Comments on: Fund Solar City and Water Smart, not footy lights: Alice environmentalists

By: Radiation Bulletin: Fuel Cycle/DOE: August 20th – 26th 2012 | The Energy Net

Mon, 27 Aug 2012 06:53:51 +0000

[...] Spring News – Has civic duty ever been mentioned in the nuke dump debate? Tomorrow’s protest in Alice may be… – [...]

By: Phil Walcott

Phil Walcott — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 13:04:27 +0000

Thanks all for your comments … always helpful to get a broader perspective.

By: David Chewings

David Chewings — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 02:20:34 +0000

@Phil Walcott 20, 2012 at 9:00pm.
You say “As the IndependeNT candidate for Greatorex, the people of the electorate and I oppose any mining licence being granted for Angela Pamela and the nuclear waste deposit being dumped at Muckaty Station.”
For the moment Phil, we’ll have to enter this one under Phil Walcott’s book of big statements.
The Alice, just like Arkaroola, is no place for a u-mine. It is your classic no brainer and as one who loves the Alice, I am sure that you know Phil where I am coming from.
I reckon about 50% of the Greatorex electorate would agree with your current position on Angela Pamela (CAMECO) and Muckaty.
D. R. Chewings aka THE lone dingo.

By: Tim Blatch

Tim Blatch — Tue, 21 Aug 2012 00:44:04 +0000

Bit of an ambit claim there Phil – “the people of the electorate and I”.
There are opposing views in any electorate, even though I suspect not a large opposing view in this particular case.

By: Russell Guy

Russell Guy — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 23:43:58 +0000

Phil, it’s a pity you’re not as proactive in alcohol supply reduction as you are in uranium mining. You appear to be conservative in that aspect of community health.

By: Larry

Larry — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:35:56 +0000

We all have a duty to help make a good decision about how best to manage this long lived nuclear waste, that will remain a hazard to human health and the environment well beyond the foreseeable future. A remote (out of sight / out of mind) location like Muckaty may not be the best management plan.
Hoping for the best, we’ll probably do a better job of looking after this unique burden if it remains in sight of the experts – the nuclear boffins at ANSTO who produced the waste in the first place.
Planning for the worst, we probably shouldn’t dump the waste anywhere that is entirely dependent on groundwater.
But ultimately, the best decision is one that is politically stable: anything that is forced upon an unwilling target is highly susceptible to being challenged and eventually overturned.
Some people insist that the only option is to dump it on someone who can’t fight back, dismissing the scenario of a fully informed community making the difficult decision to host nuclear waste, such as in your Swiss example. But in fact, here in Australia we’ve never tried.
We’ve had around 20 years of the failed strategy of imposition; perhaps it is time for Australia to try and see if a genuinely consultative process can’t be more successful.

By: Phil Walcott

Phil Walcott — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 11:30:34 +0000

As the IndependeNT candidate for Greatorex, the people of the electorate and I oppose any mining licence being granted for Angela Pamela and the the nuclear waste deposit being dumped at Muckaty Station. Until such times as nuclear waste can be stored securely, it should stay where it is … in the ground! We have several renewable alternatives that can secure sustainability.