Say No to costly dangerous Nuclear Reactors

Nuclear energy is extremely expensive, requires huge taxpayer subsidy, is environmentally destructive and threatens human healthi, but that’s not stopping Premiers Ed Stelmach and Brad Wall from pushing for construction of up to 7 nuclear reactors in the prairie provinces. The planned nuclear power would be principally for “green energy” exports to the U.S., and to fuel oil extraction at tarsands deposits. Independent polls show that Canadians are divided on whether to build more nuclear reactors, and that they have many concerns about toxic waste, accidents and health impacts associated with nuclear energyii.

Up to four new reactors are planned near Grimshaw in central Alberta, and would be fed by the Peace Riveriii. In Saskatchewan, up to three new reactors are planned near Lloydminster, and would be fed by new farmland-flooding dams on the North Saskatchewan Riveriv.

While pro-nuclear public relations spokespeople suggest nuclear is more “earth friendly” than fossil fuel energy sourcesv, this ignores that energy conservation could eliminate the need for nuclear, and that nuclear poses extreme long-term toxic and security risksvi. The nuclear industry is a major source of greenhouse gases, from uranium mining and processing, from construction, operation and repair of reactors, and from managing nuclear wastevii. Most nuclear reactors also consume over 2 million litres of water per minute, more water than is used by the entire city of Calgaryviii.

Some other environmental negatives of nuclear power include the common discharge of radioactive materials, water contamination, and the killing of billions of fish at water intakesix. There is no scientific consensus that nuclear power is safex. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence that nuclear reactors themselves, and the toxic waste they produce, cause cancerxi.

Amazingly, the Three Mile Island accident (1979) and the Chernobyl disaster (1986) do not qualify as “major” accidents by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, though they caused enough damage and fear to terminate all subsequent nuclear power development in the US and Canadaxii. According to the Ukraine government, the Chernobyl disaster cost $358 billion and caused 93,000 fatal cancersxiii. If a major accident involving a “core meltdown” occurred at just one nuclear reactor in North America, scientists estimate that the cleanup cost would exceed $1 trillionxiv, and could kill over 100,000 peoplexv.

Uranium: About 30% of the global supply of uranium ore, the fuel of nuclear reactors, is extracted from mines in Saskatchewanxvi. The refined ore is used principally for reactor fuel and weapons. It takes an average of 440,000 tonnes of uranium ore to make enough uranium to fuel a typical reactor for one yearxvii. An astounding 99.6% of uranium ore and other rock dug up at the mines is left behind as toxic wastexviii. About 213 million tonnes of radioactive mine tailing waste has been dumped in Saskatchewanxix. The uranium ore used to power the world’s 443 reactors each year is enough to fill both the Saddle Dome in Calgary and Taylor Field in Regina with radioactive mine wastexx. 380 new reactors are planned to be built globally within the next 20 years, substantially increasing the amount of uranium mined and toxic waste producedxxi.

Nuclear Waste: Uranium ore is processed into fuel rods that produce the energy that powers nuclear reactors. Fuel rods are used for about 6 years inside a reactor before they become high level nuclear wastexxii. Each reactor produces about 25 tonnes of nuclear waste, including the highly toxic fuel rods, annuallyxxiii. Used fuel rods are stored in pools of water for cooling and radiation shielding for 5-10 years, remain highly radioactive for thousands of yearsxxiv, and must be stored under heavy security for 1 million years to prevent theftxxv. All of the world’s nuclear waste is transported between temporary holding facilities because no permanent disposal solutions existxxvi.

Canada is about to become a global dumping ground for nuclear waste because of our new “Global Nuclear Energy Partnership” agreementxxvii. This partnership will result in Canada building the world’s largest nuclear waste re-processing facility, potentially handling thousands of tonnes of waste annually from around the world. The re-processed nuclear waste would then be used as fuel for many planned experimental light water reactors, generating vast quantities of liquid nuclear waste that poses many storage difficulties because of its corrosive propertiesxxviii.

