Australian Senate Inquiry into nuclear waste dumping site – begs the question

March 24, 2018

“Selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility in South Australia”   – that’s the title of the Senate Inquiry .  Begs the question, doesn’t it ?  Why does it have to be assumed that it’s gotta be in South Australia?

Sounds damn silly to me –  toting highly radioactive trash for 1700 km – pretty much involving 3 States, all the way from Lucas Heights, Sydney, where it can be relatively safely kept – until decades later when they might bury it permanently – near to the nuclear reactor that’s producing it. (Heck they might even have the brains to shut down the reactor and stop producing radioactive trash) 

But – never mind.  These uninformed Senators need your submission. They’ve already got at least 5 submissions from pro nuclear enthusiasts – now showing on their website. We can do better.

SUBMISSION TIPS There have been rumours that Senate Inquiry submissions are limited to 5-6 pages. This is not the case, if your submission is longer than 5 pages you need to provide a summary at the front of your submission. See suggestions below:

The best submissions:

  • clearly address some or all of the terms of reference—you do not need to address each one
  • are relevant and highlight your own perspective
  • are concise, generally no longer than four to five pages
  • begin with a short introduction about yourself or the organisation you represent
  • emphasise the key points so that they are clear
  • outline not only what the issues are but how problems can be addressed, as the committee looks to submissions for ideas to make recommendations
  • only include documents that directly relate to your key points
  • only include information you would be happy to see published on the internet.

Submissions that include complex argument, personal details or criticise someone may take the committee longer to process and consider.

Submissions close on 3 April 2018.

Your own ideas, your own words are best, BUT   if you are pressed for time etc, you can  submit an online submission at Waste Dump Senate Inquiry Submission.


To 24 March nuclear news this week

March 24, 2018

Well, it’s been quite a week, with all the Cambridge Analytica stuff showing the power and influence of corporations and political parties in manipulating social media– We should not be so surprised, except for the speed and effectiveness of the Cambridge Analytica’s opinion-influencing campaigns.

Manipulation of public opinion has a long and dishonourable history. Following the 1945 bombing of Hiroshima, America launched a successful pro nuclear power propaganda campaign, resulting in the growth of the ‘peaceful’ nuclear industry, especially in Japan.

Hitler used the 1936 Berlin Games to ‘sell’ Nazi Germany as a fine culture.  Currently, Putin is being accused of using the FIFA World Cup as a glorification of his Russian regime.

We can look forward now to two years of global hype over the 2020 Olympics in Japan as a glowing  (though lying) recommendation of a now healthy Fukushima.

All this in the desperate effort to save the reputation of the global nuclear industry. However not everyone, even conservatives, are buying this, as the situation in Britain shows, with renewables gaining popularity.

Climate:  social science research also shows the way in which conservatives are being won over to accepting climate change, and the need to work actively to slow its progress. Polar Anomaly Flip in an Abnormally Warm World: Arctic to Cool as Antarctica Heats Up.


Global bank HSBC warns that Australia is especially vulnerable to climate change.

The new Trans Pacific Partenership (TPP) just as bad for Australia as the old one.

NUCLEAR WASTE DUMPING.  The Senate is accepting submissions about this, with (narrow Terms of Reference). closing on April 3.  So far only 5 pro nuclear submissions have been published on their site. Yet I know that several anti-nuclear submissions have been sent. I’m working on mine now, and I urge others to send submissions. Ask the Australian Senate to consider this: why was South Australia chosen – to house Lucas Heights’ nuclear waste?   Best way to make submissions to the Senate Inquiry on Nuclear Waste Dumping.

Nuclear waste dump for South Australia? Deafening silence from politicians and journalists.

David Noonan’s Submissions to Senate regarding Reprocessing Nuclear Fuel and Safety of Intermediate Level Wastes.

Group of Montebello nuclear test veterans have no medical insurance, not entitled to gold card.

Minerals Council of Australia wants nuclear technology to be government funded as “clean and green”.

Supreme Court appeal lodged against Yeelirrie uranium mining approval decision.

Neighbours not happy as a man builds his nuclear war bunker in Victoria.

CLIMATE and RENEWABLE ENERGY.   Can Stephen Marshall stop South Australia’s transition to clean energy? Probably not.   South Australian Premier Stephen Marshall carrying out the Liberal agenda – Cuts Access To Solar Batteries For Low Income Households.   South Australia’s new Premier vows to kill the Tesla battery storage plan.   There’s miles and miles of mostly very good news about renewable energy. Find this at



NORTH KOREA. North Korea significantly slows down tunneling in nuclear weapons test site.

FRANCE. Theft of confidential information about Cattenom, Flamanville and Paluel nuclear power plants. India has not signed Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Macron keen to sell EPR reactors to India anyway.

JAPAN. Proposed storage of spent nuclear fuel sparks resistance in Aomori Pref. City. Hakodate court rejects plea for injunction to halt construction of Oma MOX plant in Aomori.


CANADA. Radioactive Cesium 134 from Fukushima nuclear disaster – found in British Columbia.

RUSSIAThe very dangerous prospect of nuclear-powered cruise missiles. Concern over Russia’s nuclear activities in the Arctic – potential for a radiological disaster.

EUROPE. 1960 Paris Convention part of undemocratic government support for nuclear industry. Plan for pan-European alliance against the promotion of nuclear energy– Austria and Luxembourg to start it.

UK. British nuclear submarine joins American naval exercises under Arctic ice.    UK Conservatives – inconsistent, incoherent, policy – agreeing to Russia’s involvement in UK’s nuclear power development.   UK: renewable energy becoming cheaper than nuclear power.

FINLAND. Finland’s nuclear power plant’s price tag – at least $11 billion.

A slick pro nuclear submission frm Ben Heard to the Australian Senate

March 21, 2018

Yes, Ben Heard is on the job, with this slick submission, in which he:

enthuses over the Kimba region nuclear waste dump plan, while touting his own supposed environmental credentials as executive director of Bright New World, his membership of as a member of the Independent Assessment Panel – but all the same he stresses that he’s “an everyday Australian”. (not a mention that he works as a consultant for nuclear firm Terrestrial Energy, and trips around the globe promoting nuclear power.)

contends that nuclear waste is nothing special, really no different in safety needs from other kinds of industrial wastes.
dismisses the idea that a nuclear waste dump in this agricultural reason would have any negative effects on the agricultural economics or reputation of the region.

puts a long and unwieldy case for confining broad community support to just the immediate local community.

reminds firmly that no stakeholder group has power of veto and goes on to waffle worthy statements about Aboriginal heritage etc.

says that The District Council of Kimba is an appropriate definition of community in relation to these site nominations, and that citizens in wider areas do not need to be informed.

State and National citizens do not need to take part in these decisions, which are best left to Parliament.

minimises the importance of radioactive trash dumping- not much more important than household garbage collection.
Glosses over the more toxic radioactive waste that will be included. Ignores the fact that with the planned “temporary” dump there is no prospect of a permanent dump being in place. Ignores the effect on the communities through which the radioactive trash will be transported

Extracts from Heard’s submission

Submission to Senate Standing Committee on Economics – appropriateness and thoroughness of the site selection process for a national radioactive waste management facility at Kimba and  Hawker in South Australia

. ……My overall view is that the current site selection process represents among some of the best practice in the world for such a challenge, and it should be supported and continued.

I am now the executive director of Bright New World, an environmental NGO that seeks greater harmony between human development and the conservation, protection and restoration of our natural world. In relation to Australia’s nuclear medical and research sector, Bright New World is strongly supportive of its continued operation and preferably expansion. … nuclear technologies and techniques are demonstrably valuable for improving human well-being

I am pleased to offer the committee my perspectives in response to the Terms of Reference. Ben Heard (Ph.D., MCESM) Executive Director – Bright New World

Speaking as a member of the Independent Assessment Panel and an everyday Australian, the proposed multiple on the land value seems unremarkable. The acquisition would be consequential and beneficial for all Australians, as it will enable Australia to move much closer to international best practice in the management of radioactive wastes from the domestic research and medical sectors. We must expect compensation at above market value, given that consideration of nuclear-related matters in Australia invariably attracts scrutiny and alarm beyond scientifically robust assessment of hazards. The precaution applied to low and intermediate radioactive wastes is exceptional (not only in Australia) compared to many other waste streams and industrial activity. Relevant examples include our sanguine attitude toward transport, use, and management of wastes from agricultural chemicals[5-7], including ammonium nitrate fertiliser[8] and hydrocarbon fuel[9, 10]. So long as we take an exceptional approach with radioactive waste, there can be no valid criticism of above-market values for land acquisition

……There is no compelling evidence globally that such a facility would have negative reputational or economic impacts to the region (though this concept is much-touted). It is therefore reasonable to weight the sentiment of stakeholders with either (i) greater proximity to the site itself, or (ii) responsibilities for regional oversight and representation such as:

  • The nominating landowner
  • The immediate neighbouring landowners
  • Stakeholders in the closest settlement to the facility
  • Stakeholders in closer proximity to the main transport corridors
  • Local government authorities
  • Representative economic or industry groups in the local region……

If stakeholders of close proximity to the site and those with responsibilities of oversight (i) have beenadequately consulted and consider themselves to be well-informed, and (ii) offer either their consentor active support, then the Department might also make a robust case for ‘broad community support’.

The Department of Industry, Innovation and Science has indicated from the outset that it is seekingbroad community support, while asserting no individual or single stakeholder group has power of veto……….

In this region, Banggarla people are traditional owners, and National Resources Eyre Peninsula has anestablished Aboriginal Advisory Committee[18]. These ought provide appropriate points of contact and consultation with those who can speak on behalf of traditional owners.

The District Council of Kimba is an appropriate definition of community in relation to these site nominations. ……. Direct consideration of Eyre Peninsula or state-wide community views in this decision is contradictory to the premise on which this process was based from the outset, being (i) freely volunteered sites from a process open to all Australians, by those with the legal right to offer the site, to be followed by (ii) a process of community consultation and engagement.

The District Council of Kimba has been offered resources ………Nor can we expect citizens in those larger catchments to take an equivalent level of interest in becoming informed. Whole-of-state (or whole-of-nation?) decisions are the job of our elected representatives in parliament. This voluntary, consent-based, local community process was established to move away from that top-down model.

any other related matters. The Australian community at large benefits from Australia’s nuclear research and medical sectors every day. Our nation-wide preparedness to consume these benefits can be reasonably inferred to represent a broad level of consent, indeed an actual expectation, that the associated waste will be managed according to international best practice. Nearly every Australian household puts a garbage bin at the kerbside once a week, in the expectation of a well-managed service to meet our need…….

A worthy aspiration is the active support and enthusiasm of a community that will embrace and enhance this project. We cannot achieve these outcomes by stripping local  communities of their agency. more

South Australian election result – NOTa triumph for Awful Nuclear Spin Taxpayer-funded Outfit ANSTO

March 20, 2018

The South Australian election result by no means is a triumph for the nuclear lobby. The  politicians and media managed to side-step the vital issue of nuclear waste dumping –   so the public at large seemed unaware of this issue.    South Australians have historically fought back, and won, against this nuclear threat, when they were clearly confronted with it.

South Australia now has a Premier Stephen Marshall, who says that he will destroy the Tesla big battery scheme, leading a Liberal government that no doubt would like to carry out the mission of the Federal Liberal government – to stop the transition to renewable energy.

Sorry, Mr Marshall and Mr Turnbull, but that horse has already bolted away. The nuclear and coal lobbies are not going to stop the global movement towards clean energy, with places like South Australia and Australian capital Territory (ACT) in a leadership position.

As for the fraudulent claim that Kimba, South Australia must host nuclear trash as a “medical necessity”- South Australia, and all Australians will see through this, when they properly get the facts.

It is up to Australian who care –  to expose the lies, and to explain the unwisdom of toting the Lucas Heights toxic radioactive trash for 1700 km to Kimba. Also the mysterious and mingled radioactive trash at Woomera should stay where it is – and not pollute the Kimba agricultural region.

Election results in Australia mean a harder battle against the twin evils of nuclear power and climate change

March 17, 2018


  • In South Australia, the Liberal win means that Australians of awareness and good will must now work even harder to alert the whole nation to the threat of nuclear waste being dumped on rural South Australia under the false cover of “medical necessity”
  • In Victoria, the Labor win means that Australians of awareness and good will must now work even harder to strengthen Labor’s opposition to the nuclear industry, and prevent Labor from supporting the Barrier-Reef destroying plan for the Adani coal megamine.

Nuclear waste dump for South Australia? Deafening silence by politicians and journalists

March 16, 2018

MOSS, No Nuclear Waste Dump Anywhere in South Australia

16 Mar 18 You could be forgiven for thinking that even the journalists are too afraid to ask this question, the silence has been deafening.

“What is each parties position when it comes to defending the South Australian Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000?”

The single most important issue in the history of South Australia, as it has significant impact on our future generations, has been ignored by all parties as an election issue. South Australia has a law prohibiting the development of a nuclear waste dump, yet the Federal Government is currently making plans to override it and build a nuclear waste facility in the heart of our prime farming land in Kimba, South Australia and also the Flinders Ranges only 40km from Wilpena Pound. Which party will uphold this law and why hasn’t any party put it on the agenda for this election. Please don’t suggest it’s a Federal issue, because it’s not. A nuclear waste dump for South Australia is breaking one of our own existing laws so it is very much a State Government issue.

We heard Nick XenophonSteven Marshall and Jay Weatherill on the ABC Adelaidethis morning and thought some hard hitting questions would be asked but instead heard a continuation of the “Cat Fight” we have been hearing for some time now. I’m thinking we need another Laurie Oaks.

Nuclear Waste Storage (Prohibition) Act 2000

We kindly ask that you please share this post to assist broader support.

7 News Adelaide 9 News Adelaide Ten Eyewitness News Adelaide A Current Affair 60 Minutes Australia Wilpena Pound Resort – Flinders Ranges, SA No Dump Alliance No Nuclear Waste Dump in Flinders Ranges Nuclear Free Adelaide – No Nukes HereFlinders Local Action Group: FLAGDr Helen Caldicott

South Australia: political parties and nuclear waste dumping

March 15, 2018

Submissions to Australian Senate on Reprocessing Nuclear Fuel and Safety of Intermediate Wastes

March 14, 2018

two David Noonan Submissions to current Federal Parliamentary Inquiry by Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCT) Reprocessing Nuclear fuel – France (to report by 19 June) have been made public,

An ARPANSA Submission (23 Feb, 2 pages) “regarding the safety of intermediate level waste” has also been made public, at:

See below url’s & extracts for DN sub’s & JSCT Inquiry homepage at:

D Noonan Submission (14 Feb): “Public Interest Questions, Scenarios and Consequences of ‘Reprocessing Nuclear fuel – France’ treaty actions & associated nuclear actions”

ANSTO is without a Plan B to address key public interest scenarios which demand answers:

·         Reprocessing in France will not prove to be available throughout the OPAL reactor Operating License to 2057. At most, this treaty covers the first 2 of 5 decades of OPAL fuel wastes;

 ·         AND the proposed above ground Store in SA for ANSTO’s nuclear waste will damage and divide community and fall over and fail just as prior attempts have in SA and in NT.

If the OPAL reactor is to continue to operate ANSTO must address required contingencies:

·         Extended Storage of OPAL nuclear fuel waste on-site at Lucas Heights in secure cask storage. Lucas Height operates a Store for HIFAR nuclear fuel wastes with capacity to do so until availability of a final disposal option and can now set up to do so for OPAL fuel wastes;

 ·         AND to have to manage ANSTO nuclear fuel wastes entirely with-in Australia through to final disposal. Sending OPAL nuclear fuel waste overseas for reprocessing is used as an excuse to produce a burden of further nuclear waste without capacity or answers for its disposal. …

my Supplementary Submission (28 Feb) provides further evidence on three key aspects:

1. Reprocessing is not International Best Practice, is in decline, and may leave ANSTO stranded

… A key Reprocessing review for consideration by JSCT is: ‘Plutonium Separation in Nuclear Power Programs. Status, Problems, and Prospects of Civilian Reprocessing around the World‘ (IPFM, July 2015), see:

France is currently the only country in the world that operates a commercial-scale spent fuel reprocessing plant.”  (IPFM Report, Country Studies Chapter 3 France p.30)

 … ANSTO should disclose the additional cost in Reprocessing compared to dry-cask storage

“The cost of spent-fuel reprocessing also is about ten times the cost of the alternative option for managing spent fuel, dry-cask spent-fuel storage.” (IPFM, Intro p.11)

 2. Extended Storage of ANSTO nuclear fuel waste at Lucas Heights is a viable option

& Contingency to return OPAL reactor Reprocessed fuel waste to Storage at LHs

3. ANSTO failure to provide a disposal strategy for OPAL nuclear fuel wastes flouts best practice

Fukushima disaster anniversary – nuclear news this week

March 10, 2018

Tomorrow, Sunday March 11,  will mark the seventh anniversary of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. I’m not sure that the mainstream media will cover this properly – or even at all. Radioactive debris piling up at Fukushima interim facility.  The  costly underground “Ice wall” to prevent radioactive leakage has not really been effective.  Radioactive water continues to pour into the Pacific ocean. Exposures levels go up while environmental health protections are lifted: life is devalued.   No. of children at time of Fukushima disaster diagnosed with thyroid cancer reaches 160. Fukushima Nuclear Fuel Release “Explicitly Revealed” In Wider Environment. Fleeing from Fukushima: a nuclear evacuation reality check.

The power of the people Safecast gets the facts on Fukushima radiation.

Crucial US-North Korea talks – could defuse nuclear tensions? Donald Trump’s historic gamble on meeting Kim Jong Un – so much could go wrong.

A sad reflection on International Women’s Day –   Climate change ‘impacts women more than men


Seven years on, Fukushima still a disaster without a solution Toshiko Okada will be speaking at the Channon Market, NSW  March 11

Nuclear waste dumping plan.

Big global weapons corporations lavish gifts on Australian Defence executives and top military personnel.

Don’t Let Josh Frydenberg [ Minister for Uranium, Coal etc] approve Yeelirrie uranium mine or extinction!

Minerals Council lobbies for changes to native title laws .



NORTH KOREA.  Kim Jong Un wants to meet Donald Trump; Trump agrees.  North Korea might send Kim Jong-un’s sister to USA for diplomatic talks on the nuclear crisis.


JAPAN. Japanese govt announced that it will accept recommendations of United Nations Human Rights Council on rights of Fukushima evacuees.   Falsified data on analyses of burying radioactive waste  – Kobe Steel again.

Fukushima 7 years after, Fukushima still struggling to return to normal.  Nuclear regulator: Fukushima accident not over.    Vietnamese trainee misled into Fukushima decontamination work.  Controversy in Thailand over Thai Officials Insisting that Fukushima Imported Fish is Safe! Fukushima Contaminated Food Products Are Receiving Top-level Promotion.

UK. UK police say Sergei Skripa, former Russian spy, was poisoned with nerve agent.   Need to monitor beaches near Dounreay, as another toxic radioactive fragment is found.

FRANCE.  The tiny village leading France’s anti-nuclear movement.   France: Police battle protesters over nuclear waste storage plans.   Radioactive leaks from Bugey nuclear power plant, near Lyon.

SAUDI ARABIA. Saudi Arabia lobbying USA hard to get nuclear technology including enriching uranium

INDIA. Protest: President Macron should not impose a problematic French EPR reactor on India.

SOUTH AFRICA. South Africa cannot afford to build a new nuclear reactor, but Environmental Dept gave permit anyway.

New York Times – omissions in covering South Australia’s Kimba nuclear waste dump plan

March 9, 2018

This New York Times author gives a fair coverage to the Kimba radioactive waste dump issue. But it’s misleading in 3 important ways, as if the author completely buys the nuclear lobby’s propaganda.:

  1. States that “The country has no nuclear power plants.”  But fails to mention the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor [which is the source of the really important radioactive trash for Kimba]
  2. Fails to mention the fact that South Australia has a clear law prohibiting establishment of any nuclear waste facility
  3. Seems unaware of the huge distances (2000 km) involved, which would mean that the vast majority of  medical wastes would no longer be radioactive, in transport to Kimba from the main points of production and use.

A Farming Town Divided: Do We Want a Nuclear Site that Brings Jobs?, NYT, By MARCH 7, 2018  “……… Now, as the federal government considers whether to build the site on one of these two farms in Kimba, this community of about 650 people finds itself divided and angry. The prospect of jobs and subsidies that the site would bring has split locals between those who want to preserve rural Australia’s way of life and those who say the glory days of farming are over…..

Despite the distances, locals say Kimba always had a strong sense of community, at least until the nuclear site was proposed. Some said the allure of millions of dollars’ worth of grants and subsidies that the government was offering the host community had blinded people to the risks.