Stalled Olympic Dam uranium project will not provide jobs for sacked auto workers

27 Dec 13 “The stalled Olympic Dam mine expansion is not the answer to job creation in South Australia, despite the Prime Minister’s vivid imagination”, according to Greens SA Parliamentary Leader, Mark Parnell MLC

“What the PM should be doing instead is focusing on how best to help South Australian industries create jobs in areas where we have a real competitive and natural advantage.  If he opened his mind to the possibilities, he would see that SA is a leader in renewable energy and there is great potential for jobs growth in wind power, solar PV and in the emerging area of Solar Thermal, such as that proposed for Port Augusta to replace the existing dirty coal fired power stations. [See:http://bze.org.au/repower-port-augusta]

“That’s why the Prime Minister’s decision to axe the Clean Energy Finance Corporation is bad news for South Australia.  It’s also why we should be very worried about his likely decision to water down the Renewable Energy Target.  This target is the reason why so many energy companies chose to invest in South Australia over the last few years – because our abundant wind and solar resources give us the edge over other States in the grid.

“Liberal leader, Steven Marshall should be horrified at what his party is doing to South Australia’s future economic opportunities and he should be calling on the PM to change direction.

“If both State Labor and Liberal were really thinking of the future, they would be joining the dots and realising that a better way of dealing with our mineral resources is to insist on local processing, powered by SA renewable energy, to deliver more long-term sustainable jobs and maximise the value we get from our natural resources.

The original Olympic Dam Expansion model is dead, but it’s not too late to revisit local processing of copper, gold and silver, whilst leaving the problematic uranium behind in the tailings.

“Mining employs less than 2% of the Australian workforce.  More local processing of ore using renewable energy extracts maximum jobs and economic benefit for all South Australians.  Exporting ore to China exports most of the jobs as well.  Local processing of ore would create substantially more jobs than simply digging it up and shipping it out”, concluded Mark Parnell.

Tony Abbott pretends that Holden workers can get uranium mining jobs

Tony Abbott’s push for Olympic Dam revival  SID MAHER AND DENNIS SHANAHAN THE AUSTRALIAN  DECEMBER 24, 2013 THE Abbott government has turned its sights on reigniting BHP Billiton’s giant Olympic Dam expansion as it seeks to find an economic  antidote to Holden’s decision to cease carmarking in Australia from 2017. Federal ministers have held talks with BHP Billiton about ways to assist in the expansion of the South Australian uranium and copper project, including  Research and development aid, approval processes and political stability in decision-making.  …. (subscribers only) http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tony-abbotts-push-for-olympic-dam-revival/story-fn59niix-1226789188416#

Aboriginal representative for Ranger uranium mine inquiry

The Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation (GAC) has welcomed the formation of a task force to investigate the recent tank collapse at Ranger uranium mine. Federal Industry Minister Ian MacFarlane and Northern Territory Mines Minister Willem Westra Van Holthe announced the investigation today noting that a representative of the Mirarr Traditional Owners of the mine site will be invited to join.

GAC Chief Executive Officer Justin O’Brien said “We welcome the Government’s proactive closure of operations at Ranger and believe that mining should remain suspended until the completion of this investigation and the subsequent implementation of all recommendations.”

The investigation has been established to:
i) identify the immediate cause of the incident;
ii) examine the integrity of broader processing operations;
iii) identify any gaps in operating procedures or maintenance practices;
iv) undertake a comprehensive examination of corporate governance arrangements; and,
v) provide recommendations to the Commonwealth Minister for Industry and the Northern Territory Minister for Mines and Energy.

Mr O’Brien continued: “This inquiry must be given full access to ensure the condition of infrastructure and the rigour of procedures at this aging mine are fully scrutinised. We look forward to assisting with the appointment of an independent investigator.”

“We are hopeful that this process will set a strong precedent for government listening to and including aboriginal landholders in decisions about the management of their land” Justin O’Brien concluded.

–

Northern Territory govt body to monitor regulator’s response to Ranger radioactive spill

EDONT to watch regulator response with interest in wake of Ranger Uranium Mine incident. ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENDERS OFFICE NT, DECEMBER 11, 2013 “………What can the Commonwealth and Territory Government do to respond to the spill?

Clearly an incident of this nature demands a strong response from regulators of the mine.   Currently the Office of the Supervising Scientist and the Northern Territory Government are investigating the spill.

Commonwealth –

Under the AEA the Commonwealth Minister has the power to impose an indefinite suspension of operations at Ranger if ERA refuses or fails to comply with or observe a condition or restriction provided in its Authority.  It is unclear whether the Commonwealth Minister has given a direction under the AEA or whether he has directed ERA to cease operations pending investigation and ERA have voluntarily complied.

It is interesting to note that while ERA have stated that the spill was contained on site, Ranger Environmental Requirement 1.2 requires that:

the company must ensure that operations at Ranger do not result in environmental impacts within the Ranger Project Area which are not as low as reasonably achievable, during mining excavation, mineral processing, and subsequently during and after rehabilitation.

Additionally, Environmental Requirement 12 requires the use of Best Practicable Technology (BPT) at Ranger.   While it is contemplated that equipment on site may be able to fulfill its serviceable life, in light of this weekends events ERA appears to be failing in its duty to adequately review and update its equipment in line with Environmental Requirement 12.

Given that preliminary reports have suggested that the tank was over 20 years old, EDO NT would suggest that a full scale review of the mines equipment to ensure that there are no further equipment failures at the mine and compliance with the BPT requirement of ERA’s Ranger Authority is achieved.

Under the Atomic Energy Act it is an offence for a person to fail to comply with a condition of their authorisation.  The maximum penalty for this offence, in the case of a body corporate like ERA, is $10,000.

Northern Territory –

The Northern Territory Government’s powers to regulate Ranger arise from the provisions of the MMA, which as stated above provides for the General Authorisation for Ranger, the Schedule to which set out the way mining operations are undertaken and the requirements for environmental protection.

In the event that the NT Government believes ERA has contravened an environmental obligation under the MMA and caused environmental harm, it is able to commence proceedings under the MMA.

The MMA provides three tiers of offences, namely for conduct causing:

• serious environmental harm (level 1 and 2);
• material environmental harm (level 1 and 2); or
• Environmental nuisance.

The penalties for the various tiers (and levels) range from about $55,000 for a body corporate who causes environmental nuisance to over $2.75 million for  a body corporate that causes serious environmental harm.

The way forward

The time for taking a strong legal stance against lack luster performance at Ranger would appear to have come.  The Northern Territory Government must send a message to ERA, and other mine operators within the Territory, that the Territory community will accept nothing less than strict compliance with the laws put in place to protect the environment.

http://edont.org.au/edont-watch-regulator-response-interest-wake-ranger-uranium-incident/

Greens Senator raises awkward questions about Ranger uranium minE

Australian Greens spokesperson on nuclear issues, Senator Scott Ludlam. 9 December 2013. Today in senate question time, Australian Greens Senator Scott Ludlam asked the Environment Minister’s representative about the massive spill of 1.4 million litres of radioactive acid at the Ranger Uranium Mine.

In response to the Government’s feeble and evasive answers, Senator Ludlam has submitted a detailed log of questions to Commonwealth environmental regulators and has called for the closure of the mine.

“The Minister representing the Environment Minister played down the events over the weekend and the on-going leakage and contamination problems at the Ranger mine.

“In fact this mine has an atrocious track record with more than 150 spills, leaks and license breaches since it opened in 1981. Just a few weeks ago a contaminated vehicle was somehow allowed out of the site.  In 2004 workers drank and showered in water laced with uranium. I revealed through Senate Estimates that water with uranium concentrations 5400 times background and a cocktail of other radionuclides are seeping from beneath the tailings dam at Ranger.

“This mine must halt operations until an independent assessment can be completed.  In addition, there should be there should be no handing over of federal powers to assess and approve uranium mining projects to state or Territory governments.

“ERA and its hapless regulators must now bring forward plans for the orderly closure of this mine, and entertain no further proposals for extending the life of this clapped out mine.”

Senator Ludlam’s Question Without Notice in Question Time today:http://scott-ludlam.greensmps.org.au/content/questions-without-notice/questions-asked-about-1-million-litres-radioactive-acid-spilled-ran

Senator Ludlam’s Question on Notice to the Environment Minister:http://scott-ludlam.greensmps.org.au/content/questions-notice/detailed-questions-nuclear-disaster-ranger-uranium-mine

Greens call to shut down Ranger mine permanently

Greens call for end of Ranger uranium mine operations after slurry spill ABC News 8 Dec 13 The Greens are calling for a permanent end to operations at the Ranger uranium mine in the Northern Territory after a radioactive spill at the site yesterday morning.

A tank containing up to a million litres of uranium ore and acid split, damaging the crane that was trying to repair it and surrounding infrastructure at the mine near Kakadu National Park…..

West Australian Greens Senator Scott Ludlam says the mine should now be shut down for good.

“The company thinks that the way to save operations at Ranger is to go underground through the 3 Deeps projects,” he said.

“As far as the Greens are concerned the company should be as good as its word and close that facility when its lease runs out.

“I think this latest disaster doesn’t improve anyone’s confidence that the mine is capable of running for another 10 or 15 years.”

Senator Ludlam says there are a number of lessons to be learned from the incident, and has called for the Federal Government to reconsider giving more approval power over uranium mines to state and territory governments.

“I think some short-term lessons include the company disclosing how many other of these leach tanks there are, and whether they’re in the same condition as the one that burst,” he said.

“But in the longer term, this is a very strong sign for Environment Minister Greg Hunt that under no circumstances should he let regulation of the uranium sector go back to the states and territories.”….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-08/greens-call-for-end-of-ranger-uranium-mine-operations/5142734

Problems with Toro Energy’s approvals for uranium projects

Senator LUDLAM: The company [Toro Energy] may be telling markets one thing and regulators another, which is a dangerous situation for it to be in, if that is the case. 

Senator LUDLAM: If I understood your colleague correctly, the assessment of uranium mines is being delegated to states and you are leaving the door open for approvals of uranium mining to also be conducted by states. If these powers go ahead, what will our environment minister actually do? What would be left for the minister to do? Would we even need one?

Senator LUDLAM: This is a 30-year ark of Commonwealth environmental law being dissolved and handed back to the states.

Senator Ludlam asks questions about WA uranium mining approvals

 

WA uranium mining approvals Senate estimates committee 18 Nov 2013 | Scott Ludlam 

Senator LUDLAM: I presume one of the 48 is the Toro uranium proposal, which was on the minister’s desk when the government changed hands. The former minister had made a number of quite extensive and complex requests of Toro. Would you provide us with an update as to whether officers of agencies have met with the company or exactly where that proposal is up to.

.……..Mr Knudson: At this point that project has been approved.

Senator LUDLAM: No, it has not-or it was approved, but the minister would not sign off until quite a large number of conditions had been met, and they had not yet been met.

Mr Knudson: The EPBC principal approval has been provided. However, as you are pointing out, if I understand your question correctly, there are a number of management plans that are required at different stages as that project proceeds, and those are indeed with the department as part of the post-approval process. If you are looking for a specific update on where those are at, then we can walk through that.

Senator LUDLAM: We are very short of time. Would you provide on notice which management plans and how many of those conditions have been met thus far? There were to be no ground-disturbing activities, for example. I am also aware, and perhaps you could fill in whether the minister has been made aware, that the company is proposing to quite radically change the scope of that project and incorporate a number of satellite uranium ore bodies, which would completely change the project configuration. Have you been notified formally of that change of scope?

Dr Bigwood: We are aware of the proposals. Our understanding is that the company is not proposing to change the Wiluna project at this stage. It will incorporate the subsidiary mines within another mining processing plant that it is considering. It is going through the assessment process.

Senator LUDLAM: Another plant?

Dr Bigwood: I think it is what they have called the Millipede and Centipede proposals. Those two ore bodies will be assessed together, and the assessment will be based on a processing plant at the Centipede mine rather than as part of the Wiluna project.

Senator LUDLAM: The company maybe telling markets one thing and regulators another, which is a dangerous situation for it to be in, if that is the case. My understanding is that there is not a second plant afoot and those satellite ore bodies would have primary crushing and then the ore would be moved to the proposed Lake Way plant rather than another one. If that is the case, maybe I could get your advice: would that require a fresh assessment?

Dr Bigwood: It would certainly change the proposal and, therefore, there would need to be an assessment of that part of the proposal.

Senator LUDLAM: If I understood your colleague correctly, the assessment of uranium mines is being delegated to states and you are leaving the door open for approvals of uranium mining to also be conducted by states. If these powers go ahead, what will our environment minister actually do? What would be left for the minister to do? Would we even need one?

Dr de Brouwer: The environment minister has a wide range of responsibilities, Senator.

Senator LUDLAM: He is busy handing them off to the states and territories as we speak……….

Senator LUDLAM: This is a 30-year ark of Commonwealth environmental law being dissolved and handed back to the states. That is how long this has been afoot……. http://scott-ludlam.greensmps.org.au/content/estimates/wa-uranium-mining-approvals

Senator Larissa Waters probes Australian govt’s plan to abandon environmental regulation

 Senator WATERS: …..Am I clear in that you will attempt to retain Commonwealth land and water but will not attempt to retain jurisdiction over state-run projects? 

Dr Bacon…… We are yet to have the detailed discussions with each state and territory 

The hand over of EPBC nuclear approvals to states,Senate estimates committee 18 Nov 2013 | Scott Ludlam

“……...Senator WATERS: “…….Could you please explain to me: what is the intended effect of the alteration to the scope of the bilateral agreement as regards nuclear actions and Great Barrier Reef Marine Park waters and Commonwealth waters? What is the effective change? It is on page 7, particularly clause 12.3. ……..

on nukes, are there some carve-outs? I do not quite understand clause 12.4(c) about nuclear actions. Are you intending to impart all nuclear action that is currently regulated under the EPBC Act to Queensland? Or are you intending to retain some power over the assessment of nuclear actions? ……..

Senators Waters and Ludlam ask questions on hand over of environmental  nuclear approvals to the States

Mr Barker: It does not give it to Queensland; it carves it out of the agreement.
Senator WATERS: It doesn’t?
Mr Barker: That is right.
Senator WATERS: So you are retaining the assessment of all aspects of nuclear actions that are currently regulated federally?
Mr Barker: No, that provision effectively prohibits those types of actions-a nuclear power plant, an enrichment plant or that type of thing-from being approved under the EPBC Act. There is no role for an assessment or approval of those types of activities. ….

Senator WATERS: So the Commonwealth will retain its full responsibility for the assessment and approval of any nuclear actions, be they prohibited or not by the terms of act-and the state cannot have any role in assessing or approving that? Is that correct?
Mr Barker: No. Maybe I am confusing things a little. I apologise. That provision relates to a subset of nuclear actions which cannot be approved under the EPBC Act. Uranium mining and other types of mining which involve radioactive products and decayed products of uranium, for example, can be assessed and approved under the EPBC Act.
Senator WATERS: By whom?
Mr Barker: Approved by the Commonwealth minister and assessed, under this agreement, by the state.

Senator WATERS: Thank you-that is what I was trying to get at. So this does give away the assessment of uranium mining to Queensland where previously it sat with the feds?
Mr Barker: Yes, it allows the state to undertake those assessments, subject to the agreement.
Senator LUDLAM: Would you not call that a substantive change? When you listed your two substantive matters, the fact that you would be delegating uranium assessment back to a state government-you did not list that as a matter you thought was worth drawing to our attention as substantive?

Dr Bacon: When I talked about the main substantive changes, one of them was to broaden the matters of national environmental significance which can be assessed under the Queensland assessment bilateral. When I mentioned ‘nuclear’, I had intended to include the nuclear matters which can be assessed by the Commonwealth. This assessment bilateral, once it is finalised by the state, does include uranium mining under the EPBC Act.
Senator LUDLAM: Is this seen as a model for future relations with other states, including WA, for example, where there are live assessment processes afoot?
Dr Bacon: The policy is to broaden, wherever we can, assessment bilateral agreements with states and territories-or, if there is no existing assessment bilateral agreement, to put one in place. With the example of WA, we would be looking at options for broadening their current assessment bilateral agreement.

Senator WATERS: On that second aspect of the change about the single set of conditions, is it yet known who will be enforcing those conditions? My sense from the agreement is that the intention is that the state will be implementing most of the conditions and the Commonwealth will be only tacking on what cannot be done by the state. Who will be responsible for the enforcement of this single set of conditions? Does that mean there will be no federal conditions and no more enforcement by the feds-or by the community to hold the feds to those conditions?
Mr Barker: I think this is a matter still to be discussed with the states-about exactly the shape in which that might be embedded between the Commonwealth and the state. It sort of depends on which jurisdiction is imposing the condition.
Senator WATERS: Yes, precisely. …..

Senator WATERS: There is currently Commonwealth jurisdiction over all matters of national environmental significance, so if that is your logic you would not hand off any of them. I do not want to verbal you. Am I clear in that you will attempt to retain Commonwealth land and water but will not attempt to retain jurisdiction over state-run projects?
Dr Bacon: In relation to other matters, we will be doing a very detailed analysis of the processes that each state and territory puts forward for accreditation. We are yet to have the detailed discussions with each state and territory about which processes we will be looking at in relation to the approvals bilateral agreements. It is probably premature to be able to say precisely which processes will be in scope for those agreements and in which state.
Senator WATERS: Has the minister instructed the department to maintain his earlier public statements about those areas being quarantined from a handoff of approval powers to the states, or has the minister not instructed the department to keep those areas?
Dr Bacon: I think I have already said that the policy position is to pursue as comprehensive an approach as possible and we are yet to have the detailed discussions about which particular processes we may be looking at for accreditation. ..http://scott-ludlam.greensmps.org.au/content/estimates/hand-over-epbc-nuclear-approvals-states

Julie Bishop hurries up marketing uranium to India

India, Australia inching towards civil nuclear agreement  THE HINDU, 2 NOV 13 India moved a step closer to sourcing uranium from Australia, the world’s biggest exporter of the radioactive mineral, with the Foreign Ministers of both countries agreeing to hold the third round of talks on a bilateral civil nuclear agreement towards the end of this month.

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid and his Australian counterpart Julie Bishop reaffirmed the commitment of both countries to finalise a Civil Nuclear Cooperation Agreement to enable the sale of Australian uranium to India, and announced that the third round of negotiations would be held here in the last week of November. They met in Perth on the margins of a multilateral conference.

The two Ministers also discussed energy security and the possibility of a Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) to strengthen ties. Both sides have laid stress on the security of sea lanes as India and Australia have supplemented their coal-based energy ties with a multibillion dollar contract for sourcing Australian gas…… http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-australia-inching-towards-civil-nuclear-agreement/article5306545.ece

US govt and GE’s Kentucky plan for laser uranium enrichment

GE Hitachi, Energy Dept. in talks over Ky. uranium Chron, By DYLAN LOVAN and ROGER ALFORD, Associated Press | November 27, 2013  LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — The U.S. Department of Energy said Wednesday that it is entering negotiations with General Electric’s nuclear division on a proposal to replace an aging uranium enrichment plant in Kentucky with a new facility.

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy wants to build a laser enrichment facility that would make use of the depleted uranium kept at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. The Energy Department announced that it has selected GE Hitachi to begin exclusive negotiations for the sale of the uranium inventory.

GE Hitachi spokesman Chris White said Global Laser Enrichment that uses a unique laser technology would extract natural uranium from Paducah’s stores of depleted tails. The uranium would be used to fuel commercial nuclear reactors in the U.S., he said.

The negotiations are just beginning and there is no timetable on building a new plant, White said…….http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/GE-Hitachi-Energy-Dept-in-talks-over-Ky-uranium-5017015.php