Community Coalition Against Mining Uranium (CCAMU)
Citizens’ Inquiry on the Impacts of the Uranium Cycle
Home Scope of the Inquiry Participants How to participate Counties & Municipalities
About CCAMU CCAMU Supporter Registration Location & Dates Supporting Organizations
   

Safe, Clean, Economical Alternatives to Radioactivity Derived Electricity

Richard Cuyler

I am concerned that the anti-mining aspect of these protests and hearings may be serving the interests of the Canadian Nuclear Industry.

We are being directed to focus our attention and concern on divers potential sites where exploration is planned and mining might eventually be done.

Stop the Sharbot Lake area prospecting and exploration.
Stop the Calumet Island prospecting and exploration.
Stop the Wakefield prospecting and exploration.
Stop the Labrador prospecting and exploration.

Uranium mining should be stopped and I commend the folks who have devoted energy, time and resources to confronting the uranium mining industry.

However, while our attention is being directed to the urgent need to stop prospecting and exploration work on these many sites, the Nuclear Industry is already proceeding toward building the most expensive expansion of radioactivity based electrical production this country has ever seen.

The $40 Billion currently being talked about for new nuclear reactors will most likely cost Ontarians hundreds of billions of dollars, and increase Ontario's ongoing radioactive pollution and the dangers from accidents or terrorism. New reactors are being proposed for Pickering, for Bruce and for Chalk River . and there is virtually no mention of this dire fact in any of the information being presented to the public .

Premier Dalton McGuinty simply announced that Ontario will build new nuclear reactors, fait accompli; the corporate press dutifully reports this fact and then declines further discussion. There is no public consultation, and no real reason why these dangerous devices need to be built.

Nuclear reactors are simply extremely large, extremely complex and extremely dangerous devices with which to boil water. Boiling water by 'burning' rocks may seem like 'wow' technology to some sci-fi tech geeks, but boiling water by 'burning' horribly toxic rocks is just stupid.

The Canadian Nuclear Industry has been a part of my life. I k(NO)w Uranium.

When I was a child my family went camping for a month every summer, often at the Inverhuron Provincial Campground, on Lake Huron, where we enjoyed some of the best swimming and fishing in Ontario. The bass fishing off Douglas Point was fabulous.

Then, one year, we were informed by park staff that access to Douglas Point was no longer permitted: Ontario Hydro was building the Douglas Point Nuclear Reactor .
the site is now known as Bruce Nuclear. If there are any bass or other decent fish anywhere near Douglas Point, those fish have been unfit to eat since the reactors were built.

Later we lived in Northern Ontario, and had friends living and working in Elliott Lake, through whom we were provided a tour of the Uranium mining and milling fueling the Elliott Lake 'boom' . we were shown 45 gallon drums full of Yellowcake; I was eleven or twelve years old when I was encouraged to hold a handful of radioactive yellowcake in my hand . from time to time I still get an occasional persistent itch in the palm of that hand.

In the mid 1970's Ontario Hydro had plans to build a network of nuclear power stations all along the North Channel of Lake Huron. I personally intervened to prevent the Dean Lake reactor site from being developed.

I was among many to try to stop the Blind River Refinery, taking film and information to North Shore communities.

I travelled down from Sault Ste. Marie to attend the Darlington protest and solar alternatives expo. We failed to stop the massive waste of time and money known as the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station, but our opposition (and the massive cost over runs for construction) ensured that Darlington was the last new nuclear reactor built in Canada. Darlington eventually cost either 3X as much as the first 'official' estimates, or it cost 5X those initial 'official' estimates . depends on who you choose to believe.

Both the 3X and 5X cost over run figures are based on the final cost being compared to the 'first' official cost estimate.

My recollection of the Darlington fiasco is that long before that 'first' official estimate, there were a series of escalating 'estimates' from the politicians, beginning with an almost 'reasonable' first estimate announced when the notion of building a new nuclear power station at Darlington was first broached . in successive months that first political 'estimate' increased time after time after time, quickly making such political pronouncements entirely laughable.

Facing widespread criticism for planning to build a new nuclear power station that many Ontarians did not want and for obviously not having any real notion of what that new nuclear power station would likely cost, the politicians of the day were eventually forced to produce what has come to be known as the 'first official estimate' several years later those political 'estimates' were replaced by what has come to be referred to as the 'first' official estimate at 'first' official estimate. year after year after year as the actual cost of the Darlington Scam 'simply' grew and grew and grew . Ontarians continue to pay a surcharge on each and every electrical bill to pay for the excessively corrupt 'cost' of Darlington.

In the early 1990's I was a Party at the Ontario Hydro Demand/Supply Plan Hearings.
. eventually the mounting evidence against nuclear and for the alternative technologies forced Bob Rae and his NDP to delay plans to build new nuclear reactors in Ontario.

Much of the 1992 forecast 'Demand' has been supplied by Independent Power Producers: small hydro, private wind power 'farms', and co-generation.

Some of the forecast 'Demand' continues to be 'supplied' by conservation: compact fluorescent bulbs, higher efficiency appliances, switching to gas water heaters and switching from electric space heating to more efficient gas/oil furnaces.

I spent the late seventies developing solar devices: active solar heating panels, moveable insulation for passive solar applications, solar food dehydrator, and a solar water distillation unit. I've lived a solar powered lifestyle for most of the past thirty years . I highly recommend it to everyone.

. the amount of money wasted on rewiring Darlington over and over and over and over (see footnote #6) could have been employed to retrofit the housing stock of that time to avoid the amount of energy consumption required by poor construction and improper solar orientation . electricity is being wantonly wasted; greenhouses gases are being unnecessarily produced and now we are being told that the only way to deal with the situation is to invest massively in more radioactive technology.

If the experience of Darlington has taught us anything, we should have learned that political/corporate initial cost estimates for new nuclear reactors are grossly below the actual final corporate cost payouts . if we include government subsidies the amount of overpayment becomes simply obscene.

Already we have seen Premier McGuinty's 'political' cost estimates balloon from an initial notion of a few billion dollars to the current estimate of $40 billion (for new nuclear reactors which have never been approved by the Ontario electorate, nor by any 'official' Citizens Inquiry or Hearing, such as the early 1990's Demand/Supply Plan Hearings).

Based on the Darlington experience we can reliably expect the actual 'final' cost of the McGuinty Nuclear Power option to exceed $120 Billion, perhaps $200 Billion . the cost overuns of Darlington are still costing Ontario Hydro users on each and every electric bill; the inevitable cost overruns of the current Nuclear proposal will make us all slaves to international bankers for many many generations yet to come . totally unnecessarily.

There are better ways to spend those energy dollars . better for the environment, better for society and better for democracy.

The tens and hundreds of billions of dollars soon to be wasted on new nuclear reactors could be more equitably spent, and achieve more lasting effect if those billions were directed to establishing a renewable energy future . a non-radioactive future .

- retrofit existing housing stock to maximize solar space heating/cooling, solar hot water heating, solar photovoltaic electric production from all available south facing surfaces, small scale wind generation and energy conservation

- retrofit existing commercial buildings to maximize solar space heating/cooling, solar hot water, solar photovoltaic electric production from roof tops and south facing wall surfaces, small scale wind generation and energy conservation

- amend the Building Code of Ontario to require that all new buildings be site oriented to maximize the collection and usage of solar energy

- move to localize solar and wind power production to reduce the usage of high power transmission lines. Decentralize electrical production; enable neighbourhood electrical production by locally owned and operated co-operatives.

- Outlaw wasteful technologies (such as incandescent light bulbs)

- Provide funding for the mass deployment of extreme energy conservation technologies (such as LED lights)

- Initiate electricity pricing whereby citizens and businesses pay higher rates per KwH as their electrical consumption increases

- More jobs will be produced for more people by retrofits and renovation than can possibly be created by building massive new nuclear power plants which are completely unnecessary . The jobs produced by retrofits, renovations and conservation will be the kinds of jobs that can be done by the very same people who have been laid off from manufacturing closures in Ontario; putting Ontario back to work.

- In-flow hydro power should be employed widely. In-flow hydro produces electricity from water flow. The generator turbines are located on the bottom of the river which permits electricity to be generated without damning the rivers, and without environmental interference in the natural flow of the rivers. Many local rivers are suitable for in-flow hydro: the Ottawa River, the Rideau River, the Madawaska, the Bonnechere and the Mississippi . just to name a few. Communities, cities and town should be subsidized to install in-flow hydro generation to provide locally generated electricity that will be stable, safe . and substantially more resilient from the sort of terrorist threats any nuclear facility must consider

- Nuclear proponents explain the exorbitant cost over-runs at Darlington as resulting from delays to construction (forcing additional financing costs) which they attribute to reduced demand forecasts during the mid-1980's .

- Ontarians had embraced the notion of a Conserver Society, and governments responded to citizens' concerns with programmes subsidizing personal energy conservation.

- Specifically, individuals switched from electricity to natural gas for space heating and hot water; and governments financed an ambitious home insulation programme.

- Late in the 1980's those 'reduced demand forecasts' were revised, taking into account rising electrical demand largely due to two factors:

- the government home insulation subsidy programme had been scrapped, and the Mulroney Conservatives changed Canada's immigration policy beginning a massive increase in the number of immigrants entering Canada, which continues. Immigrants who arrive here hungry for the 'conveniences' of 'modern' electrical devices; they want to live the life they have seen on the TV shows exported worldwide for decades; they are not coming here to ride bicycles and live simply.

- Increasing subsidy programmes such as the home insulation programme can only be partially successful at reducing electrical demand as long as we continue to allow large scale immigration of peoples who are not committed to energy conservation. It is imperative that rates of immigration be reduced until energy consumption in Ontario and Canada can be satisfied by electrical production from safe, renewable energy sources; and it is essential that new immigrants be counselled about the need for conservation, including reducing family size

- Building a fully renewable energy society in Ontario will create hundreds of thousands of good quality jobs for Ontarians laid off by the decline of old style consumerism based manufacturing in Ontario.

- A minimal energy consumption infrastructure coupled with low impact diversified renewable energy production will favourably position Ontario to compete internationally in the coming era of energy and resource depletion . without endangering the health and welfare of Ontario citizens (or anyone else on the planet for that matter).

Let's make it happen.

Peace and Love
Perseverance Furthers

Owned and operated by the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan. Teachers themselves have somehow managed to avoid considering any personal or professional issues regarding how making money from destroying the planet could in any sane way be justified alongside the political correctness social activism routinedly propounded by the Teachers Unions.

Douglas Point//Bruce Nuclear has the usual Nuclear Industry record of leaks and 'accidents' contaminating the surrounding land, water and air. Fish in the Serpent River can be classified as radioactive 'waste'. The Serpent River suffers from run-off from the tailings of the Elliott Lake uranium mines.

"Totally safe . no way it can hurt anyone ."

It was my first experience with the intensity of commitment to Nuclear Power by the ostensibly pro-environment NDP. (most recently we have seen Jack Layton lead his NDP to near instantaneous Parliamentary intervention to prevent a safety shutdown of nuclear operations at Chalk River . for absolutely no real reason whatsoever, other than pleasing the nuclear industry.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darlington_Nuclear_Generating_Station

In the 1990's I worked with an electrician who quit the Darlington jobsite because he just couldn't continue to redo the same job over and over again, no matter how much money the corrupt corporations were prepared to continue to pay him for his share of the scam. He told us that he and his fellow electricians would be given wiring plans which they would proceed to install. When they had finished all the wiring, the 'white hats' would instruct the electricians to remove all the wiring they had just finished installing, then give them a new set of wiring plans, which the electricians would then proceed to install. Again and again, the 'white hats' would allow them to complete the wiring, then instruct the electricians to remove the wiring, give them a new wiring plan and the cycle would begin again . and again . and again

Bob Rae's NDP was strongly pro-nuclear; they imported one of far too many silver spoon 'socialists' to head up the NDP Ontario Hydro plan to commit Ontario to fully Nuclear Power radioactivity based electrical production (we were told that actual Hydro electrical production had reached a 'ceiling' beyond which no further additional electrical power could be provided from hydro sources in Ontario . total BS)
. but, at least the Bob Rae NDP set up the public access Demand/Supply Hearings, where the public were able to make the case for small hydro, for Independent Power Producers, for solar, for wind, for conservation . the Hearings were publicly funded and extensive . oh yeah, the Hearings were only held in Toronto, so if you couldn't afford to travel to Toronto, you couldn't 'participate'

Government funded shared cost programmes to improve insulation in existing housing stock were very effective during the 1980's. Hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses reduced energy consumption significantly. (Consumer conservation and reduced energy consumption was one of the factors causing the 1980's 'reduction in demand forecasts' blamed by the nuclear industry for the Darlington cost over-runs.) Many thousands of jobs were created paying decent wages.

Solar energy has been used for Air Conditioning (solar cooling) for many years.

Mandate that the 'long' axis of any building be oriented along East/West; mandate that the slope of roofs optimize solar gain; mandate that roofs be constructed to provide substantial southern solar exposure.

High power transmission lines waste incredible amounts of electricity which simply 'disappears' as Line Loss. Electricity that could otherwise be usefully employed simply 'leaks' out around these high tension power lines . to give yourself a real sense of what this means, I suggest each of you take a walk under some more or less convenient high tension line; hold a 48" 'standard' fluorescent tube in one hand . as you walk into the waste electricity flow around the base of the high tension wires, the fluorescent tube will flicker into light, right in your hand. If you feel a bit playful, try moving your hand 'up' the tube . start by holding the end of the tube, the whole tube will light up in your hand . move your hand 'up' the tube and the portion of the tube below your hand will darken; only the portion of the tube above your hand hold will light up . you are the connection between the high tension waste electricity and grounding through the fluorescent tube to the earth . the electricity lighting that fluorescent tube in your hand is only a miniscule fraction of the amount of electricity being wasted 'into the air' by high tension transmission lines all over Ontario . these lines 'waste' enough electricity to power hundreds of thousands of homes . and those homes don't need high power electricity; solar photovoltaic and wind power provide more than adequate voltage/amperage for the needs of any decent family home.

Regardless of the inevitable whining from the corporate/business community, this will encourage smart thinking, conservation and innovation . it will be 'good for business'.

The new nuclear power electrical production will largely be for export to the UsofA (who simply want us to assume all the risks of nuclear accident, terrorist attack, nuclear material transport and waste disposal . while they get to enjoy 'risk free' nuclear electricity while Canadians absorb all the costs: construction, environmental damage, radioactive leakages, radioactive waste containment and 'disposal', inevitable terrorist targeting, civilian population endangerment . and the insurance costs and security costs . if the Amerikkkans want nuclear electricity let 'em endanger their own population and pocketbooks; we have plenty enough electricity here for Canadian needs and we should be investing in energy sources that provide safe clean energy .

CBC Radio 'As It Happens' April 24, featured an interview with a Port Hope resident