A nuclear response
I write in response to Bruce Wilson principal advisor National Radioactive Waste Management Taskforce.
He is the key person lobbying on behalf of the task force for a nuclear waste repository for low and medium waste to be set up in a ‘remote’ area of South Australia.
Note this means as far away as possible from the heavily populated capital cities and in the longer term it means wastes will be stored out of sight and out of mind.
This task force is wonderfully resourced and relentless in its vocation to respond to any member of the public who has the temerity to question the long term safety and wisdom of storing such waste in a rural farming community that prides itself on clean and green credentials for its export industries.
Mr Wilson makes much of lauding scientific evidence and evidence based assessment to promote storing this waste for hundreds of years across many generations as if such science is value free and not in itself subjective.
It is poppycock to make such confident assertions.
I am sure the scientists and proponents of ill fated nuclear facilities such as as Chernobyl and Fukushima were equally adamant that they had all the answers and that the scientific assessment of the safety of their facilities was rigorous and fool proof.
Well catastrophic events proved that such assurances were wrong.
It is misleading to make the statement that we are providing the community with the ‘science and the facts‘ about the project when the experts consulted do not include those who are concerned about the long term ramifications of storing low and medium level nuclear waste and its by products for centuries.
Science and facts used in this way become a cover for slick propaganda.
Like other Eyre Peninsula correspondents I am not convinced of the neutrality of the proponents and the scientific data being presented ironically as some ‘god- like’ deity.
I am concerned about the storage of long- life radioactive waste products away from the highly specialised Lucas Heights facility and the experts who reside in the vicinity.
The Kimba proposal is focused on the offer of a ‘benevolent ‘ farmers property that is in all probability to the financial advantage of this particular farming business.
It is absurd to claim as Mr Wilson has done that this ‘will not impact property prices or land values or the reputation of the region it is located in. It already has.
The local Kimba community is seriously divided and stressed by this proposal and the rest of Eyre Peninsula residents are excluded from any vote or genuine input.
Those of us who have presented submissions in the past know that so often this input is merely a box ticking exercise to validate pointless community consultation.
Kimba like many rural and regional communities is struggling.
Small scale spending on local projects in this region to massage the community to facilitate the siting of a nuclear waste repository is highly suspect and verging on unethical.
The proponents of this project should stop pretending that ‘ science’ exists in a vacuum and is value free.
Triple C in Cleve
If you are lonely or a new member of our community, come and join us at the Uniting Church Hall for coffee, chat and craft, the Triple C on Friday June 15, 10am to 12pm, with morning tea provided.
You can learn knitting, crocheting, making cards or bring something you are working on, or just a chat, with a friendly group of ladies.