AUSTRALIA, THE NEXT NUCLEAR WASTE DUMP AS SOUTH KOREA SEEKS A NATION TO DUMP IN

HEADS UP, SOUTH AUSTRALIA, LIFE AS YOU KNEW IT, MAY BE DRAWING TO A CLOSE AS YOU HAVE BEEN TARGETED FOR FIVE (5) NEW NUCLEAR WASTE DUMPS, WILL HAVE TO DREDGE AND DEEPEN YOUR SOUTHERN HARBORS TO RECEIVE WASTE SHIPMENTS FOR AT LEAST SEVENTY (70) AND UP TO ONE HUNDRED (100) YEARS AND YOU WILL ACCEPT "HIGH-LEVEL" NUCLEAR WASTE INTO YOUR ENVIRONMENT....UNLESS YOU STOP IT...


FROM  Antinuclear, Australian news, and some related international items.
     [EMPHASIS ADDED BY THE TEA ROOM]

The Nuclear Royal Commission recommended SOUTH AUSTRALIA (SA) pursue nuclear waste storage and disposal “as soon as possible” – requiring five waste dumps and a high level nuclear waste encapsulation processing facility.

 The Final Report Ch.5 “nuclear waste” and the Findings Report (p.16-20) are reliant on a consultancy “Radioactive waste storage and disposal facilities in SA” by Jacobs MCM, summarised in Appendix J.

SA is targeted for above ground high level nuclear waste storage, without a capacity to dispose of wastes, exposing our society to the risk of profound adverse impacts, potential terrorism and ongoing liabilities.

 The State government is in denial on the importance of nuclear waste dump siting by claiming social consent could be granted before we know what’s involved in siting up to five nuclear dumps across SA.

 Affected regions and waste transport routes are fundamental pre-requisites to transparency and to an informed public debate on potential consent to take any further steps in this nuclear waste agenda.

First: a dedicated new deep sea Nuclear port is to receive waste ships every 24 to 30 days for decades, to store high level waste on site following each shipment, and to operate for up to 70 years.

The coastal region south of Whyalla and north of Tumby Bay is the likely location for this Nuclear port.

 South Australia (SA) is targeted for a globally unprecedented scale of high level nuclear waste shipments.
Some 400 waste shipments totaling 90 000 tonnes of high level waste and requiring 9 000 transport casks are to be brought into SA in the first 30 year period of proposed Nuclear port operations.

This is in excess of the global total of 80 000 tonnes of high level nuclear waste shipped around the world in the 45 year period from 1971 to 2015, according to the World Nuclear Association report “Transport of Radioactive Materials” (Sept 2015) and the Jacobs MCM consultancy (Feb 2016, p.152).

 Second: an above ground nuclear waste Storage facility is to take on approx. 50 000 tonnes high level waste before a Disposal facility could first start to operate in Project Year 28 (Jacobs p.5 Fig.3).

 SA is proposed to import high level waste at 3 000 tonnes a year, twice the claimed rate of waste disposal (Jacobs p.114), with storage to increase to 70 000 tonnes. The Store is to operate for up to 100 years.

 The Nuclear Commission budgeted to locate the waste Storage facility 5 to 10 km from the Nuclear port.

 The Nuclear port and above ground waste Storage facility are to be approved in Project Year 5, ahead of pre-commitment contracts for 15 500 tonnes high level waste in Year 6 and waste imports in Year 11.

South Australia needs to know the proposed region for siting the Nuclear port AND whether the nuclear waste Store is to be adjacent to the port (likely on Eyre Peninsula) or sited in the north of SA.

 Third: a Low Level Waste Repository for burial of radioactive wastes derived from all operations including final decommissioning of all nuclear facilities is proposed to be located in north SA.
This Repository has a nominal waste burial capacity of 80 000 m3 of radioactive wastes (Jacobs p.144).

This is some eight times the total scale of the proposed National Radioactive Waste Repository.

AS COLLINS OF MINING AWARENESS + COMMENTED:

"This can’t work simply because of fire hazard and hazard to aquifers. If you don’t live in Australia and look at the google map during a drought year, it looks ideal. If you look on the ground at fire hazard, importance of aquifers, it can’t work at all. It’s totally bizarre that anyone within Australia could think this plan could work!
The US is trying to set up open air spent fuel storage in Texas and Utah, not even a building. Also burying the waste.
But, there is plenty of nuclear waste to go around and plenty of countries like South Korea, Switzerland and Germany who want someone else to take their nuclear waste. Only South Korea was honest enough to say so. Same thing between the states and even within states, in the US. Idaho does research promoting nuclear with high paying jobs and low population in an arid, cool climate with granite, but they think that someone else wants their nuclear waste! Bernie Sanders is anti-nuclear but was fine with west Texas taking Vermont nuclear waste for burial. Not even a peep did he utter that burial was wrong."


