A Duty to Warn

By James Moore In 1960, a handsome young senator and war hero from…

Democracy - Is It Worth The Fight?

In light of recent elections, it's very tempting to look at the…

Fencing the Ocean: Australia’s Social Media Safety Bill

The Australian government is being run ragged in various quarters. When ragged,…

HECS Debt Forgiveness: Path to Free Education

By Denis Hay Description Explore why HECS debt forgiveness and reinstating free public education…

Implementation will be key to success of Aged…

Palliative Care Australia Media Release This week’s bipartisan support for the Aged Care…

Trump, AUKUS and Australia’s Dim Servitors

There is something enormously satisfying about seeing those in the war racket…

Expert alert: Misinformation bill before Australian Senate…

La Trobe University Media Release The Australian Senate is set to consider the…

Political Futures: Will Conservative Global Middle Powers Go…

By Denis Bright National elections in Germany and Australia in 2025 will test…

«
»
Facebook

$100 Billion since 2023: Australia missing out on China’s massive Outbound Green Capital Tsunami

While private Chinese investment into Australia seriously lags, there are unparalleled opportunities for Australia-China collaboration in zero-emissions industries – if we get the policy settings right.

A new report by independent think tank Climate Energy Finance (CEF), Green capital tsunami: China’s >$100 bn outbound cleantech investment since 2023 turbocharges global energy transition, calculates that Chinese firms have committed >US$100bn in outbound foreign investment since 2023. This has spanned decarbonisation sectors including solar, wind, batteries, grid, new energy vehicles (NEV), hydro and green hydrogen, as China’s world-leading corporates increasingly “go global”.

This historically unprecedented investment program encompasses Europe, greater Asia, Africa and South America, as investment into North America is undermined by increasingly adverse China-specific rules.

Investment into Australia, on the other hand, has been exceptionally weak relative to the rest of the world, meaning Australia risks forgoing its massive strategic opportunity to co-invest with China – our #1 resources trading partner – on decarbonisation. This topic was high on the agenda of Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers’ talks last week with Chinese leaders.

Full executive summary, Recommendations, and tables of top investments globally and into Australia

David Olsson, Australia China Business Council President and author of the report’s foreward said:

“This report makes it clear: we are at a pivotal moment where Australia’s relationship with China can either unlock vast opportunities or see them slip away to other regions.

China’s leadership in cleantech offers us a chance not only to secure investment but to collaborate on addressing climate challenges. The time to act is now. We have the resources and capability, but if we don’t create the right environment to attract these technologies and solutions, those investments will go elsewhere.

Our shared ambition to leader the global energy transition should drive Australia and China to explore new frontiers of cooperation. By aligning our strengths in cleantech and renewable energy, we can confront the challenges of climate change together and unlock immense opportunities for both our economies.”

Co-author Xuyang Dong, CEF China energy policy analyst, said:

“China’s outbound investment into the clean energy sector globally is showing a dramatic increase, accompanied with price drops in cleantech thanks to China’s massive scaling up of manufacturing.

These two investment trends are rapidly changing the global energy market landscape. They are making renewable energy more cost-effective than traditional fossil fuels, enhancing energy security by decoupling the reliance of power systems on volatile imported oil and gas supply chains, including in the Global South, accelerating the global energy transition race.

With China’s massive investment into R&D producing world-leading cutting-edge technologies in clean energy, establishing partnerships with China has become more important than ever. When Chinese firms build a production facility elsewhere, it brings its technology, expertise, capital, experience, as well as opportunities for expanding local labor markets and boosting other nations’ domestic energy transition.

Australia should work actively with China, transforming our historic dig-and-ship economy in order to not be left behind in the global race-to-top on energy transition. Joint ventures with China have enormous potential to boost Australia’s decarbonisation trajectory.

This partnership potential between Australia and China is also important for the emerging markets and developing economies (EDMEs) in the Asian and Indo-Pacific region. With China’s capital and technology, and Australia’s soft power and expertise in the markets across the region, the two great nations with abundant resources in this part of the world can help neighboring countries catch up with other wealthy nations on decarbonisation of their energy systems and economies, critical to the global effort to address climate change.”

CEF Director and report lead author Tim Buckley, a former MD of Citigroup, said:

“It is clear that China leads the world in deploying a simply staggering 22GW per month of new renewable energy capacity since the start of 2023. And with new energy vehicles hitting a record high 54% share of total passenger vehicle sales in China in the month of August 2024, the implications are profound – with China as a nation probably reaching peak emissions this year, six years early.

CEF’s new analysis shows another globally profound trend in the making. There is growing hard evidence that China has responded to the escalating US and EU trade barriers against it by embracing the Paris Agreement commitment for world-leading countries to help the Global South access new zero-emissions investment opportunities.

This report tracks over 130 major cleantech transactions since the start of 2023 that demonstrate a geopolitical pivot. China is not just exporting its world leading cleantech manufacturing capacity surplus. China is increasingly exporting its technology, engineering, supply chain and financing capacities to create a win-win-win for the world.

A win for emerging markets in the South desperate for manufacturing investment, new infrastructure and technology access, all supporting valuable jobs. A win for China to expand its global market reach, often in partnership with domestic cleantech champions. A win for the planet as countries from Saudi Arabia to Hungary and Brazil to Uzbekistan embrace zero-emissions industries of the future.

And potentially a win for Australia if we grasp the opportunity to co-invest onshore with the world’s decarbonisation superpower, and pivot to secure our economic prosperity as a zero-emissions trade and investment leader.”

The report finds:

  • Australia’s current posture disincentives Chinese private investors, with private Chinese investment into Australia at a multi-decade low at only US$613m in 2023. Chinese capital is increasingly going elsewhere.
  • There are immense opportunities for private Chinese co-investment here in clean energy infrastructure, onshore value-adding of energy transition materials such as critical minerals and strategic metals like green iron – our #1 clean export opportunity – as well as cleantech supply chain manufacturing, with appropriate foreign ownership limits to mitigate risks.
  • China’s accelerating investment into strategic critical minerals supply chains globally and its overwhelmingly dominant buying power has driven price deflation impacting key Australian commodity exports (e.g. critical minerals), justifying a calibrated domestic national interest response (see recommendation 3 below).

The report recommends that the Australian Federal Government:

  1. As a strategic national-interest priority, clarify the rules of engagement with the Foreign Investment Review Board, so that Chinese firms looking to co-invest are incentivised by transparent, stable, welcoming investment policy frameworks and guidelines;
  2. Improve and streamline engagement by tasking federal and state investment bodies to communicate FIRB rules to prospective Chinese investors, assisting them with market entry strategies;
  3. Establish a strategic critical minerals reserve trading fund to underwrite new investment in mining and extraction and protect Australia’s national interests;
  4. Strongly advocate for an Asian Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) – a green premium price signal to accelerate investment into renewables-powered processing of Australia’s energy transition materials (e.g. green iron), helping foster collaboration with China.

Further background:

CEF’S new report finds that China’s green capital tsunami is profoundly expanding and reshaping the global energy transition and geopolitics, delivering a global decarbonisation net positive as nations, including Australia, race to tackle climate change and align their energy security, national security and economic prosperity objectives.

China leads the world on R&D, investment, innovation, manufacturing, deployment and exports of cleantech by an astonishing margin, investing more than double the US or the EU into cleantech.

This, coupled with its massive buildout of domestic manufacturing capabilities, has led to ‘overcapacity’ of cleantech production, triggering staggering price deflation: solar module prices are -60% year on year (yoy), batteries -50% yoy, and lithium -80% from its recent peak, with significant global impacts:

  • A reconfiguration of global trade dynamics and rising geopolitical tensions, including US sanctions against China’s cleantech exports and increasing tariffs from the EU to Turkey to India to Brazil. The US has imposed a 40% tariff on Chinese solar modules and 100% on EVs to protect onshore industry and domestic interests, as it accuses China of flooding global markets.
  • An opportunity to convert ‘overcapacity’ of cleantech from China – which CEF argues can be reframed as under-deployment – into increased demand via a faster rollout of decarbonisation technologies across the globe, including in emerging and developing economies (EMDE) in the Global South, both addressing climate change and enabling nations to secure their energy independence.
  • Enormous potential for bi- and multilateral partnerships and collaborations, including with Australia, on innovating and building emerging future-facing energy transition industries, as nations leverage Chinese capital, tech leadership and expertise in localised contexts to value-add domestically to mutual benefit.
  • Increasing momentum in Chinese cleantech investment into economies worldwide, including, in addition to the Global South, greater Asia, Africa and Central and Eastern Europe, as China leverages its financial and technological clean energy statecraft to navigate a complex and challenging international trade and diplomatic landscape, including trade sanctions against it.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Aged care providers must not shirk scrutiny

The National Health Services Union has strongly endorsed an open letter from Aged Care Minister Anika Wells to residential aged care providers, which calls out the sector’s lack of accountability.

National Secretary Lloyd Williams praised Minister Wells’ initiative: “This open letter is a crucial step towards addressing the longstanding issues in our aged care system. It’s precisely why we’ve been advocating for a legislated ‘workers voice’ in the Aged Care Act – a provision that was regrettably removed at the insistence of the Liberal Party.”

The Minister’s letter notes that from today, average care funding will be around 58% higher than it was in September 2022. A significant part of this increase has been to fund providers to increase their care minutes to an average of 215 minutes per resident per day.

Williams highlighted key concerns raised by the Minister:

  1. The disproportionately low compliance rates in metropolitan areas, despite greater workforce constraints in regional, rural, and remote locations.
  2. The significantly lower compliance rates among for-profit aged care providers compared to their not-for-profit counterparts.

“Never forget, it was workers who blew the whistle on the appalling operating conditions in aged care that led to residents being fed jelly and frankfurts and having sanitary pads rationed,” Williams said.

“Providers need accountability. We cannot allow profit motives to compromise the quality of care for our elderly citizens.”