All reactors currently used in Canada are of the CANDU (CANada Deuterium Uranium) type and use uranium as their energy source and deuterium water (heavy water) as a “moderator” that facilitates the nuclear reaction. About 16% of Canada’s electricity comes from nuclear power generated by 18 reactors in Ontario, New Brunswick and Quebec. The new reactors planned for Alberta and Saskatchewan would be of the experimental ACR-1000 type and would use reprocessed nuclear waste (enriched uranium) for fuel.

Each new nuclear reactor in Canada is estimated to cost from $6 -13 billionxxix. In Ontario, nuclear power plants are shut down for repair more often than they are in operation and recent breakdowns cost taxpayers $4.5 billionxxx. Since its inception, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) has received $13 billion in taxpayer subsidiesxxxi. In the US, subsidies to the nuclear industry average $7.1 billion annuallyxxxii

No nuclear plant on earth has yet been successfully decommissioned because of environmental, engineering and economic complexitiesxxxiii. Decommissioning costs billions per reactorxxxiv The cost of waste storage for Canada’s 18 reactors is estimated at $24 billion for the first 300 years of the wastes 50,000 year-long toxic life-spanxxxv. When fully accounted, nuclear power may be the most environmentally destructive and expensive mass-produced energy source on earth.

Some of the groups leading the fight against Nuclear in Alberta and Saksatchewan:

Nuclear Free Alberta

Keep Alberta Nuclear Free

Tar Sands Watch

The Pembina Institute

Citations:

i http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/Nuclear_CC_brief_editedMW.pdf

http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/canada/en/documents-and-links/publications/nuclear_liability_compensation_act.pdf

ii http://www.thestar.com/article/603905

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2009/09/15/nuclear-plant.html

http://www.saskuranium.ca/

iii http://www.cwf.ca/V2/cnt/publication_200809040947.php

iv http://www.saskuranium.ca/Default.aspx?DN=190c66dc-301d-4654-bd69-512f5fb16b88#Power-generation

v http://wiki.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Nuclear_energy

vi http://www.ehow.com/about_4571046_dangers-nuclear-energy.html

vii http://www.oilcrisis.com/nuclear/WhyNuclearNotSustainable.htm

viii http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rn/2006-07/07rn12.pdf

http://www.calgary.ca/docgallery/BU/environmental_management/Climate_Change_and_You/Watertap.pdf

ix http://library.thinkquest.org/3471/nuclear_waste_body.html

http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charleston/nuclear-contamination/Content?oid=1111275

http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/licensedtokill/executivesummary.htm

x http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/

xi http://oilsandstruth.org/nuclear-power-causes-cancer-what-industry-doesn039t-want-you-know

xii http://www.ccnr.org/CANDU_Safety.html

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/nuclear_disasters/nuclear_disasters.html

xiii http://www.citizen.org/documents/Price%20Anderson%20Factsheet.pdf 358 billion

http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/chern…

xiv http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/Nuclear_web.pdf

xv http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/sabotage_and_att…

xvi http://www.investcom.com/moneyshow/uranium_athabasca.htm

xvii http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/32.html

xviii http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/32.html

xix http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/Nuclear_backgrounder.pdf

xx http://world-nuclear.org/education/wast.htm– note – calculation made by comparing volume of waste rock at Saskatchewan uranium mines to volume of Saddle Dome and Taylor Field.

xxi http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf17.html

xxii http://www.cameco.com/uranium_101/uranium_science/nuclear_fuel/

xxiii http://world-nuclear.org/education/wast.htm

xxiv http://world-nuclear.org/education/wast.htm

xxv http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/Nuclear_web.pdf

xxvi http://pubs.pembina.org/reports/Nuclear_web.pdf

xxvii http://www.gneppartnership.org/

xxviii http://energy.probeinternational.org/nuclear-reprocessing-nothing-more-wolf-sheep-s-clothing

xxix http://www.canada.com/business/time+press+reset+nuclear/1850679/story.html

http://www.nirs.org/neconomics/nuclearsubsidies2008.pdf

xxx http://ontario.pembina.org/op-ed/1356

http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs/atmosphere-energy/nuclear-free/overview.shtml