DOCSLIB.ORG

Submission to the SA Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission by Friends of the Earth, Australia; the Australian Conservation Foundat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Submission to the SA Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission by Friends of the Earth, Australia; the Australian Conservation Foundat Submission to the SA Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission by Friends of the Earth, Australia; the Australian Conservation Foundation; and the Conservation Council of SA Contacts: Dave Sweeney (Australian Conservation Foundation) [email protected], 0408 317 812 Craig Wilkins (Conservation Council of SA) [email protected], (08) 8223 5155, 0417 879 439 Jim Green (Friends of the Earth, Australia) [email protected], 0417 318 368 CONTENTS: Page List of Recommendations 5 Issues Paper #1: Exploration, Extraction and Milling Questions 1.1 to 1.6: Uranium industry 8 Question 1.7: Uranium demand 10 The status and trajectory of nuclear power 10 Nuclear power growth forecasts 12 Ageing reactors 19 The global uranium industry 21 Australia's uranium industry 23 Arkaroola − serious failure of SA government oversight 28 Corporate governance at Beverley 28 The 2005−07 uranium bubble 31 Question 1.8: Public and worker health hazards Radiation and health 32 Radon 35 Leukemia 35 Uranium, radiation and health 37 Olympic Dam whistleblower 38 Polonium exposure at Olympic Dam 40 Uranium companies promote radiation junk science 41 Case study: the Chernobyl death toll 43 Question 1.9: Traditional Owners Introduction 46 Maralinga 46 The proposed repository in SA 51 Dumping on Muckaty Traditional Owners 56 The uranium industry and Aboriginal people 57 Question 1.10: Uranium mining − environmental risks 1 Introduction 60 Olympic Dam 61 In-situ leach uranium mines 69 Question 1.11: Past uranium industry practices 74 Question 1.12: Uranium economics 77 Export revenue 77 Jobs 78 Royalties 79 Subsidies 80 Tax arrangements 80 Question 1.13: Negative impacts on other sectors 81 Issues Paper #2: Further Processing of Minerals and Manufacture of Materials Containing Radioactive and Nuclear Substances Questions 2.2 and 2.3: Manufacturing materials containing radioactive substances 83 Questions 2.5: Manufacturing medical radiopharmaceuticals 85 Questions 2.1, 2.4, 2.13: Nuclear fuel cycle processes (conversion, enrichment, fabrication, reprocessing, fuel leasing) Conversion, enrichment, and fuel fabrication − feasibility 87 Australia's 'natural advantage'? 88 The Switkowski Review 88 BHP Billiton's submission to the Switkowski Review 89 Conversion 90 Enrichment − viability 90 Enrichment and proliferation 94 Enrichment − depleted uranium waste 95 Enrichment − Silex 96 Fuel fabrication 97 Reprocessing 97 Fuel leasing 99 Question 2.12: Safeguards 100 New reactors types − proliferation-resistant? 111 Question 2.11: Security 120 Issues Paper #3: Electricity Generation Question 3.1 Sites for nuclear power reactors 125 Question 3.2 Reactor technologies 127 Generation III reactors 127 Introduction 127 AP1000 127 EPR 130 CANDU EC6 132 South Korea's APR1400 133 Russia's AES-2006 134 Generation IV reactor concepts 135 Introduction 135 Decades away 136 Purported benefits 137 French government's IRSN report 139 Integral fast reactors 141 2 Thorium 146 Question 3.3 Off-grid reactors / Small Modular Reactors 149 Question 3.6 Best practice / less successful examples 152 Question 3.7 Medium or long term options for nuclear power 153 Question 3.8 Comparative analysis 153 Question 3.9 Lessons from accidents such as Fukushima 154 Question 3.10 Regulation 156 Question 3.11 Greenhouse emissions 161 Summary 161 Life-cycle greenhouse emissions 162 Nuclear power is not a silver bullet 164 Nuclear vs. renewables 165 Nuclear power is impractical as a short-term response 165 Nuclear winter 167 Climate change and nuclear hazards 168 Question 3.12 Wastes 170 Question 3.13 Health and safety 170 History of accidents 170 Safety challenges 