Well as long as massive misinformation is rewritten as "knowledge"! we'll just go forever backwards!

Yes, it is dangerous stuff and needs to be handled intelligently by folks who know what they're doing. and debate needs to be fully informed. Rather than led by the nose like some dumb farm animal that can be dragged hither and tither to achieve an outcome, not necessarily in the led animal's best interest!

Even so, accompanied by belligerent bellowing and big buckets of BS!?
Alan B.

The problem with the debate is that those in opposition to the project are misinformed so that no agreement will ever be possible. A good site would be in the South Gippsland hills where no aboriginal has ever set foot and some local landholder might welcome some extra income.

David

OLO has again published an article written by and for Friends of the Earth, an organisation which has demonstrated consistently over the years that they have no interest in balanced, rational, fact-based discussion about the real and pressing problems involving nuclear waste management and disposal.

If FOE have ever published a positive, practical proposal regarding nuclear waste, I have yet to see it. My experience has been that they latch onto real and imaginary side issues which they use as bricks in a wall around their position, which can usually be described by the word "NO!"

FOE is an example of the type of organisation that must be excluded from the debate if the purpose is to find an optimal path to the issue of radioactive waste sources, management and fates.

It follows that many people are already being disrespected since they live within a kilometre of the scattered places this material currently resides. That includes hospitals, universities, industrial processors and Lucas Heights.

I find it odd that the Hawker SA indigenous people use the same expressions as those from Muckaty NT. You'd almost think they were being co-ordinated by city folks or perhaps it's a coincidence like Mrs Trump and Mrs Obama using the same speech. In contrast other indigenous groups seem happy to accept a role for the nuclear industry
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/UF-Wiluna-traditional-owners-sign-agreement-0707167.html

The problem with the nuclear proponents who regularly comment on this site is that their so-called arguments are laughable. It is really not convincing to learn that anti-nuclear opinions can be discarded, because they come from "misinformed" people.

If the author of an article is connected with Friends of the Earth, does that automatically negate any opinion that she has?

In the present case, the writer is not even really opposing the federal government's plan to set up a nuclear waste dump, to take in the intermediate level waste that is returning from France and UK. She is merely arguing for a serious scrutiny of the process, and a genuine consideration of Aboriginal concerns.

ChristinaMac1 seems to have read a different article to the one at the head of this comments thread.

Where did the writer advocate management of nuclear waste? It was 100% negative.

I'd really appreciate something positive and practical from FOE regarding energy futures for our poor, tired and dirty globe. I really would. It could be the starting point for a fruitful discussion. However, my wait has been in vain because FOE determined its policies many years back and shows no signs of change.

Perhaps a starting point could be just a little advocacy for realistic safety regimes for nuclear wastes. I could go on, but in a polarised discussion, progress can only be achieved by folk who are willing to seek out points of agreement and to proceed from there.

The never-ending negativity of FOE is matched by its unthinking enthusiasm for unworkable "solar plus wind only" energy systems. South Australia's current twin electricity woes of unreliable supply and escalating prices are real world, painful example of where that leads to. Where is FOE in the discussion of ways to avoid the hardships that are being inflicted on SA's industries and population due to the decisions taken years back regarding their electricity supply industry?

Where is FOE's comment regarding the increasing reliance on bigger interconnectors to bring high-CO2 brown coal power from Victoria?