DOCSLIB.ORG

Ngoppon Together Inc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ngoppon Together Inc Ngoppon Together Inc. (Walking Together Reconciliation Group) We acknowledge the Land, Waters and Environment of the Ngarrindjeri People, the traditional custodians of this area Royal Commission into the Nuclear Fuel Cycle SUBMISSION TO ISSUES PAPERS 1 - 4 Ngoppon Together Inc is an organisation based in Murray Bridge SA of community members from diverse backgrounds with Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal members. We recognise that Aboriginal peoples have a long history of dispossession and disadvantage which still impacts today. Our common purpose is to contribute to a fair and cooperative community locally and generally, where all people, particularly Aboriginal people, are accepted and valued for who they are, their beliefs, customs, history and cultural practices. In writing our submission to the Royal Commision into the nuclear fuel cycle we are conscious of our responsibility as South Australians to work to ensure our state of South Australia continues to provide a healthy and safe environment for its peoples (present and future generations), lands and water. As a Reconciliation group we strongly recognise the need for our state with our particular historical past, to refrain from compounding mistakes made in the past in this nuclear area, including in regard to Aboriginal communities. 1.7 Is there a sound basis for concluding that there will be increased demand for uranium in the medium and long term? Would that increased demand translate to investment in expanded uranium production capacity in South Australia (bearing in mind other sources of supply and the nature of South Australia’s resources?). Our members appreciate the Royal Commission’s desire for submissions to be based on fact and extracts carefully noted. Below we present evidence from both a mining analyst and from a conservation group as a very ‘sound basis ‘ that there is not now, and there seems no evidence that there will be, ‘increased demand for uranium.’ Uranium equities are currently trending below the uranium spot price and have been under- performing long term (since Fukushima in 2011). The average loss since January 2011 is 85% and equity went down 25% in the financial year 2015. Matthew Keane, Metals and Mining Research Analyst, Argonaut Ltd Uranium Conference Perth July 2015 From mid-2000’s until Fukushima in 2011, production was in a period of stagnation Uranium price was lower than average cost of production, produces <0.2% of national export revenue and accounts for less than 0.02 per cent of jobs in Australia. Conservation Council of SA (CCSA) report 2015 p14 We submit an Australian example: ERA Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) has posted losses for each of the past five years, totalling $500 million. ERA has struggled with the political and economic impacts of many mine leaks and high impact accidents ( identified in 1.8 below) CCSA 2015. Ngoppon Together adds our warning to easy acceptance of those pro-uranium enthusiasts– no doubt many of whom who will contribute to the Royal Commission. We fear that enthusiasts’ reports, backed up as they have and can be, by easy access to the media in SA are dangerously ill -informing the South Australian community with fallacious claims. We present an example: our members well remember the claims which appeared in the local media of South Australia becoming the ‘Saudi of the South. ‘We present the reality: Politicians, academics and uranium industry representatives have drawn comparisons between the potential of Australia's uranium industry and Saudi oil revenue. The comparisons do not stand up to scrutiny. Australia would need to supply entire global uranium demand 31 times over to match Saudi oil revenue. Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), 2013, 'Yellowcake Fever: exposing the uranium industry’s economic myths', www.acfonline.org.au/resources/yellowcake-fever-exposing-uranium- industrys-economic-myths In this regard, we call upon the Royal Commission to act with the utmost integrity to ensure this reality is presented at all times – not only in these quite over - the -top headlines but in the truth of the actual basic facts and genuine risks of this, the world’s most dangerous industry. 1.8 Would an expansion in extraction activities give rise to new or different risks for the health and safety of workers and the community? If so, what are those risks and what needs to be done to ensure they do not exceed safe levels? Ngoppon Together emphasises that an expansion would give rise to both new AND different risks for the health and safety of workers and communities as well as continue the quite substantial risks of the present. The planned expansion (now delayed) of BHPBilliton’s Olympic Dam in our state, was intending to use an incredible 250 million litres of water A DAY! of the desert State’s water. leave a 44 sq. kilometre mountain range of 76 million tonnes of radio-active waste uncovered (to be blown about the state by the fierce spring winds of the SA desert.) while using one quarter of the State’s electricity (various reports) Over the years since the opening of the SA Roxby Downs/Olympic Dam mine -regardless it would seem of the identity of the various operators-there have been multiple leaks and even shutdowns. Photos taken by an Olympic Dam mine worker in December 2008 showed multiple leaks of radioactive tailings liquid from the so-called rock armoury of the so-called tailings retention system. BHP Billiton's response was to threaten "disciplinary action" against any worker caught taking photos of the mine site. BHP Billiton claimed that the "allegations" related to a single incident when a small damp patch appeared on the wall of the tailings retention system. In fact, the photos clearly showed multiple leaks, and the leaks were ongoing for months. The Monitor, 1 April 2009, 'BHP Billiton opens up on tailings' Olympic Dam generates 10 million tonnes low-level tailings waste each year . We wonder at the safety of this material. Our members also remember well the multiple severe risks, dangers and actual disasters that the Traditional Owners, the Mirrar, have faced in the life of uranium mining at the Ranger mine NT. Our following quotation names just the latest disasters in the long history of these mines …a December 2013 leach tank collapse at Ranger resulting in the spillage of 1.4 million tonnes of radioactive slurry; the collapse of a ventilation shaft in 2014; and the revelations of a whistleblower published in the Mining Australia magazine in May 2014. CCSA Report 2015 2 The Ranger mine has generated over 30 million tonnes of liquid tailings waste. Rio Tinto subsidiary Energy Resources of Australia (ERA) runs Ranger. In 2005, ERA was found guilty and fined for a contamination incident in March 2004 where 150 people were exposed to drinking water containing uranium levels 400 times greater than the maximum Australian safety standard. Twenty-eight mine workers suffered adverse health effects including vomiting and skin irritation as a result australianmap.net The present dangers of this industry’s contamination directly to workers and community members, to the land and waters are only too clear to need our further elaboration. Surely they provide ample reason why there should be no further expansion of this industry and indeed sufficient evidence for the closing down of presently active mines. 1.9 Are the existing arrangements for addressing the interaction between the interests of exploration and extraction activities and other groups with interests such as landowners and native title holders suitable to manage an expansion in exploration or extraction activities? Why? If they are not suitable, what needs to be done? As a Reconciliation group, Ngoppon Together is particularly concerned with this question. Ngoppon Together works towards achieving greater recognition of the rich laws and cultures of our First People. By breaking with their laws and culture, we diminish the whole Australian nation, both by damaging our beautiful land, Mother Earth, and by ignoring her cultural beliefs. Mining uranium has caused immense suffering and displacement of Aboriginal communities. in SA as well as elsewhere in Australia. Some of our members recall the Kokatha in the sandhills of Roxby Downs in the 1980s in the desperate hope of stopping the Roxby uranium mine before such a mine wreaked havoc on Kokatha country and on the ancient waters of the Arabunna. Regarding the proposed expansion of Olympic Dam we know that the Traditional Owners were not even consulted. BHP Billiton held all the cards and merely had to say that they wanted to continue the (exremely favourable to them) previous conditions. Of old, the tactics of the mining companies in Australia and no doubt world wide are to divide and conquer. Peoples who have been dispossessed and so in consequential poverty have been prime candidates for such tactics causing deep divisions both within and between various language groups. An added problem is the guilt and shame of the Traditional Owners who have lost the fight to protect their country and their awareness that they have not been able to carry out this reponsibility in the face of the huge influence, massive resources and often underhand tactics of the mining companies. The problems of felt responsibility have multiplied together with the fulfilment of the concerns and warnings of the Traditional Owners regarding the destruction of country and waters and the consequential dangers and serious effects on their own, their children’s and future generations’ health and well-being -and as well on the health of the workers. Ngoppon Together members live and work on the lands of the Ngarrindjeri peoples. As such, our members are acutely aware that while the Ngarrindjeri are a group of Aboriginal people who may not have yet been subjected to the dangers and threats to health on their lands that the nuclear cycle delivers, however they have, as a group, in their struggles to protect their lands, waters and culture, their own mental health and well being for themselves and for future generations, been subject to every one of the following tactics summarised by the environmental group Friends of the Earth.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BHP “Extreme” Consequence Tailings Dams with Potential to Cause Fatality of 100 Employees
    BHP “Extreme” consequence tailings dams with potential to cause fatality of 100 employees: Briefing Paper by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner - 22 May 2020 BHP has Questions to answer on Worker Safety, Transparency and Accountability at Olympic Dam BHP took over Olympic Dam copper-uranium mine in 2005, operating the mine for a decade before a GHD “TSF Dam Break Safety Report”1 to BHP in August 2016 concluded all existing Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs) are “Extreme” consequence tailings dams with a failure potential to cause the death of 100 BHP employees: “BHP OD has assessed the consequence category of the TSFs according to ANCOLD (2012a,b). A dam break study, which considered 16 breach scenarios of TSFs 1 to 5, was completed by GHD (2016) and indicated a potential for tailings and water flow into the mine’s backfill quarry and underground portal. The following conclusions were drawn: • The population at risk (PAR) for a TSF embankment breach is greater than 100 to less than 1000 mine personnel primarily as a result of the potential flow of tailings into the adjacent backfill quarry and entrance to the underground mine. • The financial cost to BHP OD for a tailings dam failure was assessed by BHP OD to be greater than US$1B, a “catastrophic” loss according to ANCOLD guidelines (2012a,b). Based on these criteria, the TSFs at Olympic Dam have been given a consequence category of “Extreme” to guide future assessments and designs. Note that this is an increase compared to the assessment prior to the FY16 Annual Safety Inspection and Review (Golder Associates, 2016a) which classified TSF 1-4 and TSF 5 as “High A” and “High B”, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Closure Management and Rehabilitation Plan Olympic Dam
    CLOSURE MANAGEMENT AND REHABILITATION PLAN OLYMPIC DAM May 2019 Copyright BHP is the sole owner of the intellectual property contained in any documentation bearing its name. All materials including internet pages, documents and online graphics, audio and video, are protected by copyright law. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this document may be reproduced, transmitted in any form or re-used for any commercial purposes whatsoever without the prior written permission of BHP. This document represents the status of the topic at the date shown and is subject to change without notice. The latest version of this document is available from Document Control. © 2019 BHP. All rights reserved. This document is uncontrolled when printed. This Closure and Rehabilitation Plan has been prepared as information only and is not to be relied on as final or definitive. It would continue to be developed and would be subject to change. BHP Olympic Dam Closure Management and Rehabilitation Plan Closure Management Plan Summary Olympic Dam Mine Project Olympic Dam Document Title Olympic Dam Mine Closure Management and Rehabilitation Plan Document Reference 99232 Mining Tenements Special Mining Lease 1 Company Name BHP Billiton Olympic Dam Corporation Pty Ltd Electronic Approval Record Business Role Name Authors Role Name Principal Strategic Planning Don Grant Principal Environment A&I Murray Tyler Principal Closure Planning Craig Lockhart Reviewer Role Name Manager Closure Planning Rebecca Wright Superintendent Environment, Radiation and Occupational Hygiene James Owen Principal Legal Zoe Jones Approver Role Name Head of Environment Analysis and Improvement Gavin Price Head of Geoscience and Resource Engineering Amanda Weir Asset President Olympic Dam Laura Tyler Document Amendment Record Version.
    [Show full text]
  • Threatening Lives, the Environment and People's Future
    other sides to the story Threatening lives, the environment and people’s future An Alternative Annual Report 2010 FRONT COVER: Stockphoto.com INSIDE BACK COVER: BHP Billiton protest. Photo courtesy of the ACE Collective, Friends of the Earth Melbourne. BACK COVER: Mine tailings at the BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam Mine in South Australia (2008). Photo: Jessie Boylan BELOW: Nickel laterite ore being loaded at Manuran Island, Philipines. The ore is then taken by barge to waiting ships. Credit: CT Case studies questioning BHP Billiton’s record on human rights, transparency and ecological justice CONTENTS Introduction 2 BHP Billiton Shadow Report: Shining a light on revenue flows 3 MOZAMBIQUE: The double standards of BHP Billiton 4 WESTERN SAHARA: Bou Craa phosphate mine 6 PHILIPPINES: BHP Billiton pulls out of Hallmark Nickel 7 CAMBODIA: How “tea-money” got BHP-Billiton into hot water 8 PAPUA NEW GUINEA: Ok Tedi – a legacy of destruction 9 BORNEO: Exploiting mining rights in the Heart of Borneo 11 BHP Billiton Around the World 12 COLOMBIA: Cerrejon Coal mine 14 SOUTH AUSTRALIA: Olympic Dam Mine 16 WESTERN AUSTRALIA: Yeelirrie ‘Wanti - Uranium leave it in the ground’ 18 WESTERN AUSTRALIA: Hero or destroyer 20 NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA: Farmers triumph 20 Conclusion 21 Footnotes 23 Credits 24 | 1 | BHP Billiton Alternative Annual Report 2010 This report examines a number of BHP Billiton’s activities must not take place. To date, BHP Billiton has operations around the world. The collection of merely noted that there are “a wide diversity of views” on case studies highlights the disparity between BHP FPIC, and fails to rise to the challenge needed to genuinely Billiton’s ‘Sustainability Framework’ and the reality implement it.
    [Show full text]
  • BHP Billiton: Dirty Energy
    dirty energy Alternative Annual Report 2011 Contents Introduction 1 BHP Global mining operations – dirty energy investments 3 Coal BHP Billiton in Colombia: Destroying communities for coal 4 BHP Billiton in Indonesia: Going for Deadly Coal in Indonesia 7 BHP Billiton in Australia: When too much in!uence is never enough 8 BHP Billiton Australia: Coal mine workers "ght back - Queensland 10 BHP Billiton Australia: BHP battle with farmers - New South Wales 10 Oil and Gas and Greenhouse Gases BHP Billiton globally: Re-carbonising instead of decarbonising 11 BHP Billiton in Australia: Hero or destroyer? 12 Uranium BHP Billiton in Australia: “Wanti” uranium – leave it 13 BHP Billiton in Australia: Irradiating the future 15 BHP Billiton in Indonesia: Mining for REDD a false solution to climate change 18 Solutions? Less mining, more reuse and recycling? 19 Moving into rare earths? 20 Footnotes 22 Introduction “More than 30 million people were displaced in 2010 by environmental and weather-related disasters across Asia, experts have warned, and the problem is only likely to grow worse as cli- mate change exacerbates such problems. Tens of millions more people are likely to be similarly displaced in the future by the effects of climate change, including rising sea levels, floods, droughts and reduced agricultural productivity. Such people are likely to migrate in regions across Asia, and governments must start to prepare for the problems this will create.” – Asian Development Bank Report1 %+3 %LOOLWRQ LV WKH ZRUOG¶V ODUJHVW GLYHUVL¿HG QDWXUDO SROLF\
    [Show full text]
  • Olympic Dam Expansion
    OLYMPIC DAM EXPANSION DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT 2009 APPENDIX P CULTURAL HERITAGE ISBN 978-0-9806218-0-8 (set) ISBN 978-0-9806218-4-6 (appendices) APPENDIX P CULTURAL HERITAGE APPENDIX P1 Aboriginal cultural heritage Table P1 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage reports held by BHP Billiton AUTHOR DATE TITLE Antakirinja Incorporated Undated – circa Report to Roxby Management Services by Antakirinja Incorporated on August 1985 Matters Related To Aboriginal Interests in The Project Area at Olympic Dam Anthropos Australis February 1996 The Report of an Aboriginal Ethnographic Field Survey of Proposed Works at Olympic Dam Operations, Roxby Downs, South Australia Anthropos Australis April 1996 The Report of an Aboriginal Archaeological Field Survey of Proposed Works at Olympic Dam Operations, Roxby Downs, South Australia Anthropos Australis May 1996 Final Preliminary Advice on an Archaeological Survey of Roxby Downs Town, Eastern and Southern Subdivision, for Olympic Dam Operations, Western Mining Corporation Limited, South Australia Archae-Aus Pty Ltd July 1996 The Report of an Archaeological Field Inspection of Proposed Works Areas within Olympic Dam Operations’ Mining Lease, Roxby Downs, South Australia Archae-Aus Pty Ltd October 1996 The Report of an Aboriginal Heritage Assessment of Proposed Works Areas at Olympic Dam Operations’ Mining Lease and Village Site, Roxby Downs, South Australia (Volumes 1-2) Archae-Aus Pty Ltd April 1997 A Report of the Detailed Re-Recording of Selected Archaeological Sites within the Olympic Dam Special
    [Show full text]
  • Public Submission to BHP's EPBC Act Referral 2019/8570 “Olympic Dam
    Public Submission to BHP’s EPBC Act Referral 2019/8570 “Olympic Dam Resource Development Strategy” copper-uranium mine expansion 9th December 2019 The proposed BHP “Olympic Dam Resource Development Strategy” (OD-RDS) copper-uranium mine expansion, and BHP’s proposed major new Tailings Storage Facility 6 (TSF 6) Referral 2019/8465 and associated Evaporation Pond 6 (EP 6) Referral 2019/8526, present significant environmental and public health implications. In particular, in relation to protection of Matters of National Environmental Significance (NES), to mine water consumption with impacts on the Great Artesian Basin and on the unique and fragile Mound Springs, and to radioactive risks and impacts. Uranium mining at BHP’s Olympic Dam mine is a controlled “nuclear action” and “Matter of National Environmental Significance” under the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act): “this means that it is necessary to consider impacts on the whole environment” (federal Department of Environment, Sept 2011, p.4). Our organisations, ACF, FoE Australia and Conservation SA, welcome this opportunity to comment and draw your attention to the following over-arching recommendations in relation to your consideration of BHP’s applications. • The Olympic Dam operation should be assessed in its entirety in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) level public assessment process under the EPBC Act, with the full range of project impacts subject to public consultation. • A comprehensive Safety Risk Assessment of all Olympic Dam mine tailings and tailings storage facilities is required as part of this EPBC Act EIS level public process. This is particularly important given the identification by BHP of three ‘extreme-risk’ status tailings facilities at Olympic Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Ngoppon Together Inc
    Ngoppon Together Inc. (Walking Together Reconciliation Group Murray Bridge SA) We acknowledge the Land, Waters and Environment of the Ngarrindjeri People, the traditional custodians of this area RESPONSE to the NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ROYAL COMMISSION TENTATIVE FINDINGS - due March 18th, 2016 INTRODUCTION: Ngoppon Together Inc.’s Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal members continue to be vitally concerned in regard to the well-being of lands and waters as well as in the health of the present generations of the people of our state and our nation. We recognise our grave responsibility to our future descendants. Based in South Australia’s Murraylands, we hear the contemporary cry of the Ngarrindjeri Elder of our region. Shocked to hear of this scheme to willingly import high level radioactive waste to the country posed as a serious recommendation from the Royal Commission: ‘They’re determined to destroy the country!’ We believe that the Royal Commission has got this wrong and that South Australia should not use part of its land mass as a dump for highly radioactive ‘used fuel’ from overseas nuclear reactors (called “high level waste”) which, in the Royal Commission’s own words, “requires isolation from the environment for many hundreds of thousands of years”. (#73) We ask the South Australian government if they intend to act on this recommendation of the Royal Commission’s Tentative Findings- What Duty of Care to its citizens is being exercised? Our members view with deep apprehension the sections Social and Community Consent and Law, Heritage and Respecting Rights particularly #110, #111 and #115 with their many subclauses.