171 Safety of nuclear vs renewables 172 Probabilistic risk assessments 173 Attacks on nuclear plants 173 Childhood leukemias near nuclear power stations 175 Australia's track record 178 Counterfeit, fraudulent and suspect items 180 Question 3.14 Safeguards 180 Question 3.16 Economics 180 Comparison of unit costs 180 Nuclear cost escalations and nuclear's negative learning curve 185 Generation IV reactors 188 Nuclear newcomers 188 Costing accidents 188 Nuclear liability 189 Finance 190 Question 3.17 Impacts on other sectors 190 Issues Paper #4: Management, Storage and Disposal of Waste Question 4.1: Physical conditions in SA 191 Social dimensions of risk assessment 191 Question 4.2: Wastes produced in Aust. which could be stored in SA? 192 Waste from a nuclear power program in Australia 193 Question 4.3: Storage or disposal of foreign nuclear waste 194 Introduction 194 National policies 194 A moral responsibility? 196 Questions: 4.4 and 4.11: Revenue / costs 197 Possible revenue 197 Costs 198 Questions 4.5, 4.8 and 4.9: Best practice and less successful examples of nuclear waste storage / disposal. Risks for health and safety. Environmental risks. 'Best practice' and 'less successful examples' 199 3 Hazards associated with high level nuclear waste 202 WIPP − explosion in deep geological repository 206 Question 4.6: Security 214 Proliferation issues 215 Question 4.7: Building community confidence 216 Question 4.10: Transportation 218 Serious transport incidents 218 Costs of transport accidents 219 International experience 220 Uranium transport 226 Waste transport 230 Sea transport 230 Transport security 234 Radioactive materials transport in Australia − further comments 241 Question 4.12: Impacts on other sectors 248 4 List of Recommendations Recommendation 1: The Royal Commission should ask the federal government and uranium companies supplying China what they are doing about the serious problems with China's nuclear power industry (safety, security, corruption, inadequate regulation, etc.). Recommendation 2: The Royal Commission should ask the SA government what steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence of problems such as those that arose with Marathon Resources and what regulatory and monitoring changes have been adopted in response to this situation. Recommendation 3: The Royal Commission should determine what action if any the federal and SA governments took in response to allegations of corporate impropriety by General Atomics / Heathgate as detailed in Fortune Magazine. Recommendation 4: The Royal Commission should recommend the enactment of legislation outlawing the infiltration of NGOs by mining companies. Recommendation 5: The Royal Commission should recommend the enactment of legislation outlawing police infiltration of NGOs involved in peaceful protest activities. Recommendation 6: The Royal Commission should determine the extent and adequacy of usage of protective equipment including masks at underground uranium mines (currently limited to Olympic Dam in Australia). Recommendation 7: The Royal Commission should investigate claims made by a BHP Billiton whistleblower in 2010 that the company uses manipulated averages and distorted sampling to ensure its official figures of worker radiation exposure fall under the maximum exposure levels set by government. The Royal Commission should also investigate the claim that radiation dose estimates are based on the assumption that all workers wear a respirator when exposed to polonium dust in the smelter. Recommendation 8: The Royal Commission should investigate why BHP Billiton's radiation plans were seriously outdated and why the SA government did not act to rectify the problem. The Royal Commission should seek further detail into what steps SA agencies have taken to address these deficiencies and enhance transparency. Recommendation 9: The Royal Commission should investigate FoI-based claims by MLC Mark Parnell regarding polonium exposure and reporting requirements at Olympic Dam. Recommendation 10: Uranium company representatives should explain to the Royal Commission why they have promoted self-serving contrarian views regarding radiation and health instead of promoting the accepted scientific understanding that there is no safe level of exposure to ionising radiation. Recommendation 11: The Royal Commission should investigate the use of Doug Boreham by some uranium companies to provide 'employee radiation training'. Are Boreham and uranium companies encouraging practices at odds with established OH&S advice and recommendations? Recommendation 12: The Royal Commission should determine whether the provision of contrarian advice at odds with mainstream scientific opinion meets the legislative and regulatory requirements for the provision of advice on radiological workplace hazards in SA. Recommendation 13: The Royal Commission should determine whether the provision of personal protective equipment is sufficient or if there is (or should there be) a requirement for workers to actually use protective equipment? Recommendation 14: The Royal Commission should recommend against any further uranium/nuclear developments until such time as: Laws exempting the uranium industry from Aboriginal heritage protection laws are repealed. Maralinga is cleaned up adequately. There have been independent inquiries into the mistreatment of Aboriginal people in relation to attempts to establish national nuclear waste facilities in SA (1998−2004) and the NT (2005−2014), and mechanisms put in place to prevent further such adverse processes and impacts. The use of divide and rule tactics by uranium companies against Aboriginal people is investigated and mechanisms put in place to prevent such tactics being deployed in future. Aboriginal land owners are afforded an effective veto provision over proposed mining and wider nuclear industry developments on their lands. 5 Recommendation 15:
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SPECTACLE, SPECTRALITY, and the EVERYDAY: SETTLER COLONIALISM, ABORIGINAL ALTERITY, and INCLUSION in VANCOUVER by NATALIE J. K
    SPECTACLE, SPECTRALITY, AND THE EVERYDAY: SETTLER COLONIALISM, ABORIGINAL ALTERITY, AND INCLUSION IN VANCOUVER by NATALIE J. K. BALOY B.A. Honours, Eastern Michigan University, 2006 M.A., The University of British Columbia, 2008 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Anthropology) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2014 © Natalie J. K. Baloy, 2014 Abstract This dissertation examines everyday social relations in the settler colonial city of Vancouver. Its contemporary ethnographic focus updates and reworks historical and political analyses that currently comprise the growing body of scholarship on settler colonialism as a distinct socio-political phenomenon. I investigate how non-Aboriginal residents construct and relate to Aboriginal alterity. The study is situated in three ethnographic sites, united by their emphasis on “including” the Aboriginal Other: (1) the 2010 Winter Olympics, which featured high-profile forms of Aboriginal participation (and protest); (2) the Mount Pleasant public library branch, which displays a prominent Aboriginal collection and whose staff works closely with the urban Aboriginal community; and (3) BladeRunners, an inner-city construction program that trains and places Aboriginal street youth in the local construction industry. Participants in this research include non-Aboriginal “inclusion workers” as well as non-Aboriginal patrons at the library, construction workers on a BladeRunners construction placement site, and audiences at Aboriginal Olympic events. I explore how my participants’ affective knowledges shape and are shaped by spatial and racializing processes in the emergent settler colonial present. My analysis reveals how everyday encounters with Aboriginal alterity are produced and experienced through spectacular representations and spectral (or haunting) Aboriginal presence, absence, and possibility in the city.
    [Show full text]
  • A Submission to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission
    Roman Oszanski A Submission to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Preamble I have chosen not to follow the issues papers: their questions are more suited to those planning to expand the nuclear industry, and many of the issues raised are irrelevant if one believes that, based on the evidence, the industry should be left to die a natural death, rather than being supported to the exclusion of more promising technologies. Executive Summary The civil nuclear industry is in decline globally. [Ref charts on existing reactors, rising costs]. It is not an industry of the future, but of the past. If it were not for the intimate connection to the military industry, it would not exist today. There is no economic advantage to SA in expanding the existing industry in this state. Nuclear power does not offer a practical solution to climate change: total lifetime emissions are likely to be (at best) similar to those of gas power plants, and there is insufficient uranium to replace all the goal fired generators. A transition to breeder technologies leaves us with major problems of waste disposal and proliferation of weapons material. Indeed, the problems of weapons proliferation and the black market in fissionable materials mean that we should limit sales of Uranium to countries which are known proliferation risks, or are non- signatories to the NNPT: we should ban sales of Australian Uranium to Russia and India. There is a current oversupply of enrichment facilities, and there is considerable international concern at the possibility of using such facilities to enrich Uranium past reactor grade to weapons grade.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy by Mark Diesendorf
    Review: Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy By Mark Diesendorf Reviewed by Elery Hamilton-Smith Charles Sturt University, Australia Diesendorf, Mark. Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy . Sydney, NSW: University of New South Wales Press, 2007. 413 pp. ISBN 978-086-8409-733. AU$45.95, paper. This is indeed a timely book. The proliferation of books on world environmental trends, policies and issues means that there are literally thousands of pages clamoring for the attention of those interested. Many of these are simply advocating specific conceptualizations and solutions to one or more of the many global problems. Too many of them either neglect, or are deficient on, critical assessment of the necessary evidence. Diesendorf writes with great clarity, explaining complex issues and ideas without over-simplifying or dumbing down. Essentially, after a basic conceptual review, he critically evaluates eight major strategic directions, either already practiced or commonly proposed and advocated in global policy arenas. Each of these strategies is assessed in terms of the potential resources, current status and action, environmental, health and social impacts, economic and future development potential. Essentially, he concludes that, at least in Australia and probably globally, a combination of efficient energy use, solar hot water, gas, bio-energy, wind power, improved public transport and fuel-efficient vehicles could halve greenhouse emissions within a few decades. But the political will is lacking, and much government policy action serves only to further the production of greenhouse emissions. The large and wealthy fossil fuel industries, including their infrastructural demands such as power stations, transport, urban structure and building standards, are major determinants of governmental expenditure.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix B: Submissions
    B Appendix B - Submissions Submissions 1 Mr Gavin Brown 2 Mr Jonathon Peter 3 Ms Glenda Maxwell 4 Mr Paul Savi 5 Mr Stuart Allinson 6 EcoEnviro Pty Ltd 7 Professor Derek Abbott 8 Mr Ian Fischer 9 Mr David Gates 10 Mr Paul Myers 11 Professor Keith Thompson 12 Mr Barry Murphy 13 Mr Peter Briggs 14 Mr Terry Ryan 15 Mr Denys Smith 16 Professor John Quiggin Attachment 1 16.1 Supplementary to submission 16 190 17 Mr Terje Petersen 18 Mr Allen Tripp 19 Mr Rob Watson-Smith 20 Dr Matthew Gustafson 21 Mr John Hallam 22 Cr Dominic Wy Kanak 23 Mr Ian Bennett 24 Mr Stephen Brown 25 Mr Greig Meyer 26 Mr John Drake 27 Mr Alan Hewett 28 Mr Robert Gishubl 29 ThorCon US 30 Mr Richard Legar and Ms Lyn Allenn 31 Mr Geoff Billard 32 Ms Trish