Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

Nuclear plan a ‘distraction’ as coal town transitions

Canberra Times, By Aaron Bunch,  June 1 2024

 A Western Australian coal town lined up as a potential site for a nuclear power station says the plan is a distraction as it works to ditch fossil fuels.

The federal coalition has floated plans to add nuclear energy to the power grid should it win government by building reactors at sites currently home to either coal or gas-fired power stations.

The sites have not yet been announced but the list is believed to include Collie, 200km south of Perth and home to about 7500 people, where a state government-supported pivot away from the coal industry is underway.

Shire President Ian Miffling said the $662 million Just Transition plan had created a “buzz” in the town and the federal coalition’s nuclear power plan hadn’t received much attention.

“Collie hasn’t been consulted at all and we don’t know any of the details of the policy and what they propose, so we’ve not given it too much credence at this stage,” he told AAP.

“(But) you don’t have to be Einstein to know that Collie would have to be on the radar, considering that we’ve got coal-fired power stations with the hub of the transmission network and it’s probably where all the all the connections would be made.”

Mr Miffling said locals were focused on bolstering their skills for jobs in new industries, like the recently approved green steel mill and Synergy’s $1.6 billion battery to store renewable energy once coal is retired as an energy supply in 2030.

“The potential for nuclear, which would be a long way down the track, is a bit of a distraction and it really doesn’t need us to spend too much time talking about it at this point,” he said…………………………………………………

Local state Labor MP Jodie Hanns said federal opposition leader Peter Dutton and the coalition were out of touch with what was happening on the ground in Collie and floating plans for a reactor in the town was “arrogant and disrespectful”.

“The federal Liberals are not interested in a conversation about Collie, their only interest is in the politics,” she said.

“And the losers in this (are) my community and the people that live and work here.”

She said the transition, which started in 2018, had created certainty for the community as it forged its future after more than 100 years of coal mining.

“My husband works at the power station and he is a transitioning worker. What’s happening in conversations around my dining table at home is happening in in other households around Collie,” she said.

“No one I’ve spoken to is in support of a nuclear reactor being put in Collie … my house will be up for sale if this becomes a reality.”

AMWU state secretary Steve McCartney said Collie workers had been discussing for years what they wanted for the town after coal mining ended, “and I can guarantee you one of the things wasn’t a nuclear power station”……………………………..

WA Liberals energy spokesman Steve Thomas on Sunday said Mr Dutton’s plan wouldn’t work in the west because the state’s power system was too small to accommodate a large, cost-effective nuclear power plant……………….. https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8648571/nuclear-plan-a-distraction-as-coal-town-transitions/

June 2, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Scott Morrison on the revolving door- government nuclear AUKUS deal, to Dyne, company advising on AUKUS

As a strategic advisor to DYNE, Morrison hopes to advance investment in dual-use technologies — inventions that have military and civilian applications. That innovation is being helped by the second pillar of AUKUS, the one that has to do with tearing down military-industrial trade barriers between the US, UK and Australia. 

Facing post-Parliament poverty, multitasking Morrison looks to seafloor for riches

What to do when your taxpayer-funded salary drops from $549k, to $225k, to nothing? Multitask, of course.

Crikey, ANTON NILSSON, MAY 30, 2024

Scott Morrison has yet another new job — and like some of his other post-Parliament gigs, it’s tangentially linked to the AUKUS submarine pact he helped set up as prime minister. 

The Age reports Morrison is listed as a strategic advisor at a newly created venture called the Seafloor Minerals Fund, alongside ex-US secretary of state Mike Pompeo. Both men are also behind venture capital firm DYNE, set up to support the strategic goals of AUKUS, and which also has interests in deep sea mining, according to the story. 

Crikey figured it was time to have another look at Morrison’s post-politics career. 

In need of cash …………………………………………..

Multitasking 

So what has Morrison done to set himself up for success? His LinkedIn lists three jobs: author, non-executive vice chairman of American Global Strategies, and board member at “various companies”. The voters who brought you Scott Morrison want stronger anti-corruption protectionsRead More

As an author, he’s already published his first work: the religious memoir Plans For Your Good. The book was aimed at the $1.175 billion US Christian book market, but in Australia, it’s reportedly sold very few copies so far. 

At American Global Strategies, Morrison is working with two former Donald Trump staffers to “help clients navigate a highly dynamic geopolitical landscape that presents risks and opportunities”, in the ex-PM’s own words. 

As a strategic advisor to DYNE, Morrison hopes to advance investment in dual-use technologies — inventions that have military and civilian applications. That innovation is being helped by the second pillar of AUKUS, the one that has to do with tearing down military-industrial trade barriers between the US, UK and Australia. The new gig, with the Seafloor Minerals Fund, will set Morrison and Pompeo up for taking advantage of the estimated trillions of dollars in rare metals estimated to be on the seafloor. According to The Age, Australians can expect a fierce future debate about the merits and risks of mining the seabed for minerals, as China seeks to do the same.  https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/05/30/scott-morrison-seafloor-minerals-fund/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1717042244

June 2, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, business, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

TODAY. Turning Point .The bomb and the cold war. Episode 4: The Wall – outlines the nuclear weapons race.

Introduction: 2019, with Donald Trump in power Mike Pompeo, Secretary of announces that USA is ls leaving the Arms Control Treaty – the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty with Russia. Only the New Start Treaty remains, due to expire soon . USA-Russia relations at a low point because of Ukraine, Russia withdraws from nuclear communications. Now other nations also have nuclear weapons, increasing the danger of confrontation, not co-operation, and of nuclear war.

************************

The Soviets were always insecure about American power. Americans also afraid of Soviet might. So Kruschev exaggerated Soviet nuclear weapons, to impress Americans. So USA in 1956 devised U2 spy plane. 1957 – Soviets develop Sputnik satellite- a space win, increasing USA’s fear. CIA satellite spying showed Soviet nuclear weapons much fewer. Daniel Ellsberg (Rand Corporation analyst 1959- 64) shows that Soviets were not trying for a first strike capability, not trying to dominate the world militarily. That discovery should have led to a change in USA thinking.

But it didn’t. USA propaganda continued, with the fraudulent belief that Russia ‘s foreign policy was world domination

Why has this totally fraudulent belief persisted all this time? Because there are jobs in it, and it’s very profitable. So many companies – Boeing, Lockheed, IBM, Martin and more become reliant on the government and the defense industry, becoming “a nuclear-headed hydra”. It changed universities, with 75% of natural science funding coming from defense industries. Society becomes oriented around defense, security and nuclear weapons. Exponential increase in the number and diversity of weapons, with an unlimited budget. (Good visuals of many types of nuclear weapons) By 1961 23000 nuclear weapons, most of them thermonuclear- a thousand times more powerful than the one dropped on Nagasaki. Eisenhower finally realised what a threat that this permanent armaments industry was to democracy – and warned against the “military-industrial-complex”. So many congressmen were reliant on the armaments jobs in their district. Armaments were seen as good business by Republicans and Democrats.

