region were ruled out of federal consideration.
“This plan is simply not the best way to advance responsible radioactive waste management in Australia”, said ACF nuclear campaigner Dave Sweeney.
“Revisiting a community that has already made its view clear looks more like Canberra’s frustration than community consultation.
“Less than a year ago Minister Canavan’s predecessor Josh Frydenberg ruled the Kimba region out, now it is back on the table. This radioactive waste is a direct hazard for many thousands of years – far longer than any politician’s promise. Short term thinking about long term waste is not good policy or practise.”
ACF joined other environment and public health representatives in the Kimba area last week in a visit that included a public meeting, stakeholder meetings and a regional tour. There is clear and continuing community concern and opposition to the waste plan.
The plan will put further pressure on an already stressed community and further highlights the continued uncertainty in the governments wider approach given it is also exploring a controversial site in the Flinders Ranges at the same.
“There has never been an independent assessment of long-term management options in Australia, rather just a decades long search for a postcode,” said Dave Sweeney. “It is time to stop repeating past mistakes and adopt a new and better approach”.
ACF supports a wide civil society and stakeholder call for Australia’s radioactive waste to be managed in improved storage facilities at existing federal sites to allow for a credible, comprehensive and open exploration of the full range of future management options.
The Federal Government’s decision to advance two sites at Kimba on the Eyre Peninsula for assessment to house Australia’s nuclear waste will cause stress, division and uncertainty for SA communities.
Less than a year ago two proposed sites near Kimba were removed from a national shortlist because of community opposition.
“The Federal Government is toying with the lives of South Australian communities,” said Conservation SA Chief Executive Craig Wilkins.
“Kimba’s original nominations were scrapped due to a lack of broad community support and that opposition remains. This process is damaging and dividing our towns. It is thoughtless, inconsiderate and inconsistent.”
The planned national facility would store intermediate level radioactive waste currently at Lucas Heights in Sydney and dispose of low level waste and contaminated soil from Woomera.
Wallerberdina, a highly contested site in the Flinders Ranges, has been the focus of the federal site search to date and remains on the table despite community opposition.
“The expansion of the site search to Kimba is also a federal vote of no confidence in the Wallerberdina site,” said Mr Wilkins.
“Instead of causing more division and stress across our regional communities the Federal Government should take all the sites off the table. We need a responsible and inclusive approach to radioactive waste management where a proper process is prioritised over our key farming and tourist postcodes.”
South Australia has a history of resistance to radioactive waste projects, from defeat of a plan to establish a facility in the north of the state under the Howard Government to widespread public backlash over the recent push to import and store international nuclear waste.
“We have long-standing state legislation that prevents the establishment of radioactive waste dumps. We will use this and more in our work to support regional communities and keep South Australia free of nuclear waste dumps,” concluded Mr Wilkins.
Controversial nuclear waste plans back under the spotlight, SMH, Steven Trask , 14 Mar 17 Issues at two of Australia’s largest radioactive waste storage facilities have put a controversial government plan back under the spotlight.
For years the federal government has tried in vain to build a national dump for the country’s nuclear waste. Staunch opposition from prospective locations has repeatedly stalled the project, which opponents believe is an environmental disaster waiting to happen.
Each year Australia produces about a shipping container full of low and intermediate-level waste through industrial, medical and research applications. Much of the country’s waste is stored at a CSIRO facility in Woomera, South Australia, and a government warehouse in Lucas Heights, Sydney.
Lucas Heights is approaching full capacity and Fairfax Media has revealed significant concerns about conditions at the CSIRO facility…….
The search for a publicly acceptable site to store nuclear waste has plagued successive governments since the doomed National Repository Project in 1992.
Started by the Labour government in 1992, the project was wound-up without success in 2004 by Liberal Prime Minister John Howard. ……
Last week the government announced two sites in Kimba, South Australia, had been formally nominated by landowners to host the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility…….http://www.smh.com.au/national/controversial-nuclear-waste-plans-back-under-the-spotlight-20170308-gutd72.html
Dear Mr Weatherill,
Re: CARA final advice to Government report
The Department of Premier and Cabinet’s 10 March 2017 email edition of ‘Nuclear News’ (‘Next steps on nuclear discussion’) states:
‘The Consultation and Response Agency (CARA), which delivered the state’s largest engagement program on record last year, and the CARA Advisory Board, have now provided their final advice to Government and will be closed.’
Given the importance for transparency in these key public policy issues, could you please advise us when and where this final CARA and CARA Board advice will be made public?
Friends of the Earth Australia is today releasing a detailed report on the National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012 (NRWMA). The report ‒ written by Monash University fifth-year law student Amanda Ngo ‒ comes against the backdrop of the federal government’s targeting of a site near Hawker in SA’s Flinders Ranges for a national radioactive waste store and repository.
The NRWMA is heavy-handed, undemocratic legislation that gives the federal government the power to extinguish rights and interests in land targeted for a radioactive waste facility. In so doing the Minister must “take into account any relevant comments by persons with a right or interest in the land” but there is no requirement to secure consent. Traditional Owners, local communities, pastoralists, business owners, local councils and State/Territory Governments are all disadvantaged and disempowered by the NRWMA.
The NRWMA disempowers Traditional Owners ‒ in this case Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners ‒ in multiple ways, including:
- The nomination of a site for a radioactive waste facility is valid even if Aboriginal owners were not consulted and did not give consent.
- The NRWMA has sections which nullify State or Territory laws that protect the archaeological or heritage values of land or objects, including those which relate to Indigenous traditions.
- The NRWMA curtails the application of Commonwealth laws including the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act 1984 and the Native Title Act 1993 in the important site-selection stage.
- The Native Title Act 1993 is expressly overridden in relation to land acquisition for a radioactive waste facility.
Adnyamathanha Traditional Owners have been clear in their opposition to the planned radioactive waste facility in the Flinders Ranges. “I call upon the Federal and State Governments to put an end to this volatile position that the Adnyamathanha people are facing,” said Adnyamathanha Traditional Owner Enice Marsh. “Native Title and the Aboriginal Heritage Act are not protecting our land. This needs a complete review or a Royal Commission. The Barndioota site in the Flinders Ranges must be struck off as a potential radioactive waste dump site and the National Radioactive Waste Management Act needs to be amended to give us the right to say ‘no’.”
Adnyamathanha Traditional Owner Regina McKenzie, who lives on Yappala Station near the proposed dump site, said: “The NRWMA is a political attack on Adnyamathanha women’s spiritual beliefs. The destruction of our culture and significant woman’s sites is a form of assimilation and thus breaches Article 8.1 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The NRWMA also breaches Article 25 of the UN Declaration which refers to our spiritual relationship with the land and the right to maintain and strengthen our culture. This is a breach of our Aboriginal human rights and our people and amounts to cultural genocide.”
The NRWMA has been criticised in both Senate Inquiries and a Federal Court challenge to an earlier federal government attempt to impose a national radioactive waste facility at Muckaty in the Northern Territory.
The NRWMA also puts the federal government’s radioactive waste agenda above environmental protection as it seeks to curtail the application of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
Dr Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia, said: “A senior government official claims the NRWMA is based on ‘world’s best practice’. In fact, the legislation systematically disempowers local communities and Traditional Owners and weakens environmental protections. It needs to be radically amended or replaced with legislation that protects the environment and gives local communities and Traditional Owners the right to say no to nuclear waste dumps.”
Amanda Ngo’s paper, ‘National Radioactive Waste Management Act 2012′, is posted at http://tinyurl.com/nrwma-2017
This article looks like one of those softening up articles that ANSTO and ARPANSA like to put out – to persuade the Australian public that a radioactive waste dump is needed, in the beautiful Flinders Ranges.
It’s time that we all really woke up to the fact that the nuclear industry, its ignorant lobbyists and craven politicians, are incompetent simpletons regarding the global nuclear mess, and should not be trusted with their decisions that are aimed at furthering this toxic industry.
Rusted barrels of radioactive waste cost CSIRO $30 million Steven Trask, Canberra Times, 7 Mar 17
CSIRO faces a $30 million clean up bill after barrels of radioactive waste at a major facility were found to be “deteriorating rapidly” and possibly leaking.
An inspection found “significant rusting” on many of the 9,725 drums, which are understood to contain radioactive waste and other toxic chemicals.
CSIRO flagged a $29.7 million budget provision for “remediation works” at a remote location in its latest annual report. Fairfax Media can reveal the work will take place at a CSIRO facility located on Department of Defence land near Woomera, South Australia.
The Woomera facility is currently one of Australia’s largest storage sites for low and intermediate-level radioactive waste. A damning report of the Woomera facility was issued by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) after an inspection in April last year.
“Evidence was sighted that indicates the drums are now beginning to deteriorate rapidly,” read the report, seen by Fairfax Media. “Significant rust on a number of the drums, deterioration of the plastic drum-liners and crushing of some stacked drums was observed.” Tests confirmed the presence of radioactive isotopes at one location and inspectors said there was a possibility the drums were leaking.
“Although unlikely, there is the possibility that the presence of deceased animals such as rodents and birds may indicate that some of the drums, which contain industrial chemicals, may be leaking into the environment.”
The mixture of water and concentrated radioactive material inside some of the drums also had the potential to produce explosive hydrogen gas, inspectors found.
They also noted CSIRO had little knowledge of what was inside many of the barrels, some of which are believed to date back more than 50 years.
“Without full knowledge [of] the contents of the drums, risks cannot be fully identified and risk controls cannot be appropriately implements to protect people and the environment,” inspectors noted in the report.
Many of the drums are understood to contain contaminated soil generated by government research into radioactive ores at Melbourne’s Fishermans Bend throughout the 1940s and 1950s.
The toxic soil was discovered by the Department of Defence in 1989, who sent it to Sydney’s Lucas Heights facility before it was palmed off to Woomera in 1994.
An ARPANSA spokeswoman said the $29.7 million estimate would cover the characterisation, handling, re-packaging and storage of the toxic material.
“As a result of an ARPANSA inspection in 2016, it was recognised that additional work was required to scientifically characterise some of the contents of the legacy materials more accurately,” she said.
“The work that needs to be undertaken is significant.”
A spokesman for CSIRO said the first phase of the three-year clean up would begin next month.
“CSIRO currently has a radioactive waste store located on defence land at Woomera, South Australia. The store currently has 9,725 drums of long-lived waste,” he said…..
The country’s other major radioactive waste storage facility at Lucas Heights, Sydney, is rapidly approaching full capacity. Coupled with issues at the CSIRO site, the revelations highlighted the urgent need for a national radioactive waste storage solution, experts said.. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/rusted-barrels-of-radioactive-waste-cost-csiro-30-million-20170307-gusb6v.html
Tim Bickmore , Fight to stop Nuclear Waste Dump in South Australia There is also another elephant in the room which is yet to rate a mention. At Lucas heights there are 2 reactors – OPAL & HIFAR. OPAL is the working reactor, whilst HIFAR is the old one now undergoing de-commissioning – which includes dealing with more radioactive waste. Is the HIFAR waste (= old reactor parts) also destined for the dump? Considering the decommission schedule, this seems highly probable & where else would it go……
“HIFAR is currently being decommissioned and will be totally decommissioned by 2018.” HTTPS://WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/GROUPS/344452605899556/
It is extraordinary that some French wine producers are accompanying the Australian and French nuclear promoters spruiking the benefits of nuclear waste dumping to the community in the Barndioota region of South Australia. Not only are many vital questions unanswered as ENuFF SA (Everyone for a Nuclear Free Future SA) has shown, but this propaganda campaign completely ignores both the opposition to nuclear waste dumping, in France and the radioactive danger to France’s Champagne vineyards
“The Champagne producers are facing two nuclear timebombs – one already leaking at Soulaine, and one planned at Bure. The wine producers in the Rhone region stood up to the nuclear state in France and won. The Champagne region needs to act fast before it’s too late,” said Fred Marillier of Greenpeace France. “The French Government must stop this madness. The new facility must not accept any more waste, and an immediate investigation launched into how to stop further contamination of ground water.”
Radioactive waste leaking into Champagne Water Supply, Levels set to rise warns Greenpeace, Greenpeace 30 May, 2006 Greenpeace today revealed that France’s iconic sparkling wine, Champagne, is threatened by radioactive contamination leaking from a nuclear waste dumpsite in the region. Low levels of radioactivity have already been found in underground water less than 10 km from the famous Champagne vineyards.
Problems at the dumpsite, including water migration leading to fissures in the storage cells have been reported to French nuclear safety agency in recent weeks (1). Greenpeace has written to the Comita des Producteur de Champagne to warn them that their production risks contamination, as experienced by dairy farmers in la Hague, Normandy.
The waste dump, Centre Stockage l’Aube (CSA) in Soulaine eastern France, contains mostly waste from Electricite de France (EdF) and AREVA, but also includes foreign nuclear waste disposed of illegally under French law (2). Every week nuclear waste is trucked across France to the Champagne site. Once full, the dumpsite will be one of the world’s largest with over 1 million cubic meters of waste, including plutonium and other radionuclides.
ANDRA, the national nuclear waste agency operating the site, stated that it would not release any radioactivity into the environment when given permission for the dumpsite in the late 1980’s. Greenpeace research released last week showed levels of radioactivity leaking from another dumpsite run by ANDRA in Normandy were up to 90 times above European safety limits in underground water used by farmers, and that the contamination was spreading into the countryside Continue reading
To ANSTO, ARPANSA & the DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY, INNOVATION and SCIENCE
From ENuFF SA (Everyone for a Nuclear Free Future SA) , Pt. Augusta February 8, 2017
We would like some straight answers to the following questions:
The current National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) is the third attempt in a decade to locate a site for a national radioactive waste dump:
Question: Are any designs for a dump planned? The last shipment of nuclear waste returned to Australia following reprocessing in France, in late 2015. It was categorised by the French authorities as high-level waste (HLW). The SA Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Report (May 2016) states on page 95 that reprocessed waste is high level. But ANSTO classifies this highly hazardous material as intermediate-level waste (ILW).
Question: Why do the Australian agencies responsible for nuclear waste mislead the public about radiation levels?
Question: Why is spent fuel from both the retired HIFAR and currently operating OPAL reactor not classified HLW? Is it the only spent fuel in the world to be classified ILW?
Question: Would ANSTO explain how the radioisotopes in spent fuel from its research reactors differ from that of nuclear power reactors? When nuclear waste is reprocessed, waste from other countries is mixed together in the reprocessing liquor. Returning material would, therefore, come from other reactors in France (or the UK) or other client country’s reactors, as well as Australia’s.
Question: When will this be explained to the public? Reprocessing of spent fuel cannot remove ALL of the fissile material: Plutonium and Uranium.
Question: Why, then, does information provided by ANSTO state that there is no fissile material remaining in the returned reprocessed waste? And, when will the agency correct this misinformation?
Question: For how long is spent fuel stored at Lucas Heights before transporting it overseas?
Question: What quantity of spent fuel is currently stored at Lucas Heights, and how is it stored?
Question: Is it the case that the Lucas Heights facility holds about 50% of Australia’s nuclear waste, the remainder being held by the Defence Department and CSIRO?
Question: Therefore, where is it intended to dispose of the remainder of Australia’s waste not currently held at Lucas Heights?
Question: What type of research is conducted at the Lucas Heights OPAL reactor?
Question: Is food irradiation occurring in Australia?
ANSTO plans a significant increase in its production of medical isotopes (in particular Molybdenum-99 MO- 99) at the OPAL reactor.
Question: When will ANSTO, and other agencies, explain how much the OPAL waste stream would grow as a result of this production of isotopes for export to other countries? ANSTO is reported to be planning to build a Synroc facility.
Question: Where would a Synroc facility be located; at Lucas Heights or elsewhere?
Question: Does such a project indicate that Australia would no longer transport spent fuel overseas forreprocessing? Or, is it for repackaging already returned reprocessed waste?
Question: When will ANSTO, ARPANSA and the Department of Industry etc. clarify exactly what waste isplanned for permanent disposal at a proposed NRWMF and what is planned for storage at such a facility?
Question: Furthermore, when will ANSTO et al clarify for how long any stored waste would be locatedat, or nearby, such a facility?
Question: Are licences for disposal/storage of any of the national waste time-limited or not? (e.g. 100, 1,000 or 10,000 years)
Question: Will ANSTO and ARPANSA or the government explain to the SA people, particularly those in the Flinders Ranges and Eyre Peninsular, that the community nearby Lucas Heights, when consulted, rejected permanent disposal of waste at that site?
Question: Do the agencies responsible for the nation’s radioactive waste not agree that it is a pointless and unnecessarily hazardous exercise to transport HLW (called ILW in Australia) to temporarily store it for up to 100 years, when it could remain at its present site?
To relocate this waste for an indefinite period is the height of irresponsibility when the Regulatory Guide for Licensing a Radioactive Waste Storage and Disposal Facility (ARPANSA) states that such waste, “must not be less than 10,000 years for disposal of ILW.”
STOP PRODUCING THE WASTE, THEN WE WILL TALK ABOUT DISPOSAL
Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges, 6 Feb 17, Inside the massively shielded “intermediate level waste container that returned to Australia from France” are multiple stainless steel containers of vitrified reprocessed waste (pictured) – and this would be called “High Level Waste” (HLW) in France, USA, Canada, Japan and the UK.
Accepting the first container of this HLW anywhere into South Australia opens the door to South Australia becoming the vitrified HLW dump for Sellafield and France. https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/
Paul Waldon Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 5 Feb 17 The governments sluggish piecemeal approach to nuclear responsibilities that betrays all South Australians safety, needs to be addressed. Also I would like the issues of classification of high grade waste dealt with promptly, as this could open the door to Frances high grade waste being dumped in SA under the guise of intermediate waste.
I believe that the French delegate are here to feather their own nest. A professional, when brokering a deal will kick ass out of the price of their second option knowing it will be rejected, then move in on their intended target, “Their first option.”
With the agenda of a nuclear waste abandonment program I believe Kimba to be their first option. Can anyone tell me with previous such programs, was there more than one site proposed per sortie, or is this a new strategy that may pay dividends to the French? https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/
They talk of ‘showing the group how we safely manage waste here at ANSTO’. If it’s all that safe why not keep it there at Lucas Heights? Why transport it 1000s of miles to outback South Australia?
They are lying about “intermediate waste” . the waste returned from Franc e is classified as “high level” by the French waste management authority ANDRA
ANSTO WELCOMES TRADITIONAL OWNERS TO LUCAS HEIGHTS The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) last week welcomed members of the Adnyamathanha community in South Australia.
Barndioota, which is in their area, is a potential site for a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility.
Les Bursill, an elder of the Dharawal community, gave the welcome to country and shared insights about some of the rich traditional heritage surrounding ANSTO.
The Sutherland Shire Mayor, Carmelo Pesce, was on hand to welcome guests, and discuss some of the benefits of having a nuclear facility in his areas, in terms of jobs, growth and community participation.
The group were at ANSTO at the invitation of the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, which is extending invitations for such tours to all community members near potential sites of the facility.
“It was our pleasure to the welcome visitors, to show the group how we safely manage waste here at ANSTO, and to answer any questions they had,” said ANSTO’s Chief Nuclear Officer, Hef Griffiths.
“The group toured our campus, saw how the low level radioactive waste is packaged and stored, and stood beside the intermediate level waste container that returned to Australia from France in December 2015.
Throughout the year, ANSTO staff and experts will continue to make visits to Barndioota as part of technical studies, and ANSTO will continue to receive guests looking to get facts on radioactive waste management.
Fading Eyre Peninsula town looks to nuclear waste dump for a future http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/fading-eyre-peninsula-town-looks-to-nuclear-waste-dump-for-a-future/news-story/d02dd60bc73cab2b8ee3a3f5efb3bdc3 The Australian February 6, 2017 VERITY EDWARDS Reporter Adelaide
Jeff Baldock, a third-generation farmer at Kimba, watches the Eyre Peninsula town 460km west of Adelaide declining as families move for work and schooling, but believes that if his land was chosen for an intermediate-level nuclear waste dump it would mean economic salvation.
“It would basically guarantee Kimba’s future, it’s a 300-year program the federal government will be here for,” Mr Baldock said.
“If we don’t do something, I’m worried the school won’t be going to Year 12 by the time my grandchildren get there, and the hospital might be closed by the time we need it. We’ve only just secured a doctor; we don’t want to lose any more services.”
The federal government earmarked a cattle station at Barndioota in the Flinders Ranges as its preferred site last April, but Bruce Wilson, the head of the Industry Department’s resources division, said other sites would be considered until a final decision, which could be made late this year. Construction of the facility is likely to be completed in the early 2020s.
A second Kimba farmer also put his property forward last week, and both submitted formal applications ahead of a French delegation visiting Kimba and Barndioota from Wednesday.
Among the delegation will be two mayors whose towns are near the Aube Disposal Facility in Champagne, the facility’s director and a representative of the French national radioactive waste agency. They will discuss safety concerns with residents, who have not previously supported the proposal.
“The facility we are proposing is for Australian low- and intermediate-level waste only, [REALLY?] and we will answer as many questions from as many perspectives as we can at these sessions,” Mr Wilson said.
Mr Baldock, whose family farms three properties, suggested a different site last year but neighbours were opposed. This time, all the adjacent property owners are supportive.
Mr Baldock said selecting a Kimba property would mean the federal government injected at least $10 million into the community and created 30 fulltime jobs. His own payment would be equivalent to a year’s worth of fertiliser costs, with the community benefiting more than his family.
Local funding could be used to boost services for the community’s ageing population, fix the pool which has been closed this year because of disrepair, and create jobs, agricultural research projects and economic opportunities.
Kimba Mayor Dean Johnson said there had been some opposition to hosting a dump last year, but an information campaign on the low risk involved was turning the tide. His council would also ask the Australian Electoral Commission to run a referendum for the 700 voters after a 60-day community consultation period ended.
“Certainly there is a group that is solidly opposed and that hasn’t changed, but the important thing to remember is this is a chance to get more information about the benefits to the community,” Mr Johnson said.
Derek Abbott No High Level International Nuclear Waste Dump in South Australia, 4 Feb 17, Here’s the American DOE report on repositories. Notice it’s much more truthful than our Royal Commission report. For starters it:
(a) compares the disadvantages of different types of rock for a repository and there are many openly listed, and
(b) it openly mentions the tens of $billions needed in repackaging costs for the fuel. Our Royal Commission totally side stepped these points. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/04/f15/DOE%20DispOptions%20R1%20Volume1%20Apr15.pdf
the repackaging and even the technical details about the casks was missing from the RC report. Wonder what they were hiding