Inquiry Into the Prerequisites for Nuclear Energy in Australia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
From: Terry Krieg To: Committee, Environment (REPS) Date: Monday, 2 September 2019 5:31:19 PM Attachments: In the JanSACOME journal articl 2..docx In the 2009 Feb.docx 00.docx My opinion piece prepared for and printed in the Adelaide Review Sept 2009.docx Australia-Ockhams Razor number 4.docx AUSTRALIAmust include nuclear.docx SOUTH AUSTRALIANuclear our saviour..docx A submission from Terry Krieg,BA Dip Ed on the Inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia. Some biographical details about the author. 1. Lives in Port Lincoln - born 26/06/1938 2.Retired secondary school Deputy Principal and teacher of mainly senior secondary geography and geology from 1959 - 1992. 3. Studied geology and climatology as part of a BA degree at University of Adelaide 1956-58.. Retired from teaching 1992. 4 Established an ecotourism business in 1993 which was closed in 2017. 5. Conducted over 150 tours for international and Australian groups mostly in the inland of South Australia especially the Flinders Ranges and Lake Eyre. 6. Experienced bush walker having walked around Lake Eyre in 1982, in the Simpson Desert, the Willouran Ranges and,the entire Flinders Ranges including the Gammon Ranges.Leader of many bush walking expeditions for both student and adult groups [1980 - 2014]. 7.Spent 1981 on teacher exchange in Toronto, Canada where he became familiar with the nuclear industry.Converted from anti to pro nuclear during that year. 8. Began speaking for and promoting nuclear power for Australia in 1998 when the establishment of a national low/medium level nuclear waste repository on Arcoona Station near Woomera was discussed. 9. Since 2005, have given many pro nuclear talks to community, student, professional and political groups. Most importantly,has given four talks on the ABC Radio National Ockhams Razor programme [Sept 4th 2011, Jan 15th 2012, Mar 10th 2013 and Feb 9th 2014]. - For audio and transcripts log on to : www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhams razor and check past programmes for above dates. 10 Made a submission for the Scarce Royal Commission on the Nuclear Fuel Cycle. 11. Have been making a comprehensive study of all aspects of the world nuclear industry since 1998. 12.Have sent many of my writings done since 2009 to Ted O'Brien and the committee for their consideration The submission will take the form of a brief general statement about nuclear waste and will continue as a series of attachments which will cover details concerning most of the terms of reference. General statement about waste. One of the most deeply ingrained anti-nuclear myths is that there is no safe way to get rid of nuclear waste.The most intractable problems of radioactive disposal are not physical or technical. They are legal, political and sociological. And the amounts of waste that have to be dealt with are very small compared with the amounts of industrial and municipal wastes we have to deal with.Because amounts of radwaste are tens of thousands times less than normal community waste, their disposal sites can be much smaller. Sadly, objectors to radwaste demand nothing less than absolute safety which is unattainable in any endeavour. That fact doesn't deter the objectors. They expect radwaste to be totally removed from the face of the earth. This has led to hare-brained schemes like rocketting High Level Waste into the sun. In reality, disposal of nuclear waste is not a serious problem.High level wastes are stored safely in cooling ponds until they can more easily be dealt with.Another anti-nuclear myth states that high level waste with plutonium will have to be guarded for centuries to stop terrorists getting it and making bombs. This is absurd because plutonium in high burn up reactor fuel is unsuitable for bombs and those who say any competent person can build a bomb in a garage workshop have no idea of the complexity of that task.Much of the truth about nuclear waste and its disposal will emerge when studying closely the attachments which follow. The most important attachment is the last listed. It's very long and has been given as a speech on two occasions so far. It is based on the four Ockham's Razor talks given on ABC Radio National 2011-14. Brief comments on some of the terms of reference Health and Safety: Consult Nuclear Radiation Exposed by Prof Colin Keay The enlightenment Press 2004.I can send my copy if interested Environmental Impacts. Much kinder to the environment compared with every other type of generation including solar and wind. Solar and wind are NOT green -take up enormous amounts of space c/f nuclear Energy affordability and reliability. Nuclear is comparable in price with other base load generating facilities. It is the most reliable of all generating types and produces NO greenhouse gases during generation. Nuclear capacity factor averages around 85-90% in all types of reactors. Solar ave capacity factor 25%, Wind capacity factor ave 35% Solar life -20-25 years, wind turbine life - 30 years. Nuclear reactor life 40-60 years with some now extended to 80 years. National consensus Achievable- last poll in SA had 56% in favour. Workforce capability. -Basic at this stage but would take off once a decision to develop nuclear was taken.Foundation of development probably at Lucas Heights [ANSTO] Security.implications Australia a signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty and a leader in its establishment The following three facts appear in the long speech but they bear repeating here. They alone should be sufficient to convince any rational Australian of the good sense to include nuclear power in our energy mix. Fact 1 Over the past 20 years, the world has spent $2.3 TRILLION on subsidies for the renewables [sun and wind mostly] for which the world generated 2.8% of its electricity and achieved zero reduction in greenhouse emissions. I believe the renewables have been a scandalous wasteful folly and In my opinion, Australia should do as many other countries have/are doing and that is to stop subsidising the renewables Fact 2. As of May 2017, there were 32 countries continuing to generate 11% of the world's electricity in 447 reactors. Those 32 and 17 additional countries were building 61 reactors at the time, 174 had been firmly planned and over 300 proposed for the future. China currently has 35 operating, is building 21 now and has plans for another 290 by 2050. By then 28% of their electricity will be clean, emissions-free nuclear.In my opinion Australia should be part of that rapid nuclear build. Fact 3 South Australia has the world's best high level nuclear waste disposal site [Officer Basin] which was researched by Pangea Resources for the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] in 1998-2000. The Olympic Dam uranium ore body containing 20% of the world's total recoverable uranium.lies to the east of the Officer Basin. The uranium contained in the Olympic Dam ore body, used in the emerging Integral Fast Reactors.[IFR's]and on line within the next decade, could power the entire planet emissions-free for 4000+ years. If it can be arranged, I would like to speak to the committee. I could come to Adelaide to meet them if there are plans for them to visit South Australia for community consultations. Political bipartisanship for nuclear has never been achieved in Australia. It's time it was. After 20 years of speaking for and teaching the community about nuclear power I hope and pray that the committee will recommend in favour of nuclear power for Australia.As James Lovelock [GAIA] said at the 2007 Adelaide Festival of ideas. "It doesn't make sense that Australia hasn't already gone nuclear." Here ends my submission. Terry Krieg BA Dip Ed . My first two Ockham’s Razor talks affirmed firstly, that Australia was unwise in pinning its clean energy future on the renewables [sun and wind] and still developing technologies like CCS and geothermal and should move towards including nuclear power in its energy mix. And secondly, I corrected many of the commonly held misconceptions promulgated by the anti- nuclear lobby. Following conversion from anti to pro nuclear in 1981 while on teacher exchange in Ontario Canada, I’ve been advocating nuclear for Australia since 1998. I believe the time has arrived for Australia to start getting serious about developing the full nuclear fuel cycle. It should be initiated in South Australia along the lines suggested in a piece which I wrote for the Adelaide Review three years ago, as follows: In the 2009 Feb/Mar issue of the SACOME journal, I called for Australia to offer the world the Officer Basin site for a much-needed international high level nuclear waste repository [dump]. Despite existing small quantities of waste [390,000 tonnes produced over the past 50 years from 33 nuclear power generating countries] and even smaller future amounts because of the development of Integrated Fast Reactors [IFR’s], probably on line within 10-20 years, the Officer Basin site has the potential to remove from the environment for ever, all of the world’s high level nuclear waste. It could certainly handle all of the waste generated by countries without suitable burial sites including many of those to which Australia exports yellowcake. Though increased reprocessing will certainly occur, thereby reducing the waste to very low volumes, ultimately there will be some waste to be disposed of in an environmentally sustainable manner. Deep burial in geologically stable zones is the preferred option of the International Atomic Energy Agency.