Frail 33 Mr Bruce McDonald 34 Mr Dale Hess 35 Mr Goronwy Price 36 Friends of the Earth Australia 37 Dr Geoffrey Hudson 38 Mr Eric Gribble 39 SMR Nuclear Technology Pty Ltd 40 Mr Gerard Van Hees 41 Dr Ziggy Switkowski AO 42 Mr Allen Biggins 43 Dr Susan Tregeagle 44 Ms Helen Smith APPENDIX B - SUBMISSIONS 191 45 Mr Gregory Wolfe 46 Mr David Allen 47 Mrs Jacqualine McCarroll 48 Mr Mark Fitzsimmons 49 Ms Peggy Fisher 50 Mr Michael Angwin 51 Ms Claudia Tregoning 52 Ms Jenny Lovric 53 Mr Clif Barker 54 Hydricity Systems 55 Mr Stuart McConville 56 Dr Tom Biegler 57 Mr Fred Tropp-Asher 58 Mrs Carmel Laycock 59 Mr Arnaud Coquillard 60 Mr Barrie Hill Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 61 Mr Terry Krieg 62 Mr Dennis Nickell 63 Dr Heiko Timmers 64 Mr Adrian Stephan 64.1 Supplementary to submission 64 65 Mr Wayne Chamley 66 Mr
    [Show full text]
  • Dollars for Death Say No to Uranium Mining & Nuclear Power
    Dollars for Death Say No to Uranium Mining & Nuclear Power Jim Green & Others 2 Dollars for Death Contents Preface by Jim Green............................................................................3 Uranium Mining ...................................................................................5 Uranium Mining in Australia by Friends of the Earth, Australia..........................5 In Situ Leach Uranium Mining Far From ‘Benign’ by Gavin Mudd.....................8 How Low Can Australia’s Uranium Export Policy Go? by Jim Green................10 Uranium & Nuclear Weapons Proliferation by Jim Falk & Bill Williams..........13 Nuclear Power ...................................................................................16 Ten Reasons to Say ‘No’ to Nuclear Power in Australia by Friends of the Earth, Australia...................................................................16 How to Make Nuclear Power Safe in Seven Easy Steps! by Friends of the Earth, Australia...................................................................18 Japan: One Year After Fukushima, People Speak Out by Daniel P. Aldrich......20 Nuclear Power & Water Scarcity by Sue Wareham & Jim Green........................23 James Lovelock & the Big Bang by Jim Green......................................................25 Nuclear Waste ....................................................................................28 Nuclear Power: Watt a Waste .............................................................................28 Nuclear Racism .................................................................................31
    [Show full text]
  • Cost Analysis of Seawater Uranium Recovered by a Polymeric Adsorbent System
    IAEA-CN-216 Abstact 180 Cost analysis of seawater uranium recovered by a polymeric adsorbent system E. Schneider, H. Lindner, D. Sachde, M. Flicker The University of Texas at Austin, USA E-mail address of main author: [email protected] In tandem with its adsorbent development and marine testing efforts, the United States Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, routinely updates and expands its cost analysis of technologies for extracting uranium from seawater. If informed by repeatable data from field tests, a rigorous cost analysis can convincingly establish seawater uranium as a “backstop” to conventional uranium resources. A backstop provides an essentially unlimited supply of an otherwise exhaustible resource. Its role is to remove the uncertainty around the long-term sustainability of the resource. The cost analysis ultimately aims to demonstrate a uranium production cost that is sustainable for the nuclear power industry, with no insurmountable technical or environmental roadblocks. It is also a tool for guiding further R&D, identifying inputs and performance factors where further development would offer the greatest reduction in costs and/or uncertainties. A life cycle discounted cash flow methodology is used to calculate the uranium production cost and its uncertainty from the costs of fundamental inputs including chemicals and materials, labor, equipment, energy carriers and facilities. The inputs themselves are defined by process flow models of the adsorbent fabrication and grafting, mooring at sea, recovery, and elution and purification steps in the seawater uranium recovery process. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) has carried out marine tests of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory amidoxime grafted polymer adsorbent in natural seawater.
    [Show full text]
  • Official Hansard No
    COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES SENATE Official Hansard No. 2, 2003 WEDNESDAY, 5 MARCH 2003 FORTIETH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FOURTH PERIOD BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE INTERNET The Journals for the Senate are available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/work/journals/index.htm Proof and Official Hansards for the House of Representatives, the Senate and committee hearings are available at: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard SITTING DAYS—2003 Month Date February 4, 5, 6 March 3, 4, 5, 6, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27 May 13, 14, 15 June 16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 24, 25, 26 August 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21 September 8, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18 October 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 27, 28, 29, 30 November 3, 4, 24, 25, 26, 27 December 1, 2, 3, 4 RADIO BROADCASTS Broadcasts of proceedings of the Parliament can be heard on the following Parliamentary and News Network radio stations, in the areas identified. CANBERRA 1440 AM SYDNEY 630 AM NEWCASTLE 1458 AM BRISBANE 936 AM MELBOURNE 1026 AM ADELAIDE 972 AM PERTH 585 AM HOBART 729 AM DARWIN 102.5 FM SENATE CONTENTS WEDNESDAY, 5 MARCH Business— Rearrangement............................................................................................... 9199 Migration Legislation Amendment (Contributory Parents Migration Scheme) Bill 2002 and Migration (Visa Application) Charge Amendment Bill 2002— Second Reading............................................................................................. 9199 In Committee................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sources, Effects and Risks of Ionizing Radiation
    SOURCES, EFFECTS AND RISKS OF IONIZING RADIATION United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation UNSCEAR 2016 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes UNITED NATIONS New York, 2017 NOTE The report of the Committee without its annexes appears as Official Records of the General Assembly, Seventy-first Session, Supplement No. 46 and corrigendum (A/71/46 and Corr.1). The report reproduced here includes the corrections of the corrigendum. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The country names used in this document are, in most cases, those that were in use at the time the data were collected or the text prepared. In other cases, however, the names have been updated, where this was possible and appropriate, to reflect political changes. UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.17.IX.1 ISBN: 978-92-1-142316-7 eISBN: 978-92-1-060002-6 © United Nations, January 2017. All rights reserved, worldwide. This publication has not been formally edited. Information on uniform resource locators and links to Internet sites contained in the present publication are provided for the convenience of the reader and are correct at the time of issue. The United Nations takes no responsibility for the continued accuracy of that information or for the content of any external website.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainability Transformations in Olympic Host Cities
    Sustainability Transformations in Olympic Host Cities by Ksenia Mokrushina B.A. and M.A. in Economics National Research University – Higher School of Economics Moscow, Russia (2008) Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2012 2012 Ksenia Mokrushina. All Rights Reserved. The author here by grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part. Author________________________________________________________________________ Department of Urban Studies and Planning May 24, 2012 Certified by____________________________________________________________________ Associate Professor JoAnn Carmin Department of Urban Studies and Planning Thesis Supervisor Accepted by____________________________________________________________________ Professor Alan Berger Chair, MCP Committee, Department of Urban Studies and Planning 2 Sustainability Transformations in Olympic Host Cities By Ksenia Mokrushina Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 24, 2012 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of City Planning ABSTRACT The Olympic Games represent an unparalleled fast-track urban development opportunity for Olympic host cities. Taking the premise that the transformational effect of the Olympics has a potential to drive long-term urban sustainability, this thesis examines how
    [Show full text]
  • Uranium Exploitation and Environmental Racism
    Uranium Exploitation and Environmental racism: why environmental despoliation and the ignorance of radiological risks of uranium mining cannot be justified by nuclear fuel production Response to consultation on: Stations ‘Justification Application New nuclear power stations Submitted by the Nuclear Industry Association’ (June 2008) By *Dr David Lowry Environmental policy and research consultant Context In May 2008 the then environment minister, Phil Woolas, stated in a written Parliamentary reply that: ―The UK currently sources uranium for commercial reactors from Australia and Russia.‖ (source: Hansard, 21 May 2008 : Column 344W) It is not known where uranium would be procured for any future nuclear fuel required by any new build nuclear energy programme. The Strategic Siting Assessment documentation, including the study on the potential environmental and sustainability effects, failed to look at any environmental implications of new nuclear plants beyond the United Kingdom shores. I made a submission of over 150 pages, some of which is repeated in this submission, but predictably, if disappointingly, not one word on uranium environmental hazards appeared in the Government response to that consultation. I would not expect the issue to be ignored in such a cavalier way a second time, for the nuclear industry is global and the nuclear fuel chain involves many countries in a complex interlocking set of managerial and processing arrangements. Extraction and processing beyond British shores are part of the radiological burden of nuclear fuel: these impacts must not be ignored. Government has a moral responsibility to ensure these important concerns are addressed. The draft Nuclear Industry Association ‗Justification Application‘ – dated June 2008 – which complements the SSA documentation, devotes only seven paragraphs (2.18-2.34) to general discussion of uranium supplies, and eight further paragraphs in the Annex 1 on the nuclear fuel cycle (three on uranium mining and milling, and five on enrichment).
    [Show full text]
  • Notes from Professor Lowe
    A Sustainable Water Future without compromising the health of interdependent ecosystems "The Big Water Debate" Thursday 11th February 2009 Allan Scott Auditorium, UniSA City West campus, Professor Ian Lowe "The truth and lies about water politics" The Big Water Debate Keynote address by Professor Ian Lowe, President of the Australian Conservation Foundation: "The truth and lies about water politics" Abstract: Highly respected Professor Ian Lowe, President of the Australian Conservation Foundation will commence proceedings with his address: "The Truth & Lies About Water Politics". Water is essential for life. Discussion of water needs to take account of some fundamental truths: South Australia is the driest State of the driest inhabited continent. We also have more variable rainfall than other continents. Both rainfall patterns and subsequent run-off are being altered significantly by climate change. The lower Murray is now in a crisis state as a result of over- extraction of water upstream. People understand these truths and expect serious discussion of water issues in the run-up to the State election. The water is muddied by some frequently-repeated lies: the Murray is in crisis because of Adelaide’s water use, irrigation water is used efficiently to maximise economic benefits, we are doing all that is reasonable to manage demand and to harvest storm-water, we need desalination and its impacts are minor, privatisation of water is beneficial, all the problems would be solved if the issue was taken over by the Commonwealth government, climate change is not a serious threat. There are also some half-truths: other States are to blame, there is now an effective plan to manage the Murray-Darling system.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legal Regime for the Road Transport of Uranium Oxide in Western Australia
    YELLOWCAKE ROAD: THE LEGAL REGIME FOR THE ROAD TRANSPORT OF URANIUM OXIDE IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA EMILY BELL BACHELOR OF LAWS / BACHELOR OF CRIMINOLOGY MURDOCH UNIVERSITY This thesis is presented for the Honours degree of Bachelor of Laws of Murdoch University, 2017. WORD COUNT: 19,620 (Excluding footnotes, bibliography and appendices) DECLARATION I, Emily Bell, declare this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content, work which has not been previously submitted for a degree at any tertiary education institution. ii COPYRIGHT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I acknowledge that a copy of this thesis will be held at the Murdoch University Library. I understand that, under the provisions of s51.2 of the Copyright Act 1968, all or part of this thesis may be copied without infringement of copyright where such a reproduction is for the purposes of study and research. This statement does not signal any transfer of copyright away from the author. Signed: ………………………………. Degree: Bachelor of Laws / Bachelor of Criminology Thesis Title: Yellowcake Road: The Legal Regime for the Road Transport of Uranium Oxide in Western Australia Author: Emily Bell Year: 2017 iii ABSTRACT Uranium is a contentious and emotive commodity. Attitudes towards uranium and the nuclear fuel cycle have, overall, been negative. Distrust of the nuclear industry and misunderstandings about the level of risk posed by the transport of uranium oxide (also known as yellowcake) has influenced a policy ban prohibiting uranium exports from Western Australian ports. Western Australia has a nascent uranium industry, with four major projects at various stages of government approval. When these mines commence production, producers will be forced to truck the uranium oxide by road to either Port Adelaide or Port Darwin for export.
    [Show full text]