Site 12km from "Wiruna" on Federal Govt nuclear dump short list

[gary]

In news this afternoon, the Federal Government has included the
locality of Sally's Flat, NSW in a short list of six sites in the country
to become Australia's first nuclear waste dump.

Sally's Flat is approximately 12km from the Astronomical of New South
Wales dark sky property, "Wiruna".

Story at ABC here -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-13/government-releases-shortlist-sites-for-nuclear-waste-storage/6937244

[gary]

In a follow-up story, ABC reports that residents of Sally's Flat want it
removed from the short-list.



Story here -
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-13/take-sallys-flat-off-nuclear-waste-shortlist-residents-say/6937442

[xelasnave]

Thanks Gary.
My view is "they" always make a list but have a particular site in mind.
If only one site is presented everyone is against it..but with a list everyone just wants it to be somewhere else other than near them...the question of do it or not disappears in the squabbles to go somewhere else.
It's a divide and conquer strategy.

[deanm]

I agree with Alex.

Somewhere in SA or NT is the obvious choice: utterly remote, vanishingly-low population density and geologically extremely stable (on the scale of millions of years).

Hell - SA is already one of the most nuked places around (think Emu & Maralinga)!

Why would anywhere near Bathurst even be contemplated - other than as a red herring?!

The only issues are those of transportation, security and compensation to indigenous (or other) land owners.

Dean

[gary]

Hi Alex,

Rob Stich and the Working Dog Productions script writers for the ABC satirical comedy series Utopia (http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/utopia/) would no doubt have come up with the same spin.

Oscar Wilde once said that "life imitates art far more than art imitates life", so you are definitely on to something.

[RB]

I just finished watching the doco - "Uranium, twisting the dragon's tail", very interesting and an eye opener.
Scary to think what they did back then to our indigenous people and now we propose to dump the world's nuclear waste back into our country.

I find it hard to believe that they'd pick Sally's Flat but then again I wouldn't put it past any government.

:rolleyes:

[Wavytone]

So what's the problem ?

Worried that you'll all come home with a faint green glow in the dark ?

[glend]

Please get your facts straight. The six sites being considered are for Australian nuclear waste - not a world dump site. The Australian waste is low to medium grade waste from reactors like Lucas Heights, and low grade research and medical waste.
Of course those that are ' professional outragers', like the Greens, will rant, distort the truth, etc. I guess they are happy to have it sitting in drums at Lucas Height.

Now down the track Australia does have an 'opportunity' to deep bury waste for countries that we supplied uranium to as exports. This is probably a moral obligation as well. There is nothing wrong with remote, deep cavern storage - there is one in Sweden I believe. After all a lot of it came out of the ground at Olympic Dam SA so why not put It back.

[xelasnave]

No more dangerous than DDT
Moral obligation to take back waste mmm
I would be happy to hear how that logic was arrived at and who presented such a outlook.
If someone disagrees I gather they must be a fool.
My mind is open but I would like to be convinced that morality is a monopoly that is called into play by one side and the opponents must not be so unreasonable.

[DJDD]

With respect to the current proposal of storing our own waste at a remote site: I am in favour of that.

With respect to storing waste for other countries:

I cannot agree that it is a moral obligation of ours to store it.
If a country wishes to use nuclear reactors then perhaps they should store their own waste.

Are there any countries that provide minerals or materials to other nations that then store the waste? I do not think that is the case.

However, is there an "opportunity" to store the waste as a commercial venture? Sure there is. Do we want to? well, that is the debate.

But putting it in terms of morality I think is overreaching.

[xelasnave]

Why store our own waste.
If others store their waste someplace else should we not do the same.
After all we are the clever country just not as clever as others who don't store their waste in the home land.

[RB]

Facts can be manipulated, as you well know Glen.

I was thinking more along the lines of 'down the track' because I heard a recent radio interview discussing the fact that Australia could wipe off some of its debt by becoming the world's nuclear waste dumping ground.
Other countries are willing to pay big money to dump their waste here.