The Health Services Union is committed to working alongside the government and responsible providers to improve conditions in the aged care sector. “We stand ready to support any initiatives that enhance transparency, accountability, and most importantly, the quality of care for our seniors,” Williams said.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Technology Academy announces global engineering and applied science innovators as 2024 Fellows

A trailblazing Indigenous genomics expert, a carbon emissions modeller, a naval defence engineer, a world farming authority, a shark tracker, a brain cancer therapist and a global artificial intelligence leader are among 32 innovators elected as Fellows of the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE).

ATSE’s 2024 new Fellows showcase the breadth and depth of world-class Australian innovation with game-changing contributions spanning food sustainability, chronic diseases, water security, health technologies, critical minerals, artificial intelligence, clean energy technologies, sustainable infrastructure and more.

ATSE President Dr Katherine Woodthorpe AO FTSE said the 2024 new Fellows are the thinkers and doers at the forefront of Australian discoveries, technological breakthroughs and future industries.

“Australia faces a challenging constellation of threats. Extreme weather and climate change, the power and risk of AI and digital technologies, crafting sustainable food systems to nourish people and the planet, shocking disparities in Aboriginal and Torres-Strait Islander health outcomes. This diverse group of Australia’s brightest stars in technology and engineering embodies progress, hope and unparalleled innovation in the face of these challenges.

“Our Fellows are bridging from discovery to shaping new industries in the ultimate service of better living for all Australians and the world,” said Dr Woodthorpe.

A farmer from the Liverpool Plains of NSW, Fiona Simson FTSE has dedicated her career to supporting the sustainability and growth of rural and regional communities. The first woman president of the National Farmers’ Federation, now Vice-President of the World Farmers Organisation, Fiona is a pioneer at the nexus of climate change, biodiversity and the future of food.

A pioneer in using acoustic tracking to study shark movement ecology, Dr Michelle Heupel FTSE has directly led to stronger protections for marine predators, informed fisheries sustainability, and guided decisions around establishing marine protected areas.

Trailblazing medical doctor and Yuin man Professor Alex Brown FTSE FAHMS has helped tackle chronic disease in vulnerable communities. By identifying and overcoming health disparities, his work focuses on empowering and growing the next generation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers.

Mining leader Gabrielle Iwanow FTSE has fused technical excellence and strategic vision to champion the use of novel technologies to make mining safer, more sustainable and more efficient. She is an advocate for a more diverse mining sector in Australia and leads efforts to support and promote underrepresented groups including women and Indigenous people.

Artificial intelligence is one of the megatrends of this moment. It is disrupting how we work, live and play at a fundamental level. Author, renowned commentator and globally recognised AI developer Professor Toby Walsh FTSE FAA has been elected for his contributions to computer science and advocacy for guardrails to ensure AI is used to improve our lives.

Elected by their peers, the cohort joins over 900 of Australia’s leading engineers and applied scientists who have been elected to the Academy for their outstanding contributions across Australia’s innovation ecosystem.

Full list of new ATSE Fellows for 2024

Australian Capital Territory
  • Dr Josep (Pep) Canadell FTSE | World-leading climate scientist | Chief Research Scientist, CSIRO
  • Rear Admiral Rachel Durbin CSC RAN FTSE | Maritime engineering leader | Head Navy Engineering and Defence Seaworthiness Regulator, Australian Defence Force
New South Wales
  • Scientia Professor Liming Dai FTSE FAA | Materials science maestro | Director, ARC Centre of Excellence for Carbon Science and Innovation, and Scientia Professor, The University of New South Wales
  • Distinguished Professor Michelle Leishman FTSE | Preeminent plant ecologist | Director, Smart Green Cities Research Centre, Macquarie University
  • Anne O’Neill FTSE | Health innovation changemaker | Director, Enterprise, International Partnerships and Clinical Trials, NSW Health
  • Guy Templeton FTSE | Impactful infrastructure engineer | Chair of Infrastructure, Transport, Construction and Planning, Business Council of Australia
  • Scientia Professor Toby Walsh FTSE FAA | Artificial intelligence pioneer | Chief Scientist, AI Institute, University of New South Wales
  • Professor Yixia (Sarah) Zhang FTSE | Advanced materials creator | Co-Director of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Western Sydney University
  • Professor Chuan Zhao FTSE | Hydrogen paradigm shifter | Professor of Chemistry, University of New South Wales
  • Honorary Fellow Fiona Simson FTSE | Global agriculture advocate | Chair, Commission for International Agricultural Research and Future Food Systems CRC
Queensland
  • Anne-Marie Birkill FTSE | Technology and healthcare investor | Co-Founder, Venture Partner and Director, OneVentures
  • Dr Iris Depaz FTSE (dec) | Life sciences champion | Managing Director of Translational Science Hub, Sanofi-Aventis Australia
  • Professor Clinton Fookes FTSE | Artificial intelligence innovator | Associate Dean, Research, Queensland University of Technology
  • Professor Paul Simshauser AM FTSE | Exceptional energy economist | Chief Executive Officer, Powerlink Queensland
  • Professor Lianzhou Wang FTSE FAA | Semiconductor materials innovator | ARC Australian Laureate Fellow, The University of Queensland
  • Professor Xiwang Zhang FTSE | Sustainable technology innovator | Chair Professor and Centre Director, ARC COE for Electrochemical Transformation of CO2, University of Queensland
South Australia
  • Professor Alex Brown FTSE FAHMS | Acclaimed medical expert | Professor of Indigenous Genomics, The Australian National University and The Kids Research Institute Australia
  • Dr Fiona Kerr FTSE | Pathbreaking human-centred technologist | Founder and Director, The NeuroTech Institute
  • Dr James Tickner FTSE | Scientist, innovator and entrepreneur | Chief Technology Officer, Chrysos Corporation
  • Professor Yan Zhuge FTSE | Waste conversion trailblazer | Professor in Structural Engineering, University of South Australia
Tasmania
  • Dr Michelle Heupel FTSE | Pioneering ocean ecologist | Executive Director, Integrated Marine Observing System, University of Tasmania
Victoria
  • Dr Angeline Achariya FTSE | Food innovation leader | Chief Executive Officer, Innovation GameChangers
  • Professor Frank Caruso FRS FTSE FAA | Pioneering particle engineer | Professor, The University of Melbourne
  • Karen Dobson FTSE | Change management leader | President and Managing Director, Dow Australia and New Zealand
  • Professor Misty Jenkins AO FTSE | Outstanding cancer immunologist | Laboratory Head and Co-Chair, MRFF Indigenous Health Research Fund, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research (WEHI)
  • Distinguished Professor David Moss FTSE | World-leading photonics researcher | Founding Director, Optical Sciences Centre, Swinburne University of Technology
  • Adjunct Research Professor Craig Rayner FTSE | Pharmaceutical development expert | Director, Translational Medicine, Infectious Diseases Development, Moderna, and Distinguished Alumnus, Monash University
  • Professor Karin Verspoor FTSE | AI in Healthcare leader | Executive Dean, School of Computing Technologies, RMIT University
  • Dr Zongli Xie FTSE | Membrane and catalysis groundbreaker | Principal Research Scientist, Group Leader of Materials for Energy, Environment and Health, CSIRO
Western Australia
  • Rachelle Doyle FTSE | Energy transition advocate | Manager Strategic Programs, Rio Tinto
  • Gabrielle Iwanow FTSE | Mineral resources changemaker | President, Contract Mining, Perenti
USA
  • International Fellow Professor Sally Benson FTSE | Climate policy powerhouse | Professor of Energy Science and Engineering, Stanford University

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Who are the terrorists?

“Pregnant women will give birth to terrorists; the children when they grow up will be terrorists.” (Phalangist involved in the Sabra and Shantila massacre, when questioned by an Israeli tank crew, West Beirut. 17 September 1982. Robert Fisk; Pity the Nation, p359).

“We know, it’s not to our liking, and don’t interfere.” (Message from and Israeli army battalion commander to his men, on learning that Palestinians were being massacred. 17 September 1982. Robert Fisk; Pity the Nation, p3590.

It is hard to see any semblance of humanity in a war zone.

In the escalation of the crisis in the Middle East, the focus yesterday was on a spot on the map of Lebanon called Ain al-Hilweh. It is a refugee camp near the city of Sidon in Southern Lebanon, quite near the border with Israel. There are several refugee camps, although to call them camps makes them sound like places of transience, where people stop for a while and then move on, as refugees, the move on would hopefully be to a place of permanence. But Ain al-Hilweh has been a refugee camp since 1948 when Palestinians were expelled from Israel. The current population of Ain al Hiwel is over 70,000 Palestinian refugees but that number has grown with refugees from Syria.

Lebanon hosted many of the 750,000 Palestinians exiled during the period of the Nakbah, from 1948 as Israel consolidated its hold on the UN mandated shared Israel/Palestine.

Another such refugee camp was the Shatila refugee camp, south of Beirut which in 1982 was the site of a massacre, the slaughtering of over 4,000 men, women and children by a militia controlled by the Israeli Defence Force. The Shatila Refugee‘s current population is almost 10,000 registered Palestinian refugees and another 10,000 Syrian refugees escaping the horrors of their civil war and the devastation that ruined cities such as Aleppo, which still looks a bit like Gaza does today, essentially levelled and uninhabitable.

Since 1948, the status of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon has denied them any entitlement to citizenship under Lebanese law, effectively rendering them as stateless and as such denied the opportunity to earn a living or access to health services.

“It is a tragedy of both our people. How can I explain in my poor English? I think Arabs have the same rights as the Jews and I think it is a tragedy of history that a people are refugees make new refugees. I have nothing against Arabs… They are the same as us. I don’t know that we Jews did this tragedy – but it happened.” (Shlomo Green, Jewish refugee from the Nazis, on learning that his home in Israel was taken from a Palestinian family in 1948. Robert Fisk; Pity the Nation, P. 12).

Shlomo Green was a refugee from Romania and settled in a house taken from David Damiani, an exiled Palestinian businessman. In Robert Fisk’s book, Pity the Nation, both men are cited in the second chapter, one was a refugee, a survivor of the Holocaust who had lost many relatives at Auschwitz, the other, forced from his home and the country of his birth.

Hamas and Hezbolla are ‘terrorist’ organisations, born out of the dispossession and dehumanisation of Palestinians who have been denied basic human rights since 1948.

The family whose home was taken for Shlomo Green’s family to occupy were among the 750,000 people shunted north to Lebanon, to live in a refugee camp, seemingly for ever with no rights, no recognition, just discarded people: Crammed into the confines of a restricted area such as Shantil or Ain al-Hawel. For over 75 years, those expelled and their off spring, now four generations have been left receiving handouts through Red Cross and UNHCR for survival. A breeding ground for discontent and even, dare it be expressed, anger at the treatment meted out for being who they are, stateless people, effectively nobodies.

Is it any wonder that the discontent can lead to the occasional bit of rebellion, the occasional outburst of anger, and when religion gets involved, that the dispossession is seen through the lens of discrimination which has been a hallmark of the region since the birth of religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam? People occupying the land because God said it was theirs.

“And the Lord spake unto Moses in the plains of Moab by Jordan near Jericho, saying,

Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye are passed over Jordan ind into the land of Canaan;

Then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land before you, and destroy all their pictures,and destroy all their molten images, and quite pluck down their high places;

And ye shall dispossess the inhabitants of the land, and dwell therein: for I have given you the land to possess it…

ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them shall be pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.” (The Bible, Numbers 33: 50-55).

Is it any wonder why casualties are so disproportionately high on the Palestinian side of the conflict?

Israeli excuses for the high rate of civilian deaths and injury is because Hamas and Hezbollah use the people as human shields. I guess that must be true, since humans lived in the several multi-storied apartment blocks which was demolished to assassinate the Hezbollah leader, Hassan Nasrallah, apparently using a US supplied ‘bunker buster’ bomb, or in targeting Hamas militants in Gaza to bomb the areas which dropped leaflets had told the people to the safe areas on the maps provided, or to bomb hospitals and schools since that is the most obvious place the ‘terrorists’ will hide.

The long long history of violence, dispossession, religion continues unabated, the rivers of blood flow endlessly and it seems that the only non terrorist is… mmmm.

Robert Fisk was a respected journalist for The Independent and various other respected newspapers and journals. He lived in Beirut until his death in October 2020.

An Israeli journalist who lives in Ramallah in the West Bank, but from1993 to 1997 lived in Gaza is Amira Hass. For over 30 years she has written for the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz. In 1996 she wrote Drinking the sea at Gaza; Days and nights in a land under siege, and explains why she chose to live in ‘Yassir Arafat’s garbage strewn statelet’.

“In the end, my desire to live in Gaza stemmed neither from adventurism nor from insanity, but from that dread of being a bystander, from my need to understand, down to the last detail, a world that is, to the best of my political and historical comprehension, a profoundly Israeli creation. To me Gaza embodies the entire saga Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it represents the central contradiction the State of Israel – democracy for some, dispossession for others; it is our exposed nerve. I needed to know the people whose lives have been forever altered by my society and my history, whose parents and grandparents, refugees, were forced from their villages in 1948.” (Amira Hass. Drinking the sea at Gaza, P 7).

Amira Hass is the daughter of Holocaust survivors who arrived in Israel in 1948.

Yes, Shlomo Green, both Israelis and Palestinians have a right to live, and to live in peace.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 

More women and children killed in Gaza by Israeli military than any other recent conflict in a single year – Oxfam

Oxfam Australia Media Release

Israeli explosive weapons hit civilian infrastructure in Gaza – including schools, hospitals and aid distribution points – once every three hours.

More women and children have been killed in Gaza by the Israeli military over the past year than the equivalent period of any other conflict over the past two decades, new Oxfam analysis has found.

As hostilities and tragic loss of life spread in Lebanon and the West Bank – including East Jerusalem – the regional escalation underscores the urgent need for an immediate and permanent ceasefire.

Conservative figures show that more than 6,000 women and 11,000 children were killed in Gaza by the Israeli military over the last 12 months. Data from 2004-2021 on direct conflict deaths from the Small Arms Survey, estimates that the highest number of women killed in a single year was over 2,600 in Iraq in 2016.

A report by the organisation Every Casualty Counts examined information on over 11,000 children killed across the first 2.5 years of the Syria conflict, an average of over 4,700 deaths a year. UN reports on Children and Armed Conflict over the last 18 years show that no other conflict killed a higher number of children in one year.

Israel’s military assault began last October, following the attacks by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Almost 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals were killed, including at least 282 women and 36 children – the deadliest day in Israel’s history. These targeted attacks constituted serious violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). More than 250 people, including 38 children, were taken hostage, 96 of whom are reported to still be held in Gaza.

Separate data from Action on Armed Violence up to 23 September shows that Israel hit civilian infrastructure across Gaza with explosive weapons once every three hours on average since the war began. Other than the six-day humanitarian pause last November, there were just two days in the entire year without bombardment.

Records – which are not comprehensive – show that Israeli explosive weapons hit, on average:

  • Homes every four hours
  • Tents and temporary shelters every 17 hours
  • Schools and hospitals every four days
  • Aid distribution points and warehouses every 15 days

Throughout the last year Israel has committed serious violations of IHL at a level which may rise to the level of crimes against humanity. This includes a level of destruction observed which is indicative of Israel’s use of disproportionate force in relation to military objectives and a failure to discriminate between military targets and the civilian population. The Israeli military has relentlessly targeted infrastructure indispensable to civilian survival. Civilians have been forcibly displaced dozens of times to so-called ‘safe zones’ that fail to meet humanitarian obligations and have also been regularly bombed or attacked.

The UN Children and Armed Conflict reports highlight the number of Palestinian children killed in Gaza and the West Bank. In the last year, over five times more children were killed in Gaza than between 2005 and 2022.

The record number of women and children killed in Gaza does not include those among nearly 20,000 people who are either unidentified, missing or entombed beneath rubble. Earlier this year, a study published in The Lancet estimated the true number of deaths in Gaza could be over 186,000, taking indirect deaths – for example due to starvation and lack of health care – into consideration.

Civilian infrastructure has either been completely destroyed or severely damaged, including around 68 per cent of cropland and roads. Only 17 of 36 hospitals remain partially functional, and all suffer from a lack of fuel, medical supplies, and clean water.

Sally Abi Khalil, Oxfam’s Middle East and North Africa Director, said: “These staggering figures are both appalling and heartbreaking. Influential actors in the international community have not only failed to hold Israel to account, they are also complicit in the atrocities by continuing to unconditionally supply it with arms. It will take generations to recover from the devastating impacts of this war and there is still no ceasefire in sight.

“Our colleagues and partners are displaced themselves, yet every day are doing their utmost to respond to this humanitarian catastrophe. It’s unprecedented on so many levels – the fastest acceleration into famine, the reemergence of polio, the utter devastation of daily life faced by the entire population. Israel’s free pass for impunity and exemption from international humanitarian law must end – we cannot allow the relentless horror and suffering to continue.”

Dr Umaiyeh Khammash, director of Oxfam partner Juzoor, which is supporting hundreds of thousands of people in more than 90 shelters and health points across Gaza said: “The past year has had a devastating impact with women bearing a double burden. Many have suddenly become the heads of their households, navigating survival and care in the midst of destruction. Pregnant and breastfeeding mothers have faced immense difficulties, including from the collapse in healthcare services.

“For children, the trauma is equally profound. Over 25,000 children have either lost a parent or become orphans, leaving them in deep emotional distress. Most children are grappling with anxiety and severe physical injuries, with many having lost limbs.”

In the occupied West Bank, the unprecedented escalation and levels of violence are raising concerns that serious violations of international law and war crimes are being committed. Since last October, more than 680 Palestinians have been killed either by Israeli settler or military violence. More than a thousand settler attacks on Palestinians have been recorded, with direct attacks on agricultural land resulting in the destruction of crops, irrigation systems and greenhouses, including internationally-funded and Oxfam-supported projects. The Israeli military has forced the demolition of more than 2,000 Palestinian homes with massive damage to public infrastructure including roads.

Oxfam is calling for an immediate, permanent ceasefire, the release of all hostages and unlawfully detained Palestinians, an end to all lethal arms sales to Israel and full access across Gaza for humanitarian aid. In light of the recent International Court of Justice advisory opinion and in order to avoid complicity, third states must do everything in their power to bring an immediate end to the illegal Israeli occupation, the removal of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and reparations paid, including restitution, rehabilitation, and compensation for affected communities.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

‘Jaw-some’ new research: What do kids think about sharks?

University of South Australia Media Release

When it comes to what people think about sharks, ‘Jaws’ has a lot to answer for. So while older generations shudder at the sound of the infamous two-note tuba alternation, what do younger generations think of sharks?

That’s exactly the question being asked by researchers at the University of South Australia. In a move to better understand why people fear sharks and how this fear might develop, researchers are looking to parents and carers or young children (aged 2-12) for new insights.

Lead researcher and shark expert, UniSA’s Dr Brianna Le Busque says there is barely any information about what children think of sharks.

“When you ask children what they know about sharks, you can get any number of replies – ‘they live in the ocean’, ‘they have sharp teeth’, or even ‘they eat bananas’ (yes, expect the unexpected) – but despite the immediate responses, there is very little empirical information,” Dr Le Busque says.

“We’re hoping that by talking with parents and children about what they know, feel, and think about sharks, we can establish how and when a fear of sharks might arise.

“Essentially, we’re questioning whether children innately fear sharks, or if this is a learnt behaviour over time, influenced by what they might see and hear around them?”

The team is now inviting parents and caregivers of young children aged 2-12 years old to participate in a short 10-minute online survey to find out what they and their children think about sharks. Children are also invited to draw a picture of a shark if they choose.

Over the past 50 years, 71% of oceanic shark populations have been depleted and one third of all shark species are now threatened with extinction.

“Through overfishing and illegal fishing, many shark species are at risk,” Dr Le Busque says.

“While conservation messages are important, it is extremely difficult to combat long-ingrained perceptions of sharks as ‘mindless eating machines’ which pose a ‘high-risk to humans’.

“Given the coverage that sharks receive on the screen – through movies, sensationalised human-shark interactions, and documentaries – it’s not surprising that sharks have a bad reputation.

“In reality, sharks pose little threat to humans – in fact, the odds of being killed by a shark in Australia are one in eight million.

“But changing perceptions is challenging. Finding out what children think and feel about sharks is just the starting point to a whole new approach to shark understanding.”

 

To participate in the survey, visit: https://bit.ly/3XRK2vU

This project has been approved by the University of South Australia’s Human Research Ethics Committee (Ethics Protocol 206267).

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Big Super is still investing in nuclear weapons: report

Quit Nukes / The Australia Institute Media Release

A new report has found that despite claiming not to invest in ‘controversial weapons’ 13 of the top 14 Australian super funds are still investing in nuclear weapons companies, in some cases even in an option described as ‘responsible’.

One of the 14, Hostplus, has excluded nuclear weapons companies across its portfolio since December 2021.

At least $3.4 billion of Australian retirement savings are invested by these funds in companies involved in making nuclear weapons, according to the new research conducted by Quit Nukes in collaboration with The Australia Institute.

The report analyses financial returns and finds that the exclusion of nuclear weapon companies from portfolios has an immaterial impact on returns.

Rosemary Kelly, Director, Quit Nukes:

“It’s frankly unconscionable to sell super fund members a responsible investment option and then use their money to invest in nuclear proliferation.

“The thing that makes this baffling is that investing in nuclear weapon companies is just completely unnecessary in the broader scheme of things.

“Superannuation funds should divest immediately from weapons manufacturers who produce nuclear weapons. If you’re a member of 13 of these 14 leading funds you can request that your fund divest or threaten to take your savings elsewhere.

“Super funds are being sneaky by boasting of policies to exclude “controversial weapons” but not counting nuclear weapons as “controversial.” That’s pretty hard to swallow when you consider that most ESG advisers now consider nuclear weapons as controversial weapons, given the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons that came into force in 2021.

Alice Grundy, Research Manager, The Australia Institute:

“The most frustrating thing about the lack of process in this area is that excluding nuclear weapon companies from super portfolios is so easy. Divesting has an immaterial impact on investment returns.

“Your super fund could divest your money from nuclear weapon companies without materially impacting your returns.

“So long as nuclear weapons exist, nuclear war is an ever-present risk. Its impacts would be catastrophic. Even a limited nuclear war, involving say 250 of the over 12,000 nuclear weapons in the world, would kill 120 million people outright and cause nuclear famine, putting 2 billion lives at risk. There would be massive impacts on global supply chains and manufacturing.

“The long-term financial implications should be factored into decisions about where to invest Australian super.”

The full report

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 

Why a Currency Sovereignty Government Should Fund Services

By Denis Hay

Description

An Australian currency sovereignty government can improve social services instead of focusing on a budget surplus. Learn why in this comprehensive guide.

Introduction

Australia, with sovereignty over its currency, has the unique ability to manage its economy differently from countries that do not control their money supply. Yet, the Australian government continues to prioritize a budget surplus, even as vital social services like healthcare, education, and housing are underfunded.

This article explores why a government with monetary sovereignty focuses on a surplus and how shifting priorities could better serve Australians’ well-being.

Despite Australia’s control over its currency, a focus on budget surpluses has left essential social services neglected, impacting the quality of life for many citizens.

This fixation on fiscal conservatism exacerbates inequality and undermines the potential for a robust, inclusive society.

By utilizing Australia’s monetary sovereignty, the government can strategically invest in social services without the need to achieve a surplus, fostering a fairer and more prosperous nation.

1. Understanding Currency Sovereignty

What is Currency Sovereignty?

Currency sovereignty refers to a government’s control over its own currency, giving it the ability to issue its money and manage monetary policies without external constraints. Australia, as the issuer of the Australian Dollar (AUD), has full control over its currency.

This allows the government to manage inflation, employment, and public services without the need for foreign borrowing. Unlike households or businesses, a currency-sovereign government does not need to “balance its budget” by ensuring that revenues meet or exceed expenditures.

In fact, a deficit can be strategically beneficial if it leads to greater public investment.

Benefits of Currency Sovereignty

Unlimited Currency Issuance: The Australian government can issue money as needed to fund programs and infrastructure.

Flexibility in Spending: This flexibility means that in times of economic downturn, the government can ramp up spending to stimulate the economy without relying on external lenders.

Full Employment Potential: Currency sovereignty offers the government tools to achieve full employment by investing in job creation programs and public services.

2. The Government’s Focus on Surplus: Historical Context

The Legacy of Neoliberalism

The Australian government’s fixation on achieving a budget surplus can be traced back to the rise of neoliberal economic policies in the 1980s. These policies emphasize small government, deregulation, and fiscal austerity, often at the expense of public welfare.

Under neoliberalism, economic health is measured by fiscal indicators like balanced budgets and low public debt, rather than the welfare of the population.

The Political Appeal of Surplus

A budget surplus is often presented as a sign of good governance and fiscal responsibility. Politicians promote it as a way to safeguard the economy for future generations. However, this narrative ignores the social costs, particularly the chronic underfunding of critical services that disproportionately affects low-income citizens.

3. What’s Left Behind: The Underfunding of Social Services

Impact on Healthcare

Australia’s healthcare system, although strong in comparison to some countries, suffers from chronic underfunding. Hospitals are overcrowded, waiting times are long, and mental health services are severely under-resourced.

While the government aims for a surplus, healthcare professionals struggle with inadequate resources, leading to poor health outcomes for the nation’s most vulnerable populations.

Education and Inequality

Public education in Australia is similarly underfunded. Schools in lower socioeconomic areas often lack the resources needed to provide a world-class education, widening the gap between rich and poor.

Meanwhile, private schools benefit from significant government funding, perpetuating inequality. Shifting focus from a surplus to direct investment in public education could dramatically improve opportunities for all Australians.

Housing Crisis

The housing crisis in Australia is another area where the focus on a budget surplus undermines public welfare. With a growing number of people experiencing homelessness and a lack of affordable housing, it’s clear that more public investment is needed. Yet, the government continues to prioritize fiscal austerity over long-term solutions to the housing crisis.

4. Why the Push for Surplus is Misguided

Misunderstanding Public Debt

The idea that government debt is inherently bad is a holdover from neoliberal economics. In reality, public debt for a currency-sovereign government like Australia’s is not the same as household debt. The government can always meet its obligations by issuing more currency.

The obsession with reducing debt at the expense of public investment fails to recognize that long-term economic growth and social stability come from investing in people, not just balancing the books.

Investing in Social Services as a Solution

By investing in healthcare, education, and housing, the government can boost overall economic productivity. Healthier, better-educated citizens contribute more to the economy, and secure housing improves stability and reduces social welfare costs.

Moreover, with full control over its currency, Australia can fund these initiatives without worrying about immediate deficits.

Case Studies: Countries that Spend without a Surplus

Countries like Japan have shown that high public debt does not necessarily lead to economic collapse. Despite running large deficits, Japan has maintained a high standard of living, robust healthcare, and a strong education system.

The United States also continues to invest heavily in its military and social programs, despite running consistent deficits. These examples demonstrate that focusing on a budget surplus is not a prerequisite for economic health.

5. The Role of Public Perception and Media

The Media’s Role in Promoting Fiscal Conservatism

The media has played a significant role in perpetuating the narrative that budget surpluses are a sign of good governance. Headlines often celebrate surpluses while criticizing deficit spending, without acknowledging the real-world consequences of underfunding social services.

This skewed reporting shapes public perception and reinforces neoliberal economic principles.

Re-educating the Public on Currency Sovereignty

One of the biggest challenges in shifting the government’s priorities is educating the public about the realities of currency sovereignty. Most Australians have been conditioned to believe that government budgets work like household budgets, and that debt is inherently bad.

Public campaigns and education efforts are needed to change this perception and explain the benefits of strategic deficit spending.

6. What Needs to Be Done: A Shift in Priorities

Prioritizing Public Money for Social Services

To improve the quality of life for all Australians, the government must shift its focus from achieving a surplus to investing in critical social services. This means reallocating public money to where it is needed most—healthcare, education, housing, and welfare programs.

Policy Recommendations

1. Increase Healthcare Funding: Redirect public money to ensure hospitals are fully staffed and equipped to handle patient loads, with a particular focus on mental health services.

2. Invest in Public Education: Shift more funding toward public schools to reduce inequality and provide every child with the opportunity for a quality education.

3. Address the Housing Crisis: Create a public housing program that ensures every Australian has access to safe, affordable housing.

4. Implement Job Creation Programs: Use public money to invest in infrastructure projects and public services that create jobs and boost economic growth.

Conclusion: A Call for Re-Evaluating Priorities

Australia has the unique advantage of currency sovereignty, yet it remains trapped in a neoliberal mindset that prioritizes budget surpluses over the well-being of its citizens. By shifting focus from surplus to strategic investment in social services, the government can create a healthier, more equitable society. This shift is not only possible but essential for the long-term prosperity of all Australians.

Question for Readers

How can Australia leverage its currency sovereignty to better fund social services and reduce inequality?

Call to Action

Share this article and start a conversation about how public money can be better used to benefit the common good. Visit our website for more information on currency sovereignty and how it can shape a better future for Australia.

Reference

Spending cuts credited for heftier second surplus, The New Daily.

 

This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Australia’s productivity deadlock persists

Productivity Commission Media Release

Labour productivity fell by 0.8% across the economy in the June quarter, but rose by a modest 0.5% over the year to June 2024. This marks a return to the weak productivity growth trend of the five years leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“During the pandemic, aggregate productivity rose but then fell as restrictions were eased. This bubble has now well and truly burst, and our productivity level remains at about its 2015–2019 average,” said Deputy Chair Dr Alex Robson.

The Productivity Commission’s Quarterly productivity bulletin – September 2024 shows the rise in the number of hours worked (1.1%) outpaced growth in output (0.2%) in the three months to June.

“Increasing productivity is still the surest path to sustainable increases in real wages and higher living standards,” said Dr Robson.

The report notes that while our overall productivity performance has reverted to pre-pandemic levels, the macroeconomic environment is different from five years ago, with higher levels of labour force participation and a lower unemployment rate.

Hours worked increased by 1.1% in the June 2024 quarter, regaining momentum after falling in the September and December 2023 quarters. Growth in hours worked reflected a 0.8% rise in the number of employed persons and a 0.3% increase in average work hours.

“While there was a brief interruption during COVID, Australia’s productivity deadlock has persisted through two very different economic environments. This suggests policymakers need to pay closer attention to the deeper structural issues at play,” said Dr Robson.

Over the 12 months to June, productivity in the non-market sector declined by 0.7%, while productivity in the market sector rose by 1%.

“Our productivity challenge is broad-based, but it is even greater and more pressing in the non-market sector,” said Dr Robson.

Read the September productivity bulletin

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Consumer inertia key to understanding supermarket competition issues: new research

e61 Institute Media Release

Australians have a ‘persistent degree’ of inertia when it comes to their choice of supermarket, which is likely to explain the dominance of Coles and Woolworths more than a lack of access to alternate options, according to new research by the e61 Institute.

Using a novel source of data – consumer bank transactions linked to store locations – the report presents new evidence on sales concentration and consumer inertia at the local level.

The ACCC recently reignited debate about the power of the supermarket giants when it accused Coles and Woolworths of misleading shoppers by claiming they were dropping prices when in fact they were raising them.

e61 economist Matt Elias said the new research helped explain why consumers may not be responding dynamically to unusual price shifts.

“The data shows us that Australian consumers are fairly loyal to a single supermarket brand even in areas where they have access to all four major options – Woolworths, Coles, IGA, and Aldi,” Mr Elias said.

“What’s causing the inertia is hard to pinpoint, but this research does suggest that a lack of options is actually not a primary driver. Customers are repeatedly revisiting the same store locations week in, week out for their big shopping trips, even when alternate options exists.

“What we do know is that consumer inertia can reduce competition. If consumers aren’t exploring potential better options at alternative stores then this confers market power onto supermarkets.”

The research conducted across NSW and the ACT finds that brand loyalty persists over long periods of time, especially for Coles and Woolworths. 70% of customers that did their largest shops at Woolworths in a given month also did so one month later. 62% continued to do their main shops at Woolworths six months later. For Coles the equivalent figures were 62% after one month and 55% after six months. For Aldi the figures were 48% after one month and 37% after six.

“Inertia can reflect a lack of consumer knowledge about price benchmarks. Price comparison between supermarkets can be difficult for a basket of groceries and the complexity grows with the length of the shopping list.

“One policy option worth exploring would be to set up a government-supported digital price comparison platform, similar to FuelCheck NSW. Such platforms have been successful overseas where they have resulted in price declines.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Is Zero Environmental Impact in Transportation Possible?

By Denis Hay

Description

Can Australia achieve zero environmental impact in transport? Explore how EVs, renewables, and innovative tech can create a sustainable future. #SustainableTransport

Introduction: Can We Achieve Zero Environmental Impact in Transportation?

As the world grapples with the consequences of climate change, the transportation sector stands out as a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions. Both electric vehicles (EVs) and fossil fuel vehicles have significant environmental footprints, but is it possible to achieve a transportation system with zero environmental damage? This comprehensive guide will explore the current state of vehicle manufacturing, compare the environmental impacts of different vehicle types, and delve into potential solutions to minimize or eliminate environmental harm. Through a combination of innovative technologies, sustainable practices, and policy changes, we can envision a future where transportation aligns with ecological balance.

The Environmental Cost of Transportation

1. Understanding the Environmental Footprint of Electric and Fossil Fuel Vehicles

1.1 Manufacturing Impact: A Deep Dive into Resource Consumption

Electric Vehicles (EVs): EVs require materials like lithium, cobalt, and nickel for their batteries. Mining these resources disrupts ecosystems and communities, leading to deforestation, water contamination, and displacement of local populations. For instance, lithium extraction in Chile’s Atacama Desert has significantly depleted local water supplies, affecting agriculture and indigenous communities.

Fossil Fuel Vehicles: The production of internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) also requires substantial resources, including metals like steel and aluminium. However, the extraction and refinement of fossil fuels for these vehicles result in continuous environmental degradation, including oil spills and habitat destruction.

1.2 Operational Impact: Comparing Emissions During Use

EVs: While EVs have zero tailpipe emissions, their environmental impact depends on the electricity mix used for charging. In regions reliant on coal or gas, the benefits are diminished. However, as the grid incorporates more renewable energy, the overall emissions associated with EVs decrease substantially.

Fossil Fuel Vehicles: ICEVs emit carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter, contributing to air pollution, health issues, and global warming. A single ICEV emits approximately 4.6 metric tons of CO₂ annually, based on average fuel efficiency and distance driven.

1.3 End-of-Life Considerations: Disposal and Recycling Challenges

Battery Disposal: EV batteries contain toxic chemicals, and improper disposal can lead to soil and water contamination. However, advancements in recycling technologies are making it possible to reclaim valuable materials and reduce the environmental impact of end-of-life batteries.

Vehicle Disposal: Traditional vehicles also pose disposal challenges. Automotive fluids and components can contaminate the environment if not properly handled. While metals can be recycled, the process is energy-intensive and generates emissions.

2. The Urgency of Addressing Environmental Impact

2.1 The Real Cost of Vehicle Pollution

Vehicle emissions contribute to nearly 24% of global CO₂ emissions. This leads to rising global temperatures, extreme weather events, and disruptions in ecosystems. The health impacts are severe, with air pollution from vehicles causing respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular diseases, and premature deaths.

2.2 The Hidden Impact of Resource Extraction

Mining activities for both EV and ICEV components cause extensive ecological damage. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, cobalt mining has led to the exploitation of workers and severe environmental degradation, while oil extraction in the Amazon has resulted in deforestation and displacement of indigenous peoples.

2.3 Socio-Political Barriers to Sustainable Change

Despite technological advances, political and economic interests often hinder the transition to sustainable transport. Fossil fuel subsidies, insufficient investment in public transport, and a lack of stringent environmental regulations perpetuate the dominance of unsustainable vehicles.

Pathways to Achieving Zero Environmental Impact in Transportation

3. Strategies for Reducing Environmental Impact in EVs

3.1 Renewable Energy Integration for EV Charging

Using Solar and Wind Energy: Transitioning to renewable energy sources for EV charging can significantly reduce their environmental footprint. Solar-powered EV chargers and wind energy integration into the grid offer pathways to zero-emission transport.

Grid Decarbonization Efforts: Policies promoting the expansion of renewable energy and phasing out coal and gas plants are crucial. Countries like Germany and Sweden have set examples by rapidly increasing their renewable energy capacity.

3.2 Sustainable Battery Development and Recycling

Alternative Battery Materials: Research into solid-state batteries, which use fewer toxic materials and offer higher efficiency, is promising. Companies like Toyota and QuantumScape are pioneering efforts in this field.

Advanced Recycling Techniques: Technologies like hydrometallurgy and direct recycling can recover up to 95% of battery materials. Initiatives such as Redwood Materials in the U.S. and Duesenfeld in Germany are making strides in efficient battery recycling.

3.3 Adopting Circular Economy Principles in Manufacturing

Recycled Materials in Production: Using recycled metals and plastics in vehicle manufacturing reduces resource extraction and emissions. Tesla and BMW are incorporating recycled materials into their production lines.

Design for Disassembly: Vehicles designed for easy disassembly help recycling and reuse, reducing waste and energy consumption during the manufacturing process.

4. Exploring Alternatives to Vehicle Use for Sustainable Mobility

4.1 Public Transportation Expansion: A Sustainable Solution

Investment in High-Quality Transit: Expanding and improving public transport infrastructure can reduce reliance on personal vehicles. Cities like China, Copenhagen and Singapore have developed efficient public transport systems, significantly lowering urban emissions.

Benefits of Electrification: Electrifying public transport, such as buses and trains, further enhances environmental benefits. Sydney’s recent move towards an all-electric bus fleet is a step in the right direction.

4.2 Promoting Active Transport: Cycling and Walking

Infrastructure Improvements: Developing dedicated bike lanes and pedestrian-friendly pathways encourages active transport. Amsterdam and Copenhagen have successfully implemented such measures, becoming leading examples of sustainable urban mobility.

Health and Environmental Benefits: Reduced traffic congestion, lower emissions, and improved public health are key benefits of promoting active transport.

4.3 Shared Mobility Solutions: Efficient Use of Resources

Car Sharing and Ride Sharing: Services like GoGet in Australia and Zipcar globally allow users to access vehicles when needed, reducing the number of cars on the road.

Micro-Mobility Options: E-scooters, e-bikes, and bike-sharing programs offer last-mile solutions that complement public transport and reduce the need for car ownership.

5. Emerging Technologies Aiming for Zero Environmental Impact

5.1 Hydrogen Fuel Cells: A Viable Alternative?

Advantages and Challenges: Hydrogen fuel cells emit only water vapor and can be a sustainable alternative for heavy-duty transport. However, the production of hydrogen, especially through electrolysis, is energy-intensive and currently reliant on fossil fuels.

Current Developments: Companies like Toyota and Hyundai are investing in hydrogen technology for trucks and buses, while countries like Japan are developing hydrogen infrastructure.

5.2 Synthetic Fuels and Carbon Capture: Bridging the Gap

Potential for Emission Reduction: Synthetic fuels, produced from renewable energy, can power existing ICEVs with lower emissions. Carbon capture technologies can also offset emissions from traditional fuel sources, although they are still in the nascent stages of development and considered a licence to pollute.

Implementation Challenges: High costs and infrastructure requirements pose significant barriers to widespread adoption.

5.3 Advanced Vehicle Design: Efficiency and Sustainability

Lightweight Materials and Aerodynamics: Using materials like carbon fibre and optimizing vehicle design for aerodynamics reduces energy consumption. Companies like BMW and Audi are incorporating these principles into their electric and hybrid models.

Autonomous Driving and AI: Autonomous vehicles can reduce traffic congestion and improve fuel efficiency by optimizing driving patterns. Research from institutions like MIT and Stanford suggests that widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles could reduce emissions by up to 40%.

6. Policy and Community Actions Supporting Zero Impact Goals

6.1 Government Policies: Incentives and Regulations

Subsidies and Incentives for EV Adoption: Tax credits, rebates, and reduced registration fees encourage consumers to choose EVs. Norway’s aggressive incentives have led to EVs making up over 54% of new car sales.

Strict Emission Standards: Implementing stringent emission standards and penalties for high-pollution vehicles can accelerate the transition to cleaner transport options.

6.2 Corporate Responsibility: Leading by Example

Sustainable Business Practices: Companies like Google and Apple are committing to carbon neutrality and sustainable transport for their operations. Corporate fleets are increasingly adopting EVs and hybrid vehicles.

Supporting Innovation: Investments in research and development for sustainable technologies can drive advancements that benefit the broader industry.

6.3 Community Engagement: Driving Change from the Ground Up

Local Initiatives: Community-based projects, such as carpooling networks and local renewable energy co-ops, can have a significant impact on reducing emissions.

Advocacy and Education: Public awareness campaigns and educational programs can shift public perception and behaviour towards more sustainable transport choices.

7. Challenges and Barriers to Achieving Zero Environmental Impact

7.1 Technological and Economic Barriers

Cost and Accessibility: High upfront costs for EVs and charging infrastructure can be prohibitive for many consumers. Government subsidies and advances in technology are essential to making sustainable transport more accessible.

Infrastructure Development: Expanding EV charging networks and developing hydrogen refuelling stations require substantial investment and coordination.

7.2 Social and Cultural Factors

Dependence on Personal Vehicles: In many regions, especially rural areas, personal vehicles are seen as necessary due to inadequate public transport options. Changing this perception requires both infrastructure improvements and cultural shifts.

Resistance to Change: Transitioning to sustainable transport requires altering long-standing habits and preferences, which can be challenging without clear benefits and incentives.

7.3 Policy and Political Challenges

Vested Interests: The influence of the fossil fuel industry and political resistance to change can hinder the implementation of sustainable policies. Advocacy and public pressure are vital to overcoming these barriers.

Summary: Towards a Zero Environmental Impact Future

In the quest for zero environmental impact in transportation, a multifaceted approach is essential. From adopting renewable energy and sustainable manufacturing practices to promoting alternative transport options and supporting technological innovations, achieving this goal requires collaboration across sectors and communities. While challenges remain, the pathway to a greener future is clear and achievable with the right policies, investments, and societal commitment.

Question for Readers

What do you think is the most effective way to reduce the environmental impact of transportation? Share your thoughts and experiences!

Call to Action:

Join us in advocating for sustainable transport solutions! Visit our website for the latest updates on eco-friendly innovations and policy changes.

Social Sharing:

Help spread the word! Share this article with your network and support a greener future. #ZeroImpact #SustainableMobility #GreenTransport #EcoFriendly

 

This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

The Last Battle of Rudy Gonzalez

By James Moore

“A soldier doesn’t fight because he hates what is in front of him, he fights because he loves what is behind him.” – G.K. Chesterton.

He wanted to help. That was a central part of his character and explained his personal mission. Everyone of his peers and family would have understood if he had said, “No, I think I’ve earned these last few days.” They would have never expected that response, though, when the radio call came. No one knew the number of risky missions on which he had flown because each one of them was dangerous, and now, he was just a couple of days from going home. U.S. troops, however, were in a nasty firefight about ten miles south of Danang, in the Quang Nam Province of Vietnam. His helicopter unit, VMO-6, Command Marine Aircraft Group 36, was being called upon to provide air cover for a medevac “dust off” of injured American soldiers. This had been its sole purpose in the war, and his, since deployment to Southeast Asia.

Corporal Rodolfo “Rudy” Gonzalez was only 20 years old when he shipped out from his home town of Harlingen on the Texas – Mexico border, a small community with palm-lined streets and surrounded by orange and grapefruit orchards. His childhood had taught him the importance of assisting others and he took various jobs as a teenager to help his parents sustain the family. In Vietnam, Rudy consistently accepted dangerous missions to earn the additional combat hazard pay to send home to his parents. He could have kept his original Mission of Service (MOS) assigned to supply for his air group but he asked for the training to get certification as a door gunner, and the chance for additional earnings.

He flew on the UH-1E, “Huey” helicopter, the aircraft that became the iconic symbol of the Vietnam War. Men rode it into battle and, if they were fortunate, back to safety. Rudy’s four-man crew specialized in extraction of the wounded by providing covering fire to the rescue helicopters and medics onboard those ships. Every time the turbines whined and the engine spooled up, the Texan was off to confront a danger that might end his life. The radio plea for rescue assistance on November 14, 1966, was no different than the dozens of others that had dispatched VMO-6 with Rudy and his comrades into combat operations. This time, though, he was just days from flying home, instead of into combat.

 

A Typical VMO-6 Extraction with Recorded Radio Communications


Aircraft and crews were suffering debilitating casualties and another medevac chopper had been downed by hostile fire 1/2 mile south of a location known as Hill 55. A medevac bird lowered into the LZ and was able to rescue the wounded pilots, crew, and medics, while encountering intense enemy fire. The Huey took several hits from Viet Cong guns but escaped under the protective cover of a VMO-2 gunship’s suppressing fire. Huey choppers and fixed wing aircraft were later dispatched in an attempt to neutralize the enemy forces but had to withdraw without success after being hit multiple times by VC weapons. Rudy’s VMO-6 crew was sent on a gun run later that day to support the insertion of a maintenance team by a larger UH-34D helicopter. He was strapped to the door, curled over his weapon, manning an M60 machine gun that was firing 7.62 x 51mm NATO rounds.

 

Young Gun – Rodolfo “Rudy” Gonzalez ca 1966


Door gunner was often considered the most dangerous job in the war because they operated from exposed positions on either side of a helicopter flying into combat zones. They were also the central target of enemies on the ground because they were laying fire into their positions. No figures were ever recorded for the exact number of door gunners killed in action but the mortality rate had to be significant. An estimated 11,800 American helicopters were lost in the conflict, which led to the deaths of 5,086 crew members, a number that included pilots, co-pilots, crew chiefs, and door gunners. Another unknown statistic is how many lives were saved by men like Rudy Gonzalez who provided the assault against an enemy that made it possible for the wounded to be rescued and sent home to their families. There are husbands and fathers and sons and brothers who have lived long and fulfilling lives because of the courage of Air Crew Marines like Corporal Rudy Gonzalez.

Another battle was also being fought by the young Marine that November day. He wanted to become a U.S. citizen and was planning on using service to his new country to qualify. A legal resident alien, Rudy had been brought to Texas by his father in 1955 at the age of nine. The entire family, which included five siblings and their parents, Jose Luis and Evelia Cardenas Gonzalez, had immigrated from Monterrey, Mexico after a house fire. Jose Luis had been working and saving money for two years at his job in Harlingen as master milliner, a hat maker for a prominent local businessman, who sponsored the family’s immigration. They sought no privileges and knew only hard work and financial struggles but the Gonzalez family loved their new country and envisioned opportunities.

As he came of age, Rudy saw his chance in the military. G.I. Bill benefits after his service would make it possible for him to attend college and earn a degree. He also understood that he would achieve eligibility to become a U.S. citizen subsequent to being honorably discharged, which was key to fulfilling his grandest ambitions as a naturalized American. Rudy’s courage in combat was exemplary and as his Huey flew over the jungle on that gun run near Hill 55 outside Danang, he had already been awarded numerous medals like the Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation; four times he had been presented with the Air Medal for Combat Heroism, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal and Combat Ribbon, and, ultimately, the Purple Heart. No one in his Marine Air Combat Crew was aware Rudy Gonzalez was not a U.S. citizen when word came that the pilot of his VMO-6 mission had been shot and his Huey had crashed, killing three of the four crewmen, including the 22-year-old from the Rio Grande Valley of Texas.

 


His parents were in a state of disbelief. Because his remaining tour of duty was so short, Rudy’s belongings in his duffle bags had already been shipped home from Vietnam and had arrived at the Gonzalez residence. The bureaucratic telegraph informing the family of his death was impossible to process. How could such a thing be real when his return seemed imminent? Instead, a Marine honor guard delivered his remains in a closed casket, which was lowered into the ground as a bugler blew the mournful sound of taps. Rudy’s parents never saw their son again after his deployment, and, perhaps because of that profound absence, were unable to accept his death, and spent the rest of their lives anticipating his return.

“My grandparents and aunt never accepted Uncle Rudy’s death,” Rudy’s nephew Jerry Gonzalez said. “They hoped, prayed, and believed that one day he was going to come home, walk through their front door. Every day they woke with fresh faith. Every day for decades. Submitting a posthumous application for Uncle Rudy was akin to an unconditional surrender of all hope, to give up their reason to awaken every morning.”

The shock, and his parents’ inability to accept the grim facts, appear to have prevented Rudy Gonzalez from realizing his dream of U.S. citizenship, if only posthumously. The Gonzalez parents had three years to apply with the federal government for their son’s naturalization from the date he was KIA, but they never acted on the required documentation. Rudy’s nephew Jerry remains convinced his grandparents were psychologically unable to accept their son’s death, and may, in fact, have been unaware of any filing deadline.

Unfortunately for the family, there appears to be no effective administrative procedure for application processing after deadlines have expired. The succeeding generations of the Gonzalezes, however, have grown and prospered as their way of honoring Rudy’s sacrifice for the nation he served and loved. A half-century of military service was recorded by his family members even as degrees were earned along with professional status, recognition, and the launch and growth of small businesses. One of Rudy’s namesakes, also a nephew, became a Pulitzer Prize Winning photographer while his brother was an accomplished network television news cameraman for three decades.

 

The Gonzalez Family at Immigration to Texas, ca 1955

 

Jerry Gonzalez’ interest in network news was a product of watching TV cameramen record the War in Vietnam. Initially, as a boy, he was searching the broadcast film clips for glimpses of the uncle he had heard was serving in combat. His curiosity led to a career in TV, and years later, he recorded a lengthy interview with his aunt about her fallen brother, which was when he learned of his uncle’s determination to be a U.S. citizen. Jerry and his brother Rudy have been trying for more than a decade to get a member of congress, the president, or a Department of Defense official, to sign an exemption to grant posthumous citizenship to their late, heroic uncle, but they have had no success. The U.S. government, nonetheless, has a long history dating back to the Civil War of offering expedited citizenship to non-citizens serving in the military; especially during conflicts.

And it is what Rudy Gonzalez, unquestionably, deserves.

“Rudy’s vision for his own future was crystal clear,” Jerry said. “He wanted to go to college, and saw military service as the path to attain this goal, and this was the message he left with his sister, Francis, before shipping off for Saigon. Go to war in order to go to school. It was simple wisdom for an 18-year-old kid.”

 

Jerry and Rudy Gonzalez, Honoring Uncle Rudy, Vietnam Memorial Wall


The surviving generations of the Gonzalez family have found the idea of closure to be emotionally evasive. Four of them carry the name Rudy and consider themselves living legacies of a courageous American Marine. They want for him the citizenship he was willing to risk his life to achieve and a denial of this simple honor seems an egregious mistake by the government the young Marine served. Rudy earned many distinctions but becoming an American was his focus. Multiple pleadings and written petitions over the past decade, however, have gone ignored, and the Gonzalez brothers cannot understand why. The American story, of course, is a never-ending saga of immigration, people who came here for opportunity, often at great risk, and helped to build a nation without equal in human history. To deny a member of that country’s military his citizenship after he offered up his life to defend its principles is to dilute the very definition of what it means to be an American.

And that’s a loss we all ought to resist with the same courage as Marine Corporal Rudy Gonzalez.

 

 

This article was originally published on Texas to the world.

James Moore is the New York Times bestselling author of “Bush’s Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential,” three other books on Bush and former Texas Governor Rick Perry, as well as two novels, and a biography entitled, “Give Back the Light,” on a famed eye surgeon and inventor. His newest book will be released mid- 2023. Mr. Moore has been honored with an Emmy from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for his documentary work and is a former TV news correspondent who has traveled extensively on every presidential campaign since 1976.

He has been a retained on-air political analyst for MSNBC and has appeared on Morning Edition on National Public Radio, NBC Nightly News, Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, CBS Evening News, CNN, Real Time with Bill Maher, and Hardball with Chris Matthews, among numerous other programs. Mr. Moore’s written political and media analyses have been published at CNN, Boston Globe, L.A. Times, Guardian of London, Sunday Independent of London, Salon, Financial Times of London, Huffington Post, and numerous other outlets. He also appeared as an expert on presidential politics in the highest-grossing documentary film of all time, Fahrenheit 911, (not related to the film’s producer Michael Moore).

His other honors include the Dartmouth College National Media Award for Economic Understanding, the Edward R. Murrow Award from the Radio Television News Directors’ Association, the Individual Broadcast Achievement Award from the Texas Headliners Foundation, and a Gold Medal for Script Writing from the Houston International Film Festival. He was frequently named best reporter in Texas by the AP, UPI, and the Houston Press Club. The film produced from his book “Bush’s Brain” premiered at The Cannes Film Festival prior to a successful 30-city theater run in the U.S.

Mr. Moore has reported on the major stories and historical events of our time, which have ranged from Iran-Contra to the Waco standoff, the Oklahoma City bombing, the border immigration crisis, and other headlining events. His journalism has put him in Cuba, Central America, Mexico, Australia, Canada, the UK, and most of Europe, interviewing figures as diverse as Fidel Castro and Willie Nelson. He has been writing about Texas politics, culture, and history since 1975, and continues with political opinion pieces for CNN and regularly at his Substack newsletter: “Texas to the World.”

 

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Qantas engineers to stage nationwide walk-outs in escalation of wage dispute, impact to Monday’s peak-hour flights likely

Qantas Engineers’ Alliance Media Release

More than a thousand Qantas engineers, fed up with management’s refusal to negotiate reasonable wages, are set to escalate the impact of their ongoing industrial action with line maintenance engineers – whose duties include the towing and marshalling of aircraft – to walk off the job during peak-hour flights on Monday morning.

Flights between 7am AEST/ 7am ACST/ 7am AWST to 9am AEST/ 9amACST/ 9am AWST on Monday morning at major airports in Brisbane, Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide, and Perth will be affected as workers participate in stoppages.

Qantas engineers commenced industrial action on Thursday, with engines and components maintenance workers downing tools. Line maintenance engineers stopping work on Monday is likely to have a significant and immediate impact on flights. As well as towing and marshalling aircraft, line maintenance engineers perform turnaround checks on aircraft once they land to make sure they are safe to take off again.

The Qantas Engineers’ Alliance – a union alliance comprising the AMWU, the AWU, and the ETU – said highly-skilled engineers had no option but to take industrial action given the refusal of Qantas management to come to the bargaining table, with further actions planned in the coming weeks.

Workers have been in negotiations since April, with their enterprise agreement having expired at the end of June. The wage claim made by the Alliance is for 5 per cent per year, and a 15 per cent first year payment to make up for 3.5 years of wage freezes.

Steve Murphy, AMWU National Secretary:

“These workers hold special and valuable skills that take a decade to build up. They were essential workers during the pandemic, and made sacrifices so Qantas would survive. Qantas needs to pay that debt back. Respect your workers, value their skills, pay them what they’re worth.

“As our members say, there are no car parks when you’re 30,000 feet in the air, so these maintenance engineers need to get it right the first time. If Qantas values that safety, it needs to show it values its workers. This is what this dispute is all about.”

Paul Farrow, AWU National Secretary:

“I know that there wouldn’t be a single engineer relishing the idea of delaying passengers. As a former aircraft engineer myself, I know there is real pride in getting people where they need to go safely. But management has backed them into a corner.

“Qantas management has absolutely smashed morale among engineers, and now we’ve reached a real fork in the road. Engineers won’t accept seeing their wages lurch backward in real terms while executives get showered in cash.”

Michael Wright, ETU National Secretary:

“For most of Qantas’s history, Qantas engineers have been deeply respected because management has understood the vital importance of the role they play in keeping passengers safe. Under Alan Joyce that respect was torched along with a lot of Qantas’s other core values.

“Vanessa Hudson needs to decide whether retaining highly skilled and experienced engineers is a priority for Qantas, or whether it’s more interested in executive bonuses. If Qantas continues to offshore maintenance because they can’t retain enough quality engineers in Australia, the safety implications are obvious.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 

Critical shortage of AFP officers a grave concern

Australian Federal Police Association Media Release

The critical shortage of police officers across Australia, as reported today, is a particularly acute problem in the Australian Federal Police, where officers are relatively underpaid compared to other jurisdictions.

AFP Association President Alex Caruana:

“AFP officers are overworked and under-resourced and the situation has reached a tipping point. It’s now at a point where it is endangering public safety and jeopardizing the welfare of AFP officers.

“The pressures on our officers have never been greater, and today’s reports of police shortages only confirm what we know. The AFP is being stretched to breaking point. Officers are exhausted, and the current pay and working conditions are pushing many to consider leaving the force altogether.

“AFP officers face unique challenges compared to other public servants, yet the federal government offers them inadequate compensation in a pay-deal that was designed for desk-job public servants.

“Unlike public servants, however, AFP officers cannot work from home. They’re on the front lines every day, dealing with the worst of humanity – whether it’s international drug traffickers, paedophile rings, or terrorists. These officers work weekends, holidays, and are often called upon at a moment’s notice. They put their lives on the line every day, and in exchange they are offered a deal by the federal government that doesn’t remotely reflect the demands of the job.

“The AFPA has warned that the government’s failure to address these issues is creating a mass exodus risk. In a recent survey, 92% of AFP officers reported that they are not resourced to handle their current workload, and 79% have considered leaving the force in the past year due to the pressures they face.

“If the government continues to lump AFP officers into the same category as desk-bound public servants, we will see a large number of officers walk out the door. Six percent of our members said they would leave immediately, and another 68% are actively looking for other jobs. This deal is toxic. The AFP is a tinderbox right now, and without urgent action, the Australian public will be the ones who suffer.

“Our officers perform vital counter-terrorism work and safeguard Australia’s national security interests. We cannot allow the AFP to be hollowed out by uncompetitive wages and conditions.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Nuclear Concerns – Hiroshima, Maralinga and Dutton’s Australia

By Michele Madigan

As always, on August 6th we commemorated the 1945 bombing of Hiroshima and later Nagasaki, when many lives were immediately obliterated and the lives of so many more, the Hibakusha were set on a terrifying trajectory of post bomb living.

This year’s commemoration brought back to my mind, one, I think, of the most privileged moments of my life. In 2018 in association with ICAN (International Campaign Against Nuclear Weapons) Australia, the Peace Boat – a Japan-based international NGO which promotes peace, human rights, and sustainability – docked at Adelaide’s Outer Harbour. Unsurprisingly the onshore meeting place at nearby Port Adelaide which ICAN had arranged for other interested people to gather, was packed. Circle conversations were a key part of the gathering and thus it was where I met my first Hibakusha.

I was honoured to be in a particular circle with Yalata/Maralinga Anangu including Mrs and the now late Mr Peters and the former Yalata Chairperson, the now late Ms M. Smart (OAM) Karina Lester was there as both nuclear survivor, Yami Lester’s daughter and Yankunytjatjara/Pitjantjatjara interpreter. The Hibakusha was a survivor from the bomb the Americans dropped on Nagasaki on August 9th 1945. Next to him sat the man who was a 2011 Fukushima survivor; then the Japanese interpreter. Then the three, perhaps middle-aged elegant Japanese women, intensely interested though presumably too young to have been direct witnesses.

Everything about being part of that circle was a sacred moment, including being in the presence of Mr Taneka Terumi who since childhood had suffered so much as one of the 100,000 Nagasaki Hibakusha. But the part that has stayed with me the most has been the image of seeing each of the Japanese lean forward in such astounded interest on hearing they were in the presence of people from Australia who were first and second generation nuclear survivors. And from a series of atomic bombs dropped on their country. Over a number of years. And by an ally.

The British nuclear tests of the 1950s and 1960s were firstly at Emu Fields and later, further south, on what has come to be known as the Maralinga Lands. Unsurprisingly, since this time many Aboriginal people in South Australia, especially from the western half of our vast state, have either suffered themselves, or have connections to those who have suffered the intergenerational effects of the fallout. Thus many continue to have the utmost suspicion of all things nuclear. Certainly this knowledge was a key trigger for the Barngarla Peoples – whose first anniversary victory over the latest proposed federal nuclear dump at Kimba we recently commemorated on August 10th.

They, like many other Australians, know that there is no safe level of ionising radiation; or to be more precise, there is no level of exposure below which there is no risk of inducing cancers.

In contrast, it’s abundantly clear in these past months, courtesy certainly of the Murdoch press, the present Opposition Leader has a fascination with things nuclear. This is despite the truth of the oft cited shorthand anti-nuclear power mantra: unnecessary, unsafe, untimely, and (eyewateringly) expensive.

On September 25th the Sydney Morning Herald, however, via reporter Nick Toscante published the warning from ‘Energy giant AGL’ to Peter Dutton on his nuclear plan:

“Power giant AGL says ‘Australia has reached a critical juncture in the renewable energy transition and has no time to waste on the Coalition’s controversial pitch to build nuclear generators’.“

Time is indeed a crucial factor and to explain this and the other crucial factors I acknowledge various resources, including Friends of the Earth’s Don’t Nuke The Climate website.

TOO SLOW: Despite the Coalition’s extremely optimistic hopes to the contrary, as well as AGL, the CSIRO and others say a nuclear power plant of any size would not be operational in Australia until well after 2040. Too Late! for our Pacific neighbours (and indeed our own Torres Strait Islanders). To quote the Hindustan Times 30/8, ‘the future is now lapping at their shores.’ For the rest of Australia, with August 31, 2024 the hottest winter day on record, waiting another 16 years is certain invitation for increasingly more fires, floods, droughts and general catastrophic disasters – of the first week of spring 2024.

UNNECESSARY: Continuous electricity generation is also known as baseload power.

The oft repeated mantra “When the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow…” pointing to renewables’ perceived lack of baseload power was used by previous Australian governments and other proponents to cite the perceived unreliability of renewables and hence the absolute necessity of maintaining the coal industry here – at least to fill in the gap. Seemingly (and perhaps only seemingly) under the present Opposition its allegiance has shifted to nuclear. As well, the Minerals Council is a keen promotor of gas.

However, here are the facts: already renewables currently supply about 40 per cent of the grid’s electricity, and the Albanese government is aiming to have renewables supply 82 per cent of the grid by 2030. My own state of SA is already a world leader in renewable energy achieved with solar and wind, with Renew Economy’s Giles Parkinson (July 10th article) wondering why not more credit is given to this standout achievement. Parkinson quotes SA Energy Minister Koutsantonis’ jubilant announcement that with recently secured federal funding, South Australia would achieve 100 per cent renewable electricity as early as 2027.

At present in SA alone there are four additional batteries sites being constructed.

Unsurprisingly, the transmission lines in Port Augusta that the Opposition project expects to use for their nuclear project are already nearly full from new renewables. And in contrast with the flexibility of renewables, nuclear plants cannot be turned off at short notice.

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) manages the day-to-day operations of the energy grid. The Albanese government cites AEMO’s statement that the grid does not need a new source of baseload power as wind and solar, paired with batteries and pumped hydro dams, will be able to supply up to 90 per cent of our power needs in the future, while rapid-response gas or hydrogen-fired generation plants could be used in short bursts when needed. AMEO’s integrated system plan, a roadmap for the optimal future grid, backs an accelerated build of available technology to reach 83% of renewable generation by 2030, 96% by 2040 and 98% by 2050 as the best, most likely option.

TOO EXPENSIVE: Nuclear power is far more expensive than other energy sources. As well, since 2010, the cost of wind and solar PV has decreased by 70‒90 per cent while nuclear costs have increased 33 per cent. The astronomical startup costs to build just one nuclear reactor, even in countries possessing the necessary expertise, are borne out by the following latest estimates for all reactors under construction in western Europe and the U.S. These range from A$25.7 billion to A$43.5 billion per reactor. And note as well: all projects have been subject to spectacular cost overruns.

The obvious question: where is the money to build seven nuclear reactors coming from?

Overseas experience makes clear that if there are any expectations that private companies will take on the project, these are unfounded by present-day reality. Thus the huge costs will need to be funded by the Australian taxpayer. The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) notes moreover that many of Australia’s leading insurance companies will not cover damage from a nuclear disaster. Reputable Australian science bodies calculate that at this stage devolving into nuclear will add $1000 to each Australian household power bills.

In summary, Australia’s leading scientific organisation CSIRO says that nuclear power “does not provide an economically competitive solution in Australia.”

TOO IMPOSSIBLE: Just taking SMRs as one example: It seems to be of absolutely no consequence to federal Opposition members – in fact do they even know – that the Small Nuclear Reactors which they are proposing for Port Augusta SA and Muja WA do not actually yet exist? Certainly not in any OECD country.

TOO DANGEROUS: To quote the Friends of the Earth website, there have been over 200 nuclear accidents world wide. Post Fukushima (2011), the disaster to which members of our 2018 Peace Boat visit gave witness, the price of uranium dropped considerably. With the passage of time and the ever optimistic promotion by the nuclear industry, the price is again rising. Obviously, the very real dangers still remain. As ACF’s Dave Sweeney noted after the August Newcastle quakes:

A magnitude 4.8 earthquake not far from one of Peter Dutton’s proposed nuclear reactor sites is further evidence of the risky nature of the Coalition’s radioactive plan. The Coalition failed to do any detailed site analysis or community consultation and has instead based its plan on politics rather than evidence.”

What of the impact on our driest continent? A significant fact is surely that a single nuclear power reactor operating for a single day typically consumes 36‒65 million litres of water.

Federal Environment Minister Bowen recently released work done by the ALP re impacts of nuclear power on agriculture (water consumption, accidents risks): Joint Ministerial Statement on Nuclear Reactors on Agricultural Land. An estimated 11,955 farms are situated within 80km of the seven nuclear reactors that the Federal Opposition has proposed for construction across regional Australia.

Included in the dangerous category must be the absolutely intransigent situation of what to do with the high-level radioactive waste from nuclear reactors which remains highly toxic for an impossible to comprehend 100,000 years. The reality is that no country in the world has a permanent solution to the permanent deposition of radioactive waste. Even Finland’s deep underground depository is not yet operational. In our own country after four separate attempts ranging from 1998 to 2023, various federal governments have failed to secure long-term security for just the nation’s present low and intermediate waste.

So WHY? One would think that with all the negatives listed above this would be the end of the story. Why would Peter Dutton reverse the previous Opposition policy to ban nuclear power?

Friends of the Earth expert Dr Jim Green and other environmentalists reveal a key reason:

“In fact, nuclear power would slow the shift away from fossil fuels, which is why fossil-fuel funded political parties and politicians support nuclear power (e.g. the Liberal / Nationals Coalition) and why organisations such as the Minerals Council of Australia support nuclear power. As Australian economist Prof. John Quiggin notes, support for nuclear power in Australia is, in practice, support for coal.”

Finally: a frightening thing for our democracy including the power of the States is the reality that the Coalition, if it were to gain federal power, plans to set up their own Nuclear Authority. This would simply ride over any Traditional Owner concern, any community concern and perhaps most frightening of all, could simply overturn any State jurisdiction. It would seem that the only way to ensure the Opposition’s nuclear plans are given no chance to come to fruition is to ensure they do remain just that: the Opposition’s nuclear plans.

Certainly the Opposition has made it increasingly clear that it has no ambition to respect Australian’s commitment to the Paris Agreement. As Mrs Crombie, a key leader of the Kupa Piti Kungka Tjuta’s 1998-2004 successful national no nuclear dump campaign used to wonder, “Haven’t white people got grandchildren?” In 2024, Wendy Farmer, co-ordinator of the seven proposed nuclear power sites opposition communities has the same question: “Why would we do it and why would we waste the future generations?”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button