Antinuclear

Australian news, and some related international items

That time when Canada cancelled its nuclear submarine order

The decision to cut the Australian community out altogether — except where we will be called upon to service the US military as it builds its base in WA — puts us in the relationship of a vassal state, existing only to do the bidding of our powerful friend.

By Julie Macken and Michael Walker, Aug 30, 2024,  https://johnmenadue.com/that-time-when-canada-cancelled-its-nuclear-submarine-order/

Back in 1987, when no one knew that the Cold War was just about to end, the Canadian Government signed up to build 10 nuclear-powered submarines. That submarine program lasted for all of two years before being cancelled in 1989. No nuclear Canadian sub ever even began construction, let alone getting put in the water.

There is a very real sense of déjà vu when we look at the Canadian experience and the current Australian experience of AUKUS. The good news is that it is not too late to learn the lessons the Canadians learnt for us.

One of the reasons for the Canadian cancellation was the $8 billion price tag, or about $19 billion in today’s money. Two billion dollars per submarine now sounds like a bargain compared to the astronomical $45 billion per submarine under AUKUS. Canada decided it had other priorities where that money could be put to better use.

But before the contract was cancelled in Canada, the ministries involved in its construction became embroiled in conflict, the Government itself was in a cost-of-living-crisis with immediate, real-world needs pressing and the hasty and secretive choice of vessel design came under withering criticism from the Treasury department for poor procurement with the cost expected to blow out to $30 billion ($70 billion today). And finally, media support eroded, with 71% of the population opposed to the project.

Déjà vu much?

On 12 June, the US Congressional Research Document service produced a research and advice document called the Navy Virginia-Class Submarine Program and AUKUS Submarine (Pillar 1) Project: Background and Issues for Congress.

The document points out the AUKUS deal was a three-step process. The first was to establish a US-UK rotational submarine force in Western Australia. The second was that the US would sell us three or five Virginia nuclear powered submarines and the third would be that the UK assists us in building our own AUKUS class nuclear submarines.

But the Congressional report outlines when comparing the “potential benefits, costs, and risks” of the three stage plan, it might just be better for the US to operate more of its own boats out of WA. That is, “procuring up to eight additional Virginia-class SSNs that would be retained in US Navy service and operated out of Australia along with the US and UK SSNs”.

That’s right, why bother with the whole step two and three when the US is best served by simply operating its nuclear-powered attack submarines out of WA?

This is an extraordinary development and one that demands more attention than has been given previously because a number of issues flow from this kind of thinking.

First, this potentially frees up $400 billion that could be put to far better use on a national housing construction program or high-speed rail network running the entire east coast of Australia or other large and much-needed nation-building projects. But not so fast.

The US Congressional Research Document suggests that “those funds (the $400 billion) could be invested in other military capabilities”, such as long-range missiles and bombers, “so as to create an Australian capacity for performing non-SSN military missions for both Australia and the United States”.

The decision to cut the Australian community out altogether — except where we will be called upon to service the US military as it builds its base in WA — puts us in the relationship of a vassal state, existing only to do the bidding of our powerful friend.

The fact that the document only referenced the “potential benefits, costs, and risks” from the US perspective, without any attempt to imagine how Australia may view becoming a life support for a US submarine base, makes the nature of our relationship pretty clear.

Australia’s Government may not consider it necessary to have done its due diligence on AUKUS but the Americans are happy to do that for us and, you guessed it, even though they quietly have doubts about the SSN project, they’ve already thought of plenty of other ways to spend our money on their own defence objectives. Spending it on the well-being and prosperity of our own people didn’t even rate a mention.

August 30, 2024 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Recent Events Prove Western Nations Are Highly Vulnerable To Cyber Calamity

Alt-Market.US, August 27, 2024

COMMENT. The original of this article contains a conspiratorial view of Covid-19 and its causes.

I can’t really agree to that opinion on Covid.

BUT – the dangers of cyber calamity seem all too real to me, and this article sets it out well

As most people are aware, this month there was a sweeping internet outage across the US which led to a failure in roughly 8.5 million Microsoft Windows devices. Disruptions included banks, airline networks, emergency call centers, online retailers and numerous corporate networks. The outage is estimated to have caused at least $5.4 billion in profit losses and it only lasted about a day.

The alleged cause of the breakdown was Crowdstrike, a cyber-security company that uses large scale data updates to Microsoft Windows networks to counter cyber threats. Instead, the company uploaded bugged code and caused a cascading outage. Mac and Linux machines were not affected.

The scale of the shutdown was immense – Over 25% of Fortune 500 companies were frozen. Travel essentially stopped. Business transactions for many companies ceased. Some banks including Bank of America, Capital One, Chase, TD Bank and Wells Fargo could not function and customers could not access their accounts.

The event reminded me of the panic surrounding the Y2K scare 25 years ago. Of course, that was all nonsense; US systems were definitely not digitized to an extent great enough to cause a disaster should there be an internet crash or a software crash. But today things are very different. Nearly every sector of the American (and European) economy and many utilities are directly dependent on a functioning internet.

The fear that prevailed during Y2K was unrealistic in 1999. Now, it makes perfect sense.

………………First and foremost, there is the potential for random error like the Crowdstrike incident. Then there’s the potential for a foreign attack on US and European digital infrastructure. Then, there’s the potential for a false flag event BLAMED on random error or a foreign government in order to foment war or economic collapse.

……………………..In June of 2021 there was an internet outage that led to large swaths of the web going completely dark, including a number of mainstream news sites, Amazon, eBay, Twitch, Reddit, etc. A host of government websites also went down. All this happened when content delivery network (CDN) company Fastly experienced a “bug.” Although Amazon had its website back online within 20 minutes, the brief outage cost the company over $5.5 million in sales.

A content delivery network is a geographically distributed network of proxy servers and their data centers. They make up what is known as the “backbone” of the internet. Only a handful of these company’s support a vast majority of internet activity. All it would take is for a few to go down, and the internet goes down, taking our economy with it.

The recent Crowdstrike situation is perhaps the worst web disruption of all time, and that was just a bug in a software update. Imagine if someone wanted to deliberately damage internet functions for an extended period of time? The results would be catastrophic.

With supply chains completely dependent on “just-in-time” freight deliveries and those deliveries dependent on efficient digital communications and payments between retailers and manufacturers, a web-down scenario for more than a few days would cause an immediate loss of consumer goods. Stores would empty within hours should the public realize that new shipments might not arrive for a long time.

Keep in mind, I’m not even accounting for payment processing between customers and retailers. If that shuts down, then ALL sales shut down. Then, whatever food you have left in your pantry or in storage is what you will have to live on until the problem is fixed. If it is ever fixed…

Network attacks are difficult to independently trace, which means anyone can initiate them and anyone can be blamed afterwards. With the increasing tensions between western and eastern nations the chances of an attack are high. And corrupt government officials could also trigger an internet crisis and blame it on foreign enemies – Either to convince the public to go to war, or to convince the public to accept greater authoritarianism.

