‘Safe nuclear power known since 2009’

Sir – First let me congratulate you on your free online independence since 1994.


Without it I would not have read your report of the Minerals Council of Australia’s claim to have had a change of heart about nuclear power.  There are better reasons for such a change than mentioned by Tania Constable.


She’s right about Australians needing to know more about nuclear energy and how it would help reduce power bills and Australia’s emissions.


She’s also right when she said: “The MCA has extensively advocated for the use of safe, reliable, zero-emissions nuclear power in recent years to support a mature and informed discussion.”


However she’s omitted mention of nuclear’s decades of better safety performance than coal’s. The undisputed evidence has been published online since 2009!


Uranium-rich Central Australia should have been informed in 2015.  It and the rest of Australia could even have started to benefit from a change of heart about safe recycling used nuclear fuel to both dispose of “waste” and supply steam energy to turbines currently fired by coal.


Jim Stewart




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

One Comment (starting with the most recent)

NB: If you want to reply to a previous comment, start your comment with this notation: @n where n is the number of the comment you want to reply to.
  1. Paul Parker
    Posted December 30, 2019 at 2:27 pm

    Australians mostly accept the existence of some nuclear benefits but they maintain opposition to wider nuclear development.
    This means Australians may support replacement of our ageing Lucas Heights facility, when know where it will be.
    Nuclear participants need STOP promoting activities wider than our existing Lucas Heights if it is to be replaced.
    Replacement of our Lucas Heights facility will ensure our needs for various nuclear products will continue to be provided within Australia.
    Replacement of our Lucas Heights facility enables continued production, training, and research with public education.
    Australians involved in public discussions of other plans then may feel better prepared to discuss alternative facilities.
    The Australian public needs to approve or reject other facilities in our wider community.

    View Comment

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *