Uranium

Whether it’s nuclear safety or weapons proliferation, the federal government (and the Opposition and the mining companies) can be safely relied upon to exacerbate problems with irresponsible uranium export policies. Widespread safety breaches and proliferation concerns in North Asia are recent manifestations of the problem.

Those umbrellas a cool but they won't save you from corporate incompetence…

In May, five engineers were charged with covering up a potentially dangerous power failure at South Korea’s Kori-I reactor which led to a rapid rise in the reactor core temperature. The accident occurred because of a failure to follow safety procedures. A manager decided to conceal the incident and to delete records, despite a legal obligation to notify the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission.

In October, authorities temporarily shut down two reactors at separate South Korean nuclear plants after system malfunctions. In November, a major scandal was revealed involving the systematic use of forged quality and safety warranties for nuclear reactor parts such as fuses, switches, heat sensors, and cooling fans. The current total stands at 8601 reactor parts, 10 firms and six reactors. Plant owner Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power has acknowledged possible bribery and collusion by its own staff members as well as corruption by firms supplying reactor parts.

Latest 2 of 43 comments

View all comments
 
  • marley says:

    06:54pm | 13/12/12

    @murray - the government ran Chernobyl.  Thanks, but no thanks. Who runs the facility is not relevent: proper regulation and inspection are.  And I’d trust private enterprise over government to actually run a facility with competence and efficiency. Read more »

  • murray says:

    04:57pm | 13/12/12

    If governments ran the nuclear power stations I would say yes to nuclear power. And I agree @expat that technology will get better and better. However, our major political parties seem to have a belief that privatisation of industry is a better (ie: cheaper for them) option. The major problem… Read more »

 

Prime Minister Julia Gillard can use her trip to India this week to undo the damage she has done to the nuclear non-proliferation regime.

A helmet just isn't going to be enough…

Until the December 2011 Labor National Conference, the government maintained Australia’s long-standing position of banning uranium sales to countries that refuse to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The NPT is the central pillar of the global nuclear regime − it commits nuclear weapons states to pursue disarmament and other countries to refrain from building weapons.

Kevin Rudd explained the previous position: “No-one in Australia wants a nuclear arms race aided by us in the Indian sub-continent or between India and China because we’ve failed to properly ensure the upholding of the NPT and the [International Atomic Energy Agency] safeguards regime under it.”

Latest 2 of 34 comments

View all comments
 
  • DS says:

    06:07pm | 16/10/12

    Pakistan only has nuclear weapons because India has them. If any nation has a right to nuclear weapons, it’s Pakistan. As for Iran, they will get nuclear weapons regardless of what the world does. We aren’t ‘allowing’ them to do anything. If they want nuclear weapons, they will get them.… Read more »

  • Gary says:

    05:56pm | 16/10/12

    Morggo, most nuclear programmes are controlled. Also the NPT has nothing to do with Iraq and Libya. Read more »

 

You don’t have to oppose uranium mining to oppose exports to nuclear-armed India. All it takes is a strong desire not to have an atomic bomb dropped on your head ... or anyone else’s.

Anyway, who needs nukes when you've got vindaloo?

Thus critics of the plan to sell to India include uranium mining advocates Ron Walker, a former Australian diplomat and former Chair of the International Atomic Energy Agency; Paul Barratt, former Secretary of the Defence Department; and Kelvin Thomson, a member of Labor’s Right faction and Chair of Parliament’s treaties committee.

The main concern is that India has not signed, and will not sign, the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Needless to say, that sets an alarming precedent. If the response to the India’s nuclear weapons program is to reward it with sales of uranium and nuclear technology, then others are sure to follow.

Latest 2 of 67 comments

View all comments
 
  • Payday Loans says:

    06:12pm | 30/07/12

    Payday loans lender are wise associates allied with the cash advance payday loans. There business is online. The lender is the one who looks after the entire loan progression of the particular consumer. It starts from the verification to sanction and delivering of sum in to the bank account. Read more »

  • amerneSweaddy says:

    07:54am | 29/06/12

    <a >payday loan</a> - <a >payday loan</a> , http://safepaydayloanhere.com/#swww.thepunch.com.au payday loan Read more »

 

When Julia Gillard rises at the ALP national conference Sunday week to urge uranium exports to India she will anger some of her closest supporters - women.

The Woo Woo Sisterhood. Pic: Digitally altered

She will also rile the ALP left who will argue against yellowcake to the sub-continent, but it is a long time since Julia Gillard has been considered a leftie.

Of greater importance might be the response of women voters in general, a significant number of whom have stuck by Gillard since she toppled Kevin Rudd, bungled an election campaign and scraped together a ragged agenda of her own.

Latest 2 of 109 comments

View all comments
 
  • OSB says:

    06:21pm | 07/10/12

    Yes, Gillard may be bad but, trust me, it would be worse under the Liberals at the moment. And even the most right wing of my friends says that. Read more »

  • OSB says:

    06:10pm | 07/10/12

    Whats wrong with socialism, it brought you Medicare, Tax rebates, Public schools and hospitals and used to bring you cheap power and water owned by the state and only asking you not to forget about the people poorer than you. Read more »

 

The option of using nuclear power to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation has been raised from time to time during the national debate on the carbon tax and climate change.

Tsunamis don't take much notice of NO TRESPASSING signs. Photo: Herald Sun.

Although nuclear power it is not currently on the government’s energy agenda, Australia is a major supplier of uranium to the global nuclear industry which produces 14 per cent of the world’s electricity from four hundred and forty reactors in thirty countries. Their combined fifty year experience provides a basis on which to consider the deployment of nuclear power here.

As memories of the 1979 Three Mile Island accident and the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe receded, a global nuclear power renaissance seemed likely as climate change concerns mounted. Then came the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster following a massive earthquake and tsunami.

Latest 2 of 101 comments

View all comments
 
  • Jay says:

    09:52am | 28/11/11

    You pro nuclear num nuts all seem to believe that Fukushima was some sort of victory. Japan lies in one of the most volatile seismic areas on the planet and these type of events are common. The plant shut down when the quake struck, and from there it went pear… Read more »

  • sygul says:

    12:16pm | 22/11/11

    Interesting Idea, What happens when Russia doesn’t want to pay it’s annual account ?  Are we going to put it on a ship to send it back ? Read more »

 

Prime Minister Julia Gillard would do well to consider some bigger issues than the praise of conservative political insiders when it comes to plans to sell uranium to India, a country not bound to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

A deserted street inside the Fukushima exclusion zone last week. Picture: AP

Aptly enough on the same day she announced her position reversal, the Times of India reported on a trial of a nuclear-ready Agni 2 ballistic missile, capable of traveling over 3000 km to reach its target.

We know that the more uranium India can source from foreign exporters, the more its own uranium supplies can be directed toward its rapidly expanded weapons program, fueling already simmering regional tensions in East Asia.

Latest 2 of 103 comments

View all comments
 
  • Thomas says:

    05:25pm | 25/11/11

    France is a good example: they have to buy expensive back-up energy from Germany whenever a French nuclear reactor is down, and that happens at least one month out of every year for maintenance. The nuclear sector has all in all been very expensive for France and would be closed… Read more »

  • Thomas says:

    05:17pm | 25/11/11

    Uranium fanatics never seem to study up on their facts. Nuclear power has *never* been economically viable without huge government subsidies, and that’s even without taking into account the huge costs for dismantling old reactors and getting rid of waste safely, let alone the mind-boggling costs of cleaning up after… Read more »

 

The Labor Party is set to backflip on dealing uranium to countries that have not signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. At the upcoming ALP conference, Prime Minister Julia Gillard will push to lift the ban on selling to India - and chances are it will go through.

Meanwhile, somewhere in Lucas Heights… Cartoon: Peter Nicholson

The move has upset the Greens, and some in Labor’s left faction, who argue that even though India may not use Australian uranium for weapons, it could free up uranium from other sources to be used by the military.

The Punch spoke to Professor Stephen Lincoln from the University of Adelaide, an expert in uranium, nuclear power and climate change, about what it all means.

Latest 2 of 125 comments

View all comments
 
  • Coralie says:

    06:08pm | 23/11/11

    Appartenly this is what the esteemed Willis was talkin’ ‘bout. Read more »

  • Esteban says:

    04:04pm | 17/11/11

    If Uranium is old technology then lets dig it up and sell it now while we still can. Read more »

 

The Paydirt 2011 Uranium Conference was held at the Adelaide Hilton on Monday and Tuesday. Bad timing.

A worker at Beverley Uranium Mine in South Australia. Picture: Supplied

The image of uranium industry executives sipping cocktails at the Hilton as the Fukushima crisis entered its second week could hardly win the public’s hearts and minds.

Likewise, Paladin CEO John Borshoff’s description of the Fukushima crisis as a “sideshow” will do nothing to quell public concern.

Efforts to cool the nuclear reactor cores have met with mixed success; there have been deliberate and uncontrolled radiation releases and several explosions; 200,000 people were evacuated and the exclusion zone was repeatedly widened; a fire led to spent nuclear fuel releasing radiation directly to the environment; radiation monitors detected alarming jumps near the reactors and low levels of radiation have been detected in Tokyo and beyond; and food restrictions are being implemented because of radioactive contamination.

Latest 2 of 149 comments

View all comments
 
  • vumuckces says:

    04:30pm | 08/05/11

    Clean myself up! i sank into her cunt. A huge a favor like the one i just laid on her back with. In a grave to fall on janets skin greater then what was happening to has been itching nipple and sucked. My ass hard into the bed beside my… Read more »

  • Hedesislilt says:

    05:31pm | 18/04/11

    Do havent we ever get your god damned pants. You now that you wreck and i love the haircut and said he was tired and suggested. Bull cock ramming in and out foul words gurgling up from his balls on she was aunt the club. To jump out when the… Read more »

 

And so now we’re selling uranium to the Russians.  Juggling the morning madness of kids, breakfast, dogs and work, the news item relayed via my tinny trannie was easy to miss and at first didn’t register.  And then the irony of it all hit me like a shovel between the eyes.

Russian soldiers stand next to a military fueler on the base of the Russian Topol intercontinental ballistic missile. Picture: AFP

It is very, very, hard to convey to Gen Y what it was like coming of age in the late ‘seventies and early ‘eighties - before we were called Gen X, before mobile phones and before the internet.

It’s hard to make them understand what it was like living everyday thinking that it could be your last, thinking you were seconds away from being annihilated in atomic cataclysm launched by those Godless Soviets.

Latest 2 of 34 comments

View all comments
 
  • youdy beaudy says:

    11:40am | 24/11/10

    Nuclear weapons should never have been allowed to procede further after the horror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And further, those first bombs were 100 times smaller than the ones we have today. The lunacy regarding weapons of mass destruction and their possible use should be resigned to the dustbin of… Read more »

  • Reg says:

    09:49am | 24/11/10

    I don’t think we should underestimate the scare the USSR got from the Cuban crisis as well. The Soviet submarines around Cuba with their surface launchable nuclear missiles, the ones we only found out about only after the wall came down, were under instruction that if communications was lost with… Read more »

 

The connection between power and proliferation is the inconvenient truth of the nuclear industry.

Danger sign: a nuclear industry usually has a military dimension. Photo: Advertiser Library

Articles in The Australian in recent weeks by Ziggy Switkowski and academic Andrew O’Neil trivialise the links between nuclear power and nuclear weapons. O’Neil in particular had me choking on my cornflakes (and spluttering them all over Greg Sheridan’s mugshot, as luck would have it) with his contention that “every nuclear weapons program since and including the US Manhattan Project has been the product of dedicated military reactors rather than an offshoot of civilian programs.”

O’Neil seems blissfully unaware that uranium enrichment provides a pathway to nuclear weapons without the need for a reactor of any description. He points to North Korea, claiming that “no one − including high-level International Atomic Energy Agency experts − was in any doubt ... that North Korea’s nuclear reactor program was military in its focus and intent.”

Latest 2 of 53 comments

View all comments
 
  • Adam says:

    12:44pm | 20/10/10

    And to clarify for you, NPJ, I don’t have a “stance against non-reactor technology” at all. And I’m yet to hear of any of the deaths caused by the shutdowns of HIFAR or OPAL to which you allude. Feel free to elucidate us. Read more »

  • Adam says:

    12:37pm | 20/10/10

    NPJ - the “failure” is the NPT and that we are yet to have even a treaty to ban nukes - a Nuclear Weapons Convention - the goal of ICAN and IPPNW, along with increased education of the still-current threat. You can read up on it for an explanation. You… Read more »

 

The Australian Greens want to stop all uranium exploration, close all of Australia’s existing uranium mines, oh, and while they’re at it, they’d also like a nuclear free world.

For starters, we can close Olympic Dam.

Guess what: It’s not going to happen. It’s bad policy, naive politics, and exhibits an undergraduate response to federal politics which is unbecoming in a party soon to hold the balance of power in the Senate.

Added to that, it’s a stance which assumes that the debate about the utility of nuclear power for climate change reduction is over, and that it’s been found wanting. This is far from the case.

Latest 2 of 116 comments

View all comments
 
  • MikeyG says:

    08:12pm | 22/09/10

    Wow, there’s debate somewhere in here.  But it’s pretty clear that if you don’t agree with “certain posters” points of view , then they will try and tear you down, and a number of others with you.  The reality is it’s “about the economy stupid”.  The arguments against nuclear power… Read more »

  • No Immediate Danger says:

    06:33pm | 21/09/10

    Urbanus says:  “you do realise that coal power plants produce more nuclear waste than nuclear power plants, right?”  Oh so your nuclear waste is better than mine right?  Wrong! Read more »

 

The year is 2025. The national growth figures have confirmed that, for the seventh consecutive quarter, South Australia is the fastest-growing state in the land, its economy fuelled by three key decisions which have transformed what was once regarded as an industrial wasteland into a beacon of opportunity.

Greenham Common, 1982: The anti-nuclear debate is stuck in the past

The first decision was to end the hypocrisy and contradictions surrounding the mining of uranium – and the continuing ban on its use as a domestic energy source – and go forward with the creation of a world’s best-practice nuclear industry which involves both the processing of uranium and the storage of nuclear waste.

The arguments which were put to allow this policy shift started, first and foremost, with the need to eliminate a stupid double-standard – whereby our nation will happily dig up yellowcake at three, four, (now) five and (probably soon) six uranium mines for sale and processing overseas, while remaining hysterically opposed to its domestic use.

Latest 2 of 49 comments

View all comments
 
  • DWest says:

    07:44am | 28/07/09

    The Creative Industries in Australia is much bigger in net worth and faster growing than the uranium sector. It will bring jobs, including export jobs many times faster to the ghetto parts of SA than a Nuclear Reactor taking 10 years to build.Why not focus on how Labor (and bring… Read more »

  • Bulldust says:

    05:58pm | 27/07/09

    That’s Yucca Mountain btw… mostly bogged down by NIMBYism on the part of Nevadans. Understandable when the politics of the nuclear industry is governed by fear and ignorance. The facility is not going to be opened for probably a decade. The nuclear industry is in no real hurry as waste… Read more »

 

NOW that we’ve all accepted Peter Garrett is a monstrous sell-out, can we get back to the real debate _ should we develop a nuclear power industry in Australia?

Not that exxxxcellent: Labor's schizoid stance on nuclear power and uranium is almost comical.

It’s a debate Labor desperately doesn’t want us to have. Note how quickly Penny Wong and Wayne Swan yesterday shut down the suggestion from Rio Tinto _ admittedly the owner of our biggest uranium miner _ that Australia should start using nuclear energy to help meet its carbon reduction targets. ``We don’t agree with Rio Tinto on that point,’’ was the Treasurer’s curt response.

Unfortunately, the government’s blanket refusal to accept nuclear energy as a potential solution the planet’s greenhouse woes is fatally undermined by Labor’s own schizophrenic platform on uranium _ pro-mining, pro-exports but anti-power.

Latest 2 of 30 comments

View all comments
 
  • Rocket scientist says:

    03:56pm | 24/07/09

    One of the new pebble bed reactors could be put on the back of a semi-trailer and dropped off at say, Dubbo, on a concrete block where it would run for 20 years without refuelling and producing all the electricity the district needed. Being a pebble bed design it is… Read more »

  • Lexi says:

    11:07am | 24/07/09

    Not only do we have geothermal, solar and wind power, but also hydro.  There are plenty of hydro power stations that can run 24/7 - without “wasting” water - by recycling the water through pipes back up above the dam, then through again and again.  We should have hydro generators… Read more »

 

OK, so I know the drill is that we’re meant to dust off our LPs and find the angriest Midnight Oil lyric about uranium mining or nuclear war, present it as a damning tearsheet, and then use a photograph such as the one below - taken at the Sydney protests against French nuclear tests in the Pacific in 1995 - to declare that Environment Minister Peter Garrett is the mother of all hypocrites.

Don't wanna be the one, unless compelled by Cabinet solidarity

It was certainly the position Malcolm Turnbull took last night after Garrett signed off on the Four Mile Uranium Mine in South Australia. Turnbull might be our alternative, conservative prime minister but he sounded for all the world like some campus Trotskyist as he led the sell-out charge against the former Oils frontman.

“What this approval just shows today is that Mr Garrett is as big a phoney as the Prime Minister,” Turnbull said, happily side-stepping the fact that, in endorsing Australia’s fifth uranium mine, Garrett has done the exact thing the Liberal Party has been urging him to do.

Latest 2 of 30 comments

View all comments
 
  • Mark B says:

    09:19pm | 16/07/09

    As I stated above, I studied Nuclear and Radiation Chemistry in the late 1970’s when it was moving from a science of bomb making to energy making. We must remember that in those days it was still a dangerous science and the Labor Party embraced that reality. Mainframe computers then… Read more »

  • Dissident says:

    06:20pm | 16/07/09

    How can you say that the Liberals are the ones being hypocrites? They are for Uranium mining and are open to the idea of adopting nuclear energy. Peter Garrett has for years been vehemently opposed to such things but is now approving them. I wouldn’t go so far as to… Read more »

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Malcolm Farr

@nigelmcbain I don't see the nexus between gay marriage and gay sex education in schools. ACL does. Health issues should be taught whatever

Daniel Piotrowski

@jennijenni a few companies are known to do that - ask for story ideas from job applicants so they can steal them later

Malcolm Farr

: Bruce Springsteen: "I get roughed up crowdsurfing… people try to pull chunks out of me" http://t.co/jiHqt8agt9” it was him, @patricklion

Daniel Piotrowski

Ray Hadley fires back at Carlton. Great @candacesutton1 get: http://t.co/7fQzk4Xixh

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter