SA Footy

Pfft High Tech Suppository, lol

If it's safe, store it in Parliament House, Canberra.

Dog_ger2 wrote:Pfft High Tech Suppository, lol

If it's safe, store it in Parliament House, Canberra.

The Aussie people are getting screwed again Guys...

Not sure you realise but a lot of the waste is already stored in hospitals around the country.

I think if we are going to mine it and sell it to other countries, we can also store it. And 4 billion a year (or whatever they are proposing) would be massive to the SA economy.

Why do you feel like you are getting screwed?

bennymacca wrote:Not sure you realise but a lot of the waste is already stored in hospitals around the country.

I think if we are going to mine it and sell it to other countries, we can also store it. And 4 billion a year (or whatever they are proposing) would be massive to the SA economy.

Why do you feel like you are getting screwed?

Problem is all the facts need to be on the table as well. Yes there are financial benifits but this stuff will be around longer than the age of a purpose built facility.

You are correct as some of this is already stored in Australia in Hospitals and even universities. If we go down this road we as a nation should name our own price.

When I met Sean Edwards the first time a couple of yeas ago I thought he was a bit ordinary, but I've concluded he is just a quiet guy who thinks.
I liked his technically sound and thoroughly prepared submission to the Royal Commission. It makes the technical stuff quite clear.
It requires a bit of focus to read it through though...

http://senatoredwards.com.au/nuclear-south-australia

you know what we should do. keep up the "not in my backyard" rants, have no jobs as a state, no money, and we will all die in a couple of hundred years anyway of climate change cos we aren't embracing nuclear. Awesome

The problem is there is just a massive stigma associated with radioactivity, because people just cite chernobyl every time.

But people fail to put it properly into context. Most of the waste is low grade medical waste, which is more akin to what is in your smoke detector than what is in a nuclear power plant.

Secondly, even the high level waste isnt that much different to other forms of pollution - Heavy metals for instance are incredibly toxic, but there is way less stigma associated with having a lead smelter next door than a nuclear power plant, even though it is likely much better to your health to live next to a nuclear power plant.

I do agree that we should name our price though - the world has a significant problem and if we are going to make ourselves part of the solution we should charge for that, but I see this as a huge economic opportunity for the state.

The will be some logistical issues that will need to be worked through though.

Dog_ger2 wrote:Pfft High Tech Suppository, lol

If it's safe, store it in Parliament House, Canberra.

Cheltenham Racecourse is in Jay's seat - perfect spot.

bennymacca wrote:The problem is there is just a massive stigma associated with radioactivity, because people just cite chernobyl every time.

But people fail to put it properly into context. Most of the waste is low grade medical waste, which is more akin to what is in your smoke detector than what is in a nuclear power plant.

Secondly, even the high level waste isnt that much different to other forms of pollution - Heavy metals for instance are incredibly toxic, but there is way less stigma associated with having a lead smelter next door than a nuclear power plant, even though it is likely much better to your health to live next to a nuclear power plant.

I do agree that we should name our price though - the world has a significant problem and if we are going to make ourselves part of the solution we should charge for that, but I see this as a huge economic opportunity for the state.

The will be some logistical issues that will need to be worked through though.

We are not talking, catching a cold here.

Getting over the flu in 4 weeks.

We are talking weapons of mass destruction...

Nuclear contamination is weapons of mass destruction...

That is why they don't store this stuff in the white house.... Wake up!!!

bennymacca wrote:Not sure you realise but a lot of the waste is already stored in hospitals around the country.

I think if we are going to mine it and sell it to other countries, we can also store it. And 4 billion a year (or whatever they are proposing) would be massive to the SA economy.

Why do you feel like you are getting screwed?

I am from the government.... Trust me...

Dog_ger2 wrote:
We are talking weapons of mass destruction...

Nuclear contamination is weapons of mass destruction...

That is why they don't store this stuff in the white house.... Wake up!!!

Lol no it's not.

That is the exact kind of stupidity that stifles legitimate discussion of this topic

Dog_ger2 wrote:

bennymacca wrote:The problem is there is just a massive stigma associated with radioactivity, because people just cite chernobyl every time.

But people fail to put it properly into context. Most of the waste is low grade medical waste, which is more akin to what is in your smoke detector than what is in a nuclear power plant.

Secondly, even the high level waste isnt that much different to other forms of pollution - Heavy metals for instance are incredibly toxic, but there is way less stigma associated with having a lead smelter next door than a nuclear power plant, even though it is likely much better to your health to live next to a nuclear power plant.

I do agree that we should name our price though - the world has a significant problem and if we are going to make ourselves part of the solution we should charge for that, but I see this as a huge economic opportunity for the state.

The will be some logistical issues that will need to be worked through though.

We are not talking, catching a cold here.
Getting over the flu in 4 weeks.
We are talking weapons of mass destruction...
Nuclear contamination is weapons of mass destruction...
That is why they don't store this stuff in the white house.... Wake up!!!

Don't give in to the usual out of date panic at the word "Nuclear".
Read the technical details...

The good side is other countries pay us large sums to store their "high-level" waste, which is an end product of their old out-of-date nuclear systems, but in the longer run that waste will be fuel for modern fast-breeder reactors (including the ones we build in time) that reduce it to much safer again storable by-product.
Then we sell the "waste" they paid us to take back to them as "fuel" and charge them to store the lower level "waste" left over after it has been used again...

I've got the same safety concerns that lots of people have, as well as reputational damage to our tourism and food exports that's difficult to quantify, but it turns out even the economics don't necessarily stack up. It seems the proponents may have taken the high side of already unrealistic estimates to make the benefits case.

http://indaily.com.au/news/business/ana ... ose-money/

And I don't think it's mentioned in the article, but for the high level waste storage there's also ...
1. Half lives of 300K years, means paying security guards for >300K years. Is that costed in?
2. What happens if countries pay to get the stuff stored, then stop making their ongoing payments?

Doddy wrote:2. What happens if countries pay to get the stuff stored, then stop making their ongoing payments?

Even though I am largely for a waste dump, this is the best argument against it. Would you start shipping it back to them? That gets messy real fast

bennymacca wrote:

Doddy wrote:2. What happens if countries pay to get the stuff stored, then stop making their ongoing payments?

Even though I am largely for a waste dump, this is the best argument against it. Would you start shipping it back to them? That gets messy real fast

There are a number of international organisations that are able to compel countries to fulfil their financial obligations. If it was so easy to get out of paying a debt a number of countries would have stopped interest payments on debts.

bennymacca wrote:

Doddy wrote:2. What happens if countries pay to get the stuff stored, then stop making their ongoing payments?

Even though I am largely for a waste dump, this is the best argument against it. Would you start shipping it back to them? That gets messy real fast

Easy, send it back in a high velocity projectile.

If we stored nucular(sic) waste here, that would give the yanks a reason to invade coz we have WMDs. They already have thousands of marines stationed in Darwin.

Now where's my hat....

Oh there it is..