It's a good idea that needs to be considered on the cold hard facts/evidence.

Rather than the mountains of vexatious mischievous misinformation from the pen of a blatant anti-nuclear activist!

If this ALLEGED environmentalist was in fact, the least bit concerned about the environment, or the plight of the first nation?

He would simply shelve his BS Anti-nuclear, anti-aboriginal anti-development activism. As evidenced in this garbage that is claimed, to be considered and "weighed on the facts", statement.

#1/ Nuclear power is carbon-free power!

#2/ The world is not being threatened by nuclear power but by carbon pollution!

#3/ Nuclear power if done properly, will burn up the nuclear waste that leaves our shores as uranium and therefore, we still have some responsibility for!

#4/ With power prices as low as 2 cents per KwH. Already affordable desalination becomes even more so and allows arid land to be converted into veritable gardens of Eden!

Moreover, CLEAN, SAFE, AFFORDABLE thorium-based power is arguably the only thing missing in intended aboriginal self-determination!

And all that prevents it as our literal reality is folk (like the author) nearly as dense as thorium, the most energy dense material in the world. We don't need to bury any of this waste or actually unspent fuel, when in fact we could be paid annual billions to burn it in thorium powered MSR's!

Leaving just 1% as waste, which is not just eminently suitable as long life space batteries! Most Aboriginals recognise HUMBUG when they see it and the article is full of it! As is its, bah humbug, author!
THE TIMES THEY'RE A CHANGING.
IF YOU CAN'T LEND A HAND?
GET OUT OF THE WAY!
Alan B.

First Nations? The first, and only nation, the one we live in, was created by white settlers as part of the British Empire. Aboriginal people were the ‘first people’. They were never a nation, but, rather, disparate tribes and wandering family groups. This ‘nation’ business to describe stone age people is nonsense. Also nonsense was the cowardice of the Wetherill Labor government acquiescing to 233 dingbat citizens in the matter of a nuclear waste storage facility, which will inevitably be installed somewhere in Australia when the penny finally drops that, to survive, we need coal or nuclear power. We are constantly nagged on how ‘dirty’ coal is, so it will have to nuclear.

But the biggest nonsense of all is that an elected government felt/still feels that it has to kow tow to a miniscule number of non-contributing people posing as ‘aborigines’ (who actually died out a long, long time ago) in order to stop Australia from its continuing drift into non-productive poverty. How can a bunch of useless, minority no-hopers be allowed to blackmail a country for purely emotional reasons because some Marxist jerks, skulking in their ‘safe place’ universities, have invented the fiction that anyone with a drop of aboriginal blood is ‘feeling the pain’ of wrongs done to their ancestors!

“The …. Traditional Owners (no such thing) have to fight industry, government, and the ecomodernists as well”. No they don’t. They need to be told to get over themselves and get out of the way of progress and security - for themselves as well as the majority.

Ever contemplated getting a productive job, Jim Green? You have added pretty much zero value apart from tenacity in your campaign as a paid apologist for the anti-nuclear and anti-science brigade, year after year.

Isn't it about time that you responded to the many requests for Greenpeace, your employer, to demonstrate conclusively that its funding does not come from the fossil fuel industry which is the ultimate enabler of the expensive, subsidised, inadequate, unstable, unreliable and vastly environmentally unworthy "100% wind + solar" industry? Without fossil fueled electrical generation whether coal, liquid or gas fired to support it, there would be little role for W+S in a modern electricity supply system that does not include nuclear power. Greenpeace's actions are condemning the world to a fossil fuelled future while avoiding their true purpose. Greenpeace's antinuclear campaign against nuclear power (and against nuclear medicine, but that's for another day) is a campaign against the very things that Greenpeace claims to value.

Ultimately, the true role of the anti-nuclear campaign run by Greenpeace is not to promote clean and green, but to prolong and to extend the impacts of fossil fuels, because without at least a substantial fraction of nuclear power in the mix, attempts to decarbonise any economy that is above subsistence level has utterly failed, with Germany's annually rising carbon emissions as the poster child. That is what your backers want from Greenpeace and it is what Greenpeace is delivering.

It is long past time for Greenpeace's representatives in Australia and abroad to show publicly where the money comes from and thus where Greenpeace's real interests lie.

But Greenpeace won't do that, will it?

I have no expertise to speak about the pros and cons of nuclear waste storage but I will comment on his outrage over aboriginal spirituality being referred to as “ mumbo jumbo”.
Aboriginal spirituality is a religion, like every other religion in the world and as such has to be subject to the same level of debate as the others, especially Christianity.No one gets their knickers in a twist when Christians are called god botherers and the like.
We live in a country where the freedom to believe or disparage any religion is a right.
The fact that the religion is that of aboriginal people gives it no special privileges.

The pantomime of a "consultation" run by the SA government had zero chance of getting a positive response. A "citizen's jury made up of people with zero knowledge of the topic bombarded with a constant stream of fear by people with a political agenda cannot make a rational choice.

The factor that always seems to be missing from these discussions is how much are the current owners of the nuclear waste willing to pay to store it in South Australia.

My guess is they want to pay as little as possible and they would rather pay consultants, lobbyists and middle men to move it through government channels on the sly, rather than compensate the people of South Australia for the risks and inconvenience they have to bear.

Jim Green says: "138,000 tonnes of high-level nuclear waste (about one-third of the world's total) and 390,000 cubic metres of intermediate-level waste." $30,000/tonne for the high level and $10,000/tonne for the intermediate level would pay $8 billion. You can buy a lot of land (5 km buffer zones) and build some really good infrastructure for $8 billion. There would be money to build infrastructure in the neighbouring communities and the communities representatives could all be a part of the decision process about how it was all going to work.

If the current owners of the nuclear waste don't want to adequately compensate the people of South Australia then they can look elsewhere for final disposal sites.

Shadow Minister,

Dead right. Some of the gormless goons were openly saying they would vote against the facility before the 'jury' even convened and the facts were heard and discussed.

A cynic might wonder whether aboriginal groups are being co-ordinated, perhaps by non-aborigines in the city. For example on TV we've seen aboriginal people from both Hawker SA and Muckaty NT use the term 'sickness country'. Those groups are a thousand kilometres apart so it seems like someone compared notes on what terms to use. Fortunately aboriginal groups near Wiluna WA and Ranger NT have agreed to uranium mining.

If city based agitators are manipulating aboriginal communities for their own agenda it's a bit weak. I'm not sure if Dr Green thinks reducing coal and gas dependence is a good idea but France has about 50 grams of CO2 per average kilowatt-hour of electricity compared to our 800 grams or so. I somewhat resent being held to ransom by dragging other people into it.

I'm not 100% against nuclear but remained to be convinced that its appropriate for Australia - something people are not getting about Aboriginal Elders is that we denoted a bomb on their land - "we" think the land is worthless they don't - when things like long time periods of radioactive half life get mentioned our brains switch off - theirs don't. I'll roughly paraphrase a quote from a Lenora elder I read about - "We believe the white man will leave our lands when they get tired of digging things up" If we start 'growing' materials like carbon fibre at the nano level thats perhaps only a century away, for them thats not long - a civilisation 10s of 1000s years old thinks differently - alot of their culture is based on observation - marital system is a text book example of genetic diversity where as Europe's didn't get much beyond animal husbandry - they understood whales and dolphins where once land dwellers and that humans were the youngest of species reflecting an advanced understanding of evolution - some central parts of Australia were never really conquered - their position isn't religious they just have a different perspective, go figure! Unfiltered contempt for Indigenous people won't fly.

Couple of other points - using nuclear waste to generate electricity could be great - even influence nuclear weapons treaties but u need to lobby to actually see the tech fully developed- Second Institutional integrity over long time periods is not a strong trait in Neo Liberal economies- look at Tepco - even without Fukushima they r a corrupt mess - I'm not sure Australia would be much different.

Hi Zeroxcliche,

Thanks for a good laugh ! Aboriginal people married, not like other people, therefore they have the most sophisticated marital system in the world. They knew that whales and dolphins were once land-dwelling mammals - how ? Perhaps you would like too suggest that, if an Aboriginal person is flatulent, that shows they know all about the relationships between pressure, temperature and density - and did so long before the Greeks ? Hooke ? - pah ! That they ate plants, therefore they had a full classificatory knowledge of all native plants, which of course they now own as well ?

My favourite is the 'elder' who explained that young fellas were allowed to take fish from fish traps 'only when there was a blue moon'. So Aboriginal people had 30-day months, perhaps a few of 31 days, and a full calendar year of 365+ days ? My bet is that that 'elder' actually thought a blue moon was blue.

And another genius here in SA who declared that 'Yep, we had a name for every star.' Clearly, he had never been out in the bush and looked up on a moonless night.

Someone should compile a large book of all of the outlandish claims that have been made just in there last ten or twenty years - that Aboriginal people had the most sophisticated mathematical system in the world: 1, 2, more than 2 .....; Aboriginal culture was all the same across Australia [Hindmarsh Island scam]; Aboriginal people weren't hunters and gatherers at all, they were farmers - Mitchell saw a field nine miles long in which the kangaroo grass looked like it had been 'stooked'. They had the most advanced child-care and education systems in there world. Towns and roads. That they traded with China long before the Europeans ever did.

And so on. And on. All good for a laugh.

Thanks Zeroxcliche,

Joe

Alan B, I like your thorium based proposition.
From what little I have looked up about it, I find it incredibly worthwhile.
As an industrial designer, it seems to tick all the boxes.
Namely, ease of handling, usage, efficiency, and the most important; cost per unit of energy!
The main factors holding progress back is return on investment.
The govt won't look at it because of vested interests and their fear of being outed because thorium will put them out of business.
Industry won't take it on because they know of the greedy elements in govt, so they don't want to lose favour either.
Even if there were private investors, they would not succeed because of the vested interests and the govt will always reject anything which threatens the on going kick-backs from grants and the like, they receive from these other absolute time and money wasting half-wit ideas like wind and solar.
It is easier to rip off the community when they are too stupid and un-informed about the true 'real' world and what is ACTUALLY going on, not what they want to believe is going on.
Musk's success is focused around investors.
I don't know who's backing him but apparently he has an open cheque book.
I've never witnessed such backing as large as this for one person and such faith.
It is not normal and leads me to the conclusion that the Bilderberg Group, or some very, very wealthy people are backing him almost mindlessly.
Nowhere in history has anyone been given so much money to do so many projects at the same time, ie; batteries, electric cars, electric trucks, electric planes, space X, etc.
It's not normal and the reason it's not normal is that nearly always it has been proven, it's not possible.
His big battery joke in SA for example.
All the media hype and BS.
All the thing could do was power a handfull of houses for about 45mins.
I wish I knew how to get a working model of thorium up and running at a scale which would at least attract investors.

No one seems to consider that any so called aboriginal chamber of
whatever design will need a sunset clause so that after a number
of generations it will be closed permanently.
The reason is simple, there will be no aborigines or if you like we
will all be aborigines.

Today on the TV a white aborigine was telling journalists to end
their racialism. Well recently especially in the universities
there has been a lot of anti white racilism, hmmm.

My understanding ...

Nuclear waste dump- Highly Radioactive Nuclear waste is a very dangerous material that many have failed at managing. Why would we manage it any better. If it was easy it wouldn't be a problem. I guess if Thorium was used and nuclear waste can be used as a fuel it would make sense- maybe we should suggest that to those with the waste. The billions of dollars on offer for the service is seductive- but some business opportunities are worth giving up.

Traditional nuclear power plants end up with the whole building being radioactive after 50 years. The nuclear power industry is about fifty years old so expect to see a few controversies popping up over the next twenty years as companies go bankrupt trying to manage the problem. The nuclear industry with respect doesn't appear to have a good safety record.

Thorium- Some of the features of this technology appear promising compared with traditional nuclear. Low pressure sodium chloride coolant (salt melts at 800/ boils at 1400 degrees), safety features- maybe current power stations can be retrofitted with a sodium chloride cooling cycle. Still 300 years radioactive half life for the fuel rods is still substantial.

Fission Energy- All types of energy are potentially explosive especially extremely high density ones such as fission- that is what also makes them useful. The energy of fission is based on the binding energy of the atoms of atomic nuclei of atoms larger than iron. For fission radioactivity is an additional feature. Radioactivity comes in the form of neutrons/ alpha (helium 4 nuclei- cause most damage to biological tissue- low penetration), beta (electrons- moderate penetration- have ionizing effects on matter), gamma rays (more powerful than X-rays- penetrating). Different radioactive substances have different radiation profiles and the decay path varies according to probability

Energy - Since the industrial revolution mankind has used carbon for energy. If carbon energy is becoming uneconomic then it makes sense to try to find other sources of energy. The reason for increased demand for energy may be related to increasing world population. The challenges in finding a replacement are large- enormous supply, cheap, scalable, "safe", ideally sustainable. Fissionable substances store enormous energy but the major risk is radioactive waste products- maybe in the future there will be a sustainable "Fission Battery". Creating a Fission Battery would require a particle accelerator/ power station with low or no radioactivity production/ decay cycles- this could be impossible due to probabilistic reactions. The view is that large atomic nuclei are produced in supernovae explosions so are (similar to carbon) stored solar energy (also created in particle accelerators). Currently the only potentially viable sources of energy that seem to satisfy requirements are tidal (indirect solar/ lunar) and geothermal. Geothermal may not be sustainable in the long term as we extract heat from the Earth.

//The nuclear industry with respect doesn't appear to have a good safety record.//

Only if you listen to clowns like Jim Green instead of looking at the actual data.

http://ourworldindata.org/what-is-the-safest-form-of-energy
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/#40c63cae709b

Nuclear power is extremely safe. And carbon free. And capable of producing baseload power.

Toni,

I agree with you entirely. Just about everyone else is building Nukes to ensure cheap reliable and carbon-free electricity.

Slightly off-topic:

From the 2001 Census to the 2016 Census, Indigenous university graduate numbers rose 363 %, from 13,400 to nearly 49,000. Numbers in NSW, Victoria and Queensland rose nearly four times. Numbers in the NT barely doubled, from a low base, and in WA only tripled. 'Only'.

Commencement numbers keep rising around 8 % p.a. and may keep doing so for the next fifteen years. Conversions from undergraduate completions to post-graduate enrolments are around 20 %. Strangely, one never hears of these achievements from the Indigenous education 'leadership'.

Whether it likes it or not, those numbers will keep rising healthily, to perhaps 100,000 by 2026, and as much as 200,000 by 2036. Those numbers will be difficult to absorb into the Indigenous Industry, especially since such a tiny, and declining, proportion will be graduating in Indigenous-focussed university courses. This problem will be exacerbated if the Industry's multitude of organisations are ever called to account to actually get results.

Of course, the vast majority of graduates are in the metropolitan areas where they most likely were born. The Indigenous population is inexorably moving to the cities, where an increasing majority will spend their careers.

Perhaps it's time to consider if the current BAB Narrative is bankrupt, with its emphasis on a bogus self-determination, on a mythical 'community', and on a push for some vague concept called 'sovereignty'. 'Sovereignty with benefits', since it will always have to be financed from Canberra. Perhaps Indigenous people are moving rapidly towards a different Narrative, of individual effort and achievement, and in urban areas. Perhaps the next couple of decades will witness the Battle of the Narratives.

Joe

The whole situation isn't as simple as it looks. Obviously there is bound to be opposition regardless from which party that it derives from. They have to really hold a discussion together to thoroughly go through the factors involved and hear the opinions of one another. If serious weighing in has been done, then only will they be able to uncover the many more angles that this whole predicament reflects on.

Loudmouth, I'm not sure but I'll take your comments as sarcasm.
I have written about this very topic, in depth.
These 'indigenous' students you speak of are in fact NOT indigenous.
They are in fact Australians.
Just because abo's get all forms of assistance these non-abo's jump on the band wagon to access these hand outs.
These people are garbage.
They are not of pure blood they are part of a line of ancestry that has long diluted any connection to their abo ancestors.
They are a 'bitsa'.
The only ones who can call themselves 'real' abo's are those who's mother and father are of pure blood.
So as the number of true abo's is more like 100,000 (at best)and dropping.
Your numbers are a grand exaggeration at best.
A lie at worst.
Now there is one thing that has to be said to put down these disgusting lying pigs.
What kind of person discards and ignores ALL the ancestors that were just as much a part of them being here today.
The reason is the selfish, greedy, arrogant so and so's get no govt assistance if they don't call themselves abo's.
No if your not pure blood your just another Aussie.
Suffer, just like the rest of us.
So, to correct your misleading information.
Given the small number of 'real'abo's, the true number attending UNI is more like, less than 100.