Parliamentary Inquiry Into the Prerequisites for Nuclear Energy in Australia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SUBMISSION TO: Parliamentary Inquiry into the prerequisites for nuclear energy in Australia Terms of Reference Addressed in this Submission: a. waste management, transport and storage, b. health and safety, c. environmental impacts, d. energy affordability and reliability, e. economic feasibility, f. community engagement, g. workforce capability, h. security implications, i. national consensus, and j. any other relevant matter. Name of Submission author Paul Langley Dated 15 September 2019 1 Introductory Summary Medical controversy surrounds the nuclear power industry. In this submission I point out that the unit of risk used by nuclear authorities, the Sievert, predates the completion of the Human Genome Project in April 2003. The completion of this Project ushered in the age of Personalized Medicine. The ICRP is at the present time accepting public submissions on its “new” draft document, “Radiological Protection of People and the Environment in the Event of a large Nuclear Accident.” This has drawn some scathing observations from people who have made public submissions to the ICRP in this matter. The arbitrary nature of what is deemed to be “acceptable risk” by nuclear authorities provokes conflict and anger from affected people and observers all over the world. Public submissions to the ICRP can be read here: http://www.icrp.org/consultation.asp?id=D57C344D-A250-49AE-957A- AA7EFB6BA164#comments . Australia follows ICRP policies and instructions. Rarely does the Australian people have the opportunity to lobby the ICRP prior to it telling Australian authorities what to do and how to treat us. Late in August 2019 a small Russian nuclear reactor exploded, killing a number of people. For the people involved in Russia, this was a large incident in their lives. The perceptions of nuclear power depend upon where one stands on certain vital topics, what one knows and what one has experienced. Perceptions in the popular culture have been formed over many years by nuclear industry public relations and the public’s perceptions of the nuclear regulatory culture. I examine the culture of nuclear regulation and compare it to other large industry cultures. Futurism has long been a prominent feature of nuclear industry public relations. Today the industry in Australia promotes itself as being able to render commercially viable reactor types proven dirty and unviable many years ago. My work record includes that of a radiation worker with appropriate technical and on the job training. Nuclear reactors depend upon the grid for safety and in order to sell and distribute electrical power. The electrical grid in the modern is undergoing rapid transformation. If nuclear power comes to Australia how will this impact the cost of the grid? Will nuclear power limit the choices for alternative power supply and storage which are available right now and which are becoming ever cheaper? The environmental costs of nuclear power in England are looked at in this submission. The costs of cleanup in the UK are enormous and will not be finished for about 70 years. Reactor emissions are looked in detail, and power reactor emissions are compared to our small research reactor. A power 2 reactor has over 200 fuel rods in its core, our research reactor has only 3. The “small” routine emissions of a nuclear power reactor are many times more than that of our research reactor. Despite this, research links reactor emissions to at least one cancer cluster (Germany). I look at gaseous emissions and liquid emissions in particular from nuclear fuel reprocessing. I show that since the 1970s US authorities and other authorities have been concerned about the rapidly accumulating amounts of gaseous radionuclides, which are building up in the Northern Hemisphere. In the wake of nuclear accidents PR takes precedence over reality in discussing the effects. And this amplifies argument about medical effects and risks. I use two examples to examine this. Prior to the events in Japan in 2011, world medical authorities gave latent periods for certain childhood illnesses with a degree of uniformity. This changed post 3/11. I give sources and discuss a spike in childhood disease in Japan that predates 3/11 as an example of medical uncertainties. Climate change due to CO2 build up in the atmosphere is a reality. The consequences of this reality will be added by the continued accretion of fission and fuel products as they continue to be released into land, sea and air, mainly via spent fuel reprocessing. I cite expert papers which show that in areas of the world local sinks, such the Irish Sea, may be approaching the limits. The industry standard procedure of “dilution”, used around the world for liquid nuclear waste, is actually already resulting in re-concentration of fission products in some environments, including British marshlands. While the nuclear industry and its advocates scoff at this today, I remind the committee that in the 1800s, which CO2 led climate change was first put forward as a risk, industry and the ignorant scoffed. A world burdened by climate change will also be burdened