@ Evelyne Roullet, Posted December 16, 2015 at 5:44pm: My …

Comment on Nuke dump: What’s the rush? by Hal Duell.

@ Evelyne Roullet, Posted December 16, 2015 at 5:44pm: My source is our very own local newspaper, whose name must not be mentioned on this site. Tuesday’s edition, and where they got their information from is not included.
Smoke and mirrors abound to be sure, but I feel a single waste site is coming either here or there. I also feel the primary goal of all concerned should not be to stop the site no matter what, but to ensure that only waste from Australia is stored there.
And why not Maralinga? What aren’t we being told about that contaminated site?
[ED – Hi Hal, you’re welcome to mention the Centralian Advocate.]

Hal Duell Also Commented

Nuke dump: What’s the rush?
@ Fred the Philistine, Posted December 19, 2015 at 11:49 am: I can’t agree with Woomera, but no question that the nearby Maralinga would be the optimum site. Trouble is, Maralinga is not an option. And while Woomera is currently being used for some temporary storage, it’s not an option either.
I suppose either Queensland or NSW could be picked, but with so many more people over on that side, the protests will be correspondingly bigger. Political headaches!
The three sites in SA all look fairly remote on the map, and the local Federal Member, Rowan Ramsey, sounds like he is fully onside. SA looks to have the inside running on this.
If, and I grant it’s a big if, the waste to be stored is to be kept to Australian waste, then we’re not looking at the really nasty stuff. And with Lucas Heights set to increase production of medical products, then we do need a national site.
And what makes you think I haven’t been down to the area on the Old South Road?


Nuke dump: What’s the rush?
@ Evelyne Roullet, Posted December 17, 2015 at 9:03am: I agree that the Centralian Advocate is not “our own”, but rather another pony in Rupert’s stable. I merely used the term to indicate where I found my quote. And I read it in spite of its owner because it does speak of local issues.
The same article asserts that Lucas Heights only has space and funding until 2023. True? Maybe.
I too followed the progress of the cargo ship bringing waste from France to Sydney. The objections and protests didn’t seem to accomplish much. The ship docked in Sydney, and the waste is now in Lucas Heights, or so we are told.
Where to from there is the pertinent question. I still think the momentum to a single site is well advanced, and exactly where it will go will be announced directly. Subject to an environment impact statement and an iron-clad guarantee that only Australian waste will ever be stored there, I can see no compelling reason not to choose the site on the Old South Road. Not-in-my-backyard doesn’t quite cut it with me.
Of course Maralinga is the most sensible destination, or at least it is to my mind. And I do wonder what we are not being told about the current state of that site and/or what plans are afoot for its future use.


Nuke dump: What’s the rush?
@ Evelyne Roullet, Posted December 11, 2015 at 7:02 pm:
I have read just today that enshrined in the enabling legislation covering the proposed national nuclear waste facility is a clause prohibiting the storage of any but Australian waste.
So I returned to your comment and re-read your link. That article speaks of the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Bill 2005 and subsequent amendments (2006). It also cites something called the ANSTO Bill passed around the same time. The implication in the article is that acceptance of other countries nuclear waste would be allowed.
It’s now a decade later, the controversy is heating up again and neither John Howard nor Alexander Downer are anywhere in sight. As stated above, I have today read an article that seems to contradict the conclusions drawn in your link. So I wonder if you could enlighten us as to which of the two is correct.


Recent Comments by Hal Duell

Ministers lash out at council over gallery
I appeal to the NT government, especially to Ministers Gunner and Wakefield, to reconsider their approach to building the proposed National Aboriginal Art Gallery in Alice Springs.
I doubt if many residents, and certainly not a majority, would be opposed to the gallery being built here. But why do you need to destroy what we have (an old high school, a central oval and a debt-free and functioning civic centre) to do that?
It’s not like we’re short of space down here.
It’s a bit unfair to ask council to solve your location problem when to date both of your proposals have presented it with a solution impossible to sell to the residents. And remember, councillors also face the coming elections.
Indigenous suggestions range from the Desert Park to the Desert Knowledge precinct.
It’s not negotiating if you reject in advance any suggestions other than your own.
And a note to council: The NT Government has clearly stated through Minister Wakefield that these discussions can be held in open. Time for you to stop hiding from us. Let’s hear what you have to say.


Locally produced hemp could replace plastic
This is a very good initiative. Congratulations to the Gunner government.
Hemp is a not only a better fibre than cotton, but growing it uses less water and fewer chemicals. What not to like?
Again, congratulations to the Gunner government.


Gunner goofs: No council ‘decisions’ on gallery site
Perhaps one of the more astonishing features of this continuing saga is the overweening arrogance of Alice’s current group of councillors.
They somehow think they have the right to dispose of our civic centre.
They forget they were elected to look after our assets, not use them as bargaining chips in some shady back-room deal.
Commercial-in-confidence is such a scam. Come on councillors – I challenge any of you to grow a pair.


Despite clear leads, no-one was punished for making this mess
It can be done. Read this.


US military base in Darwin: what risk to NT?
The Opium Wars are over. China won. And all this “containment” and forward posturing is more like dogs barking in the night while the caravan moves on.
Poor Oz! Hanging like a pendulum between London and Washington with (just) the Kiwis for company. That means Boris Johnson and Donald Trump. What can go wrong?


Be Sociable, Share!

A new way to support our journalism

We do not have a paywall. If you support our independent journalism you can make a financial contribution by clicking the red button below. This will help us cover expenses and sustain the news service we’ve been providing since 1994, in a locally owned and operated medium.

Erwin Chlanda, Editor