The South Australian Political Landscape

[Booney]

Bignell under fire for spending more dollars on accommodation.
The Libs really hate him.

Can't say he's on my Xmas card list....

[stan]

Yeah they are just looking for anything at the moment. Bignell will always be an easy target.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[stan]

Apparently Bignell will be paying back the $185.70.

Just saying that though $185.70 isnt bad for a night in a 5* hotel. Must of used wotif lol

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

[stan]

Wasnt sure where to put this but sometimes there is good news to come out of the economy. At least we are seeing one section of a mininig indsutry doing ok. It is important in SA that our other industries are strong in the coming years.

OZ Minerals lifts dividend on record copper output
February 10, 2016 9:57am
Business Editor Christopher RussellThe Advertiser

COPPER miner OZ Minerals has increased its dividend on the back of record production and reduced unit costs.


The Adelaide-based company will pay a final dividend of 14c a share, taking the full-year payout to shareholders to 20c.

Delivering its 2015 full-year results, OZ said it had made a net profit of $130.2 million, a 168 per cent increase on 2014 which had, in turn, been a return to profit.

In 2014, OZ paid a dividend of 10c/share.

Managing director Andrew Cole described OZ’s operational and financial performance from its Prominent Hill mine in SA’s far north as “robust”.

He said the company was in a position both to invest in its own growth and reward shareholders.

OZ has increased its guidance for production of both copper and gold for this year.

“2016 has got off to a good start,” Mr Cole said.

On its key development project, the vast Carrapateena deposit north of Port Augusta, Mr Cole said management would present a proposal to the board on February 25, with an announcement to market that night or early on February 26.





“Prominent Hill is proving itself to be a strong foundation asset,” Mr Cole said.


“Production is at record levels and by maintaining a sharp focus on costs, we’ve managed to increase our annual profit by over 160 per cent despite the drop in commodity prices.

“We expect 2016 to be another excellent year with copper production guidance increasing

to 115,000 to 125,000 tonnes and gold production guidance increasing to 125,000 to

135,000 ounces.
“Our lean strategy is delivering results. Prominent Hill had an impressive EBITDA margin of

55 per cent in 2015 whilst still remaining in the lowest quartile of C1 costs.

“Being at the bottom of the cost curve is a good place to be going into 2016 and we

intend to take full advantage of our relative strength in the current market.”

The final dividend will be paid on March 10 to shareholders registered on February 24.

[stan]

Royal Commission in to nuclear power for SA says it’s not commercially viable for now
45 minutes ago
Business Editor Christopher RussellThe Advertiser

NUCLEAR power for electricity in South Australia is not commercially viable at the moment, the royal commission says.


However, this situation may change in the near future, particularly as Australia moves to combat climate change.

“Nuclear power may be necessary, along with other low carbon generation technologies,” the commission said.

“It would be wise to plan now to ensure that nuclear power would be available should it be required.”

Nuclear was a low-carbon emission technology, comparable to the main renewable sources in terms of the amount of greenhouse gases generated in the full life cycle.

The UN-led international talks at Paris in December last year aimed to limit global warming.

However, even if all the commitments made in Paris were honoured, the globe would still warm by 2.7C to 3C – that is above what was regarded as a manageable level of 2C.

Therefore nuclear power had to be an important consideration.

The commission said nuclear power plants were “very complex systems designed and operated by humans, who can make mistakes”.





It warns that there can be no guarantee there will never be an accident but goes on to say “the risk of nuclear accident should not of itself preclude consideration of nuclear power as a future electricity generation option”.

The commission considered the three major international nuclear accidents – Fukushima Daiichi in Japan in 2011, Chernobyl in the Ukraine in 1986 and Three Mile Island in the US in 1979.

It said each accident had been thoroughly investigated, leading to lessons which have been applied to enhance safety.

Commissioner Kevin Scarce said safety was paramount but successful risk management was not beyond SA’s capability.


“We believe with the new technology developed since Fukushima, with appropriate regulatory oversight, that nuclear power should not be automatically ignored as a future generation technology,” he said

In addition to receiving submissions and hearing from expert witnesses, the royal commission contracted two professional reports into the viability of nuclear power in SA.

Estimates of costs and a possible business case were studied by consultants WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff.

Separately DGA Consulting/Carisway looked at how nuclear power plant in SA could be linked in with the national electricity market which is supplied by both fossil fuel and renewable sources.

The reports found demand in SA’s electricity market was in decline which would work against nuclear power.

However, in future as SA’s coal-fired power was switched off and demand increased, small modular reactors could fulfil the need.

The commission saw SA-produced electricity making contribution to the National Electricity Market, especially as part of national effort to combat climate change.

However, this would require considerable investment in infrastructure to upgrade connections between SA’s grid and the eastern states.

The commission heard evidence about Generation IV reactors which use a different cooling mechanism and are able to take nuclear waste from earlier generation reactors.

This uses up more of the energy and reduces the time in which the waste from a Generation IV reactor to about 300 years – similar to uranium – rather than hundreds of thousands of years.

The PRISM – or Power Reactor Innovative Small Module – employs the latest technology but is still at an experimental phase.

Because this technology was currently unproven, the commission saw it as a future possibility and was not in favour of SA being the testbed or a first of a kind technology.

[bennymacca]

I dont think we will ever get Nuclear power up - not in the short term anyway. We just dont have the technical capabilities for it.

But I think there is a massive opportunity for us to help store the world's nuclear waste that would be huge for our economy

[Jimmy_041]

This will test Weatherill's mettle
He has always been anti nuclear

[bennymacca]

This will test Weatherill's mettle
He has always been anti nuclear

wasnt he the one that ordered the royal commission to have a look into it?

[stan]

This will test Weatherill's mettle
He has always been anti nuclear

wasnt he the one that ordered the royal commission to have a look into it?

And it came back saying not feasable for commercial generation at the moment.

But a waste dump? I reckon he'll fire up about that.

As Jim said, this will be interesting.

[Gozu]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

[Magellan]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

Would love to see that! I reckon they've missed a golden (glowing?) opportunity now that they've filled in the old Dashwood dump, though.

Pressure is on to find a way to deliver jobs and cashola into the state's economy. I reckon Jay Weatherman will go for it, the jobs and growth data aren't helping his cause and storing this waste should help turn things around.

[Jimmy_041]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

Has he proposed a nuclear waste dump?

[Magellan]

I don't Weatherill has openly confirmed or proposed the dump (although rumored to be in support of it), but the Scarce Royal Commission supports it, finding that “storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel in SA would meet a global need and is likely to deliver substantial economic benefits”, including annual revenue to the state of $5.6 billion on average for the first 30 years of operation.

[Jimmy_041]

I don't Weatherill has openly confirmed or proposed the dump (although rumored to be in support of it), but the Scarce Royal Commission supports it, finding that “storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel in SA would meet a global need and is likely to deliver substantial economic benefits”, including annual revenue to the state of $5.6 billion on average for the first 30 years of operation.

He's on 891 saying the results need to be "tested"
Certainly says he/they have made no decision to proceed

[heater31]

I don't Weatherill has openly confirmed or proposed the dump (although rumored to be in support of it), but the Scarce Royal Commission supports it, finding that “storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel in SA would meet a global need and is likely to deliver substantial economic benefits”, including annual revenue to the state of $5.6 billion on average for the first 30 years of operation.

He's on 891 saying the results need to be "tested"
Certainly says he/they have made no decision to proceed

It's step 1 of the process. There is an opportunity to provide a service that many countries need to use. We can name our price, now to get the legislation right to set it up and get the tree huggers on side or get them to suggest alternative revenue streams.

[Jim05]

Staunch Liberal supporter but I'll throw my vote behind Jay if he can get this dump set up. Amazing opportunity for the State

[Gozu]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

Has he proposed a nuclear waste dump?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... sa/7169600

[Jimmy_041]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

Has he proposed a nuclear waste dump?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... sa/7169600

Nice heading but that's all it is: Did you listen to it? He says he doesn't have a preference.
"I have a view we should explore it" "I am duty bound to explore it"
Pressed on the matter several times, he does not commit himself at any stage and, in fact, falls back on the safety issues
He says they are trying to slow the process down
On both 891 and 5AA this morning, he said he wasn't proposing it
He is very careful with the words he's using to NOT give the impression he's proposing it
Even though he says they should make a decision this year, don't be surprised if this is drawn out for 2 years past the next election
Amazing who, and what, you'll sleep with when your job is on the line

Maybe they could use Gillman. That dirt is practically worthless

[stan]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

Has he proposed a nuclear waste dump?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... sa/7169600

Nice heading but that's all it is: Did you listen to it? He says he doesn't have a preference.
"I have a view we should explore it" "I am duty bound to explore it"
Pressed on the matter several times, he does not commit himself at any stage and, in fact, falls back on the safety issues
He says they are trying to slow the process down
On both 891 and 5AA this morning, he said he wasn't proposing it
He is very careful with the words he's using to NOT give the impression he's proposing it
Even though he says they should make a decision this year, don't be surprised if this is drawn out for 2 years past the next election
Amazing who, and what, you'll sleep with when your job is on the line

Maybe they could use Gillman. That dirt is practically worthless

Jim its as clear as day his opinion will end up siding with what the general public want.

I mean would we expect anything else?

[Gozu]

I think Weatherill's showing strong leadership by proposing a nuclear waste dump in SA. We don't need nuclear power but others nuclear waste has to be stored somewhere and we've already been doing it at various small sites anyway. A number of places it could be set up mid-north, down south, Burnside you name it.

Has he proposed a nuclear waste dump?

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/pro ... sa/7169600

Nice heading but that's all it is: Did you listen to it? He says he doesn't have a preference.
"I have a view we should explore it" "I am duty bound to explore it"
Pressed on the matter several times, he does not commit himself at any stage and, in fact, falls back on the safety issues
He says they are trying to slow the process down
On both 891 and 5AA this morning, he said he wasn't proposing it
He is very careful with the words he's using to NOT give the impression he's proposing it
Even though he says they should make a decision this year, don't be surprised if this is drawn out for 2 years past the next election
Amazing who, and what, you'll sleep with when your job is on the line

Maybe they could use Gillman. That dirt is practically worthless

Jimmy you know exactly what he's doing this is a very contentious issue as anything is to do with nuclear power/waste. He's couching his words so if the public go nuts he can turn around and say it was only ever an idea and he really wasn't proposing it etc. It's kite-flying 101, you know this.

Weren't you supposedly done with state politics when you spat the dummy after the latest election loss?