In our October Nuclear Free News update you can read about the many many reasons why nuclear power is not a viable solution to climate change, that the vast majority of the radioactive waste planned to be stored at Kimba is unnecessary waste produced by ANSTO, which is planning to five-fold this waste and huge defense budget rising in part due to nuclear submarine plans.
The pursuit of nuclear power would slow the transition to a low-carbon economy. It would increase electricity costs. It would unnecessarily introduce challenges and risks associated with high-level nuclear waste management and the potential for catastrophic accidents.
The pursuit of nuclear power in Australia would increase electricity costs, slow the transition to a low-carbon economy, introduce the potential for catastrophic accidents and present unnecessary challenges and risks associated with high-level nuclear waste management.
Even given Europe’s energy crisis, the case against nuclear power has never been so conclusive—and so important.
1. Long Time Lag Between Planning and Operation 2. Cost 3. Weapons Proliferation Risk 4. Meltdown Risk 5. Mining Lung Cancer Risk 6. Carbon-Equivalent Emissions and Air Pollution 7. Waste Risk. And that doesn't even mention the radioactive racism of this industry.
Nuclear Waste Dump
Briefing by David Noonan, Independent Environment Campaigner 03 Oct 2022. ANSTO is the predominant source of existing and future radioactive waste to be disposed and stored at Kimba. ARWA report a five-fold increase in Low Level Waste (LLW) to be disposed at Kimba. ANSTO are responsible for over 99.5% of the radioactivity in Australia's total LLW inventory to be dumped at Kimba.
Opponents of proposed dump site at Kimba in South Australia say it would be safer to keep the waste where it mostly is
Government says nuclear waste cannot continue to build up and it will work with traditional custodians of proposed Kimba site, ignoring their voice of unanimous opposition.
War, Weapons & Subs
Defence spending is set to hit $80 billion a year by the end of the decade, up significantly from the current annual figure of $50 billion. That figure will grow even larger when the cost of nuclear-powered submarines acquired under the AUKUS agreement is included, as well as an increase in military personnel.