    [Show full text]
  • Attacks on Ngos Threaten Our Democracy
    Issue #122 | November 2014 chain RRP $5.50 reacti n The National Magazine of Friends of the Earth Australia www.foe.org.au ATTACKS ON NGOS THREATEN OUR DEMOCRACY • Malaysian eco-activists combat repression • Irradiated food labelling • Nanomaterials in food • Farmlands Not Gaslands • Water justice in the Murray-Darling Basin • Maralinga: a chilling exposé • Pesticide monitoring of Vic waterways • Why renewable energy matters • Maules Creek: front-line action on coal • Small-is-beautiful nuclear rhetoric exposed Contents Edition #122 − November 2014 Regular items Publisher - Friends of the Earth, Australia Join Friends of the Earth 4 Chain Reaction ABN 81600610421 FoE Australia News 5 FoE Australia ABN 18110769501 FoE International News 8 www.foe.org.au FoE Australia Contacts inside back cover youtube.com/user/FriendsOfTheEarthAUS twitter.com/FoEAustralia facebook.com/pages/Friends-of-the-Earth- Articles Australia/16744315982 Attacks on NGOs are a threat to our democracy – Joan Staples 11 flickr.com/photos/foeaustralia Malaysia: eco-activists combat judicial repression – Meena Raman 14 Chain Reaction website Nanomaterials in food packaging: FSANZ fails consumers again – Jeremy Tager 16 www.foe.org.au/chain-reaction Throwing precaution to the wind: the government’s attempts Chain Reaction contact details to thwart the regulation of synthetic biology – Louise Sales 18 PO Box 222,Fitzroy, Victoria, 3065. Working for water justice in the Murray-Darling Basin – Will Mooney 20 email: [email protected] phone: (03) 9419 8700 Vale Eileen
    [Show full text]
  • Memories of Japan in Australian Anti-Nuclear Activism
    PORTAL Journal of GENERAL ARTICLE (PEER REVIEWED) Multidisciplinary Transnational Memory and the Fukushima International Studies Disaster: Memories of Japan in Australian Vol. 17, No. 1/2 Jan 2021 Anti-nuclear Activism Alexander Brown Corresponding author: Dr Alexander Brown, JSPS International Research Fellow, Department of Studies on Contemporary Society, Faculty of Integrated Arts and Social Sciences, Japan Women’s University, Kawasaki, Japan; Honorary Associate, School of International Studies and Education, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, © 2021 by the author(s). This Australia. [email protected] is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/pjmis.v17i1-2.7094 Attribution 4.0 International Article History: Received 13/03/2020; Revised 02/06/2020; Accepted 08/06/2020; (CC BY 4.0) License (https:// Published 28/01/2021 creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to Abstract remix, transform, and build upon the material for any This paper argues for the importance of transnational memories in framing Australian purpose, even commercially, anti-nuclear activism after the Fukushima disaster. Japan looms large in the transnational provided the original work is nuclear imaginary. Commemorating Hiroshima as the site of the first wartime use properly cited and states its of nuclear weapons has been a long-standing practice in the Australian anti-nuclear license. movement and the day has been linked to a variety of issues including weapons and Citation: Brown, A. 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Inquiry Into Nuclear Prohibition
    PARLIAMENT OF VICTORIA LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL Environment and Planning Committee Inquiry into nuclear prohibition Parliament of Victoria Legislative Council Environment and Planning Committee Ordered to be published VICTORIAN GOVERNMENT PRINTER November 2020 PP No 181, Session 2018–2020 ISBN 978 1 922425 12 6 (print version), 978 1 922425 13 3 (PDF version) Committee membership CHAIR DEPUTY CHAIR Cesar Melhem Clifford Hayes Western Metropolitan Southern Metropolitan Dr Matthew Bach Melina Bath Jeff Bourman David Limbrick Eastern Metropolitan Eastern Victoria Eastern Victoria South Eastern Metropolitan Andy Meddick Dr Samantha Ratnam Nina Taylor Sonja Terpstra Western Victoria Northern Metropolitan Southern Metropolitan Eastern Metropolitan Participating members Georgie Crozier, Southern Metropolitan Dr Catherine Cumming, Western Metropolitan Hon. David Davis, Southern Metropolitan Dr Tien Kieu, South Eastern Metropolitan Bev McArthur, Western Victoria Tim Quilty, Northern Victoria ii Legislative Council Environment and Planning Committee About the Committee Functions The Environment and Planning Committee (Legislation and References) is established under the Legislative Council Standing Orders Chapter 23—Council Committees and Sessional Orders. The Committee’s functions are to inquire into and report on any proposal, matter or thing concerned with the arts, environment and planning the use, development and protection of land. The Environment and Planning Committee (References) may inquire into, hold public hearings, consider and report on other matters that are relevant to its functions. The Environment and Planning Committee (Legislation) may inquire into, hold public hearings, consider and report on any Bills or draft Bills referred by the Legislative Council, annual reports, estimates of expenditure or other documents laid before the Legislative Council in accordance with an Act, provided these are relevant to its functions.
    [Show full text]
  • MS 727 Lists of Peter Sutton's Archives in His Own Hands And
    AIATSIS Collections Catalogue Manuscript Finding Aid index Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Library MS 727 Lists of Peter Sutton’s archives in his own hands and those he donated to the South Australian Museum Archives 2009-2012 CONTENTS COLLECTION SUMMARY ........................................................................................... 2 CULTURAL SENSITIVITY STATEMENT ..................................................................... 2 ACCESS TO COLLECTION ........................................................................................ 3 COLLECTION OVERVIEW .......................................................................................... 3 BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ............................................................................................... 4 SERIES DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................. 6 BOX LIST ................................................................................................................. 192 MS 727, Lists of Peter Sutton’s archives in his own hands and those he donated to the South Australian Museum Archives, 2009 - 2012 COLLECTION SUMMARY Creator: Peter Sutton Title: Lists of Professor Sutton’s archives in his own hands and those he donated to the South Australian Museum Archives Collection no: MS 727 Date range: 2009 – 2012 Extent: 1 box Repository: Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies CULTURAL SENSITIVITY STATEMENT It is a condition
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium Mining Site
    Olympic Dam, Australia Uranium mining site The uranium mine at Olympic Dam poses a threat to the ecosystem of the region and a health hazard to the workers and the surrounding populations. Uranium tailings, leaks and spills have caused severe radioactive contamination of the environment. With plans on the way to enlarge the mine in the coming years, comprehensive studies on health and ecological e ects are urgently needed. History The Olympic Dam mine near the town of Roxby Downs in South Australia is not only the largest underground mine on the continent, but is also the site of the world’s largest known uranium ore deposit. Western Mining Corporation began drilling at Roxby Downs in 1975, producing the fi rst shipments of copper, gold, silver and uranium in 1988. In 2005, the mine was taken amount to eight million liters per day for ten years and over by the global mining fi rm BHP Billiton. Olympic would then decrease to an “operational steady state” of Dam yields about 4,500 tons of uranium oxide per three million liters per day.2,5 In addition, the company year, producing about 10 million tons of radioactive identifi ed several possible health hazards such as tailings in the process – more than 2,000 tons for each breaches of tailings dams, erosion of embankments, ton of uranium oxide.1 radioactive radon emissions from tailing dumps and the inhalation of radioactive dust. They also conceded As uranium mining is heavily dependent on water for the possibility of a contamination of soils, groundwater processing ore and suppressing radioactive dust, up to and the surrounding environment.1,2,5 15 million liters of fresh ground water are pumped from Australia’s largest aquifer, the Great Artesian Basin, to Western Mining Corporation began drilling at Roxby Downs in 1975, producing the fi rst shipments of copper, gold, silver and the mine each day.
    [Show full text]