…………….Figuring out who triggered the breakdown would be nearly impossible. We could suspect, but proving who did it is another matter. In the meantime, western officials controlled by globalist interests could lock down internet traffic and eliminate alterna

What are the most practical solutions to this? As always we can store necessities to protect our families and friends. To protect data, I recommend shutting OFF Windows Updates to prevent something like a Crowdstrike error from affecting your devices. You can also set up a Linux-based device with all your important data storage secured.

You can purchase an exterior hard drive and clone your computer data, then throw it in a closet or a waterproof case. Then there is the option of building a completely offline device (a computer that has never and will never connect to the internet).tive media platforms they don’t like, giving the public access to corporate news sources only.

These options protect you and your valuable files, but there’s not much that can be done to prevent a national scale cyber attack and the damage that one could cause. Organizing for inevitable chaos and violence is all you can do.

With a cyber-event there is the distinct danger of communications disruptions – No cell phones, no email, no social media, nothing. So, having knowledge in ham radio and radio communications is a must. I’m a general class ham and I’m still finding there’s more to learn, but a basic knowledge of radios, frequency bands and repeaters will help you to at least listen in on chatter and get important information outside of controlled news networks.

The people who used to claim it’s “doom mongering” to examine the threat of cyber attacks have been proven utterly wrong this past month. We just witnessed one of the worst internet implosions of all time and more are on the way. Prepare accordingly and remember that technological dependency is a double-edged sword. Use your tech wisely and don’t let it run your life.  https://alt-market.us/recent-events-prove-western-nations-are-highly-vulnerable-to-cyber-calamity/

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

The AUKUS submarine deal has been exposed as a monumental folly – is it time to abandon ship?

The good news, perhaps, is that it is difficult to imagine the nuclear-powered submarines will ever arrive. The bad news is we will still have to pay the Americans and the British to prop up their overburdened and underperforming shipyards in the meantime. With friends like these, who needs to make new enemies?

Mark Beeson, Adjunct professor, University of Technology Sydney, August 27, 2024  https://theconversation.com/the-aukus-submarine-deal-has-been-exposed-as-a-monumental-folly-is-it-time-to-abandon-ship-236873?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=bylinetwitterbutton

Nautical metaphors are irresistible, I’m afraid, when talking about Australia’s seemingly endless submarine saga. But as investigative journalist Andrew Fowler makes clear in Nuked: The Submarine Fiasco that Sank Australia’s Sovereignty, his excellent and excoriating analysis of the genesis of the AUKUS pact, there isn’t much room for levity otherwise.

Anyone who doubts the accuracy of former Labor luminaries Paul Keating and Gareth Evans, who have argued that AUKUS is, as Keating put it, “the worst deal in all history”, really ought to read this book.

Review: Nuked: The Submarine Fiasco that Sank Australia’s Sovereignty – Andrew Fowler (Melbourne University Publishing)

The plan for Australia to acquire eight nuclear-powered submarines, built locally in partnership with the United Stated and the United Kingdom, is projected to cost up to A$368 billion. But it is not just the cost of the AUKUS project that is astounding.

While many people should hang their heads in shame, the principal architect of this monumental folly is Scott Morrison, whose reputation will be deservedly further diminished by the revelations contained in Fowler’s carefully researched volume. One question the book does not address in detail is the abysmal quality of political leadership in this country, especially, though not exclusively, on the conservative side of politics.

Whatever the reasons for this, the end result was that the huge shift in Australia’s foreign policy alignment was hatched by a Christian fundamentalist former tourism marketing manager with no training in strategic or foreign affairs but a great gift for secrecy and deception.

The shift in question was the decision to abandon an agreement to buy much cheaper, arguably far more suitable and deliverable submarines from France, with the aim of “welding Australia’s military to the United States”. In retrospect, it is hard to believe how badly the French were misled, or how shortsighted the rationale for the switch actually was.

In Fowler’s view, buying the French submarines would have been a “remarkable achievement”. It would have given Australia “greater independence and a more influential position in the world”.

Properly explaining Australian policymakers’ fear of strategic and foreign policy independence would take another book. But what clearly emerges from Fowler’s account is how irresponsible and self-serving Australia’s approach to national security became under Morrison. The fate of the Australian people, not to mention the endlessly invoked “national interest”, was of less concern than short-term political advantage.

“The fact that the increasing US military presence in the Indo-Pacific could draw Australia into a conflict,” writes Fowler, “seemed of little consequence in Morrison’s desire to wedge Labour on national security.”

Of course, being painted as “weak” on security, and the US alliance in particular, was the stuff of nightmares for the Australian Labor Party. It still is. Consequently, the ALP’s leadership has gone to extraordinary lengths to try and convince voters, and its own increasingly sceptical rank and file, that not only are they equally committed to national security, but that the AUKUS agreement is the best way of achieving it.

High costs, significant risks

Given AUKUS was the brainchild of a discredited conservative prime minster who, Fowler suggests, “believed he was on a divine mission”, one might have hoped the Albanese government could have at least conducted a perfunctory cost–benefit analysis. AUKUS is the largest single military acquisition the nation has ever undertaken, after all. Recent defence acquisitions have become known for massive cost blowouts and failures to operate or arrive in the advertised manner.

But the Labor Party has not only walked into Morrison’s trap; it has willingly, even enthusiastically, “embraced a decision taken after a deeply flawed process”. Even more consequentially, as Fowler points out, “with the major parties in lockstep on AUKUS, the most complex and expensive spend in Australian military history would never be publicly investigated”.

At the very least, this is an astounding failure of good governance and accountability. Perhaps even more remarkably, it also demonstrates a singular lack of political judgement, driven by short-term political concerns rather than long-term strategic interests.

“Labor lost the one chance it had to identify itself as independent and courageous and put the interests of the country ahead of its understandable desire to win government,” argues Fowler. “The consequences of the fear that drove the ALP leadership to embrace AUKUS with barely a second thought will haunt them for years to come.”

Serves them right. When there is little discernible difference between the major political parties on issues of profound national importance, voters – especially the younger variety – may understandably despair about their futures.

Even if we put aside the fragile, unpredictable and polarised nature of US politics, it is not too controversial to suggest that the US alliance has some potential frailties and significant costs. Not the least of these is fighting in wars that have no obvious strategic relevance to Australia.

AUKUS will further complicate Australia’s relationship with China, our major trading partner. But it carries other significant risks. This not just because, as Opposition Leader Peter Dutton says, it is “inconceivable” that we would not fight alongside the US in any conflict with China over Taiwan.

If the naval base at Garden Island, just down the road from me off the coast of Fremantle, is not already a nuclear target, it assuredly will be once US and UK nuclear-powered submarines routinely operate from there. Whether my neighbours realise they risk being vaporised as part of our commitment to the alliance and a “great nation building project” is a mystery that has not been explored.

Local politicians, universities and defence representatives certainly recognise the short-term benefits that may flow from new investment. But this means there is likely to be next to no informed debate about, much less opposition to, the AUKUS pact, no matter what the ultimate costs may be for a nation that can’t even provide adequate housing for its own people. Indeed, the lack of debate, not to say outrage, about the sheer cost of the AUKUS project is perhaps the most remarkable feature of the sorry submarine saga.

And that is before we get to the growing doubts about the reliability, deliverability or strategic relevance of nuclear-powered submarines. Perhaps people find technical discussions stupefyingly dull or incomprehensible. Perhaps they don’t realise that if we spend all that money on submarines, not only will our sovereignty and capacity to act independently be significantly eroded, as Keating and Malcolm Turnbull have claimed, but we won’t be able to spend the money on more immediate and tangible threats – repairing our rapidly degrading natural environment, for example.

I am not convinced Australia needs to buy any submarines. This will no doubt strike those in Canberra’s strategic bubble as heretical, ill-informed and irresponsible. But it is noteworthy that our overall security did not seem to suffer while the ageing Collins class submarines were unavailable for four years.

Even those with widely respected expertise in such matters, such as Hugh White, have cast doubt on the feasibility of AUKUS. White has written that “long delays and cost overruns are certain. Outright failure is a real possibility.”

Drunken sailors

Fowler has produced quite the page-turner for a book on strategic policy. His account provokes occasional gasps of disbelief, especially about the conduct of the Morrison government and its coterie of carefully chosen, like-minded advisors, many of them from defence companies likely to benefit from government spending.

Many former Morrison ministers – as well as Morrison himself – have exited through the revolving door between government and business to take up lucrative positions in the defence industry. Who would have thought?

Nuked is worth a close reading to see how Fowler arrives at his damning conclusion:

the level of incompetence in the government of Australia was breathtaking, as were the repercussions. The United States would be calling all the shots on what kind of submarines would be sold to Australia, how old they would be, how many there would be, when they would be delivered, and even if they would be sold at all.

It was to be expected that Washington would act in its own best interests. What is extraordinary is the possibility that Morrison truly believed that what was best for the United States was best for Australia. Just as extraordinary is the fact that the Labor Party, perhaps fearful of history embraced the deal that made Australia so vulnerable, undermining its independence and sovereignty.

Another nautical metaphor about spending like drunken sailors comes to mind. It wouldn’t be quite so galling if the nation’s political leaders weren’t using our money or were motivated by something other than short-term political advantage or the fear of being wedged.

The good news, perhaps, is that it is difficult to imagine the nuclear-powered submarines will ever arrive. The bad news is we will still have to pay the Americans and the British to prop up their overburdened and underperforming shipyards in the meantime. With friends like these, who needs to make new enemies?

It beggars belief that a country with unparalleled geographical advantages and no obvious enemies thinks it is a good idea to spend $368 billion on offensive military capabilities, which may or may not work or be delivered. Nuked explains how this situation came about. But we may need to ask psychologists why our political leaders have turned us into what the diplomat Alan Renouf famously called a “frightened country” and allowed such follies to flourish.

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

Defence Minister Richard Marles opened $600k second office in Geelong, a short walk from his existing space

COMMENT. Defence Minister Richard Marles grows more grandiose by the day.

ABC News, by political reporter Courtney Gould 29 Aug 24

In short:

Defence Minister Richard Marles requested permission to establish a second office in his hometown of Geelong. 

He is the only minister within the Albanese government to have a standalone ministerial office, besides his electorate office. It came at a cost to the taxpayer of more than $600,000.

What’s next?

A spokesperson said the spend was within the rules and guidelines set by the Finance Department.

A brand new headquarters for Defence Minister Richard Marles was established just 240 metres from his existing office at a cost to the taxpayer of over $600,000.

The costly office build, located on Geelong’s waterfront, was revealed in a freedom of information request by the ABC.

The offices are within walking distance of each other in the Geelong city centre.

Mr Marles made his request for the additional office space 13 days after Labor won the federal election in 2022. He is the sole minister to have had a standalone ministerial office approved.

“As the newly elected deputy prime minister, I am advised that I am entitled to additional office space,” he wrote in a letter dated June 3, 2022.

The original plan was to establish a new standalone office for his duties as the deputy prime minister and keep his existing Geelong headquarters open to constituents……………………………

The Department of Finance shelled out $658,053 to fit out and furnish the new office and paid $6,297 for repairs, removing and installing new signage, and new office furniture for the refurbished building.

An additional cost to fit out his now ministerial office to meet “security requirements” was paid by the Department of Defence. Defence Media did not respond to requests for comment about the cost of the upgrades

Marles the only minister to have standalone office

Under current arrangements, a minister can be provided with an additional office space to go about their ministerial responsibilities.

It is “usually” located within the Commonwealth Parliament Office (CPO), an option 19 ministers have elected to take………………….https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-29/richard-marles-second-office-geelong/104280748

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

Advocates for nuclear power should heed the lessons from Kursk

By Richard Broinowski, Aug 29, 2024,  https://johnmenadue.com/advocates-for-nuclear-power-should-heed-the-lessons-from-kursk/

On 22 August, Rafael Grossi, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, warned of the deadly effect a military attack on Russia’s nuclear power complex at Kursk would have on civilian communities in Russia, Ukraine and potentially across Europe. He had previously warned of the consequences of such attacks on Ukraine’s nuclear reactors at Zaporizhzhia.

The Kursk nuclear complex is approximately 30 kilometres from a fluid military situation between invading Ukrainian forces and Russian defenders. The complex has six Russian designed RBMK reactors, the same type as at Chernobyl. Two are shut down, two are in construction mode, and two are hot. None have protective domes. The easiest and most effective military action would be destruction of the complex’s power supply, which as with flooded generators at Fukushima, would halt cooling pumps, overheat the reactors, cause a melt-down of fuel rods, and the uncontrolled venting of radioactive materials into the atmosphere.

People have short memories, and tend to forget the dimensions of previous nuclear disasters and near disasters, particularly at Windscale, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima. Chernobyl was arguably the worst, followed closely by Fukushima. At Chernobyl, reactor number four exploded, not due to military action, but an experiment by Russian engineers to see how long turbines would spin and supply power to cooling pumps if the reactor’s main electric supply failed. In the reactor, the collision of incandescent nuclear fuel with cooling water created an explosion which blew apart the reactor vessel and spread radioactive dust including xenon gas, short-lived Iodine 131 (eight days) and Caesium 137 (30 years) across much of Ukraine and Belarus, as well as parts of Russia, and Scandinavia. The nearest town of Pripyat was evacuated and a no-go zone of 30 kilometre radius, later expanded to 4,300 square kilometres, was declared.