Presidents Richard Nixon and then John Kennedy push for the weapons industry aiming to race the Soviets, beat the so-called “missile gap”. Confrontation increasing, between Kruschev and Kennedy, (told by Kruschev’s great-granddaughter). Focus on Berlin, – graphic coverage of the Wall going up, the guards, the repression, the “death strips” .

Meanwhile American missiles set up in Europe, aimed at Russia., in Turkey aimed at the Kremlin. So Soviets tried to set up a threat to USA in Cuba’s communist regime. A CIA-led insurgency there had failed, (told by veterans) .

Pressure on Kennedy to invade Cuba, but he was reluctant. Castro urged Kruschev to attack USA, but Kruschev was reluctant. Tortuous secret diplomacy. Privately both Kennedy and Kruschev wanted no nuclear war. But they were not really in control, and they publicly threatened with nuclear weapons. This crisis led to the PARTIAL NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY putting nuclear testing underground.

1963: Kennedy assassinated, 1964 – Kruschev deposed. Brezhnev took over, aiming to be ahead in nuclear missiles. Both USA and Soviet union raced for nuclear missile superiority, but aiming to never use these weapons – use would be a mutual suicide pact. They developed the policy of Mutually Assured Destruction. Use of thousands of these weapons within 30 minutes – would kill of the entire earth, cut out sunlight and plant growth, and coat the earth with radioactive fallout.

So – the battles between the Soviets and the USA were proxy battles in other countries, intervening in other countries ‘ civil wars – Nicaragua, Angola, North Yemen, Domenica, Bangladesh, East Timor, Mozambique. Congo, (brutish visuals) . In Vietnam China and Russia supported the North Vietnamese, while many Asian allies supported USA. USA used Latin American countries to mobilise the Cold War. In Chile USA orchestrated the overthrow of President Allende, and the takeover by fascist Augusto Pinochet. U.S. intervention left a chaotic rule in Guatemala , an authoritarian rule in Iran. Far from spreading democracy, USA “got into bed with anyone who called themselves anti-communist“.

1969 President Richard Nixon- publicly blustered about the evils of Soviet communism, but in reality, talked with the Soviets about negotiation, introducing “detente”. The Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement (SALT 1) 1n 1972, the first agreement to limit intercontinental ballistic missiles. The U.S. Anti Ballistic Missile System. But the number of warheads was increasing in both USA and Russia – to a total of 70.000 nuclear weapons. A movement in USA to not trust the Soviets will culminate in the 19080s with President Ronal Reagan. Still, Reagan’s hatred of nuclear weapons brought him and Russia’s Mikhail Gorbachev together.

June 1, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , | Leave a comment

Do young people support nuclear power?

Jim Green 31 May 24

Earlier this year the Murdoch-Coalition echo-chamber was excited about younger poll respondents in a February Newspoll survey ‒ 65 percent support and 32 percent opposition among 18 to 34-year-olds to this survey question: ‘There is a proposal to build several small modular nuclear reactors around Australia to produce zero-emissions energy on the sites of existing coal-fired power stations once they are retired. Do you approve or disapprove of this proposal?’

However the Newspoll survey was a crude example of push-polling as discussed by polling experts Kevin Bonham and Murray Goot and by economist Professor John Quiggin. The question was loaded, the response options were mischievous (excluding a “neither approve nor disapprove” option, without which majority support (across all age groups) almost certainly would not have been achieved), and the Murdoch/Sky reporting on the poll was biased and dishonest.

Moreover, as Murray Goot notes, other polls reach different conclusions:

“But eighteen- to thirty-four-year-olds as the age group most favourably disposed to nuclear power is not what Essential shows, not what Savanta shows, and not what RedBridge shows.

“In October’s Essential poll, no more than 46 per cent of respondents aged eighteen to thirty-four supported “nuclear power plants” — the same proportion as those aged thirty-six to fifty-four but a smaller proportion than those aged fifty-five-plus (56 per cent); the proportion of “strong” supporters was actually lower among those aged eighteen to thirty-four than in either of the other age-groups.

“In the Savanta survey, those aged eighteen to thirty-four were the least likely to favour nuclear energy; only about 36 per cent were in favour, strongly or otherwise, not much more than half the number that Newspoll reported.

“And according to a report of the polling conducted in February by RedBridge, sourced to Tony Barry, a partner and former deputy state director of the Victorian Liberal Party, “[w]here there is support” for nuclear power “it is among only those who already vote Liberal or who are older than 65”.”

June 1, 2024 Posted by | politics | , , , , | Leave a comment

“Truly the stuff of nightmares”: unprecedented low in Antarctic sea ice recorded

By Jeremy Smith, May 31, 2024,  https://johnmenadue.com/truly-the-stuff-of-nightmares-unprecedented-low-in-antarctic-sea-ice-recorded/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0LBw8Xpve2S05Os1FH_y7RYvvv8tqj0qhXrhsM-Z3e49hH1Uu2E44lQr4_aem_AbLMAUeHwooBl6H86wLEqHTtPllDKldX5fzB5e2_5LYTTkXQuf4y_brUHNORL5PsxpdKGuD227S1VVLTWCOjJj7N

Each winter the surface of the sea freezes around Antarctica, over a vast area, mostly to a depth of about one metre. But this is starting to change. Last year, the sea ice reached an unprecedentedly low maximum extent of only 17 million square kilometres.

Why aren’t we talking about sea ice? Perhaps it’s because most people haven’t even heard of it, which is a shame because it’s important.

Each winter the surface of the sea freezes around Antarctica, over a vast area, mostly to a depth of about one metre. The continent effectively doubles in size, with 18-20 million square kilometres being covered by floating ice. That’s an area 2.5 times that of Australia; 4% of Earth’s surface.

But this is starting to change. Last year, the sea ice reached an unprecedentedly low maximum extent of only 17 million square kilometres. Although this year looks like being a little less extreme, a clear and concerning trend appears to be under way. This is emphasised in the ice minimum values in late summer. By February each year the sea ice extent shrinks typically to about three million square kilometres (mostly in two large embayments, the Weddell Sea and the Ross Sea), but through most of the present decade it has dwindled to below two million.

Why does this matter? Well for a start, it is the underside of this huge area of sea ice where algae live and multiply, which feed the shrimp-like krill that in turn sustains an entire ecosystem: fish, seals, penguins, whales, the lot. The upper surface of sea ice is also crucially important. Its albedo, or reflectivity, means that 80-90% of the incoming summer sunshine is bounced back into space. Replace the ice with dark ocean and only about 9% is reflected, the rest going to warm the water. So the loss of sea ice is not only a symptom of climate change, it also contributes to it, in a feedback loop that might accelerate.

There’s more. When sea water freezes, the developing ice crystals comprise nearly pure water. Most of the salt is extruded as a heavy brine, and this cold, dense water sinks, becoming the Antarctic Bottom Current. This circulates around the Southern Ocean before spinning off into the other major ocean basins. As this deep cold flow moves north it displaces warmer water which then up-wells and forms the main surface currents. Without the annual ‘push’ of the Antarctic Bottom Current, these warmer currents might slow and cease.

The global ocean is so vast that it changes very slowly. We are only now beginning to see the results of the ocean’s absorbance of a century of industrial environmental heating, in the form of anomalously warm seas particularly this year. Any pronounced weakening of the ocean circulation due to sea ice loss will be slow – but inexorable.

The results, which are probably not going to happen in our own lifetimes but could well become part of our legacy to future generations, are likely to be dire. It could eventually mean goodbye to the Gulf Stream and the other currents which maintain benign climates on the European Atlantic coast, around Japan, and elsewhere in the northern hemisphere.

The possible consequences of such climate change for human societies are truly the stuff of nightmares. 

June 1, 2024 Posted by | climate change - global warming | , , , , | Leave a comment

TODAY. Jobs jobs jobs in the nuclear industry – but is it true?

Go to Google news for nuclear information, and you’ll be swamped with glowing stories from the World Nuclear Association, the IAEA, and the big corporate media outlets – all about the wonderful future for the nuclear industry- –

all those jobs! including in the lovely nuclear weapons industry.

Jobs in renewable energy. This year’s report finds that renewable energy employment worldwide has continued to expand – to an estimated 13.7 million direct and indirect jobs in 2022. We can expect the creation of many millions of additional jobs in the coming years and decades.  https://mc-cd8320d4-36a1-40ac-83cc-3389-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2023/Sep/IRENA_Renewable_energy_and_jobs_2023.pdf?rev=4f65518fb5f64c9fb78f6f60fe821bf2

Jobs in nuclear power. I have not been able to find any kind of authoritative report on global jobs in nuclear power. I did find one source (on Quora) stating that each nuclear reactor in construction provides 1400-1800 jobs, and in operation 400 -700 jobs. The nuclear industry claims many more, but for construction, we must remember – this is all in the rather distant future.

The figure below is a prediction from many years ago. If we are to believe the nuclear lobby, this prediction should change rapidly.

What we do know is that at present, renewable energy jobs are increasing exponentially, and nuclear power building is almost at a standstill.

The figure on the left is also from many years ago. But I doubt that much has changed.

Of course – this is all about the actual reactors. There are many jobs in uranium mining, milling, transport etc, and of course, in nuclear weapons-making

The quality of jobs.

In energy efficiency there are many interesting and clean jobs. Also, workers know that they are contributing to a healthier planet – something to be proud of.

In renewable energy the jobs are relatively clean and healthy, and there’s again, the knowledge of being in an alternative to the polluting industries – coal and nuclear.

In nuclear energy and nuclear fuel, the workers are involved in the risky area of ionising radiation. There’s a huge amount of documentation on this. It is NOT a healthy job, though I suppose that it’s better to be a highly paid nuclear executive or lobbyist, safe in a nice office.

I doubt that nuclear workers can get much satisfaction about “helping the planet”, as the “peaceful” nuclear industry is so dirty, dangerous, and intimately connected with nuclear weapons.

No doubt some nuclear workers get paid a lot more that renewable energy workers do. But, there’s real value in knowing that your contribution to society is a clean and positive one.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Inside the nuclear influence machine

Documents unearthed by The Fifth Estate lay bare how funding for the strategy, now in motion, is coordinated by a coal mining leader from Queensland, working with possibly Australia’s most  influential conservative think tank, and also a key member of Australia’s unofficial nuclear club.

Is the push for nuclear power in Australia more stalking horse for coal than a genuine alternative for a clean energy future? Here’s how the nuclear cabal is working its pitch

THE FIFTH ESTATE, MURRAY HOGARTH, 29 May 24

There’s a sophisticated, well funded strategy underway to prolong coal and gas and eventually take Australia down the nuclear road.

Documents unearthed by The Fifth Estate lay bare how funding for the strategy, now in motion, is coordinated by a coal mining leader from Queensland, working with possibly Australia’s most  influential conservative think tank, and also a key member of Australia’s unofficial nuclear club.

For this to work, the Liberal-National coalition needs to win back political power at the next federal election due by May next year.

  • A key conservative think tank aims to keep coal until nuclear power arrives 
  • Its energy security argument is echoed by Peter Dutton as coalition policy
  • A Queensland coal baron mustered donors to fund this influence machine

As things stand, nuclear power is currently prohibited in Australia, and the Labor government is committed to fast-tracking a renewables-led energy transition and says it has no plans to lift the ban.

Canberra retreat

The documents we’ve obtained and refer to in this article are the script and slides from a revealing energy security project update to a private strategy retreat held in Canberra last year on 12 May 2023 by the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA).

Behind the current campaign to bring nuclear energy to Australia is a deliberate agenda to prolong coal generation and disrupt the renewables rollout

The Fifth Estate contacted the speaker and two other key IPA-connected figures identified in this story for comment on Monday 27 May, inviting on-the-record interviews and providing questions. On Tuesday evening 28 May, the IPA chief executive officer Scott Hargreaves responded by email but declined to be interviewed. Full details of that response and related information are included at the end of this article.

The Melbourne based IPA is known as Australia’s leading conservative think tank, a key influencer of Coalition policies, and breeding ground for conservative politicians.

It habitually loads speaking point bullets for coalition politicians to fire. And it looked like Opposition Leader Peter Dutton did just that when he delivered his headland nuclear policy speech at an IPA public event, just two months after the Canberra retreat on 7 July last year.

In 2023, the IPA threw an arm around one of the favourite sons of the nuclear club, University of Queensland Adjunct Professor Stephen Wilson, making him a Visiting Fellow, as part of a big new donor-funded influence project, running over three years.

A key and recurring focus of this project and subsequent related policy talking points is energy security.

The internal IPA documents, authored by Wilson, lay out what many people suspect and have alleged: that behind the current campaign to bring nuclear energy to Australia is a deliberate agenda to prolong coal generation and disrupt the renewables rollout.

The final commentary and slide in Wilson’s presentation show an IPA-orchestrated master plan for Australia to defend and preserve coal and gas in the 2020s; then build “mini and small modular reactor (SMR)” nuclear plants in the 2030s under the mantle of reaping energy security, environmental and low-cost rewards in the 2040s.

It’s a parallel universe to the view a vast number of people have of Australia’s energy future. And it’s totally at odds with the clean energy transition agenda and the federal government’s targets of  43 per cent greenhouse gas emissions reductions below 2005 levels and 82 per cent renewables by 2030.

Threat to climate targets

It’s also likely to breach Australia’s staged progress, with five yearly sub targets (for example 43 per cent by 2030, with 2035 targets due to be announced early next year, with a range of 65-75 per cent being evaluated by the Climate Change Authority), towards its bipartisan commitment to 100 per cent net zero by 2050, which was made by the former Morrison coalition government ahead of the UN Climate Summit in Glasgow in the UK in 2021.

The IPA, however, is no fan of UN processes, and as Wilson made clear in his project update notes for the IPA insiders, the aim of its strategy was definitely not to prolong a Labor government……………………………..

The coal connection

Wilson also identified in the presentation who was pulling together the funding for his IPA project, with a bit of ideological explanation to set the scene:…………………………………………………………………….

Bring on Peter Dutton

The private IPA retreat in Canberra on 12 May last year was followed less than two months later by Dutton’s major speech to launch the coalition’s new energy security themed nuclear policy. This was delivered at a public IPA event in Sydney on 7 July.

Dutton’s speech mirrors the theme

Dutton’s headland nuclear speech substantially mirrored the energy security theme and language from the IPA retreat. And it also picked up on themes from earlier “nuclear club”events and activities, a number of them involving Stephen Wilson. If Australia’s nuclear club has anyone it would like to make its intellectual rock star, it’s Wilson. 

Dutton’s IPA speech directly referenced Wilson, most significantly:

Professor Wilson says that we must stop procrastinating and prepare real options to deploy nuclear energy in case we need them. Countries are queuing up to put in their orders. Australia could have SMRs [small modular reactors] installed within a decade.

Wilson also confirmed his presentation to the IPA retreat in the video of another IPA event earlier this year, its 2024 Generation Liberty IPA Academy aimed at young conservatives, and relayed how Dutton had quoted him on a couple of occasions, expressing some surprise, saying, “I didn’t know he was going to do that.” (Dutton’s 7 July speech also quoted three other nuclear club regulars, as well as Wilson.)

Since then, SMRs have been a disappointment. Very inconveniently for Dutton and Wilson, the US showcase for new and thus far commercially-unproven SMR-design nuclear power stations, the NuScale project in Idaho, was cancelled in November last year due to cost overruns and lack of electricity buyer interest.

NuScale’s chief executive officer was reported as saying: “Once you’re on a dead horse, you dismount quickly. That’s where we are here.”

On message for energy security

However insecure the NuScale experience sounds, it’s worth remembering that the core theme of Wilson’s earlier 12 May IPA presentation, based on the notes and slides, was energy security. That was also a central theme of Dutton’s 7 July IPA speech:………………………………………………………………

The future of the nation and Western civilisation as we know it

On a geo-political note, national security was weighing heavily on Wilson’s mind on 12 May, as it did for Dutton on 7 July. According to Wilson’s speaking notes, at stake was nothing less than the future of the nation and Western civilisation as we know it:…………………………………………………………………..

Nuclear club bona fides

To be clear, this is the same Stephen Wilson who joined Queensland Liberal MP Ted O’Brien, Dutton’s Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and other nuclear club players, on a so-called “due diligence” study tour to the US and Canada in January-February 2023.

As Wilson’s slide deck for the IPA Canberra Retreat showed, the study tour group visited major nuclear industry companies, government representatives, lobbyists and campaign organisations. (Ted and friends’ excellent nuclear adventure in North America will feature in other upcoming articles in The Nuclear Files.)

By his own account, judging by a number of publicly available videos, Wilson imbibed deeply in the North American nuclear sector Kool-Aid, riffing off a theme he picked up on the US study tour, to proclaim that: energy security IS national security.

That became the inspiration for a key paper he published with the IPA on 1 November 2023, titled Energy security is national security. Its 1 November 2023 launch, in London on the perimeters of a global gathering of about 1500 ultra-conservatives, is another story coming soon from The Nuclear Files.

The Fifth Estate’s questions to key players in this story

The Fifth Estate provided these questions to IPA CEO Scott Hargreaves early on Monday afternoon:………………………………………………………………………………

The nuclear story, then and now, in brief

Nuclear power has been considered for Australia numerous times over the past nearly 70 years, from the 1950s, but has never happened, mainly for economic reasons. Historically because of the low cost and wide availability of coal, and now it is the low cost of renewables. This month the 2024 CSIRO GenCost report found that traditionally designed large scale nuclear power stations would cost at least 50 per cent more than solar and wind backed by batteries, and take at least 15+ years to develop, and more technically-advanced Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) could be four to six  times more expensive than renewables.

On ABC Radio Sydney on Wednesday morning, 29 May, Opposition nuclear frontman Ted O’Brien was pressed on the timing for release of the coalition’s highly anticipated nuclear policy, and insisted it would be revealed “in due course”. He confirmed that the coalition wanted to replace coal-fired power stations, as they exit the electricity grid, with nuclear ones, and that gas generation would fill any gap (which could be one to two decades) between coal shutting down and nuclear starting up.  https://thefifthestate.com.au/columns/columns-columns/the-nuclear-files/inside-the-nuclear-influence-machine/

May 30, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

CSIRO stands by nuclear power costings that contradict Coalition claims

The Coalition has attacked the GenCost report that found nuclear power plants would be at least 50% more expensive than solar and wind

Graham Readfearn, 29 May 24, https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/article/2024/may/29/csiro-nuclear-power-plant-australia-cost-peter-dutton-liberal-coalition

The CSIRO says it stands by its analysis on the costs of future nuclear power plants in Australia after the Coalition attacked the work, which contradicted its claims reactors would provide cheap electricity and be available within a decade.

The opposition’s energy spokesperson, Ted O’Brien, claimed on Tuesday in the Australian newspaper that the CSIRO should re-run its modelling to account for longer life-spans and running times of nuclear generators in other countries with nuclear programs.

Last week the CSIRO released its GenCost report on the costs of different generation technologies, saying nuclear would be at least 50% more expensive than solar and wind and would not be available any sooner than 2040.

The Coalition has yet to reveal any detail on its nuclear plan, including what type of reactors it would build, how large they would be and where they would put them.

A CSIRO spokesperson told Guardian Australia: “CSIRO provides impartial and independent advice and does not undertake modelling for specific policy directions.

“While we stand by the data provided, any alternative scenarios assessed by others would not carry CSIRO’s endorsement.”

O’Brien pointed to an assumption used in the GenCost report that nuclear plants would have a “capacity factor” – how often they are generating electricity relative to their maximum capacity – of between 53% and 89%.

O’Brien wanted the CSIRO to use a higher figure of 92.7% for nuclear based on the performance of plants in the US.

But the GenCost report discusses the reasons for setting capacity factors, saying new baseload generators such as nuclear “are expected to struggle to present the lowest cost bids to the dispatch market” and would, therefore, likely be generating less often.

O’Brien also wanted the CSIRO to model the full lifespan of nuclear plants – which could be as long as 80 years – and to add a start date of 2035 to its modelling.

The report provides cost estimates for power from different generation technologies, including both large and small reactors, for the years 2023, 2030 and 2040.

The CSIRO spokesperson said: “Specific issues in regard to economic life of generation assets and capacity utilisation, including large scale nuclear, have been assessed by the GenCost team as part of the consultation process for the 2023-24 report.”

Australia has never built a nuclear reactor for electricity and the technology has been banned since 1998.

The CSIRO report said if a decision was made in 2025 to adopt nuclear power, it would be at least 15 years until a reactor was producing power.

The report said: “Nuclear technologies need to undergo more extensive safety and security permitting, nuclear prohibitions need to be removed at the state and commonwealth level and the safety authorities need to be established.”

The report estimated if Australia could establish a nuclear industry, then a 1,000MW plant would cost $8.6bn, but the first reactors could cost double that amount – more than $17bn.

The report said: “Given the lack of a development pipeline and the additional legal and safety and security steps required, the first nuclear plant in Australia will be significantly delayed. Subsequent nuclear plant could be built more quickly as part of a pipeline of plants.”

May 30, 2024 Posted by | business | , , , , | Leave a comment

Among opposition leaders, Peter Dutton is a miracle survival story. But is he about to nuke himself with women voters?

ABC, By Annabel Crabb 29 May 24

Peter Dutton is a freak of nature. Politically, that is…………………………………

Two years in, Dutton is not only still in office, but nobody inside his own party — or even in the National Party — is trying to blow him out of it. It is a truly extraordinary achievement.

His public popularity remains firmly in negative territory, according to Newspoll. So why isn’t this translating into the customary seasonal orgy of backstabbing?

Two reasons.

The first is that there really isn’t, ahem, any alternative……………………………………………………………………………….

Dutton much a much more dangerous opponent for Anthony Albanese than is commonly assumed.

But there is one risk associated with this unseasonably warm bath of internal approbation……………………..his decision to pursue nuclear energy as a principal policy decision is a high-risk call, as a new piece of research — supplied to the ABC — makes clear……………………

When it comes to nuclear, public opinion divides along gender lines

Over recent weeks, the RedBridge Group conducted a survey of around 2,000 Australian voters, seeking their views on various issues including nuclear energy. Respondents were asked whether they would support or oppose an Australian government lifting the ban on nuclear power so private investors could build nuclear power plants here. 

The responses, across all voters, were kind of evenly divided. Strong supporters constituted 17 per cent, another 17 said they were supportive, 19 per cent were “neither”, 15 per cent were opposed, 20 per cent strongly opposed, and 12 per cent were unsure. This shakes out to an extremely slender net negative of-1

But the truly fascinating detail in the survey comes when you dig down into who especially loves the idea of nuclear, and who hates it.

And the biggest difference of opinion on nuclear, it turns out, breaks along gender lines……………….

Women disapproved of nuclear power strongly – just 7 per cent strongly agreed a ban should be lifted, compared with 24 per cent of male respondents. That’s a net negative of -29 for women, and net positive of 26 for men.

The only demographics showing real enthusiasm for nuclear power were Coalition voters, those aged over 65, those who earn more than $3,000 a week, and those who own their own home. In each of these instances, every other group was majority opposed.

In other words, every other party’s voters apart from the Coalition’s registered a net negative, as well as every other age bracket apart from the most elderly, and all other income brackets apart from the top one.

Renters and mortgage holders alike disapproved on the whole. Among those who described themselves as under “a great deal of financial stress”, the feeling on nuclear ran at negative 15. Among those under “no stress at all”, however, the reception was much warmer – positive 19…………………………………………………………………………….

And in the two years that have elapsed since female voters demonstrated their annoyance at being ignored and talked down to, the Liberal Party has failed to do anything about its structural under-representation of women in parliament, …………………………………………………………..

There always seems to be an abundance of reasons to get rid of women; almost as many reasons as traditionally abound for holding on to and even promoting male duds. Women do notice this stuff.

And “Never mind ladies, have a nuclear power plant” may not be a very compelling change of subject.  https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-29/peter-dutton-nuclear-power-policy-may-risk-alienating-women/103870338

May 30, 2024 Posted by | politics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear will cost Queensland jobs

JOINT STATEMENT Premier The Honourable Steven Miles, Minister for Energy and Clean Economy Jobs, The Honourable Mick de Brenni, 13 May, 2024  https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/100305

  • The LNP backed “Nuclear for Climate Australia” has identified multiple sites in North Queensland for nuclear reactors.
  • This would see nuclear reactors in Townsville, the Sunshine Coast, Rockhampton, Brisbane Valley, Toowoomba, the Darling Downs and more.
  • LNP going nuclear risks Copperstring jobs, critical minerals boom for Townsville to Mount Isa
  • Labor backs clean and renewable energy not nuclear.
  • The Miles Government is already delivering jobs and clean energy through the Queensland Energy and Jobs Plan and development of the SuperGrid.
  • Those jobs would be at risk with the LNP’s nuclear plans.  

The Miles Government is focussing on clean energy jobs and has a working plan for a safe and responsible transition to renewable energy, that will protect existing jobs and create new ones.

Queenslanders from Townsville to Mt Isa are at the heart of Labor’s leading plan for a clean economy future.

Our plan to build CopperString will provide more than 800 jobs during construction and will unlock the $500 billion North West Minerals Province, by linking it with Hughenden and up to 6,000 MW of renewable energy.

This is the nation’s largest expansion to the power grid and it is paid for by progressive coal royalties.

By putting their fossil fuel friends before Queensland’s transition, the LNP is risking thousands of jobs and return to high unemployment.

The LNP’s nuclear option is an LNP recipe for a cost-of-living meltdown.  Nuclear is the most expensive option. It is 5 times the price of renewables.

International examples show it will take around 19 years to build a nuclear power station.

This is decades too late for Townsville employers who need clean, affordable energy now to remain competitive.

Nuclear is neither clean nor renewable. And it’s illegal in both Queensland and Australia.

The LNP backed proposal targets nuclear power stations in Townsville, Gladstone, Sunshine Coast, Toowoomba, Brisbane Valley, Ipswich, Darling Downs, the Western Downs, Rockhampton, and Callide.

Quotes attributable to Premier Steven Miles:

“The LNP are proposing nuclear reactors right across this state. Up to three near Townsville, while they have earmarked locations on the Sunshine Coast, Toowoomba, Brisbane Valley and Ipswich.

“What we know about those nuclear reactors is that they will be much more expensive. As much as five times more expensive for your household power bills.

“We also know that as a result of those reactors, future generations of Queenslanders will have to manage nuclear waste forever.

“That’s the LNP’s plan. Higher prices and nuclear waste; putting our waterways, our environment and our beautiful state at risk.”

Quotes attributable to Energy Minister Mick de Brenni:

“Everyone from Townsville Enterprise to the Queensland Resources Council backs Labor’s plan on renewable energy, because Copperstring means jobs and long-term prosperity for the region.

“The only exception is the LNP, who voted in Parliament to oppose the Energy and Jobs Plan, because they are opposed to renewables and public ownership.

“It seems that everybody in Townsville wants local manufacturing and jobs here, except David Crisafulli, who will not stand up to Peter Dutton and Ted O’Brien and actually back Townsville jobs.

“We know how risky and expensive nuclear is and we know David Crisafulli deserted North Queensland for the glitter strip on the Gold Coast, and now he’s setting Townsville up for an unemployment and cost of living meltdown.

“North Queensland already has the world’s best plan to protect local jobs through the transition, so why would the LNP turn its back on the Queensland Energy and Jobs Plan and Copperstring, just so they can cosy up to their big donors?

“Labor is backing renewable energy because it protects jobs in North Queensland, from Townsville to Mt Isa and beyond, and Labor is not prepared to risk those jobs.”

Quotes attributable To Thuringowa MP Aaron Harper:

“I do not want to see a nuclear reactor in Townsville and anywhere near the banks of the much loved and well used Ross River.

“Nobody in Thuringowa and the Upper Ross will accept nuclear waste travelling down Riverway Drive.

“We know the LNP back nuclear energy and are against renewable energy.

“We know that David Crisafulli and the state LNP are too weak to stand up to Peter Dutton’s nuclear agenda.

“There are serious questions to answer from the LNP about their connections to Nuclear for Climate’s plan for nuclear power in Townsville.

“Peter Dutton and David Crisafulli’s nuclear agenda pose an unacceptable risk to Townsville.”

Background information:

  • Nuclear for Climate Australia, which has the backing of the Coalition, has identified multiple sites in Queensland as ideal spots to host nuclear reactors.
  • Nuclear power is currently illegal in Queensland.
  • Miles Government is delivering cheaper, cleaner, reliable power to develop the North West Minerals Province.
  • Nation’s largest expansion to the power grid – SuperGrid, not a MiniGrid.
  • CopperString will connect nation’s largest renewable energy zone at Hughenden and power a critical minerals industry that will supply world’s transition
  • CopperString will be 100% publicly owned

Fast Facts

  • Nuclear power production is prohibited under two pieces of legislation:
    • Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998
    • Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
  • CSIRO estimate the capital cost of small modular reactors in 2030 to be $15,959/kW, compared to wind at $2105/kW and solar at $1134/kW.

May 30, 2024 Posted by | employment, Queensland | , , , , | Leave a comment

TODAY: What is criminal in Ukraine, is God’s righteousness in Gaza

RUSSIA. US President Joe Biden welcomed the International Criminal Court’s issuing of an arrest warrant against his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin.

The ICC accused President Putin of committing war crimes in Ukraine – something President Biden said the Russian leader had “clearly” done…… President Biden said that … the issuing of the warrant “makes a very strong point”. The claims focus on the unlawful deportation of children from Ukraine to Russia since Moscow’s invasion in 2022.

“He’s clearly committed war crimes,” he told reporters.

His administration had earlier “formally determined” that Russia had committed war crimes during the conflict in Ukraine, with Vice-President Kamala Harris saying in February that those involved would “be held to account”.

****************************

ISRAEL. President Joe Biden denounced the chief prosecutor of the world’s top war crimes court for seeking arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas leaders.

“What’s happening in Gaza is not genocide. We reject that,” Mr Biden said at a Jewish American Heritage Month event at the White House.

He said American support for the safety and security of Israelis is “ironclad”.

 Biden administration presents its policies to overcome legal and political questions about its unconditional support for Israel, and continues to send weapons to Israel.

The US has vetoed three separate ceasefire draft resolutions at the United Nations Security Council and voted against two at the General Assembly.

Rights groups have documented numerous violations of international humanitarian law by the Israeli military, which extensively uses US weapons. Those reports include evidence of indiscriminate bombing, torture and targeting civilians.

May 29, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , | Leave a comment

Pledge sought that laid-up Rosyth subs won’t go to Australia


By Clare Buchanan 27 May 24,  https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/24344727.pledge-sought-laid-up-rosyth-subs-wont-go-australia/

A ROSYTH councillor has called for assurances that rotting nuclear submarines will not be sent to Australia for disposal.

Brian Goodall, who is UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authority’s spokesperson on nuclear submarine decommissioning, said he has written to the UK’s foreign and defence secretaries. 

He’s asked for confirmation that vessels will not go overseas if a new Australian law passes without amendments.

Seven old subs have been laid up at Rosyth Dockyard for decades with Dreadnought being there for the longest – more than 40 years – waiting to be scrapped.

The UK and USA signed a pact with Australia to build and operate a new fleet of nuclear submarines which includes the provision of new conventionally armed, but nuclear powered, vessels for the Australian Navy.

To support the pact, legislators down under have proposed a new Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2024.

This appears to allow the disposal of high level radioactive waste from British and American submarines on Australian soil, and also for the storage of such materials in Australia from “a submarine that is not complete”.

In his letter to Lord Cameron and Grant Shapps, Cllr Goodall expressed concern that this could theoretically mean permitting “the towing of redundant UK boats from Rosyth and Devonport down under for disposal”.

He said he fears that this could result in the loss of local expertise and jobs if it comes into practice.

He adds: “Surely as the operators of our own submarines, the UK Government should remain responsible for the storage of the resultant high-level waste and for their safe decommissioning in home ports?

“Not only will this preserve the expertise in these matters that has developed after many years of trial and error, but, as a ward member for the Rosyth Dockyard, it will also preserve the jobs in my local community.”

Back in 2022, the Press reported pledges from the UK Government that all laid-up submarines would be gone as part of plans to “de-nuclearise Rosyth” by 2035.

Councillors were given an update on the programme to remove radioactive waste and turn the seven boats that have been parked at the dockyard for decades into “tin cans and razor blades”.

The Ministry of Defence have previously faced heavy criticism for the delays and sky-high costs in dealing with the nuclear legacy, with 27 Royal Navy subs to be scrapped in total.

May 29, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Counteracting the spin: nuclear and associated news this week

Some bits of good news–  People power: seven grassroots conservationists who are ‘saving the world’       Air pollution is falling again in China.  Planting Trees and Equity in the Arizona Desert.

TOP STORIES The Slow-Motion Execution of Julian Assange Continues. Assange Wins Right to Appeal on 1st Amendment Issue.   Julian Assange’s five-year battle against extradition to the US continues as he WINS last-ditch legal battle to lodge appeal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvwHt70oJJ4

38 Years After Chernobyl Disaster, 12% of Belarus’s Territory Is Still Contaminated

From the archives. The longer-term consequences of a nuclear war.

Climate. Isle of Wight-size iceberg breaks from Antarctica. We’ve underestimated the ‘Doomsday’ glacier – and the consequences could be devastating. 2024 looks like producing a sizzling summer in the North of this planet.:  

It’s so hot in Mexico that monkeys are dropping dead from trees.

Noel’s notes.  UK’s political omnishambles – a damper on the nuclear lobby.         Turning Point, The Cold War and the Bomb. Episode 3- Institutional Insanity.    The insanity of DEFENSE: with climate change, Defense becomes our real enemy.

                                                  ******************************

AUSTRALIA. Renewables and storage still cheapest option, nuclear too slow and costly in Australia – CSIRO.    Coalition’s brave nuke world a much harder sell after new CSIRO report.        CSIRO puts cost of new nuclear plant at $8.6bn as Coalition stalls on policy details.     Australia can learn from the American experience with nuclear power.        Western Australia Liberals reject Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan.      Dutton’s devoid-of-details nuclear plan an atomic failure.            The ‘first-of-its-kind’ premium that could add billions to Peter Dutton’s nuclear power plan.            Powering ahead: Dutton to name nuclear sites within weeks. Peter Dutton to reveal nuclear power locations ‘soon’ amid energy debate. 

Lidia Thorpe warns new laws will turn Australia into “the world’s nuclear waste dump“.

                                                 **********************************

NUCLEAR ISSUES

CLIMATE. Sites with radioactive material more vulnerable as climate change increases wildfire, flood risks. Nuclear sites, including Hanford, feeling the heat as climate change stokes wildfires drought.

Wildfire closes 20+ miles of highway across Hanford nuclear site Saturday night.

ECONOMICS. Militarism will inevitably lead America to bankruptcy ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/05/21/3b1-militarism-will-inevitably-lead-america-to-bankruptcy/

European Investment Bank’s (EIB) financing for nuclear reactor construction remains off the agenda.

UK Nuclear Plant Sizewell Continues Fundraising Before Election. Soaring costs are likely for planned Wylfa nuclear station, but EDF, Westinghouse, Kepco clamour to build it. ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/05/23/2-b1-soaring-costs-are-likely-for-planned-wylfa-nuclear-station-but-edf-westinghouse-kepco-clamour-to-build-it/ Wylfa nuclear power plan- a financial basket case- and no developer will take on the risks. Hinkley C – don’t say I didn’t warn you

EDUCATION. University of Sheffield gets into the nuclear debt web, partnering with Rolls Royce to make “small” nuclear reactors.

Yet another university co-opted by the nuclear industry.

Follow the Money: How Israel-Linked Billionaires Silenced US Campus Protests.

ENERGY. Solar and wind generation will soon pass nuclear, hydro.Electricity grids creak as AI demands soar.Huge nuclear ship spotted docked off Welsh coast. Q&A – Germany’s nuclear exit: One year after.HEALTH. Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) set to expire soon, while many nuclear test victims await justice .HISTORY. In 1939 the Soviet Union ‘planned to send a million troops to stop Hitler if Britain and France agreed pact’.
MEDIA.Antony Blinken orders crack down on Gaza-related nuclear leaks – Politico.Endless Trump reporting in USA media, but very little reporting of genocide in Gaza.Israel blocks Associated Press from livestreaming of Gaza under new censorship law, US urges it to reverse decision. Israel says it will return video equipment seized from AP.“Nuclear War: A Scenario”: An Absolute Must-Read. ALSO AT https://wordpress.com/post/nuclear-news.net/273842OPPOSITION to NUCLEAR . Nuclear-free councils hit out at ‘mad delusion’ of new reactor. Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLAs) join Stop Sizewell in urging 120 local authorities not to back Sizewell C.
Protest continues against Japan’s further discharge of nuke-contaminated water.
POLITICS. Uncertainty in UK: Will a Labour government really tread that troubled nuclear power path? UK Election! And no Final Investment Decision project. Sizewell C nuclear: Uncertainty surrounds final investment decision as parliamentary session shortened. SNPs Stephen Flynn claims Labour ‘will divert £20bn of Scotland’s oil cash’ to build nuclear power plants in England.
Joe Biden’s Deceptive Declarations on Gaza are contradicted by his actions.
Crisis of radioactive waste mismanagement in the Ottawa River watershed”		POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY.Iran’s new leaders stand at a nuclear precipice. Iran appoints nuclear negotiator Ali Bagheri as interim foreign minister.Moscow to ‘mirror’ West, NATO approaches, including nuclear weapons: Russia.US-Saudi officials meet for security and nuclear deal.North Korea vows to boost nuclear posture after US subcritical nuke test.In Nuclear Crosshairs, Guam Still Doesn’t Control Its Own Affairs.Asian neighbors wary of China’s plans to deploy floating nuclear plants.Who was to blame for the failure to properly survey the geology at Hinkley?
SAFETY. UN watchdog warns on nuclear trafficking.
Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant’s main power line down for hours, no safety threat.
Officials set up road closures around Sunnyside Community Hospital for radiation concerns.		SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS. Why US Opposes Efforts to Keep Space Weapons-Free.TECHNOLOGY. Altman-Backed Oklo Sees Data Centers Boosting Nuclear Demand, (though OKLO SMR design not yet approved)
URANIUM. Russian uranium ban reopens threat of uranium mining escalation in US.WASTES. No nuke waste down under: NFLAs spokesperson seeks reassurance British nuclear subs will still be decommissioned at Rosyth.WAR and CONFLICT. Ukrainian missiles hit Crimea as Russia launches nuclear drills in area.
Ukraine war briefing: France flies nuclear-capable missile as Russia holds drills.

WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Nuclear subs’ $13bn cost tip of the iceberg

By Kym Bergmann, THE AUSTRALIAN, May 28, 2024

The Defence budget papers for the 2023-24 Financial Year show for the first time that the approved four-year spend on nuclear-powered attack submarines is $13.6bn. This is just the tip of the iceberg because it does not include the submarines themselves, just some of the preparatory costs.

The Defence department is notoriously vague about many details of project funding, and it is only by deduction that this figure involves a gift that will eventually reach a total of $4.6bn to the US submarine industrial base. It also seems to include a smaller, undefined payment to the UK industry for some long lead time nuclear reactor components – but over time that will also reach an identical $4.6bn figure. No one outside a handful of officials knows how these huge numbers were calculated……………………………………..

Also in the US, additional funds are now being committed to submarine construction to boost output. After something of a shaky start, supplemental funding of $3bn has finally been approved by Congress. This is in addition to two lots of $4.7bn in successive financial years which means that funding should no longer be an issue.

It is unknown whether these amounts include the Australian contributions or whether they are treated separately. What is at stake for Australia is a requirement for the USN to have sufficient excess Virginia-class submarines so some can be sold to Australia. The magic number is the construction of 2.33 SSNs per year, an increase in the long-term annual average of 1.4…………………………………….

Another development is that in the complex web of funding negotiations, Congress is now seeking to put the construction of two new Virginia boats back into the budget for the 2025 financial year, which in the US starts on October 1.

Somewhat surprisingly the Presidential Budget Request for next year included just a single Virginia – a move criticised by supporters of the AUKUS deal as slowing down production at a time when it needs to be ramped up.

The summary is that the US is definitely increasing submarine production, with new Colombia-class nuclear missile-firing SSBNs the top priority.

What remains unclear is the date when production will reach the 2.33 level and what happens to the Australian sale if the target slips by a few years. The overall SSN schedule is about three years late and there is a huge maintenance backlog for older boats.

In the next few years, the USN’s fleet of attack submarines declines as older Los Angeles boats face retirement faster than Virginias can be built. There are some work-arounds such as slowing down the retirement process, but numbers will remain tight for a while.

For the sale to Australia to go ahead, a future US president will need to legally certify that the transfer of SSNs will not negatively impact USN capabilities, which is another hurdle that will need to be overcome. In Australia, preparations are under way for the expansion of HMAS Stirling in Western Australia to handle the rotational deployment of nuclear-powered submarines from the US and the UK beginning in 2027.

Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy has frequently said this involves a $7bn investment – though that number could not be found anywhere in the budget documents either.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | weapons and war | Leave a comment

Australia, Israel and the ICC. One rule for Ukraine, another for Palestine

by Ian McGarrity | May 28, 2024  https://michaelwest.com.au/australia-israel-and-icc-one-rule-for-ukraine-another-for-palestine/
 Already on trial for genocide, Israel has defied the International Court of Justice and amped up its slaughter of Palestinians. Ian McGarrity looks at the ‘global rules based order’, Australia and the predicament for world justice.

ICJ orders and ICC’s Netanyahu arrest warrant

How many times have you heard Australian political leaders and senior bureaucrats intone our country’s belief in, and strategic reliance on the international community conforming to the ‘rules-based international order’?

But how consistent is a country like Australia likely to be when faced with supporting orders and obligations flowing from last week’s actions of rules-based entities like the International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ) when it doesn’t suit us or our own domestic values environment? Let alone those espoused by our ally, the United States?

The ICC is like a standing war crimes entity that deals with individuals accused of committing certain prescribed international crimes who are not likely to be dealt with by their own nation’s judicial system. The ICJ is a UN instrumentality dealing with disputes between countries.

Anthony Albanese and our urbane Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, are currently trying to navigate the complex thicket the ICC and ICJ have presented them. And the PM is seemingly not making a great fist of mastering the nuanced political, and arcane legal language used by the ICJ and the ICC in their respective orders and actions concerning the Gaza war last week.

ICJ orders and ICC’s Netanyahu arrest warrant

The ICJ made orders on May 17, which, on their face, appear to require Israel to cease military operations in the Gaza city of Rafah. The language of these orders is so tortured from seeking compromise and agreement from 13 of the 15 relevant judges, that international legal experts and the two dissenting judges are not really sure of their exact legal meaning.

Yet international political commentators seem to have no such difficulty interpreting the majority of the ICJ’s Rafah orders. They often take a small amount of knowledge and understanding and organically grow that into awesome conclusions that may not be factually sound.

The Chief Prosecutor of the ICC, on the other hand, put very clear meat on his bones regarding the action he wants: for a three-judge panel of the ICC to approve the issuing of arrest warrants against three Hamas leaders and the Prime Minister and Defence Minister of Israel. And if those arrest warrants are issued, for the 124 signed-on member countries of the ICC, including Australia, to arrest any of those five should they land in Australia.

One senior Australian Government Minister, Chris Bowen, has supported what he believes (really can he be sure he knows) the ICJ has ordered Israel to do by saying: “Australia believes international law should be complied with”.

Australia believes the binding rulings (of the ICJ) should be complied with, and we believe Rafah should not be invaded by Israel.

I wonder whether he’ll be as certain of his position if the Benin, Romanian and Mexican ICC judge panel of three decides Australia should arrest the Israeli Prime and Defence Ministers in accordance with the arrest warrant the ICC’s Chief Prosecutor seeks.

Or will he say the 124 members of the ICC are obligated to arrest the three Hamas leaders should their arrest warrants be approved, but remain silent on any applying to Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant?

Australia’s response

Our PM, of course, and Foreign Minister Wong back in January had already opined that they did not agree with the basic premise of the genocide case South Africa brought before the ICJ.

Presumably, that means they must have some doubts about the ICJ orders last Friday (even if Bowen does not) concerning Israel and Rafah, which, also presumably, to some extent support the contention before the ICJ that genocide is happening or about to happen in Gaza.

So much for our PM’s reluctance last week to comment mid-stream on the ICC’s arrest warrant process when he and Wong clearly did just that back in January concerning the ICJ process.

The fact is, the ‘rules-based international order’ is really a minefield inhabited by a range of countries seeking different outcomes, usually ‘according to each’s national interest’.

The ICJ and, in particular, the ICC are fundamentally political as well as judicial entities. They are not just finding that the facts comprise ‘2’ and ‘3’ and hence the sum of those facts is ‘5’. They are dealing, like Justice Lee, in the Higgins Lehmann case, much more in ‘the balance of probabilities’.

Palestine and the ICC

The matter actually begins with the ICC admitting the State of Palestine as a member of the ICC on 1 April 2015. That was nine years ago.

As a member, on 22 May 2018, Palestine raised an issue for the ICC to adjudicate regarding relevant crimes alleged to be committed by Israelis in the territory of Palestine since 13 June 2014, with no end date.

On 5 February 2021, a previous ICC panel of three judges determined (by a 2-1 majority) that the ICC had jurisdiction to examine the alleged relevant crimes covered in the Palestine referral. The previous ICC Chief Prosecutor had referred this jurisdiction matter to the panel on 22 January 2020.

Australia provided its views to the three-judge panel on 14 February 2020 and opposed the ICC having jurisdiction concerning the relevant crimes set out in the Palestine referral of 22 May 2018. The investigation by the office of the Prosecutor, which led to last week’s application to the ICC three judge panel for arrest warrants to be issued, commenced on 3 March 2021.

Note that all this action over the 6 years since Palestine became a member of the ICC, and

occurred at least 19 months before the Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October last year and the Israeli response.

The ICC genocide case – what’s next?

On 17 November 2023, the current Chief Prosecutor, Karim Khan, received referrals from five ICC members, South Africa, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Comoros, and Djibouti, requesting an investigation into possible relevant crimes in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza (the ‘territory’ of a member’s ‘state’ – Palestine). Chile and Mexico were added to the list of referral members on 18 January 2024.

Under the Rome Statute, where a signatory has referred a matter to the Office of the Prosecutor and it determines that a reasonable basis exists to commence an investigation, the Office is obliged to act. This is thre process that led to last week’s referral.

In my view, the political and legal options open to the three judges from Benin, Romania and Mexico now considering Khan’s request for 5 arrest warrants to be issued are:

  1. Neither Hamas nor Israeli leaders (notwithstanding the Prosecutor’s request and the referrals from the eight members)
  2.  Issue arrest warrants for leaders of either Hamas or Israeli leaders alone; or
  3. c. Issue arrest warrants for leaders of both Hamas and Israel

I can only imagine that many, if not all, at the top of the ICC tree probably think it would be best for its panel to find any substantial reason to delay any decision on the arrest warrant application because all of the options above are almost certain to do great damage to the ICC.

For theICC’s sake I hope in view of the majority only (2-1) decision regarding jurisdiction of February 2021 – and the cleft stick on which the ICC rules and processes have hoisted the Chief Prosecutor and the ICC judges – the panel can refer the decision on jurisdiction for further review.

This would place the Prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants into Chelmsford like deep sleep.

Albanese and Wong must also be hoping that deep sleep envelops Karim Khan’s latest application for arrest warrants to be issued against Netanyahu and Gallant.

What about Putin and Ukraine?

However this was not their view when Khan requested the ICC issue arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin, and his Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, on 22 February 2023 and such warrants were approved by the Court just 23 days later.

Australia had joined 42 other countries in referring the Ukraine invasion matter to Khan at the ICC and indicated it would act on the warrants if ever that was relevant.

Can one pick and choose which international rules-based order decisions one supports or rejects?

Could Australia say it would not support arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant and remain an ICC member?

May 27, 2024 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »