Is the SA Government Sufficiently Open & Transparent to run a Global High Level Nuclear Waste Dump?

The State Government of South Australia maintains that it is a good idea for this state to become the site of a global High Level Nuclear Waste Dump.  It plans to store a large proportion of the world’s spent nuclear reactor fuel rods deep underground on Eyre Peninsular. Part of this Peninsular is a food bowl for the state, the nation and the world.

The South Australian government plans to receive the high level nuclear waste via a purpose built port in South Australia and via the port of Darwin.  The waste will be trucked across Australia for firstly, above ground holding, and then permanent geologic storage inside cooper tubes designed in Scandinavia.

The state government has issued a Royal Commission into SA’s role in the nuclear future.  Chapter 7 of the report concentrates upon the safety of nuclear industry.  Chapter 7 makes many statements about the comparative contribution various sources, natural and man made, make to a public annual radiation dose.

All of the statements contained in Chapter 7 of the report rely upon monitoring of radiation in the environment from all sources, and it relies upon estimates of the doses received by member of the public.  Unlike radiation workers in any field, for example in mining or medicine, the members of the public are not monitored for their individual personal doses on a day by day basis. And so the annual dose for members of the public is a an average, a best guess.

Where governmental radiation protection regimes are trusted by the people of a nation, and where government is trusted by those people to release information in an open and honest manner, and where that information is released in full and in a timely manner, then such a people, such a society enjoys the trust of government. And the people tend to accept the facts as presented by government.   The job of government is to be open and honest.  The job of the people is to guard against deception, delay and falsehood.

Radiation monitoring is a primary duty of government. For example South Australian water supplies have been monitored in this way for many decades.  Generally, few people are interested in the monitoring results.  This is true of any monitoring, whether it be for smog in the air, bacteria in the water supply, and the safety of food.  We tend to trust that government authorities will inform the public in an open, honest, and timely fashion.

The government of South Australia has advised the people of this state that the decision to proceed or not to proceed with the development of a global graveyard for the world’s waste reactor cores is too important to be left to the mere democratic processes we all know, love and suffer loss in war for.  That is, the government has determined that we are not allowed a free and secret ballot on the question.  The Premier of the State has advised us that he will make the decision in due course.

After a relentless campaign since 2011 to convince us, via decrees from Flinders and Adelaide University, that the Linear No Threshold Model of radiological protection is invalid – though there is at least insufficient evidence to support Hormesis as a cheap alternative (much to the chagrin of the uranium lobby), the power elite in this State is now denying us the right and freedom to vote on the matter.  There is to be a long term propaganda process whereby local “community juries” – small groups of individuals drawn from the community by the government – will be inculcated into the consensus the government and industry require.

I have a major problem with the SA government plan for a high level nuclear waste dump located in this state.














Dedicated to the Dude at Fukushima Syndrome

We live in a cusp between technologies. The esoteric today is tomorrow’s conventional.

No amount of optimistic revisionism will successfully hide the short comings of technologies held by people to be inconsequential when such people are in fact the Luddites of both today and tomorrow.

Why boil water with 26 different types of university degrees, a process which generates nuclear waste no user nation really wants to store. The world is seriously considering exported to my home, South Australia, for storage for the next 100,000 years ? This is madness. There are no NPPs in Australia.

The proposed HLNW dump is smack bang to the immediate north of one of South Australia’s food bowls.

The whole globe really expects us to mind its nuclear sewerage for the next 100,000 years? How stupid do you think we are?

In all sincerity I say to the proponents of this mad plan – please Fuck off, Yankee go home.

Is that clear or shall I repeat it?

The School of Hormesis and its terms of abuse, stigmatisation, and political and social isolation

Published by Flinders University in the public domain.

Notice to Flinders University:

May 26th, 2016 at 1:59 pm

I am now at the point where I am fully prepared and able to present a complaint to both State and Federal human rights and EEO authorities about the impacts of the 2011 Sykes article here. The basic infringements being the exclusion of people deemed to be, judged to be or actually suffering mental health issues, whether radiophobia or any condition is actually (unlike radiophobia,an invention of the school of Hormesis. It does not appear in any relevant diagnostic manual such as DSMIV), with a primary breach to the rights of dissidents who disagree with the concepts of hormesis as a means of social control (as evidenced by the Sykes piece) or as a method by which alleged safety can be imposed upon populations.

In combination, in fact and in theory the stance of hormesis as published by Scott (LANL, USA) and Sykes and FU primarily breaches the rights of dissidents to fully participate in the current and ongoing nuclear debate as determined and invited by the current government of SA. To participate results in advocates of ALARA being labelled as mentally defective by Sykes and Flinders University. This breaches many human rights, including relevant sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including, but limited to, the following:

Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 12.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 19.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 27.

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

I observe that the aim of Hormesis and of US DoE Contractors appointed in Adelaide is to socially isolate those South Australians who disagree with hormesis and who hold contrary knowledge and opinions to that school of thought. As an advocate for ALARA, the school of Hormesis has mainted that people with allegedly deviant views are incapable of rational thought, are ignorant and are unreasonably fearfull of the edicts issued by the school of hormesis. I maintain that since 2011 at least, the school of hormesis in SA has profiled objectors to its position as mentally defective, and has carefully tried to induce the wider community to exclude such dissidents from full social inclusion and participation. This is particularly injurious given the current standing invitation for all South Australians to fully participate in the current nuclear debate which has been in fact on going since 2011. I ask again, Flinders University must stop its attempts to isolate dissidents to the school of hormesis or fact investigation by state and federal and international bodies.

Paul Langley

anyone else like to be included in this complaint?
Fukushima Syndrome perhaps? When is Bobby Scott’s and Lanl legal notice advising me I am to be sued due to my dissent going to arrive you Moron?

Epigentics and Genomic Instability

reproduced for study purposes. Please see also “Poverty linked to epigenetic changes and mental illness -Impoverished adolescents acquire DNA marks, brain changes and depression over time.” Sara Reardon 24 May 2016 for a clear introduction to epigenetics and genomic instability as a background. Environment and stressors affects how genes express and how cells read and respond to gene expression. A marked gene need not be a “damaged gene”, however processes due to environment may alter the expression of a gene. The consequences of this may be many. One outcome may be disease. A marked, undamaged, gene may be transmissible to offspring if it is a germ cell (sperm, egg).

Selected pages from Epigenetic Events and Radiation Exposure, Ranajit Chakraborty, PhD Center for Computational Genomics, Institute of Applied Genetics,
Department of Forensic and Investigative Genetics, Univ. North
Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, Texas 76107, USA. nvited Talk given at the MELODY-2012 Workshop at Helsinki, Finland, on September 13, 2012













Fukushima clean-up chief still hunting for 600 tonnes of melted radioactive fuel

Fukushima clean-up chief still hunting for 600 tonnes of melted radioactive fuel
Exclusive by Mark Willacy inside the Fukushima nuclear plant for Foreign Correspondent

The operator of the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant has revealed that 600 tonnes of reactor fuel melted during the disaster, and that the exact location of the highly radioactive blobs remains a mystery.

In an exclusive interview with Foreign Correspondent, the Tokyo Electric Power Company’s chief of decommissioning at Fukushima, Naohiro Masuda, said the company hoped to pinpoint the position of the fuel and begin removing it from 2021.

But he admitted the technology needed to remove the fuel has to be invented.

“Once we can find out the condition of the melted fuel and identify its location, I believe we can develop the necessary tools to retrieve it,” Mr Masuda said.

“So it’s important to find it as soon as possible.”
Clean-up to take decades, cost tens of billions of dollars

Reactors 1, 2 and 3 at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant suffered catastrophic meltdowns in the hours and days after a giant tsunami swamped the facility on 11 March, 2011.

Thousands of workers are braving elevated radiation levels to stabilise and decommission the plant.

TEPCO says the process will take 30 to 40 years and tens of billions of dollars.

“In Reactor 1, all of the fuel has melted down from inside the pressure vessel,” Mr Masuda said.

“In reactors 2 and 3, about 30 per cent to 50 per cent remains in the pressure vessel and the rest has melted down. But unfortunately, we don’t know exactly where [the fuel] is.”

The head of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) at the time of the meltdowns at Fukushima doubts the fuel can be retrieved, saying such an operation has never been done before.

“Nobody really knows where the fuel is at this point and this fuel is still very radioactive and will be for a long time,” said Gregory Jaczko in an interview with Foreign Correspondent in Washington.

“It may be possible that we’re never able to remove the fuel. You may just have to wind up leaving it there and somehow entomb it as it is.”
Radiation killing search robots inside reactor

For the first time, TEPCO has revealed just how much of the mostly uranium fuel melted down after the tsunami swamped the plant.

“It’s estimated that approximately 200 tonnes of debris lies within each unit,” said TEPCO’s Naohiro Masuda.

“So in total, about 600 tonnes of melted debris fuel and a mixture of concrete and other metals are likely to be there.”

TEPCO has attempted to use custom-built robots to access high-dose radiation parts of the reactor buildings where humans cannot go.

“All the robots have been disabled, the instrumentation, the camera … have been disabled because of the high radiation fields,” former NRC boss Gregory Jaczko said.

Appointed to head the US nuclear watchdog by President Barack Obama in 2009, Dr Jaczko resigned a year after the Fukushima disaster.

A particle physicist, he now questions the safety of nuclear power.

“You have to now accept that in all nuclear power plants, wherever they are in the world … that you can have this kind of a very catastrophic accident and you can release a significant amount of radiation and have a decade long clean-up effort on your hands,” he said.

10 million bags of contaminated soil in gigantic waste dumps

Another supporter turned opponent of nuclear power is Naoto Kan, who was the Japanese prime minister at the time of the Fukushima meltdowns.

He says those who argue that nuclear power is a safe, cheap source of energy are misguided.

“So far, the government is paying $70 billion to support TEPCO,” Mr Kan said.

“But that is not enough. It will probably cost more than $240 billion. I think 40 years [to decommission the plant] is an optimistic view.”

More than 100,000 Japanese are still unable to return home because their communities lie in elevated radiation zones.

Some people have returned to their towns and villages since the completion of decontamination work, which often involves the removal of up to 15 centimetres of topsoil from fields and from around homes.

More than 10 million large bags of contaminated soil and waste have so far been collected. The bags are now stored in thousands of sites around Fukushima, with some of the piles several storeys high.

“In order for people to come back, we need to show that the Fukushima plant is in a stable condition,” Naohiro Masuda said.

“We need to make that the situation … we’re working on something [for] which there is no textbook.”

Foreign Correspondent: Into the Zone goes to air tonight at 9.30pm on ABC TV.