Letter to The Editor: Proposals for a nuclear reprocessing hub in South Australia

LOGO-trim.jpg

Letter to the Editor, Australian Financial Review.

Dear Editor,

Proposals for a nuclear reprocessing hub in South Australia, apparently gaining in both Coalition and Labor support, will be sorely tested in the coming and inevitable public debate.

This is a thinly-disguised plan for the first nuclear power stations and a reprocessing plant on Australian soil. Such reactors and plant will require public subsidies unless, as in the latest UK project, a foreign entity like China helps foot the bill. China and Japan are at the heart of the South Australian proposals. When Prime Minister John Howard tested the waters of public opinion on nuclear power stations - without the China or Japan factor -  his retreat was swift and total.

The idea is to store nuclear wastes above and below ground somewhere in the Outback - that is, on Aboriginal lands. Besides raising questions of transporting the wastes, what of the morality of dumping such toxic materials in someone else's yard? If so safe, why not put the nuclear hub in Adelaide or Canberra, let alone the Chinese, Japanese, Taiwanese, Indian, British or French countrysides?

We are in an age of handbag-sized nuclear weapons. International terror organisations see these as the Holy Grail. In the coming century of unprecedented human dilemmas, a nuclear Australia will inevitably become a more attractive focus and target for such organisations - as well as for hostile foreign governments.

With rapid innovation and cost reduction for both energy efficiency and renewable energy, the South Australian proposal is not just unnecessary, it is a case of blinkered thinking, foreign pressure and big dollars getting in the way of a clear-eyed national strategy for Australia's future independence,security and lifestyle.

Yours sincerely,

Bob Brown.
Former Leader of the Australian Greens.


Add your reaction Share

The Age - Non-existent deal on preferences

BBF Logo

The Editor,
The Age.

For the third state election in a row Labor is crying 'wolf!' about a non-existent deal on preferences between the Greens and Liberals. Labor's strategy is to divert attention from the fact that the Liberals will preference it ahead of the Greens wherever the Greens are likely to win seats. Premier Denis Napthine prefers Labor because the Greens are stronger on issues of social justice, public transport and the environment.

Read more
Add your reaction Share

Barking up the wrong tree on lerps?

The Editor,
The Australian Financial Review,

Dear Editor,
The Energy Resource Information Centre's Steve Wright says (Aug 25) that I am barking up the wrong tree on lerps.
While I have some admiration for lerps, I have never referred to the little critters. Wright's fabrication is another example of a coal seam gas proponent peddling myths.

Yours faithfully,
Bob Brown

Add your reaction Share

Facts v Fiction: busting CSG myths

Dear Editor,

'Facts v Fiction: busting CSG myths' (Australian Financial Review 18 Aug) states that "myths and unfounded claims are more often found of the side of the anti-coal seam gas activists" but offers no qualitative or quantitative evidence for the claim.

The report also has NSW Chief Scientist Margaret O'Kane giving a 'cautious green light to CSG mining in the Sydney Basin - saying it is likely has less impact than long wall coal mining'.

How about comparing the CSG impact with that of extracting renewable energy?

The Chief Scientist is comparing grey with black rather than white. While this will be pleasing for the CSG companies, it is not good science.

Yours sincerely

Bob Brown

Add your reaction Share

Nikolic slanders green groups

30 June 2014

Dear Editor,

In spearheading the latest Liberal attack on the environment movement, Federal member for Bass, Andrew Nikolic, made statements ranging from the hypocritical to the dishonest.

Read more
6 reactions Share

Women have always played a lead role in environment groups

2 May 2014

The Editor,

Women ran the most crucial and contentious part of the campaign to save the Franklin River, the blockade.

From 1981 when Emma Gunn, Lilith Waud, Cathie Plowman and a band of others prepared for peaceful protest as the bulldozers were brought into the wilderness, this huge operation depended on their long-range planning, backed by national training for volunteers organised by people like Karen Alexander in Melbourne, Judy Lambert in Sydney, Jenny Whinam in Canberra and Louise Sladdin in Adelaide. The best account of arrangements on the Gordon River are in Alice Hungerford’s recent book ‘UpRiver’.

Read more
Add your reaction Share

The Mercury

11 March 2014

Dear Editor,

Former Liberal Treasurer, Peter Costello's diatribe against Tasmania in yesterday's Daily Telegraph is the latest pointer to the Liberal's ripping billions of dollars off Tasmania in coming years through an adjustment of GST payments. That will cost Tasmanian jobs dearly.

Read more
Add your reaction Share

The Mercury

31 January 2014

Dear Editor,

The Coalition Federal Government is hell-bent on reversing the 2013 World Heritage listing of the tallest flowering forests on Earth here in Tasmania.

Read more
Add your reaction Share

The Mercury

1 September 2013

Dear Editor,

Andrew Wilkie, like my maths mistress in first year, is 'disappointed' with me (Letters. 31.8.13). I will get over it.

Read more
Add your reaction Share

The Canberra Times

27 August 2013

Dear Editor,

The Australian Greens is the only national party to have selected Canberra for its election campaign launch. Saturday's launch was covered by media across the Australia but not the Canberra Times.

Read more
Add your reaction Share