by the emissions of all other industries, including nuclear industry, especially spent fuel reprocessing. I lament what the IAEA calls the “rudimentary” level of today’s medical understanding about the synergistic interaction between ionizing radiation doses and toxic chemicals, using the example off benzene. The matter remains unresolved. Diesel and petrol engines will continue to be used for many years to come. Even if Australia becomes nuclear powered. Around the world many nuclear power plants were never designed to withstand the consequences of sudden climate change. The risks of this are looked at. China is investing heavily in small thorium reactors with a view to producing a nuclear powered navy. This heavy investment is taking place in the Gobi Desert. Jiang Mianheng is heading the research effort. Thorium reactors of this type were proven in the USA to be commercially unviable. The security implications of any Australia purchase of Chinese thorium reactors needs study. A thorium reactor may suite the needs of China’s navy - however there 3 is no free market provenance for these reactors and in fact the history shows them to be unviable. The waste from the US 60s thorium reactor experiment still costs the American taxpayer money today. Australia has access to abundant wind and solar power. Australia’s Chief Scientist favors a hydrogen future. The are many ways by which hydrogen can be produced and safely handled. CSIRO has developed technology for this. Minister Birmingham has highlighted Australia’s abundant high grade Lithium ore reserves. The way is clear for Australia to economically store abundant renewable energy and use to use it in the context of a highly modified grid which can cater for industry needs, the needs of grid connected consumers and for consumers who are independent of the grid. That nuclear controversy continues to exist across many fields is shown by email exchanges between myself and Dr. David Chanin. Dr. Chanin is a US decontamination expert. He has authored important texts which enable the calculation and prediction of the effects of nuclear accidents. Dr. Chanin authored, for example US NUREG/CR—4691- Vol.3, “MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System (MACCS)” Manuscript Completed: December 1989 Date Published: February 1990 Prepared by J. A. Rollstin, D. I. Chanin, H-N Jow Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM 87185 available for Barnaby Joyce and Tania Constable to scoff at https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/21/094/21094910.p df Dr. Aaron Datesman has reviewed my work contained in this submission and has provided his views of my work for your consideration. Dr. Datesman has worked for Bechtel Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, Argonne National Laboratory, the US Department of Energy, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). I trust you find this submission interesting. Paul Langley 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section Heading 8 REVIEW OF THE SUBMISSION TO THE PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY INTO THE PREREQUISITES FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY IN AUSTRALIA. Dr. Aaron Datesman PhD. 11 1. The Sievert vs Personalised Medicine. Terms of Reference: b. health and safety, c. environmental impacts, d. energy affordability and reliability, e. economic feasibility, f. community engagement, g. workforce capability, h. security implications, i. national consensus, j. any other relevant matter. 13 2 Industry and Organisational Cultures Block Internal Awareness Terms of Reference: a. waste management, transport and storage,b. health and safety, c. environmental impacts, d. energy affordability and reliability, e. economic feasibility, f. community engagement, g. workforce capability, h. security implications, i. national consensus, and j. any other relevant matter. 15 3 Nuclear Futurism – Science perverted into mere PR. Terms of Reference: a. waste management, transport and storage, b. health and safety, c. environmental impacts, d. energy affordability and reliability, e. economic feasibility, f. community engagement, g. workforce capability, h. security implications, i. national consensus, and j. any other relevant matter. 17 4 My Training as a Radiation Worker. Terms of Reference: b. health and safety, f. community engagement, g. workforce capability. 18 5 The Planet’s Ability to Absorb Human Waste Terms of Reference: a. waste management, transport and storage, b. health and safety c. environmental impacts. e. economic feasibility, h. security implications. 22 6 Nuclear Power Plants Depend Upon the Power Grid for Safe Operation and Shut Down. Terms of Reference: a. waste management, transport and storage, b. health and safety, c. environmental impacts, d. energy affordability and reliability, e. economic feasibility, f. community engagement, g. workforce capability, h. security implications, i. national consensus, and j. any other relevant matter. 29 7 The Economic Future of a Nuclear Powered Australian Power Grid Terms of Reference: a. waste management, transport and storage, b. health and safety, c. environmental impacts, d. energy affordability and reliability, e.