Healthcare and emergency services groups have called on the Coalition to dump its nuclear energy plan. Photo: Supplied.
Firefighters and healthcare workers have written an open letter to Peter Dutton just a few days out from polling day, asking the Opposition Leader to drop his nuclear energy plan.
Organisations representing more than 350,000 emergency services workers this week called on Mr Dutton to dump the policy in the interests of good health.
The open letter was signed by the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, Emergency Leaders for Climate Action, Climate Action Nurses, Climate and Health Alliance, Doctors for the Environment Australia, and the United Firefighters Union of Australia.
After stressing that doctors, paramedics, nurses, midwives and firefighters are among the hundreds of thousands of people the groups represent, the letter expresses “grave concerns” regarding the potential introduction of nuclear power into Australia.
“As the frontline responders to disasters and emergencies, we are uniquely positioned to assess the risks posed by nuclear energy infrastructure to public safety, worker health, and environmental security,” the letter states.
“Australia’s emergency services do not have the support or resources to respond to nuclear disasters.
“Unlike other nations with established nuclear industries, Australia lacks the necessary infrastructure, resources, and expertise to manage incidents involving nuclear reactors or radioactive waste transportation and storage.
“Furthermore, international examples have shown that populations residing in close proximity to nuclear reactors are at an increased risk of developing severe health complications.
“Existing emergency response and health frameworks would need extensive – and costly – overhauls to address these challenges effectively.
“Nuclear accidents expose emergency responders to ionizing radiation levels far exceeding safe occupational limits.
“International precedents such as Chernobyl and Fukushima demonstrate the devastating health impacts on first responders, including acute radiation sickness and long-term cancer risks.”
The letter then goes on to ask the Coalition to abandon plans for nuclear energy in Australia and prioritise safer energy solutions that “do not endanger” workers or communities, such as solar and wind backed up by storage.
Last year, the Opposition Leader announced his intention to locate seven nuclear power stations across Australia if the Coalition wins the next federal election.
Each site would be located at a power station that has closed or is scheduled to close.
The locations are Liddell Power Station in NSW; Mount Piper Power Station, NSW; Loy Yang Power Stations in Victoria; Tarong Power Station in Queensland; Callide Power Station, Queensland; Northern Power Station in South Australia; and Muja Power Station in Western Australia.
The backlash has been strong enough that Mr Dutton has barely mentioned nuclear energy during the election campaign.
If asked about it, however, he repeats his strong support for the energy plan.
Federal secretary of the Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation, Annie Butler, said she was concerned about the impact that the proposed nuclear plants would have on the health of all people, but particularly nurses, midwives and carers.
“What we are still yet to see are detailed health risk assessments including how the health of nurses, midwives, carers and the community will be protected,” she said.
“This is crucial before any nuclear energy developments proceed.”
Michelle Isles, CEO of Climate and Health Alliance, said for too long the costs to health had been hidden in discussions about energy in Australia.
“Australian health workers are overwhelmed by the burden of illness and premature death from community exposure to coal-fired power pollutants. Australia does not have the safeguards in place to address the health risks posed by nuclear power,” Ms Isles said.
Former NSW Fire and Rescue Commissioner Greg Mullins, who went on to found the group Emergency Leaders for Climate Action, said the Coalition’s nuclear scheme “gives rise to far more questions than answers” and in the “unlikely event it is ever actually delivered” it would result in massive amounts of dangerous, additional climate pollution.
“Firefighters and other first responders will be expected to deal with situations for which they have no training, equipment or experience, and like in Chernobyl, possibly lose their lives,” he said.
“Costs for protection from nuclear accidents were not factored into the Coalition’s vague modelling, and nobody should be fooled – this is nothing more than a ruse to continue generating profits for the fossil fuel industry who are funding the Coalition’s election campaign.”
Greg McConville, national secretary of the United Firefighters Union of Australia, said: “Much has been said about the cost of living in this election, but we should not forget the cost of lives.
“People who live near nuclear reactors have heightened cancer risk, as do firefighters, and we cannot condone an even greater risk to whole communities when there are safer alternatives to nuclear power.”
The open letter points out that current federal guidelines allow firefighters, emergency services, essential services and health workers to be exposed to radiation doses up to 500 times higher than civilian safety limits during catastrophic events.
“This is an unacceptable risk,” the letter states.
