During and after World War II Australia began supplying uranium for the US and UK's weapons programs, and this is how Australia got involved. British weapons tests in South Australia and Western Australia 1952-63 left a long line of health problems for Aborigines and armed service personnel, as well as significant environmental damage.
ÃÂLet's face it. We don't want safe nuclear power plants. We want NO nuclear powerÃÂ plants ÃÂA spokesman for the Government Accountability Project, an offshoot of the Institute for Policy Studies, The American Spectator, Vol 18, No. 11, Nov. 1965The Atomic Energy Commission which was created in 1953 wanted to initiate nuclear power, to push towards nuclear weapons and to make plans to use ÃÂpeacefulÃÂ nuclear explosives for civil engineering projects.
Contesters of nuclear energy used the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty of 1968 to strengthen the associations between the international export and expansion of nuclear power technologies and the production of nuclear weapons.
Eventually the coalition between US and Australian imperialism developed into a stronger one. In 1951, The ANZUS treaty was signed and the building of military bases at North West Cape, Pine Gap and Nurrungar constricted Australia to the US nuclear war-fighting machine in the 1960s and '70s.
During the 1960's, due to the obvious weakening of the natural and inner-city environments the environmental movement grew. Some environmentalists saw nuclear energy as a way to decrease pollution even though the majority of the people who joined the movement by now had anti-nuclear attitudes, and all the way through that time the anti-nuclear movement was chosen within the environmental movement, although a huge portion of the people who identify themselves as environmentalists, favour nuclear energy.
Since power production by nuclear plants was usually centralized and nuclear power has forever been a technology which occupies specialists, some individuals...
Some compliments and a whole lot of waffle (on my part)
I have to say you brought up some good points and your sources are from reputable books and it really shows that you just didn't stop at websites. It looks like you've really done your research because I can't get over how many different points you've made, those books must've had a truck-load of information or your general knowledge must be superb.
On another note your conclusion lacks that extra little push that makes the reader take a step back and say,'wow'. I know I emphasize on the conclusion a lot but I believe it is the most important part of the essay because a weak conclusion can mean pushing your grade down, now matter how good the inside text is.
Also, perhaps having one strong point that you can write in detail about would help add more body to the text to because what I'm finding here is what looks like a list of events with no further investigation.
I know I'm contradicting myself with the statement I made earlier about lots of points but I'm not saying it was lacking information rather lacking further detail on your existing information.
Now that that's out of the way its opinion time.
Coming from my personal views I have always been for Nuclear power. The shortage of power in the whole of Australia (particularly the West) have been evident over the past few years with the major power corporations not been able to supply the demand given the rapid population growth Given the fact that Australia has 40 percent of the Worlds uranium and the whole outback to set up there experiments away from families, all I can say is, why not? The Chernobyl disaster was a way of learning from our mistakes and I'm sure, being as technology sophisticated as we are these mistakes would very rarely ever occur again. So I don't see why there is so much fuss over Nuclear power and the people who are against it (such as which you have stated) are living a lifetime ago.
I'd like to hear your views given you have looked in depth in this topic.
Best Regards,
James.
7 out of 8 people found this comment useful.