Nuclear medicine and the nuclear waste dumpFederal science minister Peter McGauran and others claim that nuclear medicine (and medical isotope production) is the source of the majority of the radioactive waste destined for the planned national dump in SA. No evidence has been supplied to justify the claim despite repeated requests. There is no evidence. The claim is demonstrably false. The simplest refutation of the claim is the fact that 2010 m3 of the national total of 3700 m3 is non-medical CSIRO-origin waste, i.e. 54%, so nuclear medicine couldn't possibly be responsible for the majority of the waste.A very rough estimate follows: say one quarter of ANSTO's waste from Lucas Heights is medical (1320/4=330m3), and one third of the state/territory waste is medical (151/3=50 m3), and none of the CSIRO or Defence or other waste is medical in origin, so overall roughly one tenth (380/3700 m3) of the national inventory is a by-product of medical isotope production and nuclear medicine.The government's incessant references to nuclear medicine to 'sell' the dump amount to nothing more than inaccurate emotive propaganda - which is what the government routinely accuses dump opponents of! Moreover, the fact that some waste is a by-product of medical isotope production and nuclear medicine doesn't mean that a national dump is the best way to manage the waste, nor that a dump ought to be located in SA. If nuclear medicine was the criterion, the dump ought to go in NSW, which has seven times as many nuclear medicine procedures as SA, or Victoria (four times as many) or Queensland (twice as many). In early 1997, McGauran said that "During this year more than 260 000 Australians will have a nuclear medicine procedure. ...... As a result of these procedures, some 35 spent fuel rods are generated by the Lucas Heights research reactor every year." He would have us believe that all of the spent fuel rods are the result of radioisotope production. He's out by an order of magnitude. According to ANSTO, just 10% of HIFAR's neutrons are used for medical isotope production (1993 Research Reactor Review submission). The government's propaganda ignores the potential to dramatically reduce waste production by investing in accelerator and/or spallation technology instead of a new reactor. That offers a win-win solution: broadly equivalent medical and scientific benefits, perhaps as little as 1-5% of the low-level waste output and, better still, none of the spent nuclear fuel. (See the report by nuclear physicist Dr. Robert Budnitz and energy and technology consultant Dr. Gregory Morris, 'Alternatives to a 20 MW Nuclear Reactor for Australia', at www.oocities.org/jimgreen3/medicine5.html.) There is also the tried-and-tested option of relying on existing Australian cyclotrons (a type of particle accelerator) and imported isotopes - that is what happens whenever the HIFAR reactor at Lucas Heights is closed for maintenance. During the last major HIFAR shut down, from February-May 2000, there was little or no disruption to nuclear medicine, a fact confirmed by ANSTO scientists. Australia doesn't even need a reactor for medical isotope production let alone a waste dump let alone a waste dump in SA. Back to Campaign Against Nuclear Dumping Information |