Coalition hands out $4 million to pursue new coal generator in Queensland — RenewEconomy
First move by new pro-coal resources minister Keith Pitt is to team up with Angus Taylor to announce $4 million grant to pursue new coal generator in north Queensland. The post Coalition hands out $4 million to pursue new coal generator in Queensland appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Coalition hands out $4 million to pursue new coal generator in Queensland — RenewEconomy
Stockland taps CEFC finance to ramp up solar, battery, efficiency roll-out — RenewEconomy
Australian property group set to roll out another 11MW commercial solar, this time across its logistics business, with help of $75m CEFC senior debt facility. The post Stockland taps CEFC finance to ramp up solar, battery, efficiency roll-out appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Stockland taps CEFC finance to ramp up solar, battery, efficiency roll-out — RenewEconomy
Redflow batteries to help slash costs, beat heat at outback cattle station — RenewEconomy
Solar plus 40kWh Redflow zinc-bromine flow batteries allow outback W.A. cattle station to operate completely off-grid, save $10,000 a year in diesel costs, and keep workers cool. The post Redflow batteries to help slash costs, beat heat at outback cattle station appeared first on RenewEconomy.
via Redflow batteries to help slash costs, beat heat at outback cattle station — RenewEconomy
Victorian govt Nuclear Inquiry – published Submissions
First published results on the Inquiry website are strongly ANTI-NUCLEAR. But we must remember that there could be many confidential submissions, that we don’t know about.
PRO nuclear
1. Don Hampshire
2 Robert Heron – vaguely
3 Terje- Petesen
116 Leah McDermott
122 Simon Brink
123 CFMMEU Mining and Energy Division
ANTI nuclear
4 Jessica Lawson
5 Pro Forma list of 122 contributors probably anti-nuclear
48 Jaznet Nixon 49 Karen Furniss
63 Graeme Tyschsen
68 Barbara Devine
76 Vivien Smith
77 Lachklan Dow
81 RVS Industries
92 Alan Hewett and Joan Jones
103 Anne Wharton
106 John Quiggin vague
107 Amy Butcher
109 Nick Pastalatzis
112 Philip White
see https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/epc-lc/article/4348 -to read the submissions
Submission to INQUIRY INTO NUCLEAR PROHIBITION (focussing on thorium etc)
Submission to INQUIRY INTO NUCLEAR PROHIBITION
Introduction
I read the very narrow Terms of Reference (TOR) with some amazement. It is certainly made clear that the goal is to remove Victoria’s Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Act 1983 (1)
The very first TOR makes the mining of uranium and thorium as the prime concern. After all, Victoria could presumably have nuclear power with these minerals sourced from elsewhere. I conclude that the underlying goal of this Inquiry is, under the relentless pressure of thorium lobbyists such as John White, indeed to remove that legislation, which effectively prohibits the exploration and mining of thorium and uranium in Victoria. John White has a long history of promotion of the nuclear industry (2), and previously owned the massive 3,700 sq km mining exploration lease EL4416 [picture attached] right across Southern Gippsland’s prime coastal and tourism region, and runs the entire length of the spectacular 90 Mile Beach.(3)
Clearly, the Victorian legislation was brought in to protect this State’s precious agricultural land, and iconic ocean coast from polluting mining industries.[picture attached]
The Terms of Reference are clearly biased: with no qualification they promote the nuclear industry as undoubtedly beneficial to Victoria. This is ludicrous, as the global nuclear industry is in a state of decline (4)
Meanwhile, renewable energy technologies, wind, solar and storage are now recognised by CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator as by far the cheapest form of low carbon options for Australia, and are likely to dominate the global energy mix in coming decades. (5)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_Council
- https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/ia-investigation-victoria-goes-dirty-brown,3788
- https://www.fool.ca/2020/01/31/the-death-knell-for-nuclear-and-the-end-of-cameco-tsxcco/
- https://reneweconomy.com.au/new-csiro-aemo-study-confirms-wind-solar-and-storage-beat-coal-gas-and-nuclear-57530/
on potential benefits to Victoria in removing prohibitions enacted by the Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Act 1983
Now, turning to each TOR
(1) investigate the potential for Victoria to contribute to global low carbon dioxide energy production enabling exploration and production of uranium and thorium; through enabling exploration and production of uranium and thorium.
Nuclear power is no solution to climate change. This Term of Reference assumes that the “exploration and production” will result in nuclear power plants for Victoria, otherwise why do it? It also assumes that nuclear power will be effective in lowering C02 emissions.
But there is no point in this “exploration and production” as it has been repeatedly demonstrated that nuclear power is no solution to climate change.
Even if nuclear power really could combat climate change, it would take decades to get enough reactors in operation. It would be too late, whereas renewable energy, solar and wind, and also energy effiiciency strategies, can be set up quickly. This means that to establish nuclear power would be counter-productive, as time, energy, and money would be diverted away from those genuine solutions. Dr Paul Dorfman, et al (6)
Nuclear power is vulnerable to climate change. Increasing temperatures can result in reduced nuclear reactor efficiency by directly impacting nuclear equipment or warming the plant’s source of cooling water. (7) Nuclear power is uniquely vulnerable to increasing temperatures because of its reliance on cooling water to ensure operational safety within the core and spent fuel storage. As the most water-intensive energy generation technology, (8) nuclear reactors are located near a river or the ocean to accommodate hefty water usage, which averages between 1,101 gallons per megawatt of electricity produced to 44,350 gal/MWh depending on the cooling technology.
Inland reactors that use rivers as a source for cooling water are the most at risk during heat waves, which according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are “very likely” to occur more often and last longer in the coming decades. (9)
Especially Australian climate impacts on nuclear technology. In view of Australia’s bushfire crisis, it just seems ludicrous that anyone would contemplate introducing nuclear power technology of any type to this country. The Lucas Heights research nuclear reactor is already enough of a worry. Bushfires have occurred in its vicinity.(10) The transport of nuclear wastes would be threatened by bushfires (11)
Nuclear power would place an intolerable burden on Australia’s precious, but limited water supply. Nuclear power plants require huge amounts of water to prevent fission products in the core and spent nuclear fuel from overheating (incidentally making nuclear the most water intensive energy source in terms of consumption and withdrawal per unit of energy delivered).
Uranium mining and nuclear facilities are highly water intensive, while solar and wind power can alleviate water stress. (12)
Why thorium exploration and production? Thorium nuclear reactors do not exist yet, and quite possibly never will. Thorium itself is not a fissile material. It can only be transformed into fissile uranium-233 using breeder and reprocessing technology. Its development entails a complex processes, bringing risks of weapons proliferation and smaller but highly toxic, amounts of long-lasting radioactive wastes. After reaction, the thorium blend leaves dangerous wastes like U-232, a potent high-energy gamma emitter that can penetrate one meter of concrete and will have to be kept safely out of our air, food, and water forever. (13)
In January, the Climate Council ‒ comprising Australia’s leading climate scientists and other policy experts ‒ issued a policy statement, noting that nuclear power plants “are not appropriate for Australia – and probably never will be” as they are “a more expensive source of power than renewable energy, and present significant challenges in terms of the storage and transport of nuclear waste, and use of water”.(14)
- https://medium.com/@albertbates/john-wayne-squares-off-against-jim-hansen-42a258b2260d
- The Effect of Rising Ambient Temperature on Nuclear Power Plants http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/duboc1/
- https://theatlas.com/charts/H1scYH_H7
- Future Climate Changes, Risks and Impacts https://ar5-syr.ipcc.ch/topic_futurechanges.php
- https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/residents-warned-not-to-leave-sydney-fire-worsens-20180415-p4z9os.html
- https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/transporting-nuclear-wastes-across-australia-in-the-age-of-bushfires,13465
- https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/energy-commodities/solar-wind-power-can-alleviate-water-stress
- Thorium ‒ a better fuel for nuclear technology? Nuclear Monitor, by Dr. Rainer Moormann
- https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/godfather-of-australian-science-warns-government/
(2) identify economic, environmental and social benefits for Victoria, including those related to medicine, scientific research, exploration and mining;
Economic benefits? Victoria is right now on the cusp of a renewable energy revolution, with all sorts of exciting developments, for example, Melbourne’s iconic tram network to be powered by solar energy. (15) Victoria has a renewable energy target of 50% by 2030. (16) Why imperil that progressive transition to clean energy, by the distraction of the expensive and dirty industry, with its connection to nuclear weapons development?
In 2017–18, the state’s temperate climate, high quality soil and clean water helped the industry produce $14.9 billion worth of agricultural product from 11 million hectares. This makes Victoria Australia’s largest agriculture producer.(17). In Gippsland, John White’s Ignite Energy Resources holds a huge mining license, in an area with exceptional resources of monazite, a source of thorium.(18) the same area that is renowned for both its tourist attractions and its agriculture. Gippsland farms account for at least one quarter of Victoria’s milk, vegetable and beef production with a number of Gippsland’s businesses exporting food across the world (19)
Why would anyone in their right mind imperil Victoria’s successful and continuing agricultural and tourism industries for a gamble on a fantasy about thorium nuclear reactors? Those reactors are currently nonexistent, and likely to remain so.
The Australian nuclear hype focusses on “Generation IV” technologies, especially Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs – they leave out the unpopular word “nuclear”)
No-one wants to pay for SMRS
No company, utility, consortium or national government is seriously considering building the massive supply chain that is at the very essence of the concept of SMRs ‒ mass, modular factory construction. Yet without that supply chain, SMRs will be expensive curiosities.
Small nuclear reactors are not economically viable. The main priority preventing safe deployment [of small nuclear reactors] is economics. Most commercial proposals for SMRs involve cost-cutting measures, such as siting multiple reactors in close proximity. This increases the risk of accidents, or the impact of potential accidents on people nearby. (20)
The world wide effort by the nuclear industry to hype up small nuclear reactors is not resulting in any sign of success, given their disastrous economics, among other problems. (21)
Thorium and uranium mining? Given the decline in the nuclear power industry, and the glut in uranium, the uranium market is in permanent doldrums. (22)
Thorium nuclear reactors – there are many sources that detail the problems that make these reactors unlikely ever to become a commercial reality. They are in essence really uranium fuelled, as they require plutonium or enriched uranium to start the process. Their major problem is of course their very high cost. Other disadvantages, safety risks, toxic long-lasting wastes, weapons proliferation risks. (23)
Environmental benefits? Are they kidding? The environmental consequences of using thorium-based nuclear power will result in the same problems the world faces today with uranium bases reactors. (24)
Uranium mining has widespread effects, contaminating the environment with radioactive dust, radon gas, water-borne toxins, and increased levels of background radiation. (25) The industry’s use of water is huge, making it a very unwise industry for for water -scarce Australia.
Social benefits? What social benefits? The introduction of any part of the nuclear fuel chain into clean, green Victoria would bring conflict, division and distress especially to rural Victorians. All for the faint hope of riches for a few mining entrepreneurs, and the promise of jobs, jobs jobs in mining, an industry that is becoming increasingly and rapidly automated. The effect on the tourism and farming industry would be loss of jobs, whereas solar and wind technologies can be developed alongside agriculture, bringing many more jobs.
(3) identify opportunities for Victoria to participate in the nuclear fuel cycle; and
If the well-being of the farming and tourist communities is ignored, well, some enthusiastic nuclear entrepreneurs might be able to get hold of tax-payers’ money , and get their almost certainly futile dream started.
(4) identify any barriers to participation, including limitations caused by federal or local laws and regulations.
Apart from the barriers of extremely bad economic outlook for nuclear activities in Australia, apart from the environmental, health and safety risks, apart from damage to agriculture and tourism, -yes there are legal and regulatory hurdles for the nuclear lobby to overcome.
Victoria’s laws are not haphazard whims of a few latte-drinking tree huggers.
They have been developed to protect the public from the very sorts of dirty nuclear industries that are now being touted by the nuclear lobby
Kimba nuclear waste dump: PM and South Australia Premier Marshall must step in
“South Australians have greater ambitions for our state than to be someone else’s nuclear waste dump.”
|
Kazzi Jai Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste In The Flinders Ranges
Kimba nuclear waste dump: PM and SA Premier Marshall must step in – Dr Jim Green 01 Feb 2020
Federal resources minister Matt Canavan has today announced his intention to move ahead with plans for a national nuclear waste dump near Kimba on SA’s Eyre Peninsula. Dr. Jim Green, national nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth, said: “Mr. Canavan has decided to ignore the unanimous opposition of Barngarla Traditional Owners. That decision must not be allowed to stand.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison should intervene to reverse the decision.
“SA Premier Steven Marshall should make it clear that imposing a facility against the will of Traditional Owners is unacceptable and unconscionable and that the SA government will fight the dump proposal, just as the Rann government fought and eventually convinced the Howard government to back down.”
SA Labor argues that Traditional Owners should have a right of veto. Deputy Leader of the Opposition Susan Close said in Oct. 2019 that SA Labor is “utterly opposed to the process” leading to today’s decision. She described the process as “appalling”.
Shamefully, the federal government refused a request from Barngarla Traditional Owners, native title holders of the area, to be included in the community ballot held last year. The Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation (BDAC) engaged an independent ballot agent to conduct a confidential postal ballot. Not a single Barngarla Traditional Owner voted in favour of the dump. BDAC wrote to Mr. Canavan calling on him to abandon the nuclear dump in light of their unanimous opposition, and stating that “it is BDAC’s responsibility to continue to give voice to the profound concerns Barngarla traditional owners have and to take whatever steps are necessary to oppose the NRWMF being located on Barngarla Country.”
Dr. Green said: “Mr. Canavan not only ignores the opposition of Traditional Owners, he also ignores local division in Kimba. The result of the government-initiated community ballot fell short of his own benchmark of 65% for ‘broad community support’ so Mr. Canavan shifted the goalposts. And he ignores the opposition of a majority of South Australians.”
A 2018 poll found that 55% agreed that SA should stop the federal government from building a national nuclear dump in outback SA while 35% disagreed; those who strongly agreed with stopping the dump outnumbered those who strongly disagreed by a factor of three (41:14). A 2016 Sunday Mail-commissioned poll found that support in SA for a national dump (39.8%) was well short of 50%. A 2015 Advertiser-commissioned poll found just 15.7% support for a nuclear waste dump in SA.
Dr. Green said: “The federal government’s claim that the nuclear waste dump will generate 45 jobs is a dishonest fabrication which is wildly inconsistent with job creation at comparable facilities overseas. At least when Prime Minister John Howard tried to impose a nuclear dump in SA, he had the honesty to acknowledge that no jobs would be generated.”
“The claim that the waste is low-level medical waste is a dishonest fabrication. Measured by radioactivity, well over 90% of the waste is long-lived intermediate-level waste that the federal government wants to store above ground at Kimba until such time as a deep underground disposal facility is established. No effort is being made to find a location for such a facility so this long-lived waste would remain stored above ground in SA ad infinitum.
The SA Nuclear Waste Facility (Prohibition) Act ‒ an initiative of the Olsen Liberal government ‒ should be used by the state government to halt this unacceptable proposal. The SA government should also initiate a parliamentary inquiry to thoroughly investigate the issues and the options.”
“Mr Canavan acknowledged last year that 93% of the radioactive waste is located at the Lucas Heights facility south of Sydney, operated by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation. That is where Australia’s nuclear expertise is concentrated and that is where the waste should remain.
“South Australians fought long and hard to prevent the Howard government turning SA into the nation’s nuclear waste dump. We fought and won the campaign to stop the Flinders Ranges being used for a national dump. We fought and won the campaign to stop SA being turned into the world’s high-level nuclear waste dump. And now, we will fight until the Morrison government backs off.
“South Australians have greater ambitions for our state than to be someone else’s nuclear waste dump.”
|
|
|
The shambles of the Australian government’s Kimba nuclear waste dump plan
Craig Wilkins: This waste will be temporarily parked in above-ground sheds at Kimba https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/craig-wilkins-this-waste-will-be-temporarily-parked-in-aboveground-sheds-at-kimba/news-story/064782c0e3da8ec896aafd01c8422775
A nuclear dump at Kimba will not just see low level radioactive medical waste introduced to the Outback, writes Craig Wilkins. It’s time to tackle the misinformation.
There is clearly a lot of misinformation about the proposed nuclear waste dump at Kimba.
Caleb Bond thinks it’s a mystery that anyone can oppose a low-level nuclear waste dump (“Opinion”, The Advertiser, 4/2/20). The real mystery is how Mr Bond can think it’s just a low-level waste facility.
It’s not.
In fact, there are two separate proposals located side by side. As Mr Bond says, one is for low-level, lower-risk waste. But the other is for long-lived, intermediate-level waste – a far more dangerous proposition.
The intermediate-level waste includes spent fuel reprocessing waste from nuclear reactors at the Lucas Heights site south of Sydney, which needs to be kept safe from humans for 10,000 years. To put it in context, that’s twice as old as the great pyramids in Egypt.
It’s the genuine health and environmental risks from this intermediate-level waste that people are concerned about.
Not just a few hospital gloves and gowns. In fact, the risk is so acute that some countries actually classify this waste as “high-level”.
International best practice is for intermediate and high-level waste to be permanently buried deep underground. But that’s not what is proposed for Kimba. Instead, this waste will be temporarily parked in above-ground sheds while the authorities then start working out the best site for permanent burial.
Surely it makes sense to decide on the final resting place first before shifting the waste.
Especially as there is no particular urgency to remove it from its current secure storage at Lucas Heights.
Alongside this lack of forward planning, the promises of jobs and money go up and down like a yoyo, and the consultation process has excluded many – including the Barngarla traditional owners who hold native title over the land.
Shamefully, the Federal Government refused a request from Barngarla traditional owners to be included in a community ballot held last year. And when the Barngarla conducted their own poll, not a single traditional owner voted in favour. Moreover, the proposal itself is illegal under South Australian law.
For these reasons, many people remain deeply concerned. As so many questions remain, it makes sense for the SA Parliament to conduct a full, open inquiry into the proposal to clear up exactly what is proposed. And how much benefit, if any, will flow to the Kimba community.
Until then, organisations such as mine will support the community as it seeks answers from a process that has so far failed them. And we will continue to support the Barngarla traditional owners, whose opposition has been ignored.
CRAIG WILKINS IS CONSERVATION SA CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Adam Bandt, The new Australian Greens leader looks to hopeful action on climate catastrophe
“There is no point in telling people there may be jobs in unspecified industries in the future. It is incumbent on us to explain how we will look after people in this transition”. …….
He has opened his period of leadership by talking about a Green New Deal, which he characterises as “a government-led plan of investment and action to build a clean economy and a caring society”.
Adam Bandt: the Greens must provide hope there is an exit strategy from climate catastrophe The new Australian Greens leader says the party has to connect with coal communities if it wants to be taken seriously, Guardian Katharine Murphy Political editor @murpharoo, Fri 7 Feb 2020 For the first time in the party’s history, the leader of the Australian Greens sits in the House of Representatives, not in the Senate. If you have to hold a lower house seat at every election, Adam Bandt says, you have to listen, and you have to be plugged in to the practical concerns of your constituents. Continue reading
Kimba nuclear waste deal makes the “sports rorts” look like petty cash
NEWS “NUCLEAR DIVISION” https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2020/02/08/nuclear-waste-site-selected-sa/15810804009368
The government’s decision to build a nuclear waste facility in Kimba has divided the South Australian town, with detractors questioning the millions spent on building community support. By Royce Kurmelovs.
Last Friday night, Andrew Baldock was putting his kids to bed when his father called from overseas to say he had just spoken to the then federal Resources minister, who had good news.
After five years, Matt Canavan had chosen their 7500-hectare cereal and sheep property near Kimba, South Australia, as the site for a proposed nuclear waste storage facility.
Others might have been devastated; they were thrilled……..
The decision means 160 hectares of the family property, Napandee, will be carved out to build a facility to store low-level and intermediate nuclear waste from 100 sites around the country.
According to Baldock, doing so will save Kimba. The 37-year-old carpenter says the facility will bring steady work, a certain future and millions of dollars to the town of 700 people on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula.
It will also see the government pay the Baldocks for their property, though neither the family nor the Coalition has disclosed the amount, other than to say the figure will be “four times the land value” but can also be negotiated. For his part, Andrew Baldock is quick to add that this is not about the money, but the spreading drought.
“… I see it as really important for Kimba to diversify its economy where we can make sure we’re not reliant on agriculture.”
The search for a nuclear waste storage facility in Australia began in 1998 with the Howard government, which sought to build one at Woomera, about 450 kilometres north of Adelaide. When that plan went nowhere, the government briefly flirted with putting a facility at Muckaty Station in the Northern Territory, until Indigenous opposition forced a backdown in 2014.
A year later, talk returned to South Australia. While the federal proposal gathered steam, the Labor state government had captured national attention with a plan to build a storage facility that would take in nuclear waste from across the world.
Although the state plan was soundly rejected, the federal proposal remained quietly viable when Kimba’s local Liberal MP, Rowan Ramsey, offered up his farming property as a possible site. Ramsey would be joined by former Liberal senator Grant Chapman, who offered his own land near Hawker, much to the dismay of locals.
Both would later be excluded due to the obvious conflict of interest. Yet while community opposition in Hawker led to the town eventually being removed as an option, the volunteering of properties by the Baldocks and others kept Kimba in contention.
But community support was lacking. To attract that support, French mayors were flown in from Champagne to talk about the nuclear storage facilities that operate there. Interested locals were given tours of the Lucas Heights research reactor in Sydney. Lectures on nuclear science were held.
“There’s no detail about how that [$55 million] has actually been spent. This makes sports rorts look like absolute petty cash.”
Supporters formed the view that Australia’s continued use of nuclear medicine, such as radiotherapy, meant a demand had to be filled. Opponents answered that suggesting people with cancer might not receive treatment without a nuclear waste facility in Kimba was emotional blackmail……..
More serious, however, was the issue of intermediate waste. While much of the focus had been on the “low-level medical” waste – which opponents say didn’t bother them – this other material is many times more potent.
When authorities said they would use Kimba to “temporarily” house higher-grade radioactive waste for several decades “until a more permanent solution can be found”, the plan’s detractors thought it sounded like the facility was the thin end of the wedge.
Once the waste was in Kimba, why not upsize?
Hate mail was sent; bitter arguments broke out at the pub or across the dinner table. Opponents say they were increasingly excluded from social engagements and official processes.
All this reached a new climax last Saturday morning, when Matt Canavan issued a press release about his decision……..
Two days later, Canavan resigned his cabinet position to back an ill-fated attempt by Barnaby Joyce to retake the Nationals leadership.
Kimba’s mayor, Dean Johnson, talks numbers. To date, about $55 million has been spent to find a site and build community support. It’ll be another 12 months before construction on the facility starts. There’s other legislation that needs to pass before then, as well as the risk of litigation.
More money has been promised. There is a $31 million Community Benefit Program, $8 million of which will be spent on skills, education and business training. Another $3 million will be used to fund an Indigenous heritage program. Finally, $20 million will be given to a community capital fund. The facility promises 45 full-time jobs, which Johnson insists will not be fly-in, fly-out.
The catch is that the waste dump must be built before the money flows.
“We don’t have the final figures yet, but all told it’s in the vicinity of half a billion dollars,” Johnson says. “That’s a lot of money. Yes, it is. There’s a lot of building. A lot of benefits going for Kimba, the Eyre Peninsula and South Australia. It’s a national facility so the benefits will go nationwide.”
Others, such as Barry Wakelin, aren’t so sure.
“There’s no detail about h“ow that [$55 million] has actually been spent,” he says. “This makes sports rorts look like absolute petty cash.”
Wakelin served as the electorate’s federal Liberal MP for almost 15 years, before he was succeeded by Rowan Ramsey in 2007. For him, coming out against the facility was a “matter of principle”. The decision has seen his party turn on him.
“I didn’t want anything to do with politics when I left,” he says. “I needed this like a hole in the head, but eventually your moral conscience kicks in.
“When we saw the reaction of our friends, we said: ‘What are we doing to these people?’ We have not seen anything like that in our community. The federal government has done everything they can to belt a small community.”
Wakelin is referring to the almost 40 per cent of people in town who voted against the project in late 2019.
Among them was James Shepherdson, 48, who was on his farm when the news broke on Saturday morning. To get reception on his mobile he had to drive to the top of a nearby hill. There he learnt of Canavan’s decision – two days before a planned rally against the proposal.
“I physically started to shake when I heard the news,” Shepherdson says. “Absolute betrayal. That’s the right words, I would say.
“They took a vote – they excluded a lot of people – and only got 61 per cent. This entire time they said they needed what they called ‘broad community support’ where Canavan said that was about 65 per cent.”
Sunday’s rally drew up to 300 people, standing against the facility. While Shepherdson is determined to fight, the shearer turned farmer says he is already thinking about leaving, although not because of the danger posed by radioactive material.
Instead, he says the divide and conquer strategy the government has run to secure community support means he simply doesn’t see a future in Kimba for himself or his two kids.
“Honestly, I don’t think people in favour of this are looking at anything past their lifetime of financial assistance. I call it bribe money,” Shepherdson says. “At the end of the day, money talks.”
This article was first published in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on Feb 8, 2020 as “Nuclear division”.
Nuclear Expert Engineer Says Holtec Spent Nuclear Fuel Dry Casks Are Unsafe — Mining Awareness +
From Marshfield Mariner: https://marshfield.wickedlocal.com “VIDEO: Expert engineer details concerns over dry-cask storage at Pilgrim Station By David Kindy Link: https://youtu.be/_oQNpfWRq8M Jan 22, 2020 The nuclear engineer with 50 years of experience claimed the dry-cask storage containers, which hold spent fuel rods and other radioactive waste, at the shut-down Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station are unsafe. PLYMOUTH – […]
via Nuclear Expert Engineer Says Holtec Spent Nuclear Fuel Dry Casks Are Unsafe — Mining Awareness +
Know your Federal govt pro nuclear stooges
These are just a few – mentioned in today’s Age:
- Katie Allen inner-city Melbourne Liberal MP
- Ted O’Brien, Queensland LNP MP , Fairfax electorate on the Sunshine Coast
- Trent Zimmerman, from inner-city electorate North Sydney
- Bridget Archer from Bass in northern Tasmania,
- David Gillespie Nationals MP for Lyne
- Rick Wilson MP West Australia
- Keith Pitt, North Queensland Nationals MP , who was this week promoted to cabinet as Resources Minister.
Former deputy prime minister and Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce has also promoted nuclear energy.
Record-high temperature of 18.3C recorded in Antarctica
|
Record-high temperature of 18.3C recorded in Antarctica, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/record-high-temperature-of-18-3c-recorded-in-antarctica An Antarctic research station has provisionally recorded the continent’s hottest temperature of 18.3C, beating the previous record by 0.8C.
The continent of Antarctica has experienced its hottest temperature on record, with a research station provisionally recording 18.3C. The reading beats the previous record on the Earth’s southernmost continent of 17.5C in March 2015 by 0.8C, according to the Argentine station Esperanza, which collected the data. The tweet reporting the news from Argentina’s meteorological association was shared by the United Nations’ World Meteorological Organisation (WMO). The Antarctic Peninsula, the northwest tip near South America, is among the fastest-warming regions on earth, with temperatures rising almost 3C during the past 50 years, the WMO said. About 87 per cent of the glaciers along its west coast have “retreated” during those decades and had shown an “accelerated retreat” in the past 12 years, it said. Professor James Renwick, a climate scientist at Victoria University of Wellington, told the Guardian Australia the WMO committee would likely reconvene to ratify the record. “The reading is impressive as it’s only five years since the previous record was set and this is almost one-degree centigrade higher. It’s a sign of the warming that has been happening there that’s much faster than the global average,” he said. “To have a new record set that quickly is surprising but who knows how long that will last? Possibly not that long at all.” Esperanza, near the northern tip of the Peninsula, has been collecting data since 1961. he reading breaks the 2015 record for the Antarctic continent, defined as the main continental landmass and adjoining islands by the WMO. The record for the Antarctic region – defined as all land and ice south of 60 degrees latitude – is 19.8C recorded on Signy Island in January 1982, the WMO said. |
|
|
New nuclear debate driven by spill fallout
New nuclear debate driven by spill fallout Courier Mail 7 Feb 20, A Queensland MP who has rocketed into a Cabinet position has already caused a stir, with his views on nuclear power set to put the controversial topic back on the agenda…. (subscribers only)
Combined environmental crises could trigger ‘global systemic collapse’, scientists warn
Apocalypse now: Combined impacts of rising temperatures, dwindling food supplies and biodiversity loss could trigger ‘global systemic collapse’, scientists warn https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-7975245/Multiple-overlapping-environmental-crises-trigger-global-systemic-collapse.html
- Report that surveyed 200 scientists warns of effect of environmental crises
- Future Earth says five global risks are connected and can amplify each other
- Climate change, extreme weather, biodiversity and food and water sources are a ‘monumental challenge’ to humanity in the 21st century, the report warns
By JONATHAN CHADWICK FOR MAILONLINE, 7 February 2020
|
Overlapping environmental crises could tip the planet into a ‘global systemic collapse’, more than 200 global scientists have warned. Climate change, biodiversity loss, dwindling sources of fresh water and food, and extreme weather events from hurricanes to heatwaves will provide a monumental challenge to humanity in the 21st century. Out of 30 global-scale risks, these five topped the list both in terms of likelihood and impact, according to scientists surveyed by Future Earth, an international research organisation. The report, published on Thursday, called on the world’s academics, business leaders and policymakers to ‘pay urgent attention’ to the five risks and consider them as interlinked. Continue reading |
Australian Parliament and its coal-smudged deals
Leadership spills and coal-smudged deals, Independent Australia, 
By Michelle Pini | 6 February 2020 Leadership spills aside, we have a Government littered with climate denialists and two major progressive parties effectively acting as their enablers, writes executive editor Michelle Pini.
FIRST, we had a Nats spill brought on by the sports rorts scandal. Then we had a changing of the guard – and definitely not a “spill” – at the Greens, which went largely unnoticed, what with all the drama in the Government. And talk of another Lib spill – despite Morrison’s “miracle” election win – has also been doing the rounds. Again.
But today, we still have McCormack. We still have Morrison. And though we have Bandt, he is heading a party with basically the same old agenda – a self-righteous, if admirable, one – where there is no negotiation, only elaborate demands. Oh and we still have Albanese — who heads a risk-averse Labor Party, which is unlikely to spill much other than their own unelected tears.
WHEN A SPILL ISN’T A SPILL
Deputy Prime Minister McCormack is safe. For now. And by his side is David I’m-Not-A-Scientist Littleproud.
McCormack’s first appearance on national TV, since surviving the well-sharpened knives of his predecessor, was dedicated to the importance of coal and gas….. That the focus was on rocks and other fossil fuels from the leader of the party of dinosaurs pretty much says it all……..
Most Australians want action on climate change, but it’s just not going to happen so long as they also keep voting for the Coalition…….
MORE COAL-SMUDGED DEALS
Meanwhile, it’s business as usual at the Liberal Party.
With his sudden and spectacular fall from public favour as the bushfire crisis escalated, Morrison made a few “climate change is real” noises. But anyone who has actually been listening knows he never committed to doing anything real. He never has and he never will. Not while there’s coal in his fossil fuel-lobbying belly.
A challenge for the leadership will likely bring Dutton the Overlord out of his dark sinister corner, so a Lib spill will only bring more of the same — or maybe even worse outcomes for the climate emergency…..
What we have, in essence, is a Government littered with climate denialists and two major progressive parties effectively acting as their enablers. Because as long as the Greens just lay out their wish list and Labor take refuge in their hidey-hole of inaction, the coal-smudged dinosaurs continue Australia’s fossil fuel rule.
Instead of political posturing, what is needed is the collaboration of all progressive parties. In the first instance, between Labor and the Greens, and then between this partnership and the crossbench.
Those of us on the progressive side of politics need to wake up and smell the acrid smoke of the alternative.https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/leadership-spills-and-coal-smudged-deals,13568
1 This month.
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
19 May – Webinar- Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-05-19 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-05-19 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
20 May – Webinar – The dangerous world of AUKUS, US, military occupation and suppression of dissent
National Webinar, 20th May, 2026, 6.30pm AEST. Confronting laws restricting/suppressing protest speech and action
Speakers: Former Sen. Rex Patrick, Lawyer Nick Hanna ,Arthur Rorris ,Jorgen Doyle, Sen David Shoebbridge,
Facilitator Kelley Tranter.
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 