Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

The human species destroys nature at its peril – pandemic a warning sign

 

May 3, 2020 Posted by | General News | Leave a comment

Solar heating

Renew Extra 2nd May 2020, Dave Elliott: Solar power prospects are looking good, but for solar heat as
well as solar electricity. It is clear than solar photovoltaic power generation is booming around the world, with over 580 GW of PV solar installed by the end of 2019, and much more expected, but it’s worth noting that there is also a large amount of direct solar heating system capacity in use (470 GW thermal), and that too is also growing.
Most of this capacity is in the form of standard roof-top solar heat collectors, with China in the lead (330 GWth), but large community-scaled solar heating arrays have been developed in Europe and elsewhere, some of them linked to
large inter-seasonal heat stores, allowing summer heat to be used for winter warming via local district heating networks.
Denmark has been a leader in this field, with its flagship 13.5 MW Marstal project and many others. The heat stores typically involve large lined pits with floating insulating covers for heat retention. In most cases, the solar input
augments heat supplied by other means, including from biomass combustion, but new approaches are being adopted which enhance the solar and bioenergy input using large heat pumps. Although (fossil) gas fired heating still often has the edge, solar heating with heat stores can be competitive with other heating sources if district heating networks already exists, as they do in Denmark. And of course the carbon emissions associated with using
fossil gas are then avoided.

https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2020/05/solar-heats-up.html

May 3, 2020 Posted by | General News | Leave a comment

Australia’s govt betting on a fossil-fuel led recovery – despite expert advice on renewable energy

Trouble with gas: the Coalition is betting on the fossil fuel for recovery – but the sums don’t add up
The Australian government says gas is ‘essential’, but the global view is it’s the second-least desirable source of electricity  
Guardian,  Adam Morton Environment editor @adamlmorton, Sun 3 May 2020   The agency that runs Australia’s electricity last week gave its verdict on how to deliver what would have seemed fanciful not that long ago – a power grid that within five years should at times be able to run on 75% wind and solar energy.

The Australian Energy Market Operator delivered a report on integrating renewable energy into the system with an optimistic message.

As described by its chief, New Yorker Audrey Zibelman, the technical capacity was already there, but markets and regulations would have to be adjusted. There were no “insurmountable reasons” why the grid could not take even higher levels of renewables, as it will need to for Australia to meet the Paris agreement goal of zero greenhouse gas emissions.

The minister in charge of both energy and cutting emissions, Angus Taylor, chose a different emphasis.

In a statement issued as the study was released, Taylor said it had highlighted the challenges of increased amounts of solar and wind given the system needed continuous inertia – support from constantly running “synchronous generation” – to ensure grid stability. He suggested that inertia could come from gas-fired power.

The market operator’s report does not mention gas generation, but the fossil fuel – often described as having half the emissions of coal, though recent studies have suggested it could be much more – is clearly on Taylor’s mind. A few days earlier he had given interviews to Nine newspapers to support the idea of a “gas-fired recovery” from the Covid-19 pandemic, suggesting it may be a focus of future economic stimulus measures……..

Andrew Grant, head of oil, gas and mining with London-based financial thinktank Carbon Tracker, says the global view of gas has flipped from it being seen as a cleaner fuel than coal, to it being the second-least desirable source of electricity. He points to analysis by the International Energy Agency that found global gas-fired power generation must begin to decline later this decade under a sustainable development scenario. “Better than coal is not exactly a ringing endorsement,” Grant says. …….

t there is little evidence that the Australian electricity grid will need more gas power. Last year, it provided about 9% of generation. The market operator assessment suggested this could fall to near zero in the second half of this decade before returning in a much smaller amount – less than a third of what it is now – in the 2030s if the grid was to run at lowest cost……

Simon Holmes à Court, senior advisor to the Climate and Energy College at the University of Melbourne, says the services needed for a secure power grid are increasingly available from sources other than gas, including government-backed large batteries and potentially through adjustments at wind or additions at solar farms……… https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/03/trouble-with-gas-the-coalition-is-betting-on-the-fossil-fuel-for-recovery-but-the-sums-dont-add-up

May 3, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, energy, politics | Leave a comment

The nuclear pandemic — Beyond Nuclear International

 

Celebrating a sustainable Earth means eliminating nuclear power and weapons

via The nuclear pandemic — Beyond Nuclear International

May 3, 2020 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Here’s who I’m cheering for — Beyond Nuclear International

 

Indigenous protectors of the Amazon deserve our applause too

via Here’s who I’m cheering for — Beyond Nuclear International

May 3, 2020 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

May 3 Energy News — geoharvey

Opinion: ¶ “In Midst Of Natural Gas Glut, Plastic Industry Bent, Not Broken (Yet)” • With energy demand dropping, there was the oil glut, and then a natural gas glut. Gas stakeholders have expanded petrochemical operations, anticipating an increase in the demand for plastic. But it seems that the plastic hedge is also starting to […]

via May 3 Energy News — geoharvey

May 3, 2020 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

South Australia winemaker completes shift to 100% renewables with solar car park — RenewEconomy

3MW solar system completed at Pernod Ricard Barossa Valley wineries rounds off the French company’s journey to 100% renewables for its Australian operations. The post South Australia winemaker completes shift to 100% renewables with solar car park appeared first on RenewEconomy.

via South Australia winemaker completes shift to 100% renewables with solar car park — RenewEconomy

May 3, 2020 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Want an economic tonic, Mr Morrison? Use that stimulus money to turbocharge renewables — RenewEconomy

The best way to shore up Australia’s future energy supplies is to invest economic stimulus money in renewables. The post Want an economic tonic, Mr Morrison? Use that stimulus money to turbocharge renewables appeared first on RenewEconomy.

via Want an economic tonic, Mr Morrison? Use that stimulus money to turbocharge renewables — RenewEconomy

May 3, 2020 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Another record month for rooftop solar, but Covid-19 likely to hit in May — RenewEconomy

 

Australia’s rooftop solar market charts second-highest month in April 2020 with 237MW new capacity. But analysts expect a Covid-19 drop-off to hit in May. The post Another record month for rooftop solar, but Covid-19 likely to hit in May appeared first on RenewEconomy.

via Another record month for rooftop solar, but Covid-19 likely to hit in May — RenewEconomy

May 3, 2020 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Flinders Local Action Group want a new process for disposal of Australia’s nuclear waste

 

From the communities’ perspective this entire process has been dogged by a lack of procedural fairness.
There has been a flood of information but many of the finer details have been obscured. The communities
have been urged to vote “Yes” without knowing exactly what they were voting for.

It is little wonder that we view the proposed amendments, as far as we understand them, with
considerable concern and distrust. We are fearful of opening the way for future nuclear activities that
could be implemented or imposed without the need for public consultation, assent or debate

We are particularly worried that this legislation is being debated under the current cloud of CV-19. We
believe the debate should be postponed at least until this current national crisis has abated and we have
a clearer view of the country’s direction, the effects on our economy and the path to recovery.

We believe that this current process to establish a NRWMF should cease in favour of an entirely new
approach. This should be a fully consultative process, based on the best science to identify a site that is
geologically, culturally and socially suitable for the permanent disposal of Australian generated waste.

Greg Bannon (Spokesperson for the Flinders Local Action Group   Inquiry into National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions] Submission No 79

Introduction: For over 60 years Australia has been operating a nuclear reactor. A by-product of this
operation is nuclear waste. ANSTO plans to greatly increase the production of medical isotopes. To this
day, no single, safe location for the permanent disposal of Australian generated radioactive waste has
ever been established.

In March 2015, the Minister for Industry (DIIS) Ian McFarlane, seeking a new approach for Australia’s
nuclear waste, invited private land nominations from around Australia for assessment as potential sites for
a National Radioactive Waste Management Facility (NRWMF).

Six potential sites were short listed and in 2016 one of those, on Wallerberdina Station near the Flinders
Ranges, became the first to progress to the next stage. The other five sites were abandoned, including two
near Kimba in SA. In 2017, a year behind the Flinders, two new sites near Kimba were nominated, accepted
and embarked on the same process.

Flinders Local Action Group (FLAG): Many people, including Traditional Owners, landholders, residents
and visitors, believed that Wallerberdina was culturally and geologically unsuitable for such a proposal.
They began individually protesting about it. Sadly, individual voices carry little weight against a Federal
Department with a pre-determined agenda. This Group was formed in September, 2016, to bring those
voices together.

We have had over four years of interaction with DIIS on this issue and believe we are well qualified to
comment. We believe this particular model for the NRWMF and process developed to implement it is
badly flawed. It has Continue reading

May 2, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Dr Helen Caldicott explains the (virtually eternal) problem of toxic nuclear waste – Submission to Senate Committee

how much water would theoretically be required to dilute all the high level waste expected to be on hand in the USA by the end of the 20th century, to existing drinking water standards?

The answer: If you add up all the fresh water in the world, including not only all lakes and rivers and glaciers and ground water, but also all the soil moisture (which far exceeds the sum total of all the other sources), and then double that grand total, then you have about the right amount of water to do the dilution.

The USGS points out that this calculation is only to emphasize why it is so important to keep this material out of the environment to an unprecedented degree.

Dr Helen Caldicottre National Radioactive Waste Management Amendment (Site Specification, Community Fund and Other Measures) Bill 2020 [Provisions]. Submission No. 71. have deep concerns about the federal governments proposed changes to the National Radioactive Waste
Management Act.

The government has not made a clear case about the need for the planned national facility at Kimba and the
process has been restricted and inadequate.
As a physician well versed in the dangers of radioactive waste and its longevity, its cardinogenicity and
mutagenicity I attach the following summary of the elements in radioactive waste, which is written for Canada
but applies equally to all radioactive waste. And by the way France which has produced our radioactive waste
from Lucas Heights calls it high level, not low level radioactive waste!
The high level waste from nuclear reactors remains extremely toxic for many millions of years — essentially forever.
There are hundreds of man-made (or human-made if you like) radioactive materials within irradiated nuclear fuel. Many of these disappear within the first few years, but even after ten years of “cooling” and rapid decay there are still hundreds of such radionuclides left. Here is a list of 211 of them taken from a publication by AECL (Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd): http://www.ccnr.org/hlw_chart html
This list is by no means complete.
You will notice that the radwaste materials in irradiated nuclear fuel are classified into 4 categories (by AECL). The main categories are FissionProducts, Activation Products (of which there are two types labelled FIAP  and ZAP), and Actinides (together with their decay products) Continue reading

May 2, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump | Leave a comment

Why does the Morrison govt hear the experts on coronavirus, but ignore the experts on climate change?

 

May 2, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, health, politics | Leave a comment

Fatigued or unwell experts in charge? -the special pandemic danger for the nuclear industry

The Hidden Nuclear Risk of the Pandemic The coronavirus crisis highlights the resilience problem of civilian nuclear power plants.   https://thebulwark.com/the-hidden-nuclear-risk-of-the-pandemic/  by VICTOR GILINSKY AND HENRY SOKOLSKI APRIL 27, 2020 

The coronavirus crisis has revealed a significant Achilles’ heel in civilian nuclear power: The plants can’t operate if their relatively few highly skilled operators get sick or become contagious and have to be quarantined, a situation that, according to news reports, some plants are getting close to. That puts a dent in nuclear-industry assertions that its plants provide a level of protection against natural events far beyond that of most other electricity suppliers.

The chief problem is one of public safety. Unlike other types of electric-generating plants, nuclear plants need operators to remain in control even after they are shut down because their radioactive uranium fuel cores, typically about 100 tons, continue to generate large amounts of heat. If the heat is not removed by cooling water, it can melt the core. During the 1979 Three Mile Island accident in Pennsylvania, over half the inadequately cooled core melted in hours.

In recent weeks, several vital institutions—police forces, food-processing plants, the U.S. Postal Service, not to mention health care providers—have reportedly been strained as personnel have become sick with COVID-19. As the pandemic spreads, it could create a problem for the smooth functioning of nuclear plants, as well. Just operating in safe shutdown state could be challenging. The details differ from plant to plant and are spelled out in technical specifications that are part of each plant’s federal license, but generally it takes a supervisor and several operators to man the control room and some number of maintenance staff. Altogether, counting all shifts, there may be a couple of dozen operators per plant. That doesn’t sound like much, but these are highly skilled personnel who are licensed to operate an individual plant. You can’t just pull in operators from elsewhere. If the licensed operators are unavailable because of disease or medical concerns, you are out of luck.

The operators would surely not abandon their plant so long as they could remain at their posts, but having a skeleton crew of sick and fatigued individuals operating a nuclear plant is, to say the least, not a desirable state of affairs.
A similar concern applies to the government safety regulators. At the Seabrook plant in New Hampshire, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors are doing most of their inspections over the phone from home. As one citizen oversight group remarked, while “understandable, it’s still a bit unsettling, considering we are talking about nuclear power.” A COVID-19-related notice on the NRC website states the commission “will require plants to shut down if they cannot appropriately staff their facilities,” but during a March 20 teleconference the NRC representative assured the industry that the agency was prepared to issue blanket exemptions from license requirements.
Operating a plant at power takes a lot more staff than maintaining it in safe shutdown state. Nuclear plant managements around the world have been forced to consider the consequences of coronavirus infections and the need to quarantine employees who have been in contact with infected people. The conclusions are stark. According to a Reuters report, EDF, the utility that runs all the nuclear plants in France, said its plants “could operate for three months with a 25% reduction in staffing levels and for two to three weeks with 40% fewer staff.” At one plant in the north of France, Flamanville, EDF announced it was reducing the staff at the plant from 800 to 100, keeping only those “in charge of safety and security.” There are reports that U.S. nuclear plants may ask essential staff to live on-site if the pandemic worsens, and plants have stockpiled bedding and ready-to-eat meals.
During this emergency, nuclear plant managers are doing their best to keep the lights on and the public safe. But the pandemic exposes a vulnerability of the nuclear plants that we will have to take account of in future decisions. One thing is clear: The picture painted by the trade association for the nuclear industry, the Nuclear Energy Institute, of the essential invulnerability of nuclear plants is not correct.

The Nuclear Energy Institute also argues that by contributing reliable power to military installations, nuclear energy “supports the nation’s ability to defend itself.” Yet here we have a type of emergency—involving a possible lack of operating staff—in which the nuclear plants could become a serious liability rather than an asset.

Nuclear plants are not without their advantages. But they also come with serious disadvantages, one of which—the safety imperative for constant, highly trained staffing no matter what—has become evident during the current pandemic. They are an inflexible source of energy that carries an enormous overhead in terms of safety and security, when what we need in our energy system for dealing with inevitable emergencies is not rigidity, but resilience.

May 2, 2020 Posted by | General News | Leave a comment

Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) continues attacks on ABC 

Surprise! Surprise! IPA continues attacks on ABC https://www.abcfriends.org.au/ipa_continue_attacks_on_abc  
Latest news from ABC Friends , Margaret Reynolds, President ABC Friends National, 28 February 2020   
 The Institute of Public Affairs has (IPA) commissioned a survey by global firm Dynata to continue its campaign against the ABC and public broadcasting in Australia.

Yes, this is the same IPA which tries to influence the Liberal Party to privatise the ABC!

Guess the results: less than a third of Australians agreed that the ABC was out of touch with ordinary Australians.

So, all you extraordinary Australians who value the ABC may like to phone, text, write or visit the IPA to record why you value the essential services the ABC provides.

Website: ipa.org.au/contact-us
Email: ipa@ipa.org.au
Phone: (03) 9600 4744

Next time the IPA commissions a survey they may like to consider a poll on how many Australians value the IPAs contribution to Australian public policy debate!

May 2, 2020 Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, media, secrets and lies | Leave a comment

Sea level rise ‘could threaten nuclear power station’ planned for UK

Sea level rise ‘could threaten nuclear power station’ planned for UK, report claims, Independent UK, EDF about to submit planning application for major development at Sizewell on Suffolk coast, Harry Cockburn, 1 May 20

Rising sea levels and coastal erosion could pose a threat to two nuclear reactors planned to be built on the low-lying Suffolk coast, according to local councils and analysis by an independent environmental group.

East Suffolk Council and Suffolk County Council have already lodged various concerns about French company EDF Energy’s plans for the new facilities at Sizewell C, and a new analysis by experts at the Nuclear Consulting Group suggests planned sea defences may be inadequate in future climate change scenarios.

EDF is reportedly about to submit its official planning application for the project, and has been working with Chinese state-owned nuclear company.

The Nuclear Consulting Group’s paper, written by structural engineer, Nick Scarr, suggests the Suffolk coast where the Sizewell development is planned, is inherently “unstable”, and that due to erosion by the sea the site could become an island before the station reaches the end of its active life, thereby risking a serious accident. Mr Scarr told the Climate News Network:

“Any sailor, or lifeboat crew, knows that east coast banks need respect — they have dynamic patterns, and even the latest charts cannot be accurate for long. “I was deeply concerned by EDF’s premise that there is micro-stability at the Sizewell site, which makes it suitable for new-build nuclear. It is true if you restrict analysis to recent historical
data, but it is false if you look at longer-term data and evidence-based climate science predictions…….. (subscribers only) https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/nuclear-power-sea-rise-sizewell-c-edf-suffolk-a9492901.html

May 2, 2020 Posted by | General News | Leave a comment