cop this from our govt brains dept

Submitted: Friday, Oct 14, 2005 at 21:09
ThreadID: 27269 Views:2986 Replies:11 FollowUps:13
This Thread has been Archived
Nuclear war on waste plans
From:
By Phillip Coorey and Nigel Adlam

October 14, 2005


NUCLEAR waste from Lucas Heights would be trucked along South Australia's roads to a new dump in the Northern Territory, under Federal Government legislation tabled in Parliament yesterday.
SA Environment Minister John Hill said yesterday while he was unhappy with the prospect he said not much could be done.

But the NT Government vowed it would fight the move if the legislation is passed by the Senate.

The Bills, introduced by Science Minister Brendan Nelson, seek to override all state and territory rights, as well as those of local Aborigines and environmental groups.

After first unsuccessfully trying to establish a dump in SA's outback, the Federal Government said recently it would put the dump on NT Commonwealth land.

The dump, to be built at one of three sites under consideration, would take low-level waste generated by hospitals and laboratories, as well as high-level waste including reprocessed fuel rods from Lucas Heights and parts of the current reactor.

Advertisement:
If the law is passed in the Senate, a nuclear waste depository would be built on Commonwealth land near Alice Springs or Katherine within five years.

Legislation provides for transporting the waste by road and sea and only Commonwealth waste would be buried at the site.

Waste trucked from Sydney would most likely pass though Peterborough, Port Augusta and Coober Pedy on its way to the NT.

Dr Nelson said yesterday successive governments had tried to responsibly store waste. Mr Hill said statistics showed there would be accidents transporting the waste.

NT Chief Minister Clare Martin said the move was the worst-ever Federal attack on Territory rights - worse than the overthrow of the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act in 1997.

But her Government stopped short of announcing an expensive legal challenge.

Ms Martin said the Territory was being forced to take the nuclear facility because it was not a state.

"The Federal Government is doing this to us because it can," she said. Labor said it hoped CLP Senator Nigel Scullion would cross the floor and vote against the plan.

Ms Martin said the Senator had publicly said he would vote against the Bill.

Senator Scullion last night denied this. This was despite saying in August: "I'm out on this now - I'll cross the floor." But last night Senator Scullion said he had only supported a Labor motion calling on Prime Minister John Howard to honour an election promise not to build the facility in the NT.

"I've never said I would vote against it," he said.

Territory Opposition Leader Jodeen Carney said the CLP supported the call for scrapping Federal laws.

"One thing Territorians don't like is Canberra opposing their will," Ms Carney said.

One of the Territory's two Independent parliamentarians said the Territory Government had only itself to blame for the problem.

Gerry Wood, the Member for Nelson, accused the Territory Government of engaging in a political charade to cover "its lack of leadership".

NT Health Minister Peter Toyne said the Lucas Heights reactor in Sydney could produce medical isotopes for 30 years.

"It's shameful to use cancer patients as pawns in this grubby political game," Mr Toyne said.

Federal Labor MP Warren Snowdon was thrown out of Parliament yesterday for his loud objections as the Bill was introduced.

The Australian Conservation Foundation said the Government had undertaken an arrogant course of action.

From The Advertiser and the Northern Territory N
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Footloose - Friday, Oct 14, 2005 at 21:31

Friday, Oct 14, 2005 at 21:31
According to one newspaper, dump spots include Harts Range area (!) and a spot about 27K from Alice Springs (!). No worries say the boffins, this stuff is as safe as houses. So if it's so safe , why don't they stash it under Parliament House ?
Anyone want to take the Plenty Highway and spend a few weeks in Alice with the family ? You could follow up with a "glow in the dark" night to show off your new "tan" to your friends.
AnswerID: 134660

Reply By: Member - John Thomas B (VIC) - Friday, Oct 14, 2005 at 23:00

Friday, Oct 14, 2005 at 23:00
I would have thought that the waste would go back to where it came from after all said and done that's the state or territory that got the enitial benafit of the minning.
Why has it got to be hard.
AnswerID: 134671

Reply By: F4Phantom - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 00:41

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 00:41
guys the stuff has to be put somewhere and at the rate we are going neuclear power may be back on the table cause in reality one reactor only puts out 1 cubic metre of waste per year, thats considered pretty green and clean. i dont know much about bob hawks proposal but even centralising the worlds neuclear waste in one spot sounds like a good plan, especially in a place like Australia where no one would ever need to visit the site and we could earn money from it. anyway i think the attitude of give the problem to someone else just dont let me deal with it is kind of short sighted.
AnswerID: 134677

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 00:59

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 00:59
>>> but even centralising the worlds neuclear waste in one spot sounds like a good plan, especially in a place like Australia where no one would ever need to visit the site and we could earn money from it.

Please tell me you are joking?
0
FollowupID: 388726

Follow Up By: Exploder - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:18

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:18
I do impart agree with what F4 is saying but I don’t think we should have to or even consider storing Nuclear wast from other country’s. It does need to be stored deep in the ground we are (talking kilometres down) where the risk of it being disturbed by earthquakes or allowing it to get into the water supply is minimal. I understand and do not totally agree with it, thou it has been shown “Apparently” certain parts of central Australia are some of the only placers in the world where the conditions would be right for this to happen.

Personally I think we should gather it up and launch it at the closest Black Hole Problem solved, These things swallow hole planets and suns like they are nothing so compared to the energy of a sun, throwing some uranium down one of these beast’s throats will do nothing.

0
FollowupID: 388729

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:25

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:25
Ive always wondered why they dont eject it into outerspace.... join it onto a mars probe !
0
FollowupID: 388730

Follow Up By: Footloose - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 09:55

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 09:55
Nobody visits Alice Springs ? HELLO ? Anyone home ??
0
FollowupID: 388744

Follow Up By: Mad Dog (Australia) - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 10:11

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 10:11
Thank God we don't send this waste into space, we'd all have two heads by now. The risk is too high, just this week we had a rocket come down after launch destroying the payload, a comms sat and this is not uncommon, just doesn't rate high with the news media. We do have some very reliable rockets but thankfully not one country is prepared to accept the conquences of an accident.
0
FollowupID: 388746

Follow Up By: Truckster (Vic) - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 12:43

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 12:43
While I do sorta agree Ray, I think its time they found a way to get rid of it once and for all... we are making the dung, now time to wave bye bye to it.

Driving round in trucks with container loads to just DUMP it in the bush/desert/city aint the smartest thing to do... but thats my O ;)~

We could help USA full the Grand Canyon but cornholes to storing the worlds problem here in Aussie.. Only take one psycho (read normal)raghead to bomb the storage place or a convoy driving through a city and we are all fubar.

YMMV.
0
FollowupID: 388755

Follow Up By: Member - Davoe (Widgiemooltha) - Monday, Oct 17, 2005 at 21:24

Monday, Oct 17, 2005 at 21:24
Keep sticking your head in the sand Fellas- So where do you want the waste from Lucas Hights- In the same place as lots of oyther radiactive waste? under Uni Basements or in Hospitals etc. And as for other countries Nuclear waste Where do you reckon that goes? It would be alot better here than at the bottom of international waters waiting for drums to corrode. We have these facilitys already........... Didnt know that did you? ever asked yourself what there is 100k NW of Coolgardie - perhaps you should find out!
0
FollowupID: 388951

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:00

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:00
>> Waste trucked from Sydney would most likely pass though Peterborough

we could go to willems and watch the glow come up the road!

remember chernobyl?

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/chapter1.html
AnswerID: 134678

Follow Up By: Willem - Sunday, Oct 16, 2005 at 08:35

Sunday, Oct 16, 2005 at 08:35
Hey...not through my town. We already have a number of souls here with 6 toes and two heads.....lol
0
FollowupID: 388795

Follow Up By: Member - Davoe (Widgiemooltha) - Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:45

Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:45
"Ive always wondered why they dont eject it into outerspace.... join it onto a mars probe ! "
Truckster have you ever wondered what would happen if it didnt make it like some of the space shuttles or any number of russian rockets????
Plenty of other people have simular ideas to you with names like Bin Laden etc --- No thanks much safer to truck it round like they already do without incident (not surprising when you consider the precautions). In the goldfields we already have a couple of radioactive storage facilitys and i would live next door to them any day rather than a Roaster stack spewing sulphur dioxide skwards
0
FollowupID: 388995

Reply By: Peter 2 - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 06:50

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 06:50
Surely there would be space in the basement of Parliament house, the dirt roof would keep some of the radiation in and might remove a few pollies as a side effect.
Before anyone gets there knickers in a twist, I am joking!
AnswerID: 134685

Follow Up By: gramps - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 13:20

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 13:20
Damn Pete. I thought this was the most sensible idea of all so far :)
0
FollowupID: 388756

Reply By: Snowy 3.0iTD - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 11:31

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 11:31
The choice of storage site needs to be carefully thought out and planned, but I don't see what the issue is with transporting it. Many hundreds of tonnes of toxic chemicals are transported on our roads every day. I work at a gold mine we have we have six road trains per fortnight; four of sodium cyanide (when spilt sodium cyanide can covert to hydrogen cyanide gas which is deadly at less than 10ppm), two of caustic soda and one of hydrochloric acid. There are hundredrs of industrial sites around the country that produce and use these dangerous and often highly toxic chemicals and transporting them via our road network yet here people are jumping up and down about a few truckloads of nuclear waste, why?
AnswerID: 134714

Follow Up By: Member - John (Vic) - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 11:55

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 11:55
The Nuclear waste would be smaller and packaged in stronger containers that your typical thin skinned road tanker carrying 40 to 80 tonnes of chemicals.
VKS737 - Mobile 6352 (Selcall 6352)

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 388753

Follow Up By: Member - Davoe (Widgiemooltha) - Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:38

Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:38
to much emotional crap when it comes to discussion like this talk like glowing green and maralinga is just crap. Maralinga was a series of nuclear weapons detonated which is a far cry from the massivly regulated transport of neclear material. The way some people are carrying on you would think they are proposing carrying radioactive material with no more than a tarp over it and dumping it out in the bush somwhere near sydny waiting for kids on trail bikes to use it as a bike track
0
FollowupID: 388994

Reply By: Member - Duncs - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 13:48

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 13:48
I have a good friend who's father worked at ANSTO Lucas Heights for 30 years, he niether glows in the dark nor can see through walls.

Part of my job is to clean up Hazardous materials spills, including radiaoctive material. I was stationed at the HAZMAT section of the NSWFB for 4 years. I take the possibility of spills or leaks of this kind very seriously, especially as I now live and work on the most likely transport route for this waste. It would pass within 300m of my home. This is a route which currently carries all manner of hazardous materials, including explosives and military materials.

I have also been part of the escort convoy for nuclear waste materials transported through Sydney. The precautions taken for the transport of this stuff are incredible. The likelyhood of an accident is virtually nill.

Whilst there are certainly dangers involved in this transportation they are far less than most people percive. The major problem with nuclear waste, particularly the low level stuff that is being talked about here is it's emotive value. That means it's ability to stir the emotions. It makes good press and is garanteed to get people talking. Just look at this thread.

Given the choice of responding to a spill of low level nuclear waste from Lucas Heights or a tanker full of unleaded petrol, I'll go to the nuclear waste spill every time. It is a relatively simple job to clean up. Once the accident is over the material will simply sit still until someone picks it up. I can be protected from it simply by wearing clothing which covers my skin plus breathing protection. Either compressed air breathing apparatus (BA) or a suitable respirator. As the person in charge of the incident I would order nearby residents to remain indoors and close the windows. The material can be cleaned up by placing it in a closed container, metal, plastic or even a wooden box.

As for the petrol, the risk of explosion caused by the accident is very high, the fuel will run, if it gets into stormwater drains, which it will, the risk of secondary explosions throughout the drainage system is also high. Every iginition sauce in the area needs to be shut down. Everyone within 200m of the perimiter of the spill would need to be evacuated, as the fuel runs downhill the area evacuated would grow. To clean up the spill I need special intrinsically safe pumps and another tanker capable of containing all the fuel and any liquids that it can't be seperated from including the fire fighting foam that would be put down over the spill.

Add to this the fact that there has never been a significant escape of radioactive material in a transport accident and compare this to the number of road tanker leaks and spills that occur.

I am not saying I am in favour of this move by our Fed pollies but I don't believe it is as serious or as dangerous as people make out. As I said before the argument is more emotional than anything else.

Of far greater concern are the actions of the Federal parliament in trampling the rights of states and teritories now that there is no effective moderator in Canberra.

Now that is my 2c worth. No doubt there are those who will think it's not even worth that. That's OK.

Duncs
AnswerID: 134720

Reply By: GOB & denny vic member - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 19:38

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 19:38
howdy folks
i posted this to see what others thought
i personally dont beleive the govt should be able to ride roughshod over the peoples wishes (although and again i dont agree with bracks dumping rubbish near mildura )but also the fact of carting this stuff for so many ks by road leaves us wide open to many sorts of terrarism ?? spelling especially the distance it will be transported and with what protection with most govenments in this country it will probably end up in the back of a couriers ute

steve
AnswerID: 134743

Reply By: Bob of KAOS - Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 21:06

Saturday, Oct 15, 2005 at 21:06
Firstly, nuclear waste exists and it has to be stored somewhere. At present it is stored in each of the cities where it is used.

Where is the best place to store it? I imagine it has to be geologically stable, and not over an artesian basin or near another water course. (I wonder how Katherine is suitable) And it has to be defended from terrorists who might want to blow it up.

Ignoring the Nimby state and territory opinions (after all state boundaries are just nominal lines on a map) we should choose the most appropriate place, wherever that may be. If that happens to be somewhere in outback NSW or SA, or in the Centre, then so be it. But please, lets make a technical rather than a political decision.

Then if we have the best storage facility in the world maybe we could store waste from other countries too. After all it is a global issue that transcends national and state boundaries.
AnswerID: 134758

Follow Up By: Member - Davoe (Widgiemooltha) - Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:49

Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 at 10:49
Plenty of suitable spots here in WA
0
FollowupID: 388997

Reply By: Member - Luxoluk - Sunday, Oct 16, 2005 at 07:04

Sunday, Oct 16, 2005 at 07:04
Our wise and wonderfull leaders had the wisdon to blow the crap out of Emu and Marilinga and left us with a 10 thousand plus year problem..not to mention a lot of fried indigenous people who were obviously unaware of the problem..foresight or just plain shortsightedness?? Perhaps they could continue using these places as the toilet for future disposal?? The Poms have got a lot to answer for in terms of their deceitful and shamefull disregard of their ally's intersets...remember when you used to drink radio active milk as a kid in the 50's in the southern states? Perhaps if they had flavoured it we could forgive....nah...f**k em! As for the waste dump...think carefully cos there's zero margin for error.
AnswerID: 134767

Reply By: GOB & denny vic member - Sunday, Oct 16, 2005 at 16:40

Sunday, Oct 16, 2005 at 16:40
i was thinking later on maybe we could use PINE GAP i know its not far from 1 of my favorite places the alice but it would ? could be well guarded or the opposite end of the runway to the bombing range at tindal although the way the yanks drop there bombs maybe the bomb range end would be safer or as some one has already suggested maybe maralinga as they have already stuffed that for many years to come

steve
AnswerID: 134816

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)