which was supposed to be built in this state may now not go ahead. Someone in the Senate has decided her party should not support the proposal. That is two votes against when the proposal is already facing opposition from the Opposition.
The Opposition is being opportunist. One of their current MPs has told me, "We know we have to deal with the problem sooner rather than later."
Of course they do. At the moment we have tiny amounts of nuclear waste stored in over one hundred locations around the country. "Tiny amount" might not sound as if it is anything to worry about but it is. It is a worry because it is often housed in insecure locations and in ways that are potentially dangerous. This has nothing to do with people being careless - although that might be a worry - and everything to do with the fact that advances in medicine have outstripped the facilities to house them.
The nuclear waste storage facility has support from a majority in the electorate it was intended to house it. Not everyone supported it but some of them will have opposed it simply because it was not a proposal from the side of government they support. Some will have opposed it on "environmental grounds" while completely ignoring that this is the far safer option. After all we have a nuclear facility in the middle of one Downunder's major cities. It has been there for a very long time. It is almost entirely for medical purposes.
And that of course is the problem. I have said it elsewhere and I will say it again - if we want the benefits of nuclear medicine then we have to deal with the problems it poses as well. Those who oppose the storage facility would, I am sure, want to use the benefits of nuclear medicine if it was going to save their life or the life of someone they loved.
I know one or two rabid "greenies" here who say they are "totally opposed" to the facility. I have tried saying this to them. Their response is, "It's not going to happen (to me) and there has to be some other way (or place) to deal with this."
Well, find me the way or the place but do it quickly. I don't believe it exists yet. We can go on searching but, until then, we need a place so that all of us are as safe as we can be. Is that reasonable?
Posts
2 comments:
I don't suppose those greenies would appreciate foregoing nuclear medicine to save their lives or the lives of loved ones then? No Xrays for their child with a suspected broken bone or to get informed dental treatment? No diagnoses without certain scans which use nuclear isotopes. If we want the benefits of such technologies, why shouldn't we bear the responsibilities of cleaning up after ourselves? That's the ethical thing to do. Storing it in our backyard has fewer risks of environmental damage than sending it far away to pollute someone else's backyard or spread it asking the way. They seem to want their cake and eat it too.
ALONG the way (typo)
Post a Comment