The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Don't waste the homelands: community opposition to a national radioactive waste dump in WA > Comments

Don't waste the homelands: community opposition to a national radioactive waste dump in WA : Comments

By Anica Niepraschk, published 15/5/2015

The process (and the relevant legislation) is lacking clear participatory, deliberative mechanisms, meaning that the community and wider civil society are not given an arena for actually influencing the decision-making.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Yes Has, you'd think one or two would stop and smell the Co2 they say is threatening an extinction event!

And if they should be right, we're threatened much more by Co2, than any peaceful use of nuclear fuel!

It has to be stored somewhere, and where in the world would you find a better place than the virtually waterless McDonald ranges?

Even traditional Aboriginals need a fairly permanent water supply, so they'd not be troubled by a selected site such as that?

So what, if a small minority of tail wagging the dog minority don't like it?

We elect decision makers to make the to hard decisions for us; and without a shadow of doubt, basket case S.A., could use the extra income!

But hey, as usual for the (can't see the forest for the trees) greens, they don't give a plugged nickle for anybody else's economic circumstances; or at least those not permanently coupled to soul destroying handouts!?

And have reportedly said, we can always print more money! Perhaps they weren't looking when Zimbabwe tried that?

What's a loaf of bread cost there now? A million Zimbabwe dollars; and consequently, the only place in the world where you can find a million dollar note!?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Friday, 15 May 2015 5:28:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The government has not made a clear distinction between the nuclear wastes generated at Lucas Heights, and sent overseas for processing, and the radioactive wastes from medical facilities.

In the first case, Australia is legally bound to take back the reprocessed highly radioactive wastes from UK, France and Argentina. Though a small amount, there is an argument for storing them away from Lucas Heights. The logical thing now is to shut Lucas Heights down, and not produce any more.

The medical radioactive wastes are short-lived, and should be stored onsite. Canada is now producing radionuclides by cyclotron, a non-nuclear process. That's expensive, but cheaper in the long run than relying on a nuclear reactor, which produces long lived toxic wastes.

The fumbling efforts of Australian governments to deal with these issues open the door to a greedy few who dream of making Australia the world's radioactive waste dump - importing radioactive trash from nuclear nations
Posted by ChristinaMac1, Saturday, 16 May 2015 12:14:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PaulWalter,

I could be wrong but that's a hell of a long bow you've drawn there.

There are around five thousand 'communities' around Australia, and close to half of those actually have people living in them.

[Hmmm ..... problem: how to somehow implicate the Murdoch press in all of this]. [And Abbott].

Got it !

(a) The Murdoch press publishes articles about Barnett's (and Giles') plans to focus services in relatively larger Aboriginal 'communities'. Therefore, they support the forcible closure of most of them. B@stards !

(b) And Abbott is nefariously pushing Barnett and Giles, his Liberal mates, to plot and plan to forcibly close those 'communities'. B@stards !

(c) And/or distribute nuclear waste dumps on a couple of thousand of them.

Conclusion: Therefore, Murdoch, Abbott, Barnett and Giles want to drive Aboriginal people from their 'communities' in order to use all of that land, all two million square kilometres of it, for nuclear waste dumps.

Is that what you're claiming ?

All you need is some evidence at (a), (b) and/or (c) :)

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 17 May 2015 6:10:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I can't believe how ignorant this article is.

Nuclear 'waste' IS NOT waste, it is fuel for GenIV reactors like the IFR and LFTR.

There will be a final pile up of broken atoms (fission products), but most of the longer lived actinides will have been burned up by the IFR / LFTR.
1. Most of this waste will be back to safe levels within 300 years.
2. The tiny portion of it that isn't will be safe enough after 1000 years.
3. It's only 1 golf ball per person (of actual waste: there is also nuclear power plants to decommission after 60 to 80 years of use, and a few parts to bury).

Waste = fuel, and never more so than in modern reactors!
It has been calculated that the world's nuclear waste could run the world for about 500 years and is worth about $30 TRILLION dollars as a result! Australia's got to put in a bid to 'store' it so that we can then let GE build a few dozen S-PRISM's here, so we can BURN IT!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-PRISM

Storing 1 golf ball per person for 300 years drowned in concrete is so easy it doesn't even have to leave the reactor site. Dig a bunker out back, fill each layer with concrete, and you're done! Too easy!

Please: no hysterical posts about safety, unless you're going to lie down in front of coal trucks! George Monbiot explains: “Coal kills more people when it goes right than nuclear power does when it goes wrong. In fact coal kills more people every week than nuclear power has in the entire history of its deployment.”
http://www.monbiot.com/2012/10/09/the-heart-of-the-matter/

I've done the math: depending on whether you believe WHO or the IAEA as to how bad Chernobyl was, coal is a Chernobyl either every day or every 3 days!
Posted by Max Green, Sunday, 17 May 2015 10:00:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Another illustration of so-called democracy failing the interests of the people.

Government of the people by the people for the people is democracy.

Government of the people by the politicians and officials for those who can buy them is not.

Especially when the buyers and owners of the politicians are bribing them with the wealth created by the people.

Who actually gets to decide whether or not Australia will become a nuclear waste dump?
Posted by EmperorJulian, Monday, 18 May 2015 1:20:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Emperor Julian,
if your concerns about democracy are addressed by the South Australian Royal Commission as representing a mature, peer-reviewed discussion about our energy options, then maybe there's some democratic input after all?

I used to be anti-nuclear. That is, until I realised coal kills about a Chernobyl's worth of people every few days! I would LOVE Australia to become a 'nuclear waste dump' because it would SAVE LIVES! Coal is 4000 times more deadly than nuclear. Fact. Google it. Google 'Death's per terrawatt'.

Also, nuclear waste = fuel! Burn it, and then bury the FINAL, real waste products for just 300 years and then they're safe. 1 golf ball per human lifetime of waste. That's tiny. That's NOTHING compared to "800 elephants" of a lifetime of coal waste going into the atmosphere for the average Australian citizen!
Posted by Max Green, Monday, 18 May 2015 1:44:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy