Australian news, and some related international items

Shonky opinion poll results to give the go-ahead for Kimba nuclear waste dump?

An ill-advised plan to boost a small rural town’s economy is likely to do the very opposite.

But anyway, should the purpose of a national nuclear waste dump be primarily to improve the economics of a small rural town?

Kazzi Jai  Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste In The Flinders Ranges, 30 Nov 19

Facility to boost Kimba economy
(The Eyre Peninsula Tribune November 21, 2019)
Letter to the Editor:

The recent result of the vote for hosting a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility was positive for the Kimba community, with a significant increase in a number of people welcoming the facility.

Going according to figures taken from previous surveys , the NO vote only lost 12 votes. Would not call that a significant increase!

The 90 per cent engagement in the vote is a great indication of how much the people of our community care about its future.

The engagement was centred on “objective criteria”…whatever that was chosen to mean – it’s all secret, despite being told that this is meant to be an “open and transparent” process!

People who live on the other side of the proposed sites, but within 5 – 10 kms, were not included in the vote! How exactly is that a great indication? And excluding the Barngala people who have Native Title too…….?

Small communities including Kimba are finding it more and more difficult to sustain their volunteer rates, fill sporting teams each week, and individuals are having to travel for FIFO (fly-in fly-out) work to be able to provide for their families.

All small communities have feast and famine times.

After three main businesses have closed in the past 18 months, we have to act now.

And they closed why? Probably because of the threat of a proposed nuclear waste dump happening there! You are already becoming orchestrators of your own demise!

Many people have worked for a number of years to try to increase tourism and search for another industry that can support the community and its people but still have come up short to get to the level of industry we need to increase jobs and boost the economy for all.

But you haven’t actually looked that far have you?

All that has happened IN REALITY is that a landowner has nominated their property to have the nuclear waste…and will be paid WADS OF TAXFREE MONEY to do it! They will be off quicker than you can blink an eye!The nuclear waste no-one wants, and definitely SHOULD NOT BE ON AGRICULTURAL LAND NOR IN THE ICONIC FLINDERS RANGES!

It is NOT the very best geological site for either of the all above ground dumps either! This is a cheapskate Federal Government at its very best! Offloading the responsibility and problems onto South Australia, and targeting vulnerable tiny communities who are none the wiser of the consequences!

The proposed facility is also set to increase the economy across the Eyre Peninsula and greater South Australia during the construction phase.

Where are the figures for this bit of fiction? Increase the economy? More like damage our economy forever! If it really was such a golden opportunity, then there are plenty of sites actually in NSW which would be suitable! Even agricultural ones! Why are they not demanding that they be considered instead!…..

Oh wait! There was… at Sallys Flat NSW which was also deemed suitable by the Federal Government as one of the SIX proposed sites around Australia. Why was this site not hounded like the South Australian ones were! Only 260kms from Lucas Heights….and not 1500+kms like the ones in South Australia! Even Oman Ama in Qld, also deemed suitable by the Federal Government, is only 780kms from Lucas Heights.

No one is DEMANDING to be considered for this “WONDERFUL” opportunity….why do you think that is?

We believe in the capacity of our community and its people, we have four years of facts that prove to us the proposed facility, transport and storage will be monitored and safe and we will keep positively working towards a sustainable future, for the wage earners, the farmers, the children, the home owners, the aged and more.

You have had four years of slow burn HALF TRUTHS and not FULL FACTS. They can promise you the world…..but the REALITY is something VERY DIFFERENT!

Are you really prepared to willingly contaminate your land. To undertake EVERY DAY the thought that today may be the day that the shielding and containment FAIL. That you will be left alone and abandoned as the Federal Government have achieved what THEY wanted to achieve – more political votes and NOT dealing with the waste PROPERLY in the first place, but rehashing the SAME plan which was drawn up in 1980…..which is FORTY YEARS AGO!

You may THINK you are SPECIAL now…..but you are simply A MEANS TO AN END!

And you are deliberately exposing your children and your land which you currently take for granted, to a poison which will remain dangerous for hundreds if not thousands of years!
When has any NORMAL person actually TRUSTED a Government with its promises? You are either naïve…..or very foolish!

We are told on a regular basis from others across the Eyre Peninsula and SA how awesome it would be for Kimba and the region, so let’s hear the voices of the positive people and I encourage all to write to the minister and department at or call 13 28 46.

No you are not! You just choose to hear what you want to hear! That is TOTALLY DIFFERENT! And when it all goes pear-shaped, which is not a matter of IF but WHEN, then you will be one of the first to leave and head for another state! People who spruik for this dump are often the ones with the least to lose!

There is no way a sensible person would support having nuclear waste in agricultural land, nor in the iconic Flinders Ranges! It is sheer lunacy!

Fighting for the future of our community and region.
KimbaFighting for the future of our next generations who will have to deal with the liability and problems from people like you who have chosen EASY money (a once off payment mind you!) over the interests not only of Kimba and Hawker, but the rest of South Australia, since both proposed sites are not isolated islands in all of this!

South Australia is NOT Lucas Height’s nor the rest of the Nation’s Nuclear Dumping Ground!

Each state should deal with its own waste!


December 2, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Australia to get high level nuclear wastes from UK, in return for Lucas Heights nuclear waste sent to UK

Kazzi Jai   No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia, 1 Dec 19, 

This is a quote taken from Hef Griffiths in June 2018 for National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF) ….”The reprocessed waste is based on equivalence and what is returned is the same total radioactivity by isotope of waste that you have sent over, bar what would have decayed during the time overseas. Companies wouldn’t process just the small amount of waste that a country like Australia would generate. What is agreed is what we are going to send, what is going to be extracted and what is going to get sent back.
Australia sent some waste in the early 90s to Dounreay in Scotland and it would have come back in cement drums which would have been difficult to manage. In 2013 Australia was offered a substitution agreement.
This offered us the chance to substitute the cemented waste from Dounreay of an equivalent activity of waste in vitrified form from the Sellafield facility. It meant that we were getting 4 vitrified canisters rather than 52 concrete drums. Ultimately it will allow us to have a lot more cost effective disposal.”

We then have a Joint Committee report in 2017 which you can find on the ARPANSA website which states ”As stated in the 2014 report, ANSTO and the UK Nuclear Decommissioning Authority enacted a substitution agreement in 2013, under which ANSTO gave up title to the reprocessed residues from the reprocessing of 114 SFEs at Dounreay.

Instead, ANSTO agreed to take a radioactive equivalent to the Dounreay waste in the form of four canisters of CSD-V vitrified material currently held at Sellafield. Planning for the return of this material is underway. An agreement for the supply of a second TN-81 container has been enacted with AREVA TNI, and negotiations for the eventual removal from storage and transportation of the canisters are underway with the UK. It is anticipated that the shipment to Australia will occur in or after late 2020,resulting in the full disposition of spent fuel from the HIFAR reactor.”

Soooooo….The next question is….these canisters are CSD-V……

According to La Hague in France…..

”A high level glass-ceramic for the vitrification of legacy, highly-corrosive UMo fission products (from recycled GCR fuel). These are known as CSD-U canisters.

A high level borosilicate glass for the vitrification of UOX fission products (fission product solutions derived from the processing of LWR fuel), with a high throughput (the capacity of the vitrification line is doubled by retrofitting a CCIM). These are known as CSD-V canisters.”

So….what are we getting back from Sellafield again….you have it ….CSD-V!!

And…..From an Assessment Report tabled by ANSTO for Interim Waste Store Safety Assessment 2014… ”The analysis is bounded by the thermal power of the CSD-V (i.e. vitrified waste from HLW) which generates about 3.7 times more heat than CSD-U.”

Just as well the TN-81 casks have cooling fins!!

December 2, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

“Intermediate Level” nuclear wastes for South Australian are really “High Level”

Barb Walker shared a post. Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste In The Flinders Ranges.   Relaying important information at the request of Dr. Susi Andersson

Intermediate level radioactive waste (ILW) is not the gloves, masks and gowns mentioned by Alan Moskwa (Nuclear Safety (26/11/19). Australia’s intermediate level waste (ILW) includes the spent fuel elements of the HIFAR (Australia’s first) reactor, which are classified as high level waste in many other countries. In ANSTO’s words, 98% of their ILW is waste specific to the post reactor processing of uranium targets to produce Mo-99 and other radiopharmaceuticals.

November 28, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, secrets and lies | 1 Comment

All Australians can vote – no nuclear waste dump in the Flinders Ranges. *

Cindi Drennan, No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia. November 21 
Dear Australia, I am voting on behalf of you all, no waste dump in the Flinders Ranges. *
Having researched as much as I can, I can’t agree to a nuclear waste dump that on all evidence is a badly planned political project that hasn’t even defined a suitable site or method of transport. I wish to pay respects to the wishes of the adnyamathanha and first nation elders who have said no, to the geologists who have said no, and the tourism and pastoral businesses who have said no. I appreciate so many would love to see new industry in the Flinders Ranges and I too am in agreement that sustainable developments will be fantastic, but we must be sure new industry is fully fleshed out, supports renewables and sustainability, and planned and implemented ethically. I don’t feel confident in the process or the proposed product being done well, nor confident it can be ethically managed for generations into the future.
One last thing: huge appreciation to FRC council and community members on both sides of the fence for your months and years of work dealing with this matter in such professional ways. I’m saddened by the impact on the region, of a “debate” that was not invited and you all amaze me with your generous time and efforts to keep this a peaceful argument over a hot issue. Much respect.

*As an eligible voter in this ballot, it greatly upsets me that it is put to a tiny community and region of less than 2000 people to make a decision for all of Australia. It is unethical – especially considering nuclear waste is against the law in SA! If you do not live in this region and you wish to make your voice heard, please : have your say by contacting the federal government or the state minister for mining and energy… details are here.

November 25, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

A tiny percentage of South Australian people coerced into the decision on nuclear waste dump

This is a decision which will affect all South Australians, not just a tiny percentage of people who have experienced four years of federal government promises and pressure to acquiesce.

the Minister failed to mention the main component of the project — long lived intermediate level waste from the Lucas Heights reactor  

Farmers and Traditional Owners decry SA nuclear more, Michele Madigan,20 November 2019 

    • On 12 November, Senator Canavan, federal Minister for Resources, took a question from the rather more junior Senator Alex Antic. The questioner wondered whether there was any recent progress on the federal nuclear facility proposed for Antic’s own state of South Australia.
The Minister was delighted to have the chance to announce that in the district area of Kimba the long awaited vote to host both a permanent facility for national low level radiactive waste and storage for intermediate level radioactive waste had concluded. The result: 61.17 per cent voted in favour.
Unsurprisingly, Canavan failed to mention that voting rights in the poll were severely restricted. The Barngarla Traditional Owners, native title holders of the area, were given no voice. Farmers whose land is actually closer to the site were also excluded as their properties are outside the allocated narrow boundary. 
Surprising however, even to four year battle-weary opponents of the scheme, was the fact that even on the second and third questions offered him by the willing SA Senator, the Minister failed to mention the main component of the project — long lived intermediate level waste from the Lucas Heights reactor  
With the total vote consisting of only 734 ballot papers, the yes vote represented just 452 people. My letter to the Advertiser of 11 November 2019 pointed out that on these figures we have .027 per cent of South Australians speaking for us all. In her response on 15 November, task force manager of the project, Sam Chard, wrote to the Advertiser that ‘the transport of waste will be conducted safely’ — a careful phrase. Unfortunately not even a federal government can prevent accidents from happening as they surely will — and already have.
South Australian filmmaker Kim Mavromatis’ just released video of an historic 1980 road accident involving nuclear waste from Lucas Heights graphically demonstrates the severe effects on former NSW police officers Bob Deards and Terry Clifford, who were tasked with cleanup. While there is no doubt that modern transport containers will be of better quality than in the past, the men’s warning is obvious: ‘The more they transport, the more accidents will happen.’
A later South Australian example was highlighted by the Advertiser‘s front-page headline of 9 December 1994: ‘Radioactive drum spills on SA road’. ‘A drum carrying low grade radioactive waste from New South Wales to Woomera has leaked contaminated material on to South Australian outback roads … Port Augusta police confirmed last night they were conducting an emergency clean-up of the site about 2km north of Port Augusta …’
Coober Pedy Aboriginal women Emily Austin and Lois Brown’s alarmed response was published a few days later: ‘When they were washing the truck after the leakage, they even took the water away. Why? if it was low-grade toxic waste. It must have been dangerous.’ Their warning: ‘Also that accident might have been low grade but what about the next time?’
Long-term Friends of the Earth environmentalist Dr Jim Green reiterates that nuclear transport accidents are commonplace. ‘Indeed the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) acknowledges that a small number of nuclear transport accidents occur each year. If the industry is expanded, there will inevitably be more transport accidents. A British government database documents an average of 19 nuclear transport incidents each year. Countless thousands of Australians who live along potential nuclear waste transport corridors are being ignored and disenfranchised by the Morrison Government ”.

Union spokespeople are under no illusion that accidents are inevitable and about who will be automatically called for the cleanup. As Jamie Newlyn, South Australian Branch Secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia, warns: ‘MUA members work in critical points of the logistics cycle and therefore the safe handling and above ground storage for decades is of great concern to the MUA … ‘

A day of high temperatures and strong winds last month did nothing to deter opponents of the federal government’s nuclear plans from the latest Port Augusta Rally. Terry Schmucker, who owns a farm in nearby Poochera, had no vote in the recent poll. He was scathing about the inability of the nuclear industry to guarantee project safety when ANSTO has been unable to prevent radioactive leaks even on site.

After the rally, Aboriginal Co-Chairs of the Australian Nuclear Free Alliance (ANFA), Dwayne Coulthard and Vicki Abdulla, led a strong contingent to present ANFA’s petition to the office of South Australia’s Minister for Energy and Mining, Dan van Holst Pellekaan: ‘South Australia has legislation that makes such waste facilities illegal: The Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000 … We ask you to act now and protect South Australia and its people from Minister Canavan’s site selection process that has caused so much distress to South Australian communities … ‘

No, Senator Canavan, South Australians don’t believe that 452 people in one small town have the right to agree to burden us with all the nation’s nuclear waste — and forever.

In fact the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation has just set another challenge. With the results of their own Australian Electoral Company internal members vote showing 83 No and zero Yes votes, the Barngala have issued a statement which reads in part: ‘BDAC has written to Minister Canavan advising him of the result. BDAC has requested that given the first people for the area unanimously have voted against the proposed facility that the Minister should immediately determine that there is not broad community support for the project. ‘

With the arrival of the voting papers for the proposed alternative Flinders Ranges site on 14 November, the intensity of the division between potential yes and no voters in the small towns and hinterlands of Hawker and Quorn seems to have hit fever pitch. The potential yes voters welcoming of a new ‘industry’ to the area seem to disregard the effect a nuclear facility will have on the major tourism industry and Adnyamathanha heritage; not to mention the threats to groundwaters in an area subject to seismic activity and floods.

This is a decision which will affect all South Australians, not just a tiny percentage of people who have experienced four years of federal government promises and pressure to acquiesce.

November 22, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, politics, reference | Leave a comment

Determined Aboriginal opposition to plan for Federal Nuclear Waste dump in rural South Australia

National waste dump: Aboriginal groups share support as ballot closure approaches,, Amy Green, 21 Nov 19,

November 21, 2019 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Aboriginal group votes against nuclear dump, but government department warns that they cannot veto it

Barngarla ballot shows “no support” for facility, Rachel McDonald 20 Nov 19,

The Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC) have announced the result of a separate ballot on the two proposed Kimba sites for the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).

The BDAC recently conducted a confidential postal ballot of its members through independent ballot agent Australian Election Company, asking voters the same question posed to residents of the Kimba District Council area in a ballot which concluded earlier this month.

The Kimba district ballot returned a 61.58 per cent ‘yes’ vote and 38.42% ‘no’ vote.

Of 209 eligible voters in the BDAC ballot, all Barngarla native title holders, 83 valid ‘no’ votes were counted, with zero yes votes returned.

The BDAC board said the result showed native title holders were not supportive of the facility.

“This unanimous “No” vote demonstrates that there is absolutely no support at all within the Barngarla community for the NRWMF,” the board said in a statement.

The BDAC has written to resources minister Matt Canavan advising him of the result.

“BDAC has requested that given the first people for the area unanimously have voted against the proposed facility that the minister should immediately determine that there is not broad community support for the project,” the board said.

“In light of this total rejection of the NRWMF by the Barngarla people, it is BDAC’s responsibility to continue to give voice to the profound concerns Barngarla traditional owners have regarding the NRWMF, and to take whatever steps are necessary to oppose the NRWMF being located on Barngarla Country.”

A spokesperson for the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science said the ballot would be considered alongside other consultation.

“We will consider the results of the Barngarla’s own ballot alongside the ballot of people who live in Kimba, as well as submissions received, neighbour and business surveys, and direct feedback including at our drop-in offices over several years.

“The department has said on numerous occasions that the facility will only be delivered alongside a community that broadly supports it, that no single metric or number will determine the level of support, and that no one group or individual will have a right to veto the facility.

The spokesperson said the minister and the department had been working closely with relevant Indigenous representative groups throughout the consultation process and had previously offered to finance a ballot.

“Those conversations are in some instances ongoing.

“With respect to heritage, while native title on both of the Kimba sites has been extinguished, expert heritage consultants were engaged by the department to conduct an independent desktop assessment of Aboriginal cultural heritage, and confirmed no registered heritage sites in or surrounding them.”

Community submissions on the proposed facility will remain open until December 12.

November 21, 2019 Posted by | aboriginal issues, AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Kimba and Flinders Ranges communities do not know what nuclear wastes they are getting, and for how many decades

Dump in decades, The Advertiser, GREG BANNON, Quorn, 19 Nov 19, REGARDING the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility, taskforce manager Sam Chard wrote a separate facility “will be found for the permanent disposal of intermediate level waste, but that’s a few decades off” (“Nuclear assurance”, The Advertiser, 16/11/19).

Temporary storage of intermediate-level waste is a major reason why some in the communities of Kimba and the Flinders Ranges are objecting so strongly to this proposal.

The Federal Industry Department acknowledges this material will need to be disposed of for 10,000 years to be considered safe. After four decades a disposal site has not been established and now we are being told it is still “a few decades off”.

The Department acknowledges that intermediate-level waste is the most toxic nuclear waste in Australia. We have asked for, but have received no guarantees, that this material will not end up being stranded at whichever site is chosen at the end of this ballot process. Why should these communities be expected to accept all of Australia’s nuclear waste, on behalf of all Australians, when they don’t know what they are signing up for?


November 19, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Flood risk at proposed nuclear dump site at Wallerberdina.

Barb Walker shared a post.  Flinders Local Action Group  Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 18 Nov 19

Last Thursday five members of FLAG met with James Rusk from AECOM, and Johnathon from DIIS to voice our concerns regarding the flood threat from the Hookina Creek to the proposed dump site at Wallerberdina.

James admitted that flood waters could cover the site up to a meter deep in a rare Possible Maximum Flood event, and that this could be easily mitigated by raising the surface area of the 40 hectare site by approximately one metre.

To put this in perspective: This would require the the mining of approximately 600,000 tonnes of top soil from a borrow pit close to the site,
the carting of 26,400 semi tipper loads and the spreading and compaction of this fill to a metre deep over the entire site. Huge amounts of water of would also be needed for the costruction.