Now as has been mentioned, our waste from medical and research should be stored here. We produce it, we should be responsible to 'dispose of it'.

I don't want to see our country though become the dumping ground for other nations that use our resource for nuclear weapons etc (like the British and others did back when they conducted nuclear bomb testing here).
I fail to see our 'moral' obligation in that.

'Nuclear' for medical and research that can save human life, I'm all for it.
'Nuclear' for weapons and other uses that destroy human life, I'm against it.

Perhaps I have learnt not to trust the government, any government.
That I try and read between the lines and not just blindly digest the 'facts and figures' as they're presented to me.

Like the days in which we live, the forums, social media and even the news are infested by 'armchair art critics' as I like to refer to them.
Like art critics they have the head knowledge and spit out facts, figures and opinions yet they themselves fail to possess the ability to produce 'a painting', the very thing they purport to be experts in, so to speak.

I don't have much respect for such people and don't be fooled into thinking I'm a 'Greeny', or easily swayed by the ' professional outragers'.

My opinions are based on my experiences in life, using discernment to make a judgement call on matters that effect me and my family.

I assume you have similar concerns about governments and the state of the world in which we live, no?

RB

[g__day]

I prefer my nuclear fuel to be stored about 8 light minutes from us.

Seriously storing things that can poison in minute quantities and last for tens of thousands of year is a recipe for a future disaster. America has huge problems with spills from waste storage that are only detected when someone draws a cancer map 10 - 30 years later and says what is going on.

It may be intended to only be low to medium grade yield, but watch this foothold blossom into spent weapons grade in your life time; and realse no containment system is safe over what has to be evolutionary timescales.

[Wavytone]

But none of you have suggested why being within 12km of Wiruna makes this a "bad thing".

As I said, are you worried you'll come home from a weekend there glowing in the dark, or what ?

If not then frankly the rest of the discussion is irrelevant, and you have nothing any more significant to say than the opinions of the other 8 million NIMBY's in this country.

And I'll suggest the locals who actually live in the region have a stronger position to argue than ASNSW.

And no doubt this post will be deleted by those intolerant of a different opinion.

[RB]

Wrong again, why would your post be deleted.
It would only be deleted if it contravenes the TOS.
But you see, it's easier to cast aspersions, to create guilt by association in the minds of people rather than just defending the point.
The very thing you critasise others for.

:)

[gary]

If Sally's Flat were chosen, the nuclear waste would need to be
trucked in via the Goulburn-Ilford/Sofala Road.

This is the road one takes from Ilford before turning into the Tara Loop
Road to Wiruna.

The town of Sofala was where the 1974 Peter Weir film "The Cars
That Ate Paris" was shot and the Sofala Road is where the fictional
townsfolk of "Paris" would cause the cars of passers-by to come off the road and crash.

See scene starting at 3:15 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f52V7LTpVI

[Steffen]

Because the site will be drenched in powerful floodlights all night long.

For security reasons, of course :rolleyes:

[xelasnave]

ad hominem attack suggests that side of the argument. has nothing to offer in useful debate and suggests those who resort to same have little of substance to contribute.

Professional outrages and nimbys eh..

How do you expect to gain respect from anyone who does not agree .. How do you expect to be taken seriously.
Great debating tactics revealing an unnecessary eliItist approach.

[Wavytone]

On the contrary - I'm not attacking anyone - merely pointing out that with one (recent) exception, not one of the previous posts have said why it is supposedly bad to have a waste dump 12 km from Wiruna.

And even that - re lighting - is also an assumption with little basis in fact.

Ad hominem? Try a dictionary ...

[Steffen]

This is the radioactive waste storage facility at San Onofre, California, by night:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16496720/SONGS_at_night_tx201.jpg

[xelasnave]

Wavytone

Thanks for the suggestion with the dictionary in return may I guide you via this link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[rally]

I agree with DJDD

Its not our waste - We supplied perfectly refined Uranium 235 and they used it for their benefit and after their use converted it into nuclear waste !!
So they created the waste, and they should have considered and provisioned how they would deal with that waste when they bought it.

So I can't see any moral obligation arising from it.

[Kunama]

With so much arid land in the country which is isolated from populations and food producing areas, and not connected to the major waterways and catchment areas, they suggest building this wonderful facility near Wiruna, probably because some landholder has seen this as a way to make a quick dollar (read here 4 to 5 times the actual current value of their land).............

One would think it would be obvious that such a venture should be kept away from any area which drains its water into larger waterways. Sally's Flat water runs into the Macquarie River, to Lake Burrendong which is a recreation area.

Wavy, You haven't actually stated whether you agree with the siting at Sally's Flat or not and you haven't given any reasons for or against ..... perhaps they could site the 'Dump' at Killara and save transport costs ..... ;)

[andyc]

Can't see this would affect astronomers in the slightest. And would be trivial compared to the dirty coal mines and power stations with radioactive (and other pollutants like mercury etc) fly ash in the area. From an astronomical view, completely unimportant though.

[gary]

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the post.

Thanks also to Steffen who enunciated the primary concern, which I would
have thought to be self evident but were mistaken, that such a facility,
by definition, would be made to be very secure and that floodlighting is
usually part and parcel of that.

So the news is as welcome as that of, say, news of plans for a night
time golf range or twenty-four hour open cut coal mine.

The Astronomical Society of New South Wales (ASNSW) owns the 107
acre property at Ilford and it is rare for an astronomy club anywhere
in the world to have possession of such an asset.

Considerable time, most of it voluntary, and money has been invested
in the property over the years and it has brought great enjoyment to
thousands of people who come for its primary asset of dark skies.

However, as visitors to Wiruna often note, over the past decades the
night skies there have been deteriorating with the increasing light
pollution, particularly in the direction toward Sydney.

Any additional sources of light pollution, particularly from a source so
close, would be disappointing to say the least and at those distances,
anecdotally, it is likely to be visible.

It is a double-edged sword. On the one had, if such a facility were built
nearby, observers would hope that its light pollution footprint would
be small. On the other hand, right-minded folk would hope that the facility
exercised best practice security. There are no shortage of people in the
world who would dearly love to get their hands on even small amounts
of low-grade nuclear waste. So if the facility was not engineered
with security floodlighting and the threat of lethal force, which seem
reasonable measures, most of us would be asking why not.

As I understand it, currently South Australian state law makes it illegal
to build or operate a nuclear waste storage facility. It might be one of the
reasons less remote locations are being considered.

Best Regards

Gary Kopff
Mt Kuring-Gai

[KenGee]

All the other areas are in food producing areas as well so i'm not sure there is a point there.
The things to consider are....
We need to store it somewhere
We need to transport it to the place where it is stored.
We need a place where the locals will tolerate it.

As one poster has already said we have a lot of not in my back yarders.
We also have a lot of people who a happy to take the benefits of nuke medical, and scientific devices and what not what. But think the waste is someone else's problem.

I personally think each state should have it own waste storage area and deal with the products they use themselves.

[speach]

Now there are 1000's of kms^2 out there, what's the problem with using a few for storing nuclear waste.
In fact we could store it for other countries too. Of course we would require a fee for doing this.
If you think about it we could mine the UO2 (pitchblende) process it into fuel rods, lease the rods to the end user, except them back for storage or reprocessing, at a fee.
This way we would have complete control of the U from digging up to final disposal, and make money at each stage, can't think of a better business plan.

[xelasnave]

Simon that sounds a good idea.
Who owns our U anyway we may have to lease it from them.

[xelasnave]

*Australia's uranium**reserves are the world's largest, with 23% of the total. Production ... Ranger is**owned**by Energy Resources of Australia Ltd (ERA), a 68.39% subsidiary of Rio Tinto.

So if I buy Rio Tinto shares I get to own a bit.

[xelasnave]

*Rio Tinto Coal**Australia is one of Australia's leading mining organisations so maybe a good each way bet.

[strongmanmike]

Well I couldn't find an exact proposed location for the proposed facility anywhere, the potential location is identified only as "Sallys' Flat NSW" which according to Google Earth is marked at a position about 20km from Wiruna and to its west..? The terrain in that area is 100-200m lower altitude than Wiruna too so without knowing the exact location of the proposed site it is hard to predict the effect, if any, a heavily floodlit facility like this might have on the dark skies of Wiruna? My feeling is that at 20km to the west and a likely lower altitude, it would be negligible... and certainly less damaging than if the neighbours at Wiruna turned on a few lights and left their curtains open..? :eyepop:

Anyone know the exact proposed location of the nuke dump?

Mike

[Larryp]

I remember many years ago when I was secretary of Sutherland Astro Soc., there was an opportunity given to register designated observatory sites, with a view to protection from future light pollution. I can't remember the exact details now, but
if the Wiruna site was registered, it may force consideration of any light intrusion.

[gary]

G'day Mike,

Did some searches and according to http://www.radioactivewaste.gov.au
it's at 149.5235E 33.0199S.

Google map here -

https://www.google.com.au/maps/place/33%C2%B001'11.8%22S+149%C2%B031'24. 6%22E/@-33.0200716,149.5251844,12z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0

According to the http://www.radioactivewaste.gov.au web site all sites proposed were
volunteered during a proposal period.

The incentive for the landowner is that they are to be compensated
at four times the market value of their land.

Interestingly the government web site gets all the co-ordinates jumbled
up.

I discovered that for the page for Sally's Flat they have the co-ordinates
for Oman Ama in Qld and vice-versa.

http://www.radioactivewaste.gov.au/proposed-sites/sallys-flat
http://www.radioactivewaste.gov.au/proposed-sites/oman-ama

The facility might look something like this -
http://www.radioactivewaste.gov.au/sites/prod.radioactivewaste.gov.au/files/files//images/radimage3a.jpg

Best regards

Gary

[lazjen]

I have no problems with a waste site somewhere in Australia, particularly for our own waste. We need the nuclear material for medicine, etc, so we need to deal with the waste.

However, for other countries, I think we should also provide a service to store their waste, but I would make it cost them a lot, have ongoing fees and explicit, strict shipping conditions (safety and security to OUR standards). And by costing a lot, I would mean that it would cover any costs we would need (labour, materials, transport, security, on going testing, maintenance, etc) and well beyond (I consider it should become a profitable revenue source for the country).

[strongmanmike]

Couldn't make hide nor hair of those coordinates either..?? But if that google map location you link to is correct it would put it at over 20km's away and an hour by road, so I would think any bright waste dump lighting will not be noticable from Wiruna?

Mike

[gary]

Hi Mike,

Hopefully so.

There is now a period where the public is invited to provide feedback
so this provides an opportunity to request light pollution mitigation.

Given the Government process whereby anyone could nominate their
own land in return for premium compensation, it could have been worse
for the Society, or anyone living in a rural area for that matter, if a
neighbour had volunteered theirs.

It certainly would be a slick move if you wanted to sell out and didn't get
along with your neighbours. Nominate your land, pick up four times the
market value and a thank you handshake courtesy of the Government,
retire to a yacht on the Whitsundays and stick it to the neighbours as well
by leaving them will severely devalued properties next to a nuclear
waste dump.

Over the years I've noticed the ever increasing impact of the lights from the
open cut coal mines in the lower Hunter some 45km to the north
from where we observe from near Bucketty.

Best regards

Gary

[gary]

Hi Mike,

I concur with your distance estimate.

From up at the house to the co-ordinates found on the government
web site I make it to be 23.3km.

A lot better than only 12km.

Best Regards

Gary