TODAY. AUKUS nuclear pact – a lame duck?
What is AUKUS? It’s a weird nuclear pact – loftily described as a trilateral security pact for the Indo-Pacific region.
In reality it’s an agreement made without the knowledge of the Australian people, without discussion in Parliament , to make Australia pay close to $400 billion for second-hand nuclear attack submarines, including their radioactive trash.
How did this agreement come about?
In 2021, Australia’s then Prime Minister, Scott Morrison was a Trump-like figure, basically incompetent, but willing to do anything to get his face on the international media. He organised this extraordinary agreement, much to the joy of the nuclear lobby and Western war-hawks in general.
Morrison caused an international incident, in breaking Australia’s contract with France for non-nuclear submarines, (which would be much better suited for Australia’s coastal security monitoring”)
Is there opposition in Australia to this costly boondoggle?
Yes, but not enough. With the media about 70% owned by Murdoch outlets, the Australian public was fed a steady diet of what a threat China is to us, and how the AUKUS nuclear submarine will save us and blah blah.
And then, we got a new Prime Minister – Labor’s Anthony Albanese, (who has a history of opposition to nuclear). It was a national sigh of relief to get rid of the narcissistic and unpredictable Morrison. But ’twas too much to hope that Albanese would have the guts to stand up to the USA, or indeed to appear “weak” to the Australian public.
What is the present situation with AUKUS?
Well, apart from the misgivings of Australia’s near neighbours, like Indonesia, and the Nuclear-Free Zone, now there’s even trouble in the USA camp. On 12 March came the Tuesday release of the Biden administration’s 2025 defence budget request, – with reduced funding, well below the production rate of 2.33 subs a year the US says is necessary to sell any submarines to Australia. They got cold feet about the deal, as the USA is struggling to build the nuclear submarines that it needs for itself.
Meanwhile the American opposition, whatever you think of Donald Trump, is at the moment less keen on the idea of waging war against China. I mean – they probably do want to, – but they don’t like spending the money on making military stuff for another country.
There are, of course, other problems with the AUKUS nuclear submarine plan. Like the fact these subs will almost certainly be obsolete before they ever get under the water. China, with its shallow coastal waters, is making lots of small drones , that could detect and destroy these nuclear submarines. The AUKUS sub and its peers are intended for surveillance only. but they could be fitted with nuclear warheads. Perhaps that’s the plan. Who knows?
Meanwhile – is there a chance that Australia could avoid this costly boondoggle? And actually have the money to meet some real needs?
Australia’s State governments fight each other to avoid having to store nuclear wastes
Expect weapons-grade NIMBYism as leaders fight over where to store AUKUS nuclear waste
Given that proposals for even low-level nuclear waste sites have been rejected by communities, who is going to take on the radioactive waste created by our new military pact?
ANTON NILSSON, FEB 01, 2024, Crikey,
here should Australia store the waste created by its investment in nuclear-driven submarines? It’s a question no-one knows the answer to yet — although we do know a couple of places where the radioactive waste won’t be stored. As the search for a solution continues, expect politicians to try to kick the radioactive can further down the road — and expect some weapons-grade NIMBYism from state and territory leaders if they’re asked to help out.
In August last year, plans to build a new nuclear waste storage facility in Kimba in South Australia were scrapped. As Griffith University emeritus professor and nuclear expert Ian Lowe put it in a Conversation piece, “the plan was doomed from the start” — because the government didn’t do adequate community consultation before deciding on the spot.
Resources Minister Madeleine King acknowledged as much when she told Parliament the government wouldn’t challenge a court decision that sided with traditional owners in Kimba, who opposed the dump: “We have said all along that a National Radioactive Waste Facility requires broad community support … which includes the whole community, including the traditional owners of the land. This is not the case at Kimba.”
Kimba wasn’t even supposed to store the high-level waste that will be created by AUKUS submarines — it was meant to store low-level and intermediate-level waste, the kind generated from nuclear medicine, scientific research, and industrial technologies. As King told Parliament, Australia already has enough low-level waste to fill five Olympic swimming pools, and enough intermediate-level waste for two more pools.
Where the waste from AUKUS will go is a question without answer. Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said in March last year the first reactor from a nuclear-powered submarine won’t have to be disposed of until the 2050s. He added the government will set out its process for finding dump sites within a year — which means Marles has until March this year to spill the details.
“The final storage site of high-level waste resulting from AUKUS remains a mystery,” ANU environmental historian Jessica Urwin told Crikey. “Considering the historical controversies wrought by low- and intermediate-level waste disposal in Australia over many decades, it is hard to see how any Australian government, current or future, will get a high-level waste disposal facility off the ground.”
In his comments last year, Marles gave a hint as to the government’s intentions: he said it would search for sites “on the current or future Defence estate”.
One such Defence estate site that’s been the focus of some speculation is Woomera in South Australia. “A federal government decision to scrap plans for a nuclear waste dump outside the South Australian town of Kimba has increased speculation it will instead build a bigger facility on Defence land at Woomera that could also accommodate high-level waste from the AUKUS submarines,” the Australian Financial Review reported last year.
Urwin said such a proposal could trigger local opposition as well.
Due to Woomera’s proximity to the former Maralinga and Emu Field nuclear testing sites, and therefore its connections to some of the darkest episodes in Australia’s nuclear history, communities impacted by the tests and other nuclear impositions (such as uranium mining) have historically pushed back against the siting of nuclear waste at Woomera,” she said.
Australian Submarine Agency documents released under freedom of information laws in December last year show there is little appetite among state leaders to help solve the conundrum.
A briefing note to Defence secretary Greg Moriarty informed him that “state premiers (Victoria, Western Australia, Queensland, and South Australia) [have sought] to distance their states from being considered as potential locations”. ………………………………………………….. more https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/02/01/aukus-nuclear-waste-storage-australia/
Queensland’s Smile With Kids helping Fukushima children to rebuild their lives
On shaky ground: Australian uranium and Fukushima
‘There is a clear chain of consequence from a failed nuclear facility on Japan’s East coast to the back of a big yellow truck at an Australian mine-site.’
THE POWERFUL EARTHQUAKE that struck off the coast of Fukushima prefecture in Japan last week, is a stark reminder of the deep and continuing safety concerns following the 2011 nuclear disaster.
The stricken reactor complex remains polluted and porous and every added complication leads to further contamination.
Closer to home the renewed tectonic instability highlights the need for urgent Australian government action on the industry that directly fuelled the continuing nuclear crisis.
In October 2011, Robert Floyd, the director general of the Department of Foregn Affairs and Trade (DFAT) Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office (ASNO) confirmed to the Federal Parliament that
“Australian obligated nuclear material [uranium] was at the Fukushima Daiichi site and in each of the reactors.”
Rocks dug in Kakadu and northern South Australia are the source of Fukushima’s radioactive fallout. There is a clear chain of consequence from a failed nuclear facility on Japan’s East coast to the back of a big yellow truck at an Australian mine-site.
The Federal Government has cravenly ignored this fact and also remains resistant to an independent cost-benefit assessment of Australia’s uranium trade, as directly requested by the then UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon in the wake of Fukushima.
To date there has been no meaningful response from any Australian government, uranium company, uranium industry body or regulator. There have been political platitudes and industry assurances but no credible attention or action.
Indeed, instead of the requested industry review there has been a retreat from responsibility and a rush to rip and ship more uranium ore by fast-tracking risky and contested new uranium sales deals, including to India and Ukraine.
Despite Canberra’s irresponsible fire sale approach the Australian uranium sector is facing tough times.
“Rocks dug in Kakadu and northern South Australia are the source of Fukushima’s radiocative fallout.”
In June, BHP Billiton, the world’s biggest miner, confirmed that it scrapped its long planned, budgeted and approved Olympic Dam expansion in South Australia because of the impact of the Fukushima disaster on uranium demand and prices.
BHP says:
‘Fukushima changed everything.’
And the result is clear — nuclear power’s contribution to the global energy mix is shrinking and is being eclipsed by renewables. Uranium operations are on hold, extended care and maintenance or well behind planning schedules and prices, profits, share value and employment numbers have gone south.
IBISWorld’s March 2015 market report shows that less than 1,000 people are employed in Australia’s uranium industry. The uranium industry accounts for 0.01 per cent of jobs in Australia and in the 20131/14 financial year, accounted for a scant 0.19 per cent of national export revenue. Despite the uranium industry’s promises, uranium mining is not and never will be a significant source of employment or wealth in Australia.
Fukushima is a global game changer with Australian fingerprints. Like Japan, the Australian uranium sector is also on shaky ground and is in urgent need of review. This high risk, low return sector lacks social licence and it is time for less excuses and more examination of the asbestos of the 21st Century.
Human error the biggest danger in nuclear technology
In 2007, six nuclear warheads were transported from Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, to Louisiana’s Barksdale Air Force Base – by mistake. It’s a pattern of mistakes where there’s zero room for error.
When We’re Our Own Biggest Nuclear Threat Gizmodo Australia, By Brian Barrett November 23, 2010 Continue reading
Speculating on other possible nuclear or uranium targets for Stuxnet computer worm
Dragons, Tigers, Pearls, and Yellowcake: 4 Stuxnet Targeting Scenarios, Forbes, Nov. 22 2010 – by Jeffrey CarrIn all of the thousands of words that have been printed about Stuxnet, and the many interviews given, there’s been almost no discussion of alternative targeting scenarios for the Stuxnet worm…. Continue reading
Millions spent on lobbying gets results for Body Scanner Radiation company
spent $271,500 on lobbying so far this year too. In return it has received $41.2 million in government contracts for their scanners this year.
Body Scanner Radiation Machine Makers Spent Millions On Lobbying, Wall Street Window, – Mike Swanson (11/22/10) The truth comes out. USA Today reports that L-3 Communications, which makes the TSA radiation scanning machines at the center of controversy spent millions on lobbying government officials over the past few years to get government contracts to build the machines. Continue reading
Australian soldiers, Aborigines, civilians exposed to depleted uranium in ’50s nuclear tests
The government is preparing a study of those who may have been affected, including soldiers, and Aboriginal and civilian populations in the area at the time of testing.
Depleted uranium used at Maralinga Paul Langley’s Nuclear History Blog, 23 Nov 10, Australian Government Confirms Depleted Uranium Used in 1950s The Australian Federal Government announced that it will conduct a health study of Australian volunteers who worked at Maralinga, a British nuclear test site. Continue reading
North Korea shows off new nuclear complex
Experts caution, however, that true hydrogen bombs are quite difficult to make, so it seems unlikely that North Korea would succeed in that step anytime soon.
North Koreans Unveil Vast New Plant for Nuclear Use, NYTimes.com, By DAVID E. SANGER November 20, 2010 WASHINGTON — North Korea showed a visiting American nuclear scientist last week a vast new facility it secretly and rapidly built to enrich uranium, confronting the Obama administration with the prospect that the country is preparing to expand its nuclear arsenal or build a far more powerful type of atomic bomb…….. Continue reading
USA keen to market nuclear power to Australia
The deal would allow for the United States to export nuclear technology, material and equipment to Australia for atomic power generation
Legislation Would Protect U.S.-Australia Atomic Trade Deal, NTI: Global Security Newswire , Nov. 18, 2010 Recently introduced U.S. legislation would ensure that a civilian nuclear trade agreement with Australia would still enter into force even if its time runs out in Congress, Continue reading
Despite its own committee’s warnings, Australian govt quietly does uranium deal with Russia
Joint Standing Committee of Treaties (JSCOT) pointed out that uranium sales to Russia should not proceed unless significant security measures were addressed. Few if any of these measures have been addressed since then.
it seems to be just another case of “business as usual” in Australian politics, in which our country’s resources are sold off to the highest bidder, regardless of the dangerous impacts such sales add to geo-regional security.
New Risks from Australia Russia Uranium Deal – On Line Opinion – By James Norman 19/11/2010 Late last week on the sidelines of the G20 meeting in South Korea, Prime Minister Julia Gillard ratified a deal with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev that should send shockwaves through the Australian electorate. Continue reading
The halt on German nuclear transports to Russia
Thousands attend unprecedented anti-nuclear protests in Germany: Local action achieves global impact. Bellona, 19 Nov 10, GORBLEN, Germany .……..The deal that the Germans were preparing with the Russians involved the transportation of 951 spent nuclear fuel assemblies burnt in a research reactor in Rossendorf, Eastern Germany, from a temporary storage facility in Ahaus, Western Germany, to the chemical reprocessing plant Mayak in Russia for final disposal.On November 13, the German news agency DPA reported that authorities in Hamburg – namely, city mayor Christoph Ahlhaus – had refused to allow the port to be used as a transit point for the delivery.
“In October, another decision to refuse to participate in the transportation of nuclear waste had come from the authorities in Bremerhaven, also a port. Therefore, for the time being, there is no suitable seaport in Germany that would agree to serve as a transit harbour [for the waste]. The German government says shipping the 18 containers with nuclear waste may be postponed until April 2011,” the DPA report said (rendered here from the Russian translation). ……
Despite Republicans’ electoral success, nuclear power industry’s future in USA looking grim
Nationwide, ground has been broken for just four reactors, two twin-unit nuclear plants since the 1970s……both are in locations that are insulated from the market, in Georgia and South Carolina. In both locations, the business risk rests with the ratepayers, not with the shareholders…….
G.O.P. Gains on Capitol Hill May Not Advance Nuclear Power, NYTimes.com, By MATTHEW L. WALD, November 16, 2010 WASHINGTON THE outspoken supporters of nuclear power are mostly Republicans, and the Republicans are about to take control of the House of Representatives and gain six seats in the Senate. Is this good news for nuclear power? Continue reading
Guangdong nuclear plant radiation leak reported
Radiation Leak Reported at Guangdong Nuclear Power Plant, Economic Observer News-, By Ruoji TangShare By Yu Huapeng and Hua Yan, November 17, 2010,Translated by Ruoji Tang Original Article: [Chinese] On October 23rd, during a routine inspection of the No. 1 reactor at Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant, a small leak of radioactive material was discovered, the third leak detected in a Hong Kong Nuclear Investment Company plant since May this year. Yesterday, Daya Bay Nuclear Power Operations Management Ltd. Co. released a report stating that one of the heat removal pipes had been found to be defective but had since been dealt with….Radiation Leak Reported at Guangdong Nuclear Power Plant- Economic Observer News- China business, politics, law, and social issues
Port Hope residents should sue govt over radioactive wastes
OSHAWA — The people of Port Hope should sue the federal government “to the tune of millions of dollars” for the exposure to radiation from Cameco, prominent anti-nuclear activist Dr. Helen Caldicott said during a public speech in Oshawa.
(Canada) Anti-nuclear doctor advises Port Hope residents to sue over exposure northumberlandnews.com Dr. Helen Caldicott gives impassioned talk to standing-room-only crowd in Oshawa Nov 17, 2010
1.This Month
Small Nuclear Reactors Education Task Force: https://stop-smrs.weebly.com/bulletins.ht
24 May. The Vow from Hiroshima film is coming on PBS, this month https://www.thevowfromhiroshima.com/
3 June – FILM. SOS – The San Onofre Syndrome: Nuclear Power’s Legacy
6-7 July A summit and a rally in Washington D.C. https://nonatoyespeace.org/
-
Archives
- May 2024 (157)
- April 2024 (366)
- March 2024 (335)
- February 2024 (345)
- January 2024 (375)
- December 2023 (333)
- November 2023 (342)
- October 2023 (366)
- September 2023 (353)
- August 2023 (356)
- July 2023 (362)
- June 2023 (324)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 