The resulting massive desecration of the proposed area, containing many sites of cultural significance to the Adnyamathanha women was not perceived by either James or Johnathon to be a problem. – Bob.

November 18, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

With 40% opposed to Kimba nuclear waste dump, is this “consensus”

November 17, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

A duplicitous letter from Sam Chard, General Manager, Radioactive Waste Taskforce


What a duplicitous letter  from Sam Chard!

She says “A separate facility, likely a deeply geological one, will be found for the permanent disposal of the intermediate-level waste, but that’s a few decades off.”
So where is this intermediate-level waste to go, in the meantime? –      to become stranded nuclear wastes at Wallerberdina or Kimba.

Nuclear assurance, by SAM CHARD, NRWMF taskforce general manager

I WRITE in response to the letter from Michele Madigan (“Nuclear vote”, The Advertiser, 11/11/19).

The National Radioactive Waste Management Facility will be for the permanent disposal of low-level waste, and temporary storage of intermediate-level waste.

A separate facility, likely a deeply geological one, will be found for the permanent disposal of the intermediate-level waste, but that’s a few decades off.

The transport of waste will be conducted safely, and examples in France and the UK demonstrate such a facility can coexist with a clean, green image and a successful export industry.

In the recent Kimba community ballot, more than 61 per cent of local residents supported hosting the facility, and now a ballot is under way for residents near Wallerberdina Station.

Traditional owner, neighbour, and business consultation is also being undertaken, and anyone else with an interest can make a submission


November 16, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

Australian Government report states that Lucas Heights spent nuclear fuel rods (for Kimba dump?) are High Level Wastes

Zac Eagle Nuclear Fuel Cycle Watch Australia, November 14

This is an extract from a government report from1993.
The report calls the nuclear fuel rods from the decommissioned Hifar reactor High Level waste.
This would be dumped in the Flinders or Kimba.
Stop the lies, stop the dump.

“The report of the Research Reactor Review examines, among many other things, the issue of the management of spent fuel rods from the HIFAR reactor, which had been accumulating at Lucas Heights since 1963. The Report says:

The spent fuel rods at Lucas Heights can only sensibly be treated as high level waste.
The pretence that spent fuel rods constitute an asset must stop’ (p. 216)

Kazzi Jai “The spent fuel rods at Lucas Heights can only sensibly be treated as high level
waste. … The pretence that spent fuel rods constitute an asset must stop.”
(McKinnon Review, Principal Conclusions p.xxiii, July 1993)

November 16, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, reference | Leave a comment

Federal Govt to decide on new radioactive waste storage facility next year

November 16, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

The vote of one town shouldn’t be the views of all people in South Australia.

Dianne Hedger The people of South Australia do not consider our state a wasteland that’s the view of the eastern states. The majority of South Australians don’t want anything to do with the nuclear industry in any form. We even have anti nuclear state legislation !!!!
The nuclear waste dump is being forced down our throats by the federal government and some people who only think of the almighty dollar.
The vote of one town shouldn’t be the views of all people in South Australia. The government know that if all of South Australia have a vote they wouldn’t be able to push their agenda.
The rest of Australia sits back and don’t think this issue will affect them.But they might like to think a little harder, Because the waste cannot fly across the country by itself to get to said dump. It will travel thru your state!! One spill is all it takes and your farming land will be useless too.

November 12, 2019 Posted by | Federal nuclear waste dump, South Australia | Leave a comment

Kimba’s pro nuclear advocates seem unaware of the facts about medical radioactive wastes

Jillian Marsh  No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia, 12 Nov 19,   hi Andrew Baldock perhaps you are not aware that waste from nuclear medicine is deemed safe enough to dispose of in council waste depots – it does not need to be located in a high level waste facility as being proposed by Fed Govt. The reason they need a ‘remote location’ is about housing high level dangerous and long-lived waste. and it will be shipped in from hundreds of kilometres away, risking not only contamination of the actual site of the dump, but also the transport routes used to ship waste. this is a national issue that requires a national discussion.

November 12, 2019 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment