A citizen's jury! what a joke. Why not simply design policy by flipping a coin?

Hi Silly Sausage,
We have a little thing in this country called democracy. If you don't like a policy, I urge you to step out of the shadows and identify yourself so you, as a citizen of a democracy, can have your say.

We don't pay much attention to anonymous trolls, I'm afraid, even those who invent qualifications.

We don't pay much attention to wife beaters that can't differentiate between democracy and a political stunt.

SS,

I can't claim to understand your second post, at all.

Craig,

On anonymity, Noel Wauchope is not the lady's real name, either. I think you will find that she is really Christina Mac, a notorious activist on everthing. And, we don't really know that you are Craig Minns, do we?

It would have been rather hard for SS to engage in the democratic process, even if he is South Australian. The 'citizen' jury' was drawn out of a hat, so who knows whether or not they represent the views of around 1.7 million people.

I think there was enough evidence for the government to legitimately make the decision itself, but our gutless little monkey of a premier wants someone else to make the decision for him. SA is probably neck and neck with Victoria in the race to be the shonkiest collectivist "progressive" state in the country.

Off subject, but important to know, the Weatherill government, just last week, blocked the Auditor General from access to information that would have allowed him to see if the goverment was spending money wisely or not. 'Or not' seems to be the answer that we have all suspected for a long time.

An ethical case? How about an irrefutable one? It's easy to make out a case against anything to do with nuclear based on rock solid redoubtable ignorance! Where alpha radiation like that used in targeted life saving cancer treatment, confused with deadly gamma radiation!

And where the same folk who indubitably hold fast with rigorous determination to flat earth science! And where they would prefer that the average American burns the equivalent to 54 barrels of oil to satisfy their energy needs, when just one cup of uranium oxide would met those same energy requirements or just 4 grams of thorium!

The cup of uranium needs enrichment and then pressure vessel containment to hold back "steam" pressure when violently released, lifting a 400 ton roof off of the Chernobyl containment building!

Thorium needs no enrichment, is less radioactive than a banana, used in safe molten salt reactor needs no pressure containment, given it operates at normal atmospheric pressure, with walk away safe design features. Energy dense Thorium is abundant and is easily recovered with simple gravity separation and ready as is!

Then we can use thorium powered molten salt reactors to burn nuclear waste, turning it into copious free power as we do so, while other folk pay us billions for our endevour! And burn and burn it in the cycle until the completely depleted waste has a half life of just 300 years and most importantly can never ever be used to build a thermonuclear bomb!

Moreover, just 8 grams of thorium is enough to power your car and without refueling for 100 years, and if adopted by the world as their principle energy source could WIPE OUT the fossil fuel industry, including coal, N.G. and current nuclear technology!

The latter made entirely unaffordable due to safety/decommissioning etc/etc requirements, the amount of fuel burnt (5%) in relation to the waste produced. (95%) Whereas thorium reaction burns (95%), leaving just (5%), vastly less toxic waste, eminently suitable for long life space batteries!

Hence the highly reactive/survival motivated, political activist/hysteria/terror campaign!?
Alan B.

I am a member of the Citizen's Jury. For me the "under what circumstances" condition is all about a community driven decision. South Australians have not had the opportunity to consider a range of possible options for our future. We have been handed one "industry driven" option and told that we need to do this or we will go broke.

I believe that local communities need to determine their own future. The South Australian future needs to be decided by South Australians for South Australians. If after a deep and genuine community engagement process, my South Australian community said that we felt there was a case for importing HL nuclear waste, then I would work with my community to consider the social, technological, economic and ethical issues.

South Australians did not want a uranium mine. South Australians did not want to be guinea pigs for nuclear testing. These activities have been foisted upon us against our will and against our better judgement.

While I whole-heartedly share your vision for a nuclear free world and the push to stop generating this hazardous material which we clearly have no solution for, as a South Australian I object to being offered up in a bid to achieve this objective. We - indigenous and non-indigenous South Australians have a right to determine our our future. We no longer want to be played as pawns in a global nuclear tussle, however ethical and noble the option of taking the material may seem to non South Australians.