Subsequent reports by the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation found that immediate deaths caused by radiation from Chernobyl could be calculated, most certainly deaths from thyroid cancer, but not of long-term stochastic deaths. The precise number is unknown and there are wildly different estimates, including among the medical profession. Because of fears about radiation damage to foetuses, over one million abortions were performed across Europe in the year following the disaster.

And now, two warring countries dice with death over Zaporizhzhya, Europe’s largest nuclear power complex and one of the 10 largest in the world.  Most recent attacks occurred between 2022 and 2024. Fighting in 2022 led up to Russia wresting management of the complex. While it was going on, a large calibre bullet pierced the outer wall of reactor number four and an artillery shell hit a transformer in reactor number six.

In April 2024, the IAEA reported the plant was attacked by a swarm of drones, three of them torching surveillance and communication equipment. There were three direct hits on containment structures. On 11 August, fire broke out in one of two cooling towers. Zelensky blames Putin for the attacks, Putin blames Zelensky. Putin is probably right. Why would Russia attack the complex it now managed? Both tend to downplay the disastrous consequences an attack on the reactors or their electricity and cooling systems would have on civilian populations across Europe. They would be similar if not worse than the results of the Chernobyl fiasco.

Although badgered by journalists following his 22 August address, Grossi refused to attribute blame for the attacks at Zaporizhzhia and who might initiate them at Kursk. He said the IAEA was not a political organisation, and blame would be up to the UN Security Council. He would not get into speculation. When pressed, however, he said if his investigations led to clear evidence of the perpetrators, he would call them out. Meanwhile, he was about to go to Kursk and examine the situation in conjunction with the managers and engineers of the nuclear complex there. He then planned to separately see both Putin and Zelensky.

What the whole situation should bring home to Australian politicians and their backers in the nuclear industry, who so blithely recommend the construction of a dozen-odd nuclear reactor complexes here, is the widespread lethal damage a kinetic attack on any one of them would cause in this country. We already see that US military and surveillance installations would become natural targets for China if ever war breaks out over Taiwan. Nuclear reactors would pose a much wider damage to the civilian population.

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

Opposing a USA-led international nuclear agreement that is bizarrely unfair to Australia

Australians can object to the agreement, by putting in a submission to a Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee.

Submissions are due by September 1st. So far, only 2 submissions have been published. They’re sort of “zipped” – so I can’t read them. You can bet your boots they are from the nuclear lobby

I’s a bit of an IT hurdle to actually get your submission in. That’s after you’ve even written it. Which is tough, too, as the general public in Australia knows nothing about it.

But anyway, here’s one little effort

TITLE: Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties concerning the:
Agreement among the Government of Australia, the Government of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Government
of the United States of America for Cooperation Related to Naval Nuclear Propulsion.


This submission urges that the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties recommends against
the Australian Government signing this Agreement as I believe that it is not in the best interests of the Australian people on a number of grounds, as outlined in this submission


Australia would be landed with high level nuclear waste – This Agreement
requires Australia to “be responsible for the management, disposition, storage, and
disposal of any spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste resulting from the
operation of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Plants transferred pursuant to this Article,
including radioactive waste generated through submarine operations, maintenance,
decommissioning, and disposal.” (ARTICLE IV Naval Nuclear Propulsion Plants,
Related Equipment and Material, Section D).


The health risk to Australians brought in by the construction of nuclear facilities
and the management and storage of radioactive wastes. Buying second-hand
nuclear submarines make this waste danger another hazard, as we’d be buying
already existing toxic wastes.


Under this agreement it is possible for a nuclear weapon to be present on
Australian shores– this would it would be a clear breach of the highest order of the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) because as a signatory to
NPT Australia is not allowed to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons.
The agreement does not guarantee that the USA will continue with the nuclear
submarine arrangements, but still ensures that Australia will cop the costs. This is
blatantly unfair.

It is extraordinarily unfair and bizarre that under Article IV E. “Australia shall
indemnify, the United States and the United Kingdom against any liability, loss,
costs, damage or injury (including third-party claims) arising out of, related to, or
resulting from Nuclear Risks connected with the design, manufacture, assembly,
transfer, or utilization of any Material or Equipment, including Naval Nuclear
Propulsion Plants and component parts and spare parts thereof transferred or to be
transferred pursuant to this Article.”


The ‘National Interest Analysis [2024] ATNIA 14 with attachment on consultation’,
acknowledges that “There has been no public consultation”, with paragraph 55
stating that “No public consultation has been undertaken, given the classified scope of consultations between the Parties on the Agreement, including matters relating to
national security and operational capability.”


The Treaty clearly outlines that Special Nuclear Material to be transferred under the
agreement, “shall contain highly enriched uranium and, only with respect to
irradiated fuel, may contain plutonium”, (ARTICLE VI Conditions and Guarantees,
SECTION I –SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL)


In conclusion – the whole agreement is unfair, poorly organised, and should not be
accepted by Australia, particularly in this situation where there has been no public
consultation – set up completely in the dark as far as the Australian people are
concerned.

Noel Wauchope

August 29, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Coalition Proposal Undercuts Australians to Fund Expensive Nuclear Fantasy

August 28, 2024,   https://theaimn.com/coalition-proposal-undercuts-australians-to-fund-expensive-nuclear-fantasy/

In response to the federal Coalition’s proposal for $100 billion in cuts to housing, transport, education, and climate solutions, the 30 undersigned organisations released the following statement:

Peter Dutton and the Coalition made their priorities clear today with a proposal to gut social services and roll back Australian renewables – all to fund their expensive nuclear fantasy

The radical proposal would slash everything from housing and public transport to renewable energy and manufacturing jobs in an attempt to find the $100 billion they’d need to bankroll their unpopular nuclear scheme – a scheme that would drive up energy bills in the short, medium, and long-term.

By attacking both bedrock social programs and the renewable energy already providing 40% of Australia’s electricity, the Coalition would undercut Australia’s economic prosperity, undermine investor certainty, and make life harder for Australians already doing it tough.

By scrapping Future Made in Australia, Powering the Regions Fund and Rewiring the Nation, Peter Dutton would also abandon the key initiatives designed to reduce carbon pollution and reform the economy to ensure we remain prosperous and internationally competitive in a decarbonising world.

Peter Dutton’s attacks on a Future Made in Australia are especially telling, a rehash of the tired arguments Donald Trump and the Republicans used in their attempt to kill the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act.

Contrary to their ‘sky-is-falling’ rhetoric, however, U.S. inflation has decreased substantially since the U.S. passed its signature clean industry policy. Meanwhile, the policy has crowded in private investment equivalent to six times the support it provides, driven the creation of 210 new clean projects, created 400,000 new jobs and added $155B to the U.S. GDP annually.

The Coalition wants Australians to forego that same opportunity and sacrifice their own social services so they can prop up a nuclear industry expected to raise household energy bills an average of $1000 annually. If elected, Peter Dutton risks taking Australia back to the decade of chaos that characterised the Abbott, Turnbull, Morrison years on climate and energy policy.

-Advertisement-

This proposal is a transparent stunt, not a serious plan. Where the Coalition should be proposing real solutions on cost of living, the economy, and climate, they continue to offer only denial, delay, and disinformation. The Australian people deserve far more.

August 28, 2024 Posted by | politics | Leave a comment

Surging seas are coming for us all, warns UN chief

Katy Watson, 26 Aug 24

 The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has said that big
polluters have a clear responsibility to cut emissions – or risk a
worldwide catastrophe.

“The Pacific is today the most vulnerable area of
the world,” he told the BBC at the Pacific Island Forum Leaders Meeting
in Tonga. “There is an enormous injustice in relation to the Pacific and
it’s the reason I am here.” “The small islands don’t contribute to
climate change but everything that happens because of climate change is
multiplied here.”

But eventually the “surging seas are coming for us
all,” he warned in a speech at the forum, as the UN releases two separate
reports on rising sea levels and how they threaten Pacific island nations.
The World Meteorological Organization’s State of the Climate in the South
West Pacific, external report says this region faces a triple whammy of an
accelerating rise in the sea level, a warming of the ocean and
acidification – a rise in the sea’s acidity because it’s absorbing
more and more carbon dioxide.

“The reason is clear: greenhouse gases –
overwhelmingly generated by burning fossil fuels – are cooking our
planet,” Mr Guterres said in a speech at the forum. “The sea is taking
the heat – literally.”

 BBC 27th Aug 2024

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ej0xx2jpxo

August 28, 2024 Posted by | climate change - global warming | Leave a comment

Australian nuclear news from 26 August to 1st September

 Australian nuclear news from 26 August to 1st September 

Headlines as they come in:

August 27, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Coalition pledges to ditch nuclear sites if earthquake zones are declared unsafe

The Age, By Mike Foley, August 26, 2024 

Proposed nuclear sites would be abandoned if studies reveal unacceptable risks, the Coalition has declared following an earthquake near its planned Hunter Valley site, raising questions about other selected locations close to geological fault lines.

A magnitude 4.7 earthquake struck near Muswellbrook in NSW’s Upper Hunter region on Friday, several kilometres from the Liddell coal plant where the opposition has pledged to build a nuclear reactor if elected. The quake damaged buildings in the town while tremors were felt as far away as Sydney.

Opposition energy spokesman Ted O’Brien pledged that if the Coalition formed government, it would establish an independent nuclear authority that would conduct detailed studies of the proposed sites.

“If [the studies] come back with advice that says any power plant should not proceed, then a power plant would not proceed, full stop,” he told ABC radio on Friday. “That is absolutely key.”………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Four of the opposition’s seven proposed nuclear sites are located near active fault lines: Port Augusta in South Australia, Lithgow in NSW, Collie in Western Australia and the Latrobe Valley in Victoria – an area that has had seven seismic events this year ranging from magnitudes of 2 to 4.3.

Latrobe Valley resident Wendy Farmer, president of the Voices of the Valley group, is helping to establish an alliance of anti-nuclear groups from the communities selected for plants.

Farmer said the opposition should have studied its selected sites before nominating them for reactors.

“Had they taken time to either speak to companies or communities, they would have already known this,” she said.

Hunter Community Environment Centre co-ordinator Jo Lynch said she was concerned about nuclear waste, considering the millions of tonnes of fly ash stored in dams across her region.

“I am concerned about waste management from a nuclear facility. Just looking at the track record with coal, that was a result of outdated environmental laws,” Lynch said…………………………..  https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/coalition-pledges-to-ditch-nuclear-sites-if-earthquake-zones-are-declared-unsafe-20240826-p5k5d5.html

August 27, 2024 Posted by | politics, safety | Leave a comment

Countering the nuclear lobby spin this week

Some bits of good news.     How Copenhagen cleaned up its harbour. Renewable energy consumption hit a record high. The US finally supported a global plastics treaty

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

TOP STORIES. 

How US Big Tech monopolies colonized the world: Welcome to neo-feudalism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf1wQ9QeaKM 

The heroes who saved the world from Chernobyl Two. 

‘Very serious’ nuclear situation could happen ‘at any moment’ in Ukraine, says IAEA chief. 

Donald Trump and Nuclear Weapons. 

Molten salt reactors were trouble in the 1960s—and they remain trouble today.

From the archives. A new French fairy tale: “Cheap” nuclear electricity in France is not what it appears.

Biodiversity. Capitalism is killing the planet – but curtailing it is the discussion nobody wants to have. ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/08/20/2-b1-capitalism-is-killing-the-planet-but-curtailing-it-is-the-discussion-nobody-wants-to-have/ 

Climate. Climate scientist says 2/3rds of the world is under an effective ‘death sentence’ because of global warming. Think we don’t have a choice when it comes to saving the planet? Think again– ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/08/20/2-b1-think-we-dont-have-a-choice-when-it-comes-to-saving-the-planet-think-again/ Project 2025: The right-wing conspiracy to torpedo global climate action. Meeting 1.5C warming limit hinges on governments more than technology, study says.

Plastic pollution. Human brain tissue made up of 0.5 per cent microplastics, study reveals.

Noel’s notes. A whole new way of thinking about nuclear weapons – THEY’RE SILLY! “Churnalism” – that is a timely word that we all need to consider.

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

AUSTRALIA. Is the USA now considering withdrawal from AUKUS? Australia offers U.S. a vast new military launchpad in China conflict. AUKUS 2.0: Albanese Drives It Like He Stole It, and Then Gives It Away to the US. Civil Society faces imposition of an AUKUS military High Level nuclear waste dump. The anti-renewables groups pushing the nuclear option to rural Australia – ALSO AT  https://antinuclear.net/2024/08/26/the-anti-renewables-groups-pushing-the-nuclear-option-to-rural-australia/ Too big to fail? Who cares if there’s no accountability – the Nuclear Lie.  More news items at  https://antinuclear.net/2024/08/19/australian-nuclear-news-headlines-19-26-august/

NUCLEAR ITEMS.

ARTS and CULTURE. The lost world of Chornobyl: inside a nuclear disaster zone – in pictures. The UK nuclear lobby’s festival of joyous propaganda.

CLIMATE. Why Nuclear Energy Is Not the Solution to the Climate Crisis. Why the big push for nuclear power as “green”?

ECONOMICS. Atlantic Canada’s only nuclear power station is offline, again.

Final investment decision on new nuclear plant Sizewell C is delayed. “Final Investment Decision (FID) ” in Sizewell C nuclear station might never happen. Nuclear unicorn Newcleo to move holding company from UK to France to tap EU funds.

China keeps door firmly closed to Japanese seafood imports.

SMRs and nuclear renaissance: Learning from past to avoid over promising on low costs.

ENERGY. AI’s insatiable energy demand is going nuclear.

Global disappointment with the most promising energy: ‘The dream is dead’, and we are in ‘big trouble’

ENVIRONMENT. Sizewell C seeks permit for ‘water vole displacement activities’ ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/08/24/1-b1-sizewell-c-seeks-permit-for-water-vole-displacement-activities/

EVENTS. 1 September, Ontario WALK AGAINST NUCLEAR WASTE  https://www.facebook.com/nonukesontreatylands

MEDIA. Defence Correspondents: The Journalistic Wing of the Military?
POLITICS. Harris’s concluding speech at DNC embraces agenda of global war. Democrats Release Insanely Hawkish Middle East Policy Platform. ‘Strong record of supporting the U.S.-Israel relationship’: a look at Tim Walz’s votes on Palestine as a member of Congress.Biden’s Convention Speech Made Absurd Claims About His Gaza Policy.POLITICS INTERNATIONAL and DIPLOMACY. Blinken ‘Sentenced Ceasefire Talks to Death’ With Comments on Netanyahu.Hungary again breaks with West: Ukrainian attack on Kursk is ‘wrong‘ .The U.S. and China Can Lead the Way on Nuclear Threat Reduction. White House downplays Chinese concerns over possible US nuclear strategy change,
SAFETY. Rafael Grossi to visit Kursk nuclear power plant in Russia , following reports that remains of a drone were found there Nuclear power risks rising in Russia-Ukraine war. Fire at Zaporizhzhia elevates meltdown risk. IAEA chief to visit Kursk nuclear plant due to Ukraine incursion.
UK’s nuclear facilities ‘at high risk of atomic blackmail’ from Putin. Flight attendant turned author reveals terrible security vulnerability she fears could trigger nuclear apocalypse.
How EDF almost plunged France into darkness .Incident: Fluid leak forces rail shipment to return to the San Onofre nuclear power plant		SECRETS and LIES. Report on nuclear power in Wales is so secret the UK Government won’t even disclose its name
.Labour MP under fire for accepting £2,000 donation from Sizewell C developer. ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/08/22/1-b1-labour-mp-under-fire-for-accepting-2000-donation-from-sizewell-c-developer/

Inside the ‘suitably opaque’ response to a toxic sewage spill at Chalk River nuclear lab.
SPACE. EXPLORATION, WEAPONS. Rocket Test on Remote Scottish Island Ends in Flames.SPINBUSTER. Nuclear power on the prairies is a green smokescreen. ALSO AT https://nuclear-news.net/2024/08/21/2-b1-nuclear-power-on-the-prairies-is-a-green-smokescreen/ Why fans of nuclear are a problem today.
TECHNOLOGY. Small modular reactors: Not all that glows is gold.

The Risk of Bringing AI Discussions Into High-Level Nuclear Dialogues.

A robot’s attempt to get a sample of the melted nuclear fuel at Japan’s damaged reactor is suspended		WASTES. Britain’s Dirtiest Beaches – Don’t Mention the Pu! Japan: Removal of nuclear fuel remains in Fukushima will begin on August 22.The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA)NDA’s £30 million investment into nuclear research & innovation.We don’t want your garbage‘: Northern township in shock after hearing Ontario is sending it radioactive waste.
WAR and CONFLICT. Blinken Heads to Israel for Gaza Cease-Fire Push as IDF Slaughter Continues.

Moscow Says Ukraine Destroyed Russian Bridge With Western-Provided Missiles. Ukraine could trigger ‘another Chernobyl’ – ex-US Army officer. Zelensky’s Misadventures in Kursk.

Kazakhstan Takes Lead in Global Push for Nuclear Disarmament Amid Heightened Tensions.		WEAPONS and WEAPONS SALES. From the NPT to the UN Summit of the Future: Cut nuclear weapons budgets and investments.

‘US the primary source of nuclear threat in world’. Biden approved nuclear strategy focusing on China: Report. US crying wolf over China’s ‘nuclear threat’ while expanding nuclear arsenal.

Ex-Google CEO Eric Schmidt says the Ukraine War turned him into an arms dealer.


August 27, 2024 Posted by | Christina reviews | Leave a comment

Australia offers U.S. a vast new military launchpad in China conflict

Australia is expanding its northern military bases, with U.S. support, to counter China’s growing threat. Critics quip it’s become the “51st state.”

Washington Post, By Michael E. Miller, August 24, 2024

ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AIR FORCE BASE TINDAL, Australia — Deep in the outback, a flurry of construction by Australia and the United States is transforming this once quiet military installation into a potential launchpad in case of conflict with China.

Runways are being expanded and strengthened to accommodate the allies’ biggest airplanes, including American B-52 bombers. A pair of massive fuel depots is rising side by side to supply U.S. and Australian fighter jets. And two earth-covered bunkers have been built for U.S. munitions.

But the activity at RAAF Tindal, less than 2,000 miles from the emerging flash points of the South China Sea,isn’t unique. Across Australia, decades-old facilities — many built by the United States during World War II — are now being dusted off or upgraded amid growing fears of another global conflict.

“This isabout deterrence,” Australia’s defense minister, Richard Marles, said in an interview. “We’re working together to deter future conflict and to provide for the collective security of the region in which we live.”

The United States has ramped up defense ties with allies across the region, including with the Philippines and Japan, as it tries to fend off an increasingly assertive and aggressive China. Australia offers the United States a stable and friendly government, a small but capable military, and a vast expanse from which to stage or resupply military efforts.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, hailing the “the extraordinary strength of our unbreakable alliance with Australia,” said after a meeting with Marles earlier this month that deepercooperation — including base upgrades and more frequent rotational bomber deployments — would help build “greater peace, stability, and deterrence across the region.”

Australia has also joined the AUKUS agreement, under which the United States and Britain will provide it with nuclear-propelled submarines, some of the world’s most closely guarded technology.

These moves underscore a bigger shift, as Canberra has grown increasingly tight with Washington as they both grow wary of Beijing. Military cooperation has become so extensive that critics quip Australia is becoming the United States’ “51st state.”

Mihai Sora, a former Australian diplomat who is an analyst at the Lowy Institute, a Sydney think tank, has a different metaphor. Australia is “an unsinkable aircraft carrier right at the bottom of the critical maritime sea lanes.”

“As the stakes increase in the South China Sea, as the risk over conflict in Taiwan increases, northern Australia in particular becomes of increasing strategic value for the United States,” Sora said.

American representatives ona recent congressional delegation to Darwin,onAustralia’s northern coast, agreed.

“This provides a central base of operations from which to project power,” Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said during the trip.

Some Australian experts, however, argue that the growing U.S. military footprint doesn’t deter conflict with China so much as ensure Australia will be involved.

“I have deep misgivings about the whole enterprise” of increased U.S. military activity in Australia, said Sam Roggeveen, a former Australian intelligence analyst who is also at the Lowy Institute. “It conflates America’s strategic objectives in Asia with ours, and it makes those bases a target.”

……………………………………….Australia has spent roughly $1 billion on upgrading the Tindal air force base. Built by U.S. Army engineers in 1942 to stage bombing raids on Japanese targets in Papua New Guinea and Indonesia, Tindal is now the site of dozens of construction projects. A key one is the new parking apron capable of accommodating four of Australia’s biggest planes: KC-30 tankers that can refuel fighter jets and allow for far more distant attacks.

But there are also plans for the United States to build its own parking apron here, big enough for six B-52 bombers capable of reaching mainland China.

“That is absolutely something China would pay attention to,” Roggeveen said.

Marles declined to comment on the increasing rotations mentioned by Austin but said the trajectory is “an increasing American force posture in Australia.” We see that as very much in Australia’s national interest,” he said. “People understand that we are living through challenging times, when the global rules-based order is under pressure.”………………………………………………………………..

Australia is also surveying three “bare bases” — skeleton facilities in remote parts of western Australia and Queensland — with an eye to upgrading them so heavier Australian and American airplanes can use them, said Brigadier Michael Say, who leads Australia’s Force Posture Initiative. He said it’s still being determined whether the United States will pay for some of the improvements. [WHAA-A-AT!]

In the Cocos Islands, tiny coral atolls in the Indian Ocean northwest of the Australian continent and just south of Indonesia, Canberra will soon begin upgrading the airstrip to accommodate heavier military aircraft, including the P-8A Poseidon, a “submarine hunter” that could monitor increased Chinese naval activity in the area. A U.S. Navy construction contract published in June listed the Cocos as a possible project location, but Say said it hasn’t yet been decided whether the United States will contribute.

Diversifying — or redistributing?

These “bare bases,” which stretch for 3,000 miles from east to west, fit a new U.S. strategy of dispersing forces to prevent China from delivering a knockout blow.

“If one location gets taken out, the U.S. can still project force, it can still replenish and resupply and reinforce its troops,” Sora said. “Australia is fundamental to that but is just one plank in America’s regional force posture.”

Roggeveen questioned, however, whether the United States is actually increasing its capabilities in the region or merely moving assets out of places like Guam that are more immediately threatened by China’s improving missile capability. Under AUKUS, the United States will begin rotating up to four nuclear-powered submarines through western Australia in 2027………………………………………

Some concerns linger in Washington over Australia’s commitment, however. During the visit to Darwin, McCaul and other representatives asked about the 99-year lease a Chinese company holds over the port surrounding the Australian naval base. Australian officials said two reviews had found there wasn’t a security concern, and that in the case of a conflict, the port could be nationalized.

“Australia relies on China for prosperity and on America for security,” Rep. Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.) told The Post. “That’s the balance they are playing.”   https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/08/24/us-military-base-australia-china/—


—

August 26, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Western world complicit in Gaza Hellfire attacks

By Alison Broinowski | 26 August 2024,  https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/western-world-complicit-in-gaza-hellfire-attacks,18907

Gaza schools and hospitals continue to be bombarded by Israeli weaponry, much of which has been supplied by Western governments. Dr Alison Broinowski reports.

BY HALFWAY through August, the Israeli military had bombed at least five schools. Accused of using six-bladed American-made “Ninja” missiles, they have chopped to pieces the Palestinians inside, most of them women and children.

On 19 November 2023, head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) Martin Griffiths wrote:

‘Shelters are a place for safety. Schools are a place for learning… Civilians cannot and should not have to bear this any longer. Humanity needs to prevail’.

This was the day after Israel’s military bombed the Al-Fakhoora school in northern Gaza, where displaced people were sheltering. On the same day, they bombed another nearby school with a combined total of more than 150 dead.

Humanity still has not prevailed in Gaza, where the surviving Palestinians are bearing even worse consequences. It’s alleged that the massacres are now being delivered by Ninja Hellfire AGM-114R9X missiles. These are nicknamed “assassination” missiles for having killed Al Qaeda’s leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in 2022.

Soon after the Hamas breakout on 7 October, Israel cut off supplies to Palestinians and pushed them into northern Gaza. It then forced displaced people to flee south to Rafah, where shelter and supplies were as limited as in the north. The fact that Hamas is the elected governing authority in Gaza didn’t stop Israel’s cynical, genocidal pursuit.

First were bombs on hospitals, which the Netanyahu Government claimed harboured Hamas, leaving them ruined or barely functioning.

Next, Israel’s military made schools their target, with the same excuse. On 6 and 7 June, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) attacked a UN-run school at Nuseirat refugee camp, killing 33 people, and another school in Deir al-Balah in northern Gaza killing more. Some of the victims (including an 8-year-old boy) were claimed to be Hamas militants.

At the same time, Israel expressed outrage in the UN at being listed as a nation violating its obligation under the Fourth Geneva Convention to protect children in armed conflict.

School bombings then multiplied. On 9 July, an attack on Abbasan, east of Khan Younis in southern Gaza, hit the entrance of al-Awdah school, killing at least 30 people who were sheltering there and wounding 53. Palestinian medics said most of the victims, as always, were women and children. The Israeli military said its sole target was a ‘terrorist from Hamas’ military wing’ near the school.

In the first ten days of August, Israeli attacks on five schools in Gaza City killed more than 179 Palestinians. On 1 August, Israel’s military attacked the Dalal al-Mughrabi school, and on 10 August, at least 100 displaced people were killed at the Al-Tabin school in Daraj, part of Gaza City. In this deliberately-timed attack as the Palestinians were preparing for dawn prayers, or were already in the mosque area, many bodies were shredded into unrecognisable pieces.

Three Israeli rockets reportedly hit the school, setting fire to the building that housed hundreds of displaced people. Described as the deadliest massacre in the ten-month-old war, this attack confirmed a deliberate pattern of Israel killing and maiming defenceless civilians sheltering in schools. It was the latest of 174 UN-identified bombings of shelters, and Al Jazeera reports 500 school attacks over the last ten months.

Fragments of at least two shells used at al-Tabin school on 10 August were identified as being of the American GBU-39 SDB type, manufactured and exported to Israel by Boeing.

Columbia’s Professor Anthony Zenkus alleges that AGM-114 Hellfire missiles were also used, made of 45 kilograms of dense material with six blades flying at high speed, supposedly to crush and cut a targeted person. If they were, in fact, used in crowded spaces in Gaza, Israel cannot claim they “targeted” any Hamas individual.

Zenkus claims that by 2 July, 3,200 Ninja Hellfires had been sent to Israel by the Biden–Harris Administration, and thousands more will be included in the $23.5 billion worth of weapons they have approved.

As every day brings news of another school massacre, the choice facing Australians is between psychic numbing and motivated, active outrage. How can we make our government protest on our behalf against Israel’s atrocities? Ministers know that all the U.S. has to do is cut off the funds and stop the export of weapons of terror like the Ninja Hellfire to Israel. How many more schoolchildren will be shredded before Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Defence Minister Richard Marles and Foreign Minister Penny Wong come out and say it?

When will they adhere to Australia’s obligations to the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court? When will they stop exporting the multiple Australian-made components for the F-35 bombers made by American companies that Israel uses for its attacks on schools and hospitals?

We are already complicit in Israel’s genocide. How much worse can it get?

August 26, 2024 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Is the USA now considering withdrawal from AUKUS?

A little bird sent me this:

“I have just had it from a strong source in America that if Australia fails to reach an article 14 arrangement with IAEA within the next three months then irrespective of the presidential result America will give notice of withdrawal from AUKUS 

 However it may negotiate with Australia to use Garden Island as a base for its Indian Ocean fleet 

 Apparently major contractors involved with the first phase of AUKUS are lobbying the USA government to continue irrespective of what occurs with AUKUS but so far with little success”

Answers to the Questions on Notice are published in due course on the Australian Parliament House website.

August 26, 2024 Posted by | politics international | Leave a comment

Civil Society faces imposition of an AUKUS military High Level nuclear waste dump

by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner 22 August 2024

The Federal ALP belatedly disclosed a secret pre-condition in AUKUS plans to buy second hand US
nuclear subs: for Australia to keep US N-Subs US origin military High Level nuclear waste forever.

In a breach of trust the ALP is seeking to ‘normalise’ High Level nuclear waste in Australia. Claims of
‘nuclear stewardship’ in taking on US N-Subs and in retaining untenable US N-Sub wastes are a farce.

Disposal of High-Level nuclear waste is globally unprecedented, with our AUKUS ‘partners’ the US &
UK having proven unable to do so in over 65 years since first putting nuclear powered subs to sea.

Minister for Defence Richard Marles MP has still not made a promised ‘announcement’, said to be by
early 2024, on a process to manage High Level nuclear waste and to site a waste disposal facility, he
saying “obviously that facility will be remote from populations” (ABC News 15 March 2023).

Defence is already working to identify potential nuclear waste storage and disposal sites, assessing
existing Defence lands, and appraising potential regions with areas to compulsorily acquire a site.

The public has a right to know who is already being targeted for imposed AUKUS N- waste storage.

Political leaders in WA, Qld and Vic have already rejected a High-Level nuclear waste disposal site.
Our SA Premier has so far only said it should go to a safe ‘remote’ location in the national interest.

AUKUS compromises public confidence in Gov and sets up a serious clash with civil society:

In setting the offer for a next Federal Election, Labor must become transparent and be made
accountable over AUKUS and associated rights and interests that are at stake in Labor’s intended
High Level nuclear waste dump siting process. For instance:

  • Federal and SA Labor must commit to comply with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights
    of Indigenous Peoples Article 29 provision of Indigenous People’s Rights to “Free, Prior and
    Informed Consent” over storage or disposal of hazardous materials on their lands.
  • Defence must declare their intension to over-ride the SA Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act
    2000 to impose an AUKUS nuclear dump on outback lands and unwilling community in SA.
  • Federal Labor must fully set out the array of AUKUS nuclear wastes to be stored in Australia.

The ALP National Platform (2021, Uranium p.96-98) makes a commitment to oppose overseas waste:

Labor will: 8.d. Remain strongly opposed to the importation and storage of nuclear waste
that is sourced from overseas in Australia.


In contrast, AUKUS aims Australia buy existing US military nuclear reactors in second-hand N-Subs
that are to be up to 10-12 years old, loaded with intractable US origin High-Level nuclear wastes that
are also weapons usage fissile materials – and remain as Bomb Fuel long after decommissioning.


Further, in an affront to public trust Labor’s AUKUS Bill has been written to provide a federal legal
power to take existing US and UK N-Sub nuclear reactor wastes for storage and disposal in Australia.

Labor claims that it is not their ‘policy’ to do so – but it is their proposed Federal Law…

Q: Is Federal Labor already targeting the Woomera Area in SA as a potential site to impose an AUKUS military High-Level nuclear waste dump?
A Labor AUKUS Bill assumes a power and a right to over-ride State laws by naming State laws in
Regulations that are to be made in 2025. Section 135 “Operation of State and Territory laws”, states:
If a law of a State or Territory, or one or more provisions of such a law, is prescribed by the
regulations, that law or provision does not apply in relation to a regulated activity.

The Bill provides for regulated activities in ‘nuclear waste management, storage and disposal’ at
AUKUS facilities in future nuclear zones, which are to be authorised in part under Sec.135.

The national press has reported the Woomera rocket range is understood to be the ‘favoured
location’ for storage and disposal of submarine nuclear waste (“Woomera looms as national nuclear
waste dump site including for AUKUS submarine high-level waste afr.com 11 August 2023).

A ‘Review’ of the Woomera Prohibited Area has just been announced by the Minister for Defence
Richard Marles MP: “to ensure it remains fit for purpose and meets Australia’s national security
requirements.” The Review is due to report in mid-2025 – after the federal election…

AUKUS will aim to compulsorily acquire and declare a High-Level nuclear waste dump site, with over-
ride of State laws through this Bill, long before the 2032 first purchase of a second-hand US N-Sub.

It was left up to a US Vice Adm. Bill Houston to reveal the proposed sales of in-service Virginia-class
subs will be in 2032 and in 2035, with a first new N-Sub in 2038 (US Breaking Defence 8/11/23).

If Federal Labor wants to locate an AUKUS nuclear waste dump in SA, it will have to over-ride our
existing State Law to impose the dump. This AUKUS Bill is a threat to the safety of the people of SA.

Storage and disposal of nuclear wastes compromises the safety and welfare of the people of South
Australia, that is why it is prohibited by the SA Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000.

Labor Premier Mike Rann strengthened these laws in 2002 and now Federal Labor may over-ride them.

The Objects of this Act cover public interest issues at stake, to protect our health, safety and welfare:
“The Objects of this Act are to protect the health, safety and welfare of the people of South
Australia and to protect the environment in which they live by prohibiting the establishment
of certain nuclear waste storage facilities in this State.”

The import, transport storage and disposal of High-Level nuclear reactor waste is prohibited in SA.

However, Federal Labor are taking up legal powers to impose a dangerous AUKUS nuclear dump on
SA or on the NT, through an undemocratic override of State laws and compulsory land acquisition.

Question: Will Federal Labor also disregard Indigenous Peoples UN recognised Right to Say No?

In the lead up to a federal election Labor must now declare if they will respect or ignore an
Indigenous Right to Say No to an AUKUS nuclear waste dump on their country.

South Australians have a democratic right to decide their own future & to Say No an AUKUS dump.

August 26, 2024 Posted by | politics, wastes | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »