The Root Cause of the Lynas Controversy

I have a confession: I haven't been following the Lynas story. I'm a little jaded by all the protesting on one side and the posturing on the other. That's not to say I don't care. It's just to say I'm trying to figure out how to live without obsessing about everything. Please don't get me wrong. I appreciate and applaud those who are seeking to engage my attention about Lynas. I'm just having some down time, some reflection time.

I remember reading something by the historian Christopher Catherwood, a specialist in religious conflict, in which he trained his mind on “Islamic rage.” He said those who want to stem the flow of funds from the Middle East to terrorists should drive only fuel-efficient vehicles.

I don't remember all his arguments. I think he basically said he thought reducing personal consumption of fuel was the most effective way for Americans and others to tell their own governments they needed to curb the Saudi King from promoting anarchists. ['curb' in this context could include 'interfere in the affairs of another nation.']

When I was at University, we joked that the “Nuclear Power No Thanks” sticker on a Citroen 2CV was a standard accessory. [The 2CV had a 9 horsepower engine, some called it a food processor engine. The 2CV was an ingeniously designed, economical car.] The sticker covered the whole door, and was placed on both sides of the car.

I remember the arguments for and against nuclear power. I took a course on alternative energy. Are you surprised nuclear power was 'alternative energy'? It was. It was the late 70's. The Middle East oil cartel had brought the world to it's knees. Nuclear power was harnessed to break the hold of the Middle East on the world, through oil.

I studied the physics and engineering of nuclear reactors – heavy water, fast breeder, etc. I watched and read the news. I learned about risk evaluation. I learned about the ponds for ducks and the fields for cows in and around nuclear facilities. I learned about the reminders nuclear industry workers were constantly given about the great risks of harnessing nuclear energy, and the importance of putting people first.

I have followed the news about the havoc wrought by the earthquake and tsunami on the nuclear power station in Fukushima, Japan. I know the root cause of the disaster isn't nuclear power. It's people. More precisely, it's management and politicians clamouring to meet the 'needs' of voters and over-ruling the engineers.

I know nuclear power need not be dangerous. I know if the Japanese Energy authority had been headed by an honourable Malaysian like Ani Arope (who was effectively sacked by Mahathir) the Fukushima disaster would not have happened. Ani Arope would have resigned before allowing things to deteriorate to such a state.

I have written before about Admiral Rickover and the safety of American nuclear submarines. It's all about leadership and 'what people want.'

I have not read much of the commentary about Lynas. Perhaps someone has already suggested the root cause of the Lynas controversy. First, a little about root causes.

I do not think a day goes by at work when I am not involved in some discussion about root cause. We ask 'Why' multiple times. When someone finds an unsealed package, we ask “why is the package unsealed?” If the answer is “the machine failed to seal it,” we ask “why did the machine fail to seal it?” We keep asking until we find the answer. Sometimes the answer is that – in a paper manufacturing factory thousands of miles away – it is possible to run the process with a valve open when it should be closed. My point is this: the root cause is often far away.

In my opinion, the root cause of the Lynas problem is our 'need' for all kinds of gadgets which need the 'rare earths' which are to be produced by the Lynas plant: disk drives, cellphones, LCD television sets. As Marxists would say, the root cause is our distance from the people who produce the rare earths used to build the gadgets we 'need.' [Isn't it ironic that the protesters depend so much on cellphones?]

I think it important that the rare earths are 'needed' because we 'need' gadgets – yes, including the ones invented by that demigod, Steve Jobs, in the temple of Apple – and we need them cheaply.

I think the root cause is that we treat China as a source of cheap, expendable labour and as a nation where controls on safety and pollution are not enforced with the same vigilance as in countries like the USA and Australia. It's the price we pay for 'cheap gadgets.'

I think the root cause is our failure to grapple with this brutal fact: 95 % of the world's supply of rare earths comes from China – ironically a 'communist' country where workers, the proletariat, are supposed to be king.

I think the root cause is the maturity of Australian voters: they will go to the polls and boot out politicians who will allow Lynas to operate a rare earths plant in Australia. I think the root cause is the double-standards of Australians: they have the dirt (earth), they will profit from it, but only at risk to populations other than their own. Australians will add to the carbon footprint of the earth by shipping huge volumes of earth across the oceans, Australians will talk of shipping back radioative waste to Australia, but Australians will not grant a license for the waste to be returned to Australia.

I am surprised UMNO-BN politicians are not spinning this story: "Malaysians are willing to share the burden with China. Malaysians are willing to do what Australia and other developed nations won't. Malaysians are willing to take on the burden: we will accept one third of the worldwide risks of rare-earth processing."

I think the root cause of the Malaysian dilemma over Lynas is that the government we put in office thinks more like the government of China than like the government of Australia. What do you make of people who enjoy the benefits, but prefer that other people do the dangerous work and bear the risks? Do you want to "drive a 2CV"?

Rama Ramanathan reads Malaysia Chronicle