Australian Use Of Uranium For Aussie Nuclear Weapon - Defence Review

[Garpal Gumnut]

Given that there has been a Defence Review one question not asked by what passes for Press Reporting these days is whether Australia should develop a Nuclear weapon for its own defence.

We already provide over one third of the world's Uranium.

Australia's Uranium - World Nuclear Association

Australia's uranium has been mined since 1954, and three mines are currently operating. Australia's known uranium resources are the world's largest – 29% of the world total. It is the world's third-ranking producer, behind Kazakhstan and Canada.

www.world-nuclear.org

The world is becoming a more dangerous place.

We are relatively alone as a mid-sized power in the Southern Hemisphere.

Our mining sector would become more valuable and secure as a contributor to GDP with the backing of a weapon capable of protecting us with or without the USA as a partner defence.

Industry would benefit from the importation and development of an Aussie Nuclear Bomb and Missile via the skills and enterprise which accompany new clean energy and defence.

It appears an obvious step to me.

Nuclear reactors in the Southern cities whose denizens can't be bothered to buy blankets against the cold and the weapons developed and placed strategically across the North.

The North Shore of Sydney and Toorak in Melbourne would appear after a quick look on Google Maps to have sufficient green space for Nuclear Reactors.

gg

 

[Sean K]

Given that there has been a Defence Review one question not asked by what passes for Press Reporting these days is whether Australia should develop a Nuclear weapon for its own defence.

We already provide over one third of the world's Uranium.

Australia's Uranium - World Nuclear Association

Australia's uranium has been mined since 1954, and three mines are currently operating. Australia's known uranium resources are the world's largest – 29% of the world total. It is the world's third-ranking producer, behind Kazakhstan and Canada.

www.world-nuclear.org

The world is becoming a more dangerous place.

We are relatively alone as a mid-sized power in the Southern Hemisphere.

Our mining sector would become more valuable and secure as a contributor to GDP with the backing of a weapon capable of protecting us with or without the USA as a partner defence.

Industry would benefit from the importation and development of an Aussie Nuclear Bomb and Missile via the skills and enterprise which accompany new clean energy and defence.

It appears an obvious step to me.

Nuclear reactors in the Southern cities whose denizens can't be bothered to buy blankets against the cold and the weapons developed and placed strategically across the North.

The North Shore of Sydney and Toorak in Melbourne would appear after a quick look on Google Maps to have sufficient green space for Nuclear Reactors.

gg

I'm pretty sure we're covered by the US nuclear umbrella, if we trust it. We wouldn't be attacked in isolation, only if the US was being attacked at the same time. That exchange would produce attacks on Pine Gap and Harold E Holt and therefore US response in support of Australia. It'd all get out of hand very quickly if those things occurred and the Four Horseman would be in full stride. Canada and Australia probably missed their window for nukes after WW2 with a guarantee from the US and (maybe) Britain.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I'm pretty sure we're covered by the US nuclear umbrella, if we trust it. We wouldn't be attacked in isolation, only if the US was being attacked at the same time. That exchange would produce attacks on Pine Gap and Harold E Holt and therefore US response in support of Australia. It'd all get out of hand very quickly if those things occurred and the Four Horseman would be in full stride. Canada and Australia probably missed their window for nukes after WW2 with a guarantee from the US and (maybe) Britain.

We certainly missed that window after the end of WW2 to plan for nuclear weapons.

I believe that if our umbrella is in the hands of an 79 yo Biden or a very mad ( as in Psychiatric ) Trump, all bets are off as to how the alliance with our partners should progress.

A unilateral decision by Australia to arm with nuclear weapons would be wise before the USA implodes, as it appears it may, no matter who ends up being Presidential candidate.

Decisions made 80 years ago are as redundant as those made 5, and the world continues to be a more dangerous place for Australia.

gg

 

[Gringotts Bank]

In a recent survery, 78% of American parents doubted their kids would have a better life than they did, which is unusual in a historical perspective. Normally that would signal the end of an empire, but AI could potentially save them. AI is likely to create a utopia or dystopia within maybe 20yrs if the experts are right in their predictions.

AI will also change warfare and weaponry enormously, though I don't know in what direction.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Opinion | Nuclear Waste Is Misunderstood (Published 2023)

We must stop seeing nuclear waste as a dangerous problem and instead recognize it as a safe byproduct of carbon-free power.

www.nytimes.com

As for Uranium and Nuclear Power it would appear that even the New York Times and Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez of the Democrats are getting on board with Nuclear energy as a better way to go rather than ICE and EV as it produces much less waste.

On a visit in February to the site of the Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown in Japan, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York did something refreshing: She discussed radiation exposure and nuclear waste without fanning fear. The radiation she got from her visit — about two chest X-rays’ worth — was worth the education she received on the tour, she told her 8.6 million Instagram followers. She then spoke admiringly of France, which, she said, “recycles their waste, increasing the efficiency of their system and reducing the overall amount of radioactive waste to deal with.”

As a mid-range power with large Uranium deposits it beggars belief that we do not have our own Nuclear weapons.

Expanding Nuclear power initially may be a better first step politically for Australia.

gg

 

[Smurf1976]

it would appear that even the New York Times and Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez of the Democrats are getting on board with Nuclear energy as a better way to go rather than ICE and EV as it produces much less waste.

What that tells me isn't about the merits of nuclear energy but about the lack of knowledge of politicians.

Nuclear generates electricity.

EV is an electric vehicle.

They're not alternatives to each other, indeed if the aim is nuclear power then EV's are exactly what we need to go with it.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

What that tells me isn't about the merits of nuclear energy but about the lack of knowledge of politicians.

She's known as Alexandria Occasional Cortex

 

[Value Collector]

What that tells me isn't about the merits of nuclear energy but about the lack of knowledge of politicians.

Nuclear generates electricity.

EV is an electric vehicle.

They're not alternatives to each other, indeed if the aim is nuclear power then EV's are exactly what we need to go with it.

I think that was a Typo by GG, she didn’t actually say Nuclear was better than ICE and EV, she compared the waste from nuclear reactors to the waste from fossil fuels.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I think that was a Typo by GG, she didn’t actually say Nuclear was better than ICE and EV, she compared the waste from nuclear reactors to the waste from fossil fuels.

Without going back to the original article that is what was implied.

Less carbon waste overall.

gg

 

[UMike]

...
Expanding Nuclear power initially may be a better first step politically for Australia.

gg

With this Left Green Govt. No way.

Morrision really let a golden opportunity slip by not using this to differentiate themselves as to Labor Lite.
Could of been a great positive policy that would of made a difference.

 

[SirRumpole]

I'm pretty sure we're covered by the US nuclear umbrella, if we trust it. We wouldn't be attacked in isolation, only if the US was being attacked at the same time. That exchange would produce attacks on Pine Gap and Harold E Holt and therefore US response in support of Australia. It'd all get out of hand very quickly if those things occurred and the Four Horseman would be in full stride. Canada and Australia probably missed their window have really nukes after WW2 with a guarantee from the US and (maybe) Britain.

What guarantee do we have really ?

ANZUS is only an agreement to consult, not an agreement to defend so we don't have anything really. Our best defence is probably strategic US bases here like Pine Gap and US forces stationed here.

We couldn't afford to develope our own nukes. Little expertise here and no processing facilities.

 

[Sean K]

What guarantee do we have really ?

ANZUS is only an agreement to consult, not an agreement to defend so we don't have anything really. Our best defence is probably strategic US bases here like Pine Gap and US forces stationed here.

We couldn't afford to develope our own nukes. Little expertise here and no processing facilities.

None, but it's why we went to Vietnam and Gulf War 2. Long term strategic positioning to guarantee the US put a blanket over us. Plus, they need us as a strategic base in the SW Pacific. The 1st Marine Divisions marching song is Maltzing Matilda. They have a ship named the USS Canberra. ANZUS, ABCA Armies, AUKUS... It's hard to believe we're not covered.

In regard to our own nukes, I don't know how much it would cost to build one but we're part of the NNPT so it would be a massive turn around. In regard to our ability to do it, we already have a nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights, so we have the skill set.

More likely might be the US positioning nukes somewhere in north central Australia, which if things turned pear shaped over Taiwan and China started marching through SE Asia, even the Greens might support. I doubt the Voice would approve though so perhaps not likely to happen.

 

[Smurf1976]

Morrision really let a golden opportunity slip by not using this to differentiate themselves as to Labor Lite.

The Coalition's support base comes substantially from business owners and investors and therein lies the issue. Business is well known for not liking cost increases so no chance they'll want nuclear power. There's a reason it's primarily used in countries with state-run economies or at least a hefty dose of "tax and spend" - it's a damn expensive means of turning an alternator.

For nuclear weapons though, well at a guess they thought it wouldn't be a vote winner at the time. Ideologically I'm not keen but plausibly we need to go down that track at some point given the international situation.

 

[Dona Ferentes]

What guarantee do we have really ?
..ANZUS is only an agreement to consult, not an agreement to defend so we don't have anything really. Our best defence is probably strategic US bases here like Pine Gap and US forces stationed here..

however.. it has been invoked
.
"As Americans, we will never forget that the only time the collective defense article of the ANZUS Treaty was formally invoked was after September 11, 2001. " ..... - 01 Sept 2021

https://au.usembassy.gov › secretary...

Secretary Blinken: Celebrating 70 Years of the ANZUS Treaty​

 

[SirRumpole]

however.. it has been invoked
.
"As Americans, we will never forget that the only time the collective defense article of the ANZUS Treaty was formally invoked was after September 11, 2001. " ..... - 01 Sept 2021
View attachment 162002
https://au.usembassy.gov › secretary...

Secretary Blinken: Celebrating 70 Years of the ANZUS Treaty​

Hopefully it won't need to happen again.