nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Pledge sought that laid-up Rosyth subs won’t go to Australia


By Clare Buchanan 27 May 24,  https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/24344727.pledge-sought-laid-up-rosyth-subs-wont-go-australia/

A ROSYTH councillor has called for assurances that rotting nuclear submarines will not be sent to Australia for disposal.

Brian Goodall, who is UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authority’s spokesperson on nuclear submarine decommissioning, said he has written to the UK’s foreign and defence secretaries. 

He’s asked for confirmation that vessels will not go overseas if a new Australian law passes without amendments.

Seven old subs have been laid up at Rosyth Dockyard for decades with Dreadnought being there for the longest – more than 40 years – waiting to be scrapped.

The UK and USA signed a pact with Australia to build and operate a new fleet of nuclear submarines which includes the provision of new conventionally armed, but nuclear powered, vessels for the Australian Navy.

To support the pact, legislators down under have proposed a new Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2024.

This appears to allow the disposal of high level radioactive waste from British and American submarines on Australian soil, and also for the storage of such materials in Australia from “a submarine that is not complete”.

In his letter to Lord Cameron and Grant Shapps, Cllr Goodall expressed concern that this could theoretically mean permitting “the towing of redundant UK boats from Rosyth and Devonport down under for disposal”.

He said he fears that this could result in the loss of local expertise and jobs if it comes into practice.

He adds: “Surely as the operators of our own submarines, the UK Government should remain responsible for the storage of the resultant high-level waste and for their safe decommissioning in home ports?

“Not only will this preserve the expertise in these matters that has developed after many years of trial and error, but, as a ward member for the Rosyth Dockyard, it will also preserve the jobs in my local community.”

Back in 2022, the Press reported pledges from the UK Government that all laid-up submarines would be gone as part of plans to “de-nuclearise Rosyth” by 2035.

Councillors were given an update on the programme to remove radioactive waste and turn the seven boats that have been parked at the dockyard for decades into “tin cans and razor blades”.

The Ministry of Defence have previously faced heavy criticism for the delays and sky-high costs in dealing with the nuclear legacy, with 27 Royal Navy subs to be scrapped in total.

May 28, 2024 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Indigenous opposition to nuclear waste being transported through their territory

Concerns growing surrounding nuclear waste management

Anishinabek, The voice of the Anishinabek nation. May 22, 2024, By Rick Garrick

FORT WILLIAM — Fort William’s Elysia Lone Elk is raising concerns about the transportation of nuclear materials through Northern Ontario if the proposed nuclear waste site near Ignace in Treaty #3 territory gets the go-ahead.

The Trans-Canada Hwy. was closed for about 20 hours in 2001 after a head-on collision between two transport trucks, one of which was transporting two canisters of radioactive material — iridium — about 25 kilometres east of Dryden, 105 kilometres west of Ignace. The collision resulted in “widespread destruction” and the deaths of four people, two from each vehicle, according to a news report. Officials from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission eventually arrived on site, found there was no leakage, and removed the canisters to a safe location.

“Water is life, it’s our most sacred resource,” Lone Elk says. “We need that to survive, animals need that to survive, and I don’t think we should be drilling underground and playing with aquifers with a very toxic harmful material that has a half-life beyond my conception of time.”

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) has been following a process to select a site for Canada’s plan to safely manage used nuclear fuel long-term since 2010, and has since narrowed down the potential sites to two areas for Canada’s deep geological repository, the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation-Ignace area in northwestern Ontario, and the Saugeen Ojibway Nation-South Bruce area in southwestern Ontario. If the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation-Ignace area is selected as the site, nuclear materials would have to be transported across Northern Ontario to the site.

“If it’s so safe, then why are you even transporting it, just bury it where it is? We know how dangerous those highways can be,” Lone Elk says. “The fact that no one on the [potential transportation] corridor gets a say is a democratic problem, very frustrating.”

Lone Elk adds that the nuclear material would be transported across Northern Ontario for the operating life of the proposed deep geological repository. The NWMO states on their website that based on current projections of Canada’s inventory of used nuclear fuel, transportation is anticipated to take about 40 years to complete. The NWMO adds that they are exploring road and/or rail options for transporting used nuclear fuel to the deep geological repository.

“The (Fort William) Band Council has passed two resolutions, one focusing on the proximity principle and then the other one specifically outright stating we do not support nuclear fuel being transported through our traditional territory,” Lone Elk says. “We’re trusting their scientists, we’re trusting industry scientists, we’re trusting industry factors; so when does the First Nation get to participate with Indigenous knowledge?”

Fort William Chief Michele Solomon says Fort William passed two resolutions in the last four years opposing nuclear waste being brought into Fort William territory.

“I think that it’s fair to say we stand with other First Nations in Robinson Superior Treaty territory to say that there’s nothing that gives us comfort that there would be any safety with this being transported through our communities,” Solomon says. “We see the increase in accidents on the highways going through our homelands so we’re strongly opposed to it.”

Solomon adds that their community has not been consulted on this issue.

Based on how the community has responded to other possible threats to our homelands, the people have been strongly opposed to other things that have been proposed for our territory,” Solomon says. “If the government wants to proceed with this, then they need to consult with the rights holders of this territory. So if it needs to pass through Robinson Superior territory, you need to consult with all of those communities.”

Solomon says it is not enough for the Nuclear Waste Management Organization to say that it is safe.

“I think there should be independent research done and that has not happened as far as I know,” Solomon says, noting that unhealthy things have been brought into her community’s airspace and waterways before. “So we are strongly opposed.”

The Assembly of First Nations is holding four Regional Dialogue Sessions: A Dialogue on the Transportation and Storage of Used Nuclear Fuel at locations across the country, including on May 22 at the Delta Hotels by Marriott in Thunder Bay.

--

May 27, 2024 Posted by | Canada, indigenous issues, wastes | Leave a comment

Indigenous Senator warns new laws will turn Australia into “the world’s nuclear waste dump”

Giovanni Torre – May 13, 2024,  https://nit.com.au/13-05-2024/11377/lidia-thorpe-warns-new-laws-will-turn-australia-into-the-worlds-nuclear-waste-dump?mc_cid=a41a81cd8c&mc_eid=261607298d

Senator Lidia Thorpe has warned new legislation to regulate nuclear safety of activities relating to AUKUS submarines has left Australia open to becoming “the world’s nuclear waste dump”.

Under the AUKUS deal, the federal government agreed to manage nuclear waste from Australian submarines, but under legislation to be introduced in June, Australia could be set to take nuclear waste from UK and US submarines also, Senator Thorpe warned.

The Gunnai, Gunditjmara and Djab Wurrung independent senator for Victoria called on the government to urgently amend the bill to prohibit high-level nuclear waste from being stored in Australia, a call she said is backed by experts in the field and addresses one of the major concerns raised during the inquiry into the bill.

“This legislation should be setting off alarm bells, it could mean that Australia becomes the world’s nuclear waste dump,” Senator Thorpe said on Monday.

“The government claims it has no intention to take AUKUS nuclear waste beyond that of Australian submarines, so they should have no reason not to close this loophole.

“Unless they amend this bill, how can we know they’re being honest? They also need to stop future governments from deciding otherwise. We can’t risk our future generations with this.”

In March, Senator Thorpe questioned Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong about the long-term cost from storage of nuclear waste, and whether Australia would take on foreign nuclear waste under the AUKUS deal. The minister responded that this cost is not included in the current $368 billion estimated for AUKUS, and she could not confirm that foreign waste would not be stored in Australia.

Senator Thorpe noted that the US Environmental Protection Agency warns high-level nuclear waste remains dangerous for at least 10,000 years; managing the risk posed by the decommissioned fuel rods from the AUKUS submarines would require storage and management that is future-proof, something that has proven challenging even in countries with advanced nuclear industries.

She also pointed out on Monday that the bill has also been criticised for lack of transparency and accountability; and allows the Minister of Defense to bypass public consultation and override federal and state laws to determine sites for the construction and operation of nuclear submarines, and the disposal of submarine nuclear waste.

Senator Thorpe said there are serious concerns about a lack of community consultation and the risk of violating First Peoples right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent.

Historically, governments have tried to push the storage of radioactive waste on remote First Nations communities, with successful campaigns in Coober Pedy, Woomera, Muckaty, Yappala in the Flinders Ranges and Kimba fighting off these attempts.

“We’ve seen how far the major parties will go to ingratiate themselves with the US. Labor must amend this bill to prove they’re putting the interests of our country first,” Senator Thorpe said.

“And they need to change the powers that allow the Minister and the Department to choose any place they like for nuclear waste facilities with no oversight or community consultation.

“That’s complete overreach and will undermine First Peoples rights for Free, Prior and Informed Consent under the United Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”

The senator said “time and again” governments have attempted to turn remote communities into nuclear waste dumps, with the risks from nuclear waste always being put on First Peoples.

“I’m concerned that this time it will be no different,” she said.

“The Bill allows the government to contract out liability for nuclear safety compliance, includes no emergency preparedness or response mechanisms, no consideration of nuclear safety guidelines from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency and leaves many other questions on nuclear safety unanswered.”

“This Bill fails to set out a nuclear safety framework for the AUKUS submarines and instead focuses on defence objectives, while sidestepping safety, transparency and accountability. It’s a negligent and reckless bill that should not pass the Senate.”

May 24, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, indigenous issues, wastes | Leave a comment

No nuke waste down under: NFLAs spokesperson seeks reassurance British nuclear subs will still be decommissioned at Rosyth

Secretaries of State, frankly this seems either a massive – and probably unintended – faux pax by Australian legislators, or an incredible gesture of largesse on the part of Britain’s AUKUS ally.

https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/no-nuke-waste-down-under-nflas-spokesperson-seeks-reassurance-british-nuclear-subs-will-still-be-decommissioned-at-rosyth/ 20 May 24

The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities have written to senior government ministers seeking their assurance that redundant British nuclear submarines will not be sent to Australia for disposal.

NFLA Spokesperson on Nuclear Submarine Decommissioning Councillor Brian Goodall, who represents the Rosyth Ward in Scotland where decommissioning is currently taking place, has written to the Foreign and Defence Secretaries asking for their confirmation that they will not be sending waste or decommissioning work overseas should a new Australian law be passed unamended.

The United Kingdom and United States have signed the AUKUS pact with Australia to build and operate a new fleet of nuclear submarines; this includes the provision of new conventionally armed, but nuclear powered, vessels for the Australian Navy.

To support the pact, Australian legislators have proposed a new Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2024, which appears to provide under Clauses 7 and 12 of the Bill for the disposal of high level radioactive waste from British and American submarines on Australian soil, and also for the storage of such materials in Australia from ‘a submarine that is not complete (for example, because it is being constructed or disposed of)’.

In response, members of the Australian Senate’s Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Standing Committee has recently recommended that ‘the Government consider amending the Bill so that a distinction is made between Australia’s acceptance of low-level nuclear waste from AUKUS partners, but non-acceptance of high-level nuclear waste’.[i]

In his letter to Lord Cameron and Grant Shapps, Councillor Goodall expresses his concerned that this could theoretically mean ‘permitting towing redundant UK boats from Rosyth and Devonport down under for disposal’. Councillor Goodall fears that, were this to become practice and not just theory, local expertise and the jobs of his constituents could be lost.

Councillor Goodall ends by an appeal for the maintenance of the status quo as surely ‘the UK Government should remain responsible for the storage of the resultant high-level waste (HLW) and for the safe decommissioning of British nuclear submarines in home ports.’

nds…For more information please contact Richard Outram, NFLA Secretary, by email to richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk

The letter sent to Lord Cameron and Grant Shapps on 17 May reads:

The Lord David Cameron, Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs,

The Rt. Hon. Grant Shapps MP, Secretary of State for Defence

Dear Secretaries of State,

The future disposal of AUKUS submarine waste in Australia

As the Spokesperson on Nuclear Submarine Decommissioning for the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities, I am writing to you to seek your assurance that the United Kingdom would not avail itself of any facility provided by the Australian Government to dispose of any of its own radioactive waste resulting from the operation of British nuclear submarines.

For some inexplicable reason, the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2024, which has recently been subject of a Senate Inquiry, appears to provide within Clauses 7 and 12 of the Bill for the disposal of waste from UK and US operated submarines, in addition to that from Australian navy vessels. The legislation specifically references the ‘managing, storing or disposing of radioactive waste from an AUKUS submarine’ in a bespoke facility, with an AUKUS submarine being described as ‘an Australian submarine or a UK/US submarine’. Furthermore, it provides for the storage of such arisings from ‘a submarine that is not complete (for example, because it is being constructed or disposed of)’, which might even theoretically be read as permitting towing redundant UK boats from Rosyth and Devonport down under for disposal!

Secretaries of State, frankly this seems either a massive – and probably unintended – faux pax by Australian legislators, or an incredible gesture of largesse on the part of Britain’s AUKUS ally.

Opponents of the Bill are now seeking amendments to ensure that the revised Bill does not provide for the storage of High-Level Waste from UK and US submarines, nor provide for the storage of allied vessels during a prolonged process of construction or decommissioning.

Surely as the operators of our own submarines, the UK Government should remain responsible for the storage of the resultant HLW and for their safe decommissioning in home ports. Not only will this preserve the expertise in these matters that has developed after many years of trial and error, but, as a Ward Member for the Rosyth Dockyard, it will also preserve the jobs in my local community.

I am writing to seek your reassurance that this shall remain the case.

Thank you kindly for giving this letter your consideration. I very much look forward to your reply. Please respond by email to the NFLA Secretary Richard Outram at richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk

Yours sincerely,

Councillor Brian Goodall, Rosyth Ward, Fife Council

[i] https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/ANNPSBills23/Report Recommendation 3

May 23, 2024 Posted by | wastes | Leave a comment

  ALL reactor-produced plutonium is usable in nuclear weapons.

Gordon Edwards 19 May 4

Whenever plutonium is created in a nuclear reactor, it is always mostly plutonium-239. The higher isotopes – plutonium-240, plutonium-241, plutonium-242 – are always present in diminishing order of importance. 

A lighter “burnup” (a shorter residence time in the reactor) will reduce the opportunity for the heavier isotopes to be created (by repeated neutron captures), and so the relative percentage of plutonium-239 will be that much greater. 

The important thing to know is that ALL reactor-produced plutonium is usable in nuclear weapons, including the even-numbered isotopes.

See www.ccnr.org/plute_for_bombs_GE_2024.pdf 

Plutonium-238 is only a very small fraction of the plutonium in used reactor fuel. By itself, plutonium-238 is the only isotope of plutonium that probably cannot be used for bomb-making, simply because it generates too much spontaneous heat for the bomb to be stable (i.e. the concentniopnal explosive=s needed for detonation will likely melt.)

However the presence of very small amounts of plutonium-238, as in any plutonium extracted from used nuclear fuel, is not a serious problem..

May 20, 2024 Posted by | - plutonium, Reference | Leave a comment

Nuclear waste to be buried 650ft under the English countryside.

 Swathes of nuclear waste are set to be buried in the English countryside
after ministers agreed to dig a 650ft pit starting this decade. The
facility, which has yet to be allocated a site, will hold some of the 5m
tonnes of waste that was generated by nuclear power stations over the past
seven decades.

This will ease pressure on the 17 nuclear waste disposal
plants currently in operation around the country, which consist of giant
sheds and cooling ponds. The largest facility is the Sellafield site in
Cumbria.

Plans for the 650ft pit will see it house so-called
intermediate-level waste, possibly in a mine on a pre-existing nuclear site
to minimise planning objections. The facility will be separate from the
much deeper geological disposal site that will hold the UK’s most
dangerous waste, such as plutonium, which is unlikely to be built until
after 2050.

The proposals come amid fears Britain’s stockpile of nuclear
waste will grow in the coming decades with nowhere to put it. Concerns are
particularly acute as the Government is currently planning to build at
least three new nuclear power stations. This will put the country at odds
with the 1976 review of nuclear waste policy by the Royal Commission on
Environmental Pollution, which warned the UK was accumulating nuclear waste
so fast that it should stop building reactors until it had a solution.

Ministers want to brand nuclear energy as a “green” and
“sustainable” fuel. However, experts on the Government’s own advisory
body, the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, have said such terms
are misleading if there is no safe place to store radioactive waste.

A government spokesman said: “In addition to long-term plans to dispose of
the most hazardous radioactive waste in a geological disposal facility
hundreds of metres underground, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will
explore a facility closer to the surface for less hazardous radioactive
waste. “While a geological disposal facility is not expected to be ready
until the 2050s, a shallower disposal facility – which is up to 200m
below ground – could be available within 10 years.”

 Telegraph 16th May 2024

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/16/nuclear-waste-stored-650ft-under-english-countryside/

May 19, 2024 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Japan starts 6th discharge of Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater

CGTN, 17-May-2024

Japan on Friday started the sixth round of release of nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean.

Despite opposition among local fishermen, residents as well as backlash from the international community, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), the plant’s operator, started releasing the radioactive wastewater in the morning, the second round in fiscal 2024.

The same as the previous rounds, about 7,800 tonnes of wastewater are being discharged from about a kilometer off the coast of Fukushima Prefecture via an underwater tunnel until June 4.

According to the TEPCO, the concentrations of all radioactive substances other than tritium in the water stored in the tank scheduled for release were below the national release standards, while the concentration of tritium that cannot be removed will be diluted with seawater.

The Chinese Embassy in Japan expressed firm opposition to this unilateral move of ocean discharge. While safety and reliability have yet to be ensured, Japan’s dumping of nuclear-contaminated water has repeatedly raised risks to neighboring countries and marine ecology, a spokesperson for the embassy said.

The spokesperson called on the Japanese side to attach great importance to the concerns at home and abroad and to fully cooperate in setting up an independent international monitoring arrangement that remains effective in the long haul and has the substantive participation of stakeholders.

………………………….. In fiscal 2024, the TEPCO plans to discharge a total of 54,600 tonnes of contaminated water in seven rounds, which contains approximately 14 trillion becquerels of tritium.  https://news.cgtn.com/news/2024-05-17/news-1tFIzr3u9Da/p.html

May 19, 2024 Posted by | Japan, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities welcome Traws abandonment from New Nuclear plans

https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/welsh-nflas-welcome-traws-abandonment-from-new-nuclear-plans/

The Welsh Nuclear Free Local Authorities Forum hope that the decision made by Great British Nuclear to temporarily postpone plans for new nuclear at Trawsfynydd at this time might become a permanent one.

In March, responding to the UK Government consultation on the siting of new nuclear plants after 2025, the Welsh NFLAs said that the Trawsfynydd site was wholly inappropriate for redevelopment as it lies within the beautiful Eryri National Park. Ministers have previously agreed that any Geological Disposal Facility will not be in the Lake District National Park, and the NFLAs have called for this principal to be applied as a blanket ban on new nuclear plants in National Parks, at World Heritage Sites and in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Great British Nuclear has just announced that the site ‘may not be able to deploy quite as quickly as some other sites’, with reports that site was too small and lacked sufficient cooling water to support the deployment of so-called Small Modular Reactors for the foreseeable future.

Trawsfynydd had an operating Magnox nuclear reactor on site until 1991. It was unique in being inland and cooled by the water of an artificial lake, but it is also a brutalist eyesore standing out stark and ugly against the idyllic backdrop of mountains and forest. The plant is now being dismantled by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, a British taxpayer funded body responsible for decommissioning redundant nuclear plant and for managing Britain’s radioactive waste inventory.

To the NFLAs, locating a new nuclear power plant in any National Park would be entirely incompatible with the Sandford Principal. From 1971 until 1974, Lord Sandford chaired a committee which examined the future management of National Parks in England and Wales:

‘National Park Authorities can do much to reconcile public enjoyment with the preservation of natural beauty by good planning and management and the main emphasis must continue to be on this approach wherever possible. But even so, there will be situations where the two purposes are irreconcilable… Where this happens, priority must be given to the conservation of natural beauty’.

We want to see the old Trawsfynydd plant decommissioned, and the site cleared and landscaped, as soon as practicable. n our view, any proposed new medical isotope facility would be better located at Bangor University, which has an established academic nuclear faculty and has much better transport links. The activities of the Welsh taxpayer funded Cwmni Egino, which was established to pursue new nuclear at the site, are entirely at variance with the stated ambition of the Welsh Government to source the nation’s domestically consumed electricity from truly ‘green’ sources. The body should be abolished, and its resources used to support the development of Welsh renewable energy projects.

May 19, 2024 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Australia risks being ‘world’s nuclear waste dump’ unless Aukus laws changed, critics say

Labor-chaired inquiry calls for legislation to rule out accepting high-level nuclear waste from US and UK submarines among other recommendations

Daniel Hurst Foreign affairs and defence correspondent,  https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/13/australia-aukus-deal-submarines-critics-nuclear-waste

Australia risks becoming the “world’s nuclear waste dump” unless the Albanese government moves to rewrite its proposed Aukus laws, critics say.

A Labor-chaired inquiry has called for the legislative safeguard to specifically rule out accepting high-level nuclear waste from the US and the UK. One of the members of a Senate committee that reviewed the draft laws, independent senator Lidia Thorpe, said the legislation “should be setting off alarm bells” because “it could mean that Australia becomes the world’s nuclear waste dump”.

The government’s bill for regulating nuclear safety talks about “managing, storing or disposing of radioactive waste from an Aukus submarine”, which it defines broadly as Australia, UK or US submarines.

In a report published on Monday, the Senate’s foreign affairs, defence and trade legislation committee said this wording did not reflect the government’s promise not to accept high-level nuclear waste.

It recommended that the government consider “amending the bill so that a distinction is made between Australia’s acceptance of low-level nuclear waste from Aukus partners, but non-acceptance of high-level nuclear waste”.

The government has left the door open to accepting low-level waste from US and UK nuclear-powered submarines when they conduct rotational visits to Western Australia in the first phase of the Aukus plan. Low-level waste contains small amounts of radioactivity and include items such as personal protective equipment, gloves and wipes.

“According to the Australian Submarine Agency, nuclear-powered submarines only generate around a ‘small skip bin’ of low-level naval nuclear waste per submarine per year and that intermediate- and high-level waste will not become a concern until the first naval nuclear reactor requires disposal in the mid-2050s,” the Senate committee report said.

The government has yet to decide on the location for the disposal of radioactive waste from the submarines.

But infrastructure works proposed for HMAS Stirling – the naval base in Western Australia – to support the increased rotational visits are expected to include an operational waste storage facility for low-level radioactive waste.

The Department of Defence has argued any changes to the definitions should not prevent “regulatory control of the management of low-level radioactive waste from UK or US submarines” as part of those rotational visits.

Thorpe, an independent senator, said the call to prohibit high-level nuclear waste from being stored in Australia was “backed by experts in the field and was one of the major concerns raised during the inquiry into the bill”.

“The government claims it has no intention to take Aukus nuclear waste beyond that of Australian submarines, so they should have no reason not to close this loophole,” Thorpe said.

“They also need to stop future governments from deciding otherwise. We can’t risk our future generations with this.”

The government’s proposed legislation would set up an Australian naval nuclear power safety regulator to oversee the safety of the nuclear-powered submarines.

The committee made eight recommendations, including setting “a suitable minimum period of separation” to prevent a revolving door from the Australian Defence Force or Department of Defence to the new regulator.

The main committee report acknowledged concerns in the community that Australia might become a “dumping ground” for the Aukus countries, but it said the term was “not helpful in discussing the very serious question of national responsibility for nuclear waste”.

It also said the bill should be amended to ensure the regulator was transparent about “any accidents or incidents” with the soon-to-be-established parliamentary oversight committee on defence.

The Labor chair of the committee, Raff Ciccone, said the recommendations would “further strengthen the bill” and help “ensure Australia maintains the highest standards of nuclear safety”.

In a dissenting report, the Greens senator David Shoebridge said the legislation was “deeply flawed”, including because the regulator would report to the defence minister.

“The proposed regulator lacks genuine independence, the process for dealing with nuclear waste is recklessly indifferent to community or First Nations interests and the level of secrecy is a threat to both the environment and the public interest,” Shoebridge said.

The defence minister, Richard Marles, was contacted for comment.

May 15, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics international, wastes | Leave a comment

Government asks Genkai mayor to accept site survey to host nuclear waste

 https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/05/08/japan/government-asks-town-to-accept-nuclear-waste-site-survey/—

Industry minister Ken Saito has asked the mayor of the town of Genkai in Saga Prefecture to accept a so-called literature survey, as part of the process for selecting a final disposal site for high-level radioactive waste from nuclear plants.

Saito sought understanding from Genkai Mayor Shintaro Wakiyama at a meeting in Tokyo on Tuesday, saying that “the literature survey is not directly connected to the selection.”

Last month, the Genkai town assembly approved a petition submitted by local business groups asking for the literature survey request to be accepted.

“I’m torn between the town assembly’s decision and my thinking,” Wakiyama told reporters after the meeting with Saito. The mayor said that he will make a decision by the end of this month.

A literature survey is the first of three stages in the selection process for disposal sites, and involves the condition of geological strata being examined on paper, based on maps and other data.

So far, a literature survey has been accepted only by the town of Suttsu and the village of Kamoenai, both in Hokkaido.

For a literature survey to be conducted, a local government must apply for or accept a central government request.

May 10, 2024 Posted by | Japan, wastes | Leave a comment

Nuclear waste at center of testy Nevada Senate race

The Hill , BY NICK ROBERTSON AND ZACK BUDRYK – 05/05/24

Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sam Brown is under fire from Democrats for 2022 remarks in which he expressed support for plans to store federal nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain.

Nevada lawmakers from both parties have strongly resisted a federal plan to turn the isolated southwest Nevada mountain — about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas — into a nuclear waste storage facility since the idea was first proposed in the 1980s.

But Brown has expressed support for the idea in the past, and he can be heard in a new recording from his 2022 campaign saying the state risked losing out on an opportunity if it blocked the plans.

“If we don’t act soon, other states … are assessing whether or not they can essentially steal that opportunity from us,” he said in the recording, first obtained by The Los Angeles Times.

Brown, who is seen as a favorite in Nevada’s GOP Senate primary this June, said in a statement to The Hill he was not actively calling for the reopening of Yucca Mountain, but that future proposals should be considered.

“I am not strictly committed to opening Yucca Mountain at this time,” Brown said. “However, I will consider all thoroughly vetted future proposals, with the safety of Nevadans being my top priority, while ensuring the proposals are substantially economically beneficial.”

Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), who is running for reelection, quickly seized on the comments. Rosen is seen as vulnerable this fall in a state where former President Trump is up in polls. The Cook Political Report lists her seat as a toss-up.

“For decades, Nevadans across party lines have been clear that we will not allow our state to become the dumping ground for the rest of the nation’s nuclear waste,” Rosen said in a statement. “I’ve been fighting against Washington politicians trying to force nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain since Sam Brown was still living in Texas, and his extreme support for this dangerous and unpopular project underscores how little he understands the needs of our state.”…………………………………………………. more https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4642131-nuclear-waste-at-center-of-testy-nevada-senate-race/

May 8, 2024 Posted by | politics, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Land Defence Alliance stands united against the burial of nuclear waste

The group held a rally in Waverley Park on Tuesday afternoon.

NWO Newswatch, Clint Fleury, Apr 30, 2024 

THUNDER BAY – With the decision on where Canada will store its nuclear waste looming, four of the six First Nations representatives from the Land Defence Alliance held a rally in Waverley Park to voice their concerns and dangers of this controversial project.

“We’re concerned about future leaks and accidents and we’re very concerned that if that should happen, it could contaminate the local environment like the animals and also the air and the grounds,” said Grassy Narrows Chief Rudy Turtle in an interview with Dougall Media.

Turtle was the first to take the microphone and send out a profound message of solidarity with his fellow First Nations who are opposed to the burial of used nuclear waste in the Revell Lake area.

Currently, Ignace Township and nearby Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation are each in a “willingness process” to decide whether they will be hosts for a deep geological repository between their communities.

Outside of Ignace and Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation, no other municipality or First Nation communities have a right to vote on their willingness to allow the storage of nuclear waste in Northwestern Ontario.

In southern Ontario, the municipalities of South Bruce and Saugeen Ojibway Nation are also considering being willing hosts to the repository where it is situated near them.

For many, there are too many variables and “what if” questions as the deep geological repository project slowly becomes less like a science fiction concept.   

The trouble is that for many First Nation communities, the government’s track record of leaving contaminated industrial sites on treaty land has given way to skepticism.   ……………………………………………………………………..

Turtle explained: “It’s coming from down south which is like 28 hours of driving, or whether it’s coming by train, it’s still like over 20 hours and there’s always the possibility of an accident. We’ve seen it happen with other chemicals. We’ve seen it happen with oil transportation.

“So, the potential, the possibility is there of an accident and people should be concerned about that. The towns that are in between during those 20-hour travel times. Those towns should be concerned. Those towns should be worried about the potential of having nuclear waste dumped or accidentally dumped along their communities.”

At the end of the rally, the Land Defence Alliance stood united to say no to the burial of nuclear waste in Northwestern Ontario.  https://www.nwonewswatch.com/local-news/land-defence-alliance-stands-united-against-the-burial-of-nuclear-waste-8676906

May 7, 2024 Posted by | Canada, indigenous issues, wastes | Leave a comment

Bill before Australian Parliament would allow UK and USA to dump decades of high-level nuclear waste in Australia.

Dave Sweeney, 6 May 24

Minister Marles has a Bill before Parliament to establish a dedicated regulator for military radioactive waste arising from AUKUS – it is deeply flawed legislation but a particular concern is that it would permit Australia hosting UK and US naval nuclear waste – including waste from six decades of their nuclear submarine programs.

Media attention to this has been limited apart from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/02/poison-portal-us-and-uk-could-send-nuclear-waste-to-australia-under-aukus-inquiry-told and a story from today’s Australian.

ACF has put in a submission and a supplementary and presented to a current inquiry by the Senates Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee.

This Committee – https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/ANNPSBills23 – is due to report on May 13 and is likely to be supportive of the plan and there are concerns that Marles may look to do a deal with Dutton and steam this legislation through under the cover of the Budget week.

Marles states that the government ‘has no intention’ to do this but we have clear confirmation that the legislation would allow for the import and hosting of AUKUS partners military waste.

On 13 March 2024, the Chair of the Senate Committee investigating the bill asked Government officials: “could you also clarify whether there is scope in the legislation for Australia to take high-level waste from the US and UK submarines? Mr Kim Moy from the Department of Defence confirmed that this was the case. In a subsequent hearing on April 22, Senator David Shoebridge sought to establish whether other stakeholders were aware of this fact. Mr Peter Quinlivian, Senior Legal Counsel for weapons manufacturer BAE Systems Australia, admitted that “the legislation, as drafted, is in language that would accommodate that scenario”.

This loophole must be closed

May 6, 2024 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, politics, wastes | , , , , | Leave a comment

The undersea nuclear graveyard now more costly than HS2

Behind the much delayed plan to store the radioactive waste generated over decades

A vast subsea nuclear graveyard planned to hold Britain’s burgeoning piles of radioactive waste is set to become the biggest, longest-lasting and most expensive infrastructure project ever undertaken in the UK… ……………………………..(Subscribers only)  https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/05/66bn-nuclear-graveyard-became-expensive-challenge/

May 6, 2024 Posted by | oceans, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

To find a place to store spent nuclear fuel, Congress needs to stop trying to revive Yucca Mountain

Bulletin, By David Klaus | April 30, 2024

A recent congressional hearing strangely resembled the film Groundhog Day. The hearing—titled “American Nuclear Energy Expansion: Spent Fuel Policy and Innovation”—not only rekindled a decades-old debate about whether to recycle spent nuclear fuel from reactors; it also provided a platform to relive yet again the fantasy that somehow the US government can resolve all of the political, legal, and technical issues necessary to build a permanent nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

The Republican leadership of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce clearly supported one path forward for commercial spent fuel. In her opening remarks, committee chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican from Washington state, urged the committee to “update the law and build state support for a permanent repository at Yucca Mountain.” In his own opening remarks, Jeff Duncan, a South Carolina Republican and chair of the subcommittee hosting the hearing, lamented that “[u]nfortunately, the political objections of one state, NOT based on scientific reality, blocked the [Yucca Mountain] repository from being licensed and constructed.” Yucca Mountain was a recurrent theme in witness testimony and congressional questioning throughout the hearing.

But to really advance federal policy and innovation on spent nuclear fuel, Congress needs to learn the lessons of Yucca Mountain and to stop trying to revive it.

In the 2020 presidential campaign, Donald Trump and Joe Biden agreed there shouldn’t be an underground repository to permanently store nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, and that it was time for everyone else to accept that the project was finally off the table. As was the case four years ago, it is very unlikely the next administration, be it led by President Biden or President Trump, is going to reverse its position and attempt to revive a multibillion-dollar infrastructure project that has been dormant for over a decade.

Even if support were to emerge at the federal level, attempting to obtain permits for the facility would create an extraordinary legal and regulatory morass. The state of Nevada alone had filed over 200 objections to the Yucca Mountain construction and operating permits that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was considering before the process for considering them was suspended in 2011…………………………………………………………………………………… more https://thebulletin.org/2024/04/to-find-a-place-to-store-spent-nuclear-fuel-congress-needs-to-stop-trying-to-revive-yucca-mountain/

May 5, 2024 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »