Lucas Heights EIS released
By Jim Green
SYDNEY — On January 18, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) released the final environmental impact statement on a new nuclear reactor in the southern Sydney suburb of Lucas Heights.
The EIS gives a glowing report on the project and glosses over concerns raised in public submissions. A total of 935 public submissions were received commenting on the draft EIS — about 98% were opposed to the reactor plan.
The next stage of the process is for the government to "review" ANSTO's final EIS, with cabinet approval for the project expected in March. There is no opportunity for the public to comment.
In an interview with ABC radio last year, a "senior government source" described the government's strategy in this way:
"The government decided to starve the opponents of oxygen, so that they could dictate the manner of the debate that would follow the announcement. Because they couldn't win it on rational grounds ... they decided, right, we'll play the game and in the lead-up to the announcement catch them totally unawares, catch them completely off guard and starve them of oxygen until then. No leaks, don't write letters arguing the point, just keep them in the dark completely."
For many years, ANSTO has given assurances that its stockpile of more than 1000 spent fuel rods would be shipped to the Dounreay reprocessing plant in Scotland. However, it was announced last year that the Dounreay plant is to be shut down and no new contracts entered into.
In the press release announcing the completion of the final EIS, ANSTO says it has reached agreement with the French nuclear agency COGEMA to reprocess spent fuel. "This will resolve spent fuel management issues", ANSTO claims optimistically.
However, even if ANSTO is able to send its spent fuel to France, the waste from its reprocessing will be returned to Australia for disposal at Australia's yet-to-be established radioactive waste dump.
On January 11, a judge notified COGEMA that it had been placed under formal investigation — a step short of being charged — for practices that "endanger the lives of others by exposing them to an immediate risk of death or injury".
An activist group called Committee for Reflection, Information and the Anti-Nuclear Struggle claims COGEMA has deliberately violated safety procedures regarding waste storage.
Apart from the health risks associated with reprocessing (not to mention the risks associated with transporting waste to and from France), there are also weapons proliferation dangers.
Reprocessing is the only method to separate fissile plutonium from irradiated uranium fuel. Even the US — hardly a role model for non-proliferation — has a stop-start history of banning reprocessing because of weapons concerns.
Little effort is made in France to separate civil and military nuclear programs. The COGEMA plant, which is operated by the state, is involved in both.
If the COGEMA option falls through, the government has other tricks up its sleeve: it can maintain ANSTO as Australia's de facto radioactive waste dump, send the spent fuel directly to the dump planned for the Billa Kalina region of South Australia, or build a reprocessing plant in Australia.
The executive director of ANSTO says suburban Lucas Heights would be a "reasonable" location for a reprocessing plant. According to the "senior government source" who spoke to ABC radio last year, federal cabinet "considered reprocessing [in Australia], but decided it was an issue for another generation ... reprocessing is a possibility then."
The People Against a Nuclear Reactor campaign group has mapped out a strategy to fight the reactor plan, including a car cavalcade from Lucas Heights to the Billa Kalina region to highlight the links between the two issues. Phone (02) 9545 3077 for more information.
While there is no opportunity for public comment on the final EIS, if you feel like making your views known, don't hesitate to ring Steve Mercer from the federal environment department on (02) 6274 1861.