TRULY, YOU FOLKS IN AUSTRALIA MAY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THIS WILL DO TO YOU AND YOUR BEAUTIFUL LAND SINCE DUMP SITES THERE ARE SLATED TO INCREASE DRASTICALLY....

ASK MANY 'AMERICAN INDIANS' WHOSE TRIBES HAVE LONG ENDURED BEING DUMPED ON, DECIMATED BY THIS NUCLEAR GARBAGE.

ASK THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE DOWNWIND AND DOWNSTREAM FROM THE HANFORD 'SUPER-FACILITY' IN WASHINGTON STATE, WHERE "HIGHLY ABNORMAL" BIRTH DEFECTS ARE 'COMMON' NOW, WHERE PEOPLE ARE DYING FROM CANCERS THEY CONTRACTED 'IN UTERO'....

ASK THE JAPANESE PEOPLE WHO WILL SUFFER THE LEAKS AT FUKUSHIMA'S DAI'ICHI FACILITY FOR MAYBE ANOTHER 100 YEARS BEFORE 'TECHNOLOGY' IS INVENTED TO STOP THOSE LEAKS, WHERE EVEN THE GOVERNMENT HELPS COVER UP THE BLUNDERS AND DATA EVERY DAY AND REFUSES TO TAKE EXTREME MEASURES TO SAVE THEM.

LOOK WHAT'S HAPPENED TO THEIR RIVERS AND AQUIFERS!


LOOK AT THE CHILDREN OF CHERNOBYL!


DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN IN AUSTRALIA!

IF YOU CARE, ACT, DO WHAT MUST BE DONE TO STOP IT.
IT'S YOUR COUNTRY AND THE CITIZENS OF AUSTRALIA  SHOULD MAKE SUCH DECISIONS.

 MEANWHILE, BACK IN SOUTH KOREA.....



AS FOR SOUTH KOREA, AS COLLINS OF MINING AWARENESS +  PUT IT SO WELL, "WHO GIVES A FUKUSHIMA WHAT SOUTH KOREA WANTS?"


BUT THEY DO ADMIT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR A NUCLEAR DUMP SITE, JUST NOT ON SOUTH KOREAN SOIL.


WHICH NATION WILL PLAY VICTIM, GET ALL THAT RADIOACTIVE GARBAGE FROM GOOD OLD SOUTH KOREA?

ANY OF OUR NATIONS COULD BE THE TARGET, UNLESS WE MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR WE WILL NOT ACCEPT IT.

IT'S WAY PAST TIME WE, THE PEOPLE, JUST SAID, "HELL NO! NO MORE! SHOVE YOUR NUCLEAR WASTE WHERE THE SUN WON'T SHINE ON IT!"


I BOW TO COLLINS' TAKE ON SOUTH KOREA (but added a bit of emphasis):



"South Korea has decided that they may want to give someone else their nuclear waste, according to Reuters (July 25, 2016). Well doesn’t almost everyone?

Why would anyone give a flying Fukushima about what South Korea wants anyway? Let North Korea have them. Or China. China would still be smaller than Russia.

At least South Korea was honest enough to say so, however, and people can be on guard, instead of sneaking it out the backdoor like Germany’s trying to do with its high level Pebble Bed radioactive waste, and like Switzerland did with its old Swiss made, useless, plutonium.

Swiss plutonium will be “diluted” and buried at WIPP as so-called GAP plutonium (aka foreign plutonium that foreign countries didn’t want).

A long list of other countries have dumped their nuclear waste upon America, since treasonous US government officials (e.g. Obama; Tom D’Agostino) offered to take foreign nuclear waste to destroy America, while pretending it was about non-proliferation.

Many countries did ocean dumping in the past, and some zig-zagging ships carrying nuclear waste have raised a concern in a skeptical mind or two that they are still doing it.

[My note: Several ships were busted for doing so off the coast of Sudan.]

“SOUTH KOREA TO PICK SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL SITE BY 2028, EYES OVERSEAS STORAGE"
Mon Jul 25, 2016 5:28am EDT SEOUL (Reuters) – South Korea plans to select a site for permanent storage of its high level radioactive waste by 2028, and will also consider looking to store spent nuclear fuel overseas, the government said on Monday.”
http://feeds.reuters.com/~r/reuters/environment/~3/FAKUSSMlNqE/us-nuclear-southkorea-idUSKCN1050K1

There is a good chance that if South Korea is allowed to continue to (legally) steal America’s uranium from Public Lands due to the 1872 Mining Law, that they will use that as an excuse to dump the nuclear waste so created back upon America’s shores:

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/07/27/attempt-by-canadian-miner-to-expand-uranium-mine-on-us-public-land-near-natural-bridges-national-monument-comment-deadline-monday-1st-august/

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/07/29/expanding-energyfuels-uranium-mine-impact-by-41-8-acres-is-unnecessary-degradation-of-us-public-lands-health-environmental-hazard-comment-to-blm-deadline-monday/
(The legality of some of these mining permits is being challenged on the basis of inadequate environmental and cultural impact considerations; studies).

This is how WCS proposed to the US NRC to store high level spent nuclear fuel in West Texas [above ground] – not even a cover!

[MY NOTE: SEE COLLINS' SITE FOR MANY PHOTOS OF THE HANDY-DANDY OUTDOOR, TOPLESS STORAGE METHOD. AND DO UNDERTAND THAT YOUR FRIENDLY, CARING "REGULATORY" AND "PROTECTION" AGAENCIES ARE ALLOWING CRAP LIKE THIS.]

Or, South Korea may hit upon Australia to dump their nuclear waste, if Australia lets them:

This won’t work out due to Australia’s fires. Australia needs to stop mining uranium too, thus cutting its nuclear fuel chains.

South Korea plans to keep on making nuclear waste and they want to make even more by building additional reactors. But, they don’t want any of that nasty radioactive waste!
“South Korea has a relatively smaller number of generating stations, only four, but each station houses four or more units, and three sites have more reactors planned. Thus Korea’s nuclear power production is slightly more centralized than most nuclear power nations. Housing multiple units at each site allows more efficient maintenance and lower costs, but reduces grid efficiencies. Four of the six Wolsong reactors are Canadian-designed CANDU pressurized heavy-water reactors (PHWR).

In 2013, in response to a petition from local fishermen, Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power (KHNP) renamed its Yonggwang as the Hanbit plant, and its Ulchin plant in North Gyeongsang province was renamed as the Hanul plant.

In 2014, an agreement was signed to allow construction of two additional APR-1400 reactors at Hanul (as Shin Hanul-3 and -4; construction to start no earlier than 2017) and two as-yet unnamed units in Yeongdeok County (construction may start by 2022”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_South_Korea

South Korea’s also building a nuclear power station for the UAE, with US funding – read Middle Eastern Nuclear Bombs in the making:



Why doesn’t the US just let China and North Korea have South Korea? What’s to lose other than for missionaries? Crappy defective Korean washing machines?

They can take Japan too for lagniappe. Who the Fukushima cares? Most Veterans of the Korean war will be dead soon anyway. That way Japan won’t be able to send the US radioactive food and defective or radioactive cars and car parts.

Cut them all lose. Let China, Japan and Korea work their own problems out and let them hunt for uranium in their own land, if they must have it. "

---
HEAR, HEAR, COLLINS!

WE DO NOT NEED NUCLEAR POWER TO SURVIVE ON THIS PLANET.
IN FACT, WE NEED TO RID THE WORLD OF NUKES SO WE CAN SURVIVE! 

NUCLEAR ANYTHING CREATES RADIATION THAT SEEPS INTO EVERYTHING AROUND IT, DOWNWIND AND DOWNSTREAM FROM IT, UNDERNEATH  IT, CONSTANT, UNENDING, CANCER-CAUSING, LIFE-DESTROYING IONIZING RADIATION.

NOT IN 100 GENERATIONS WILL WE BE FREE FROM THE EFFECTS OF DAMNABLE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.
THEIR WASTE WILL LIVE ON AND ON, FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS, BUT, BYALLTHEGODS, WE CAN REDUCE THAT!

WE CAN ... EACH OF US ADDED TO THE REST OF US WHO HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF THIS.
ONE VOICE MAY SEEM BUT A WHISPER, BUT A MILLION VOICES WOULD BE A ROAR, AND TEN MILLION?

WE HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THINGS.
I ASSURE YOU, WE DO!

ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS TAKE A STAND AND NEVER WAIVER UNTIL WE'RE ALL NUKE FREE.
IF WE DON'T, HOW CAN WE FACE OUT CHILDREN, OR THEIR CHILDREN?

[ABOVE, JUST ANOTHER NORMAL DAY OF LEAKING RADIATION, RADIOACTIVE PLUMES RISING AT HANFORD, "COLUMBIA GENERATING FACILITY", GENERATING DEATH SINCE WORLD WAR II.]