Stop Pangea nuclear waste dump
by Joan Williams Opposition is growing in Western Australia against the Pangea Resources proposal for a commercial high level nuclear waste dump in outback WA. Pangea Resources have put aside a minimum $1 million to sidetrack the growing opposition to the dump. First shot is to stop the word "dump" being used in connection with the project, which is being covered with hypocritical moralising about our "duty" to humanity to take nuclear waste which is too hot for Europe and the USA to handle. Charles McCombie, Pangea Resources Technical and Strategic Adviser, is very hurt by the constant use of the word "dump" for Pangea's lofty intentions. "This waste is actually a high quality product, not rubbish off the back of a lorry", he was quoted as saying in Minerals Gazette, May 1999. "In fact, it is often a quality assured value-added product ... So you can call the facility what you like, but it is not just a dump". A pity that a growing number of West Australians do see it as a dump by multinationals clubbing together specifically to explore the global nuclear dump concept, starting with WA and malleable State and Federal Governments. These corporations include British Nuclear Fuels (BFNL), linked to the world's second largest plutonium stockpile and having no way of storing its waste. US connections go all the way to the top — Pangea has the ear of the President through his Special Envoy on weapons of mass destruction, says Robert Galluci in New Nuclear News, published by the Anti-Uranium Coalition of WA. With growing membership, the Coalition includes: The Conservation Council of WA, The Environment Centre of WA, Medical Association for the Prevention of War, PND, Parliamentarians against Uranium Mining, Australian Conservation Foundation. The Anti-Uranium Coalition is sponsoring a speaking tour by Mary Olson, US anti-nuclear campaigner with the Nuclear Information Resource Centre, with public meetings from August 14-17. Is Peace Possible? On this theme, the WA Branch of the CPA held a successful breakfast and discussion, underscored by the coming anniversary of Hiroshima Day on August 6. The discussion included many thoughtful contributions from an audience ranging from peace activists and trade unionists to anthropologists.