Albanese and Dutton team up on toxic AUKUS nuclear waste deal   :(
2024-10-11
greens.org.au
The Albanese Government today teamed up with Peter Dutton’s Coalition to push through a controversial AUKUS Bill that will allow the dumping of high-level naval nuclear waste anywhere in Australia.

The Albanese Government, in alliance with the Coalition, rammed the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill through the Senate today without debate.   

The Bill also created a new naval nuclear regulator as part of the AUKUS agreement with the UK and US on nuclear submarines. It initially allowed for all UK and US nuclear submarine waste to be dumped in Australia until the Albanese Government sheepishly amended it, due to growing public opposition, to prevent the dumping of UK or US ‘spent nuclear fuel’.

However, the amendments still allow the dumping of US and UK intermediate-level waste and other high-level nuclear waste from their nuclear submarines. The Greens moved amendments this afternoon that explicitly prevented this, and the major parties voted against these amendments and others.

The Bill immediately creates two nuclear dump ‘zones’, one off the coast of Perth and the other at Port Adelaide, without any community consultation or local support.

The Bill also allows nuclear dump zones to be declared anywhere in Australia that the Defence Minister chooses with the flick of their pen, again without any consent from local communities or First Nations traditional owners.

Senator David Shoebridge, Greens Spokesperson for Defence, said: “Albanese and Dutton have teamed up today to push this AUKUS nuclear waste legislation through the Senate without debate."

“Today’s actions see both Labor and the Coalition joining hands to ram through legislation that will let the UK and US dump their naval nuclear waste in Australia.”

“The Albanese Labor Government initially tried to sneak through a law that would allow the UK and US to dump all types of nuclear waste in Australia. The Greens called the Government out on this, and then people around Australia pushed back.

“Even with last-minute Labor amendments, this legislation still allows the dumping of US and UK nuclear waste in Australia. Labor’s amendments only prohibit the US and UK dumping 'spent nuclear fuel' from their submarines in Australia, but do not prohibit any other highly irradiated UK and US nuclear waste.

“This legislation green-lights dumping of all Australian naval nuclear waste anywhere in Australia. To be clear, exposure to even intermediate-level waste is lethal to humans, and the risk lasts for hundreds of years.

“Everyone can see AUKUS is sinking, the question is now becoming how much environmental and financial damage it will do before it hits rock bottom,” Senator Shoebridge said.

Maybe it can be dumped in NT minesites.
'A number of U ore bodies in the Northern Territory of Australia have been evaluated as geochemical analogues of high-level radioactive waste repositories.  Groundwater colloids were found to carry between 0.01% and 2% 238U, and between 0.3% and 39% 230Th.'
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0009254186900288

'Half-life: Thorium-230. 77,000 years, Alpha Particles weak Gamma Rays. If ingested, thorium typically leaves the body through feces and urine within several days. The small amount of thorium left in the body will enter the bloodstream and be deposited in the bones where it may remain for many years.'

Dumping nuclear waste in regions of the Northern Territory would be ideal in dealing with nuclear waste. Internationally, the nuclear waste of the world could be safely stored underground for as long as it takes to keep the remainder of the world clear of contaminants.

Hardly anyone lives out in the rural Northern Territory. And I am sure that there are remote places throughout Australia that could store nuclear waste. The fee to store international nuclear waste in Australia could end up making Australia a modest profitable industry. We Australians are world leaders in ingenuity. And our friends and allies in North America, Europe, Asia, and various other countries and regions throughout the world know that Australia is strategically ideal geographically to unburden nuclear waste safely in storage facilities well away from the populated towns and cities throughout Australia.

Perhaps places in external island territories of Australia could be even better places to store international nuclear waste. "The Australian Government, through the department, administers the Indian Ocean Territories of Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Norfolk Island, the Ashmore and Cartier Islands, and the Coral Sea Islands". Maybe put those regions to good use for nuclear waste management, well away from mainland Australia.

You are aware, I hope, that there are inhabitants on most of those islands who might object to the storage of nuclear waste on their land (or under it).  Then you have the dangers that climate change produce.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  ::) ::)

It could perk up the Barrier Reef corals and make them shiny at night.

The whole thing was too Scomo when he visited Washington as Trump guest and he put on a band and turkey dinner and pin a medallion on Scomo chest.

Scomo and majority of Australian politicians would think that’s the highlight of there career.

Selling Australians out in exchange for a yankie pretend medal and a  free decent hot dinner with entertainment

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 13^th, 2024 at 6:53pm:

You are aware, I hope, that there are inhabitants on most of those islands who might object to the storage of nuclear waste on their land (or under it).  Then you have the dangers that climate change produce.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  ::) ::)

Brian... There are also people living in Australia, where the nuclear waste is stored. Are you going to say that 27 million Australian lives are less important than the 10,000 people living in those remote islands?

UnSubRocky wrote on Oct 13^th, 2024 at 10:24pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Oct 13th, 2024 at 6:53pm: You are aware, I hope, that there are inhabitants on most of those islands who might object to the storage of nuclear waste on their land (or under it).  Then you have the dangers that climate change produce.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...  ::) ::) Brian... There are also people living in Australia, where the nuclear waste is stored. Are you going to say that 27 million Australian lives are less important than the 10,000 people living in those remote islands?

Yes.  Australians in Australia have 7.741 million km² to spread out over, UnSub. How much area is covered by the islands?  135 km² for Christmas Island and just 14 km² for the Cocas Keeling Island and 34.6 km² for Norfolk island.  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   ::) ::)

The submarines are paid for by Australia but owned and operated by the USA.

The USA should dispose of its own nuclear waste.

Nuclear waste. Plastic waste. Glass waste. There must be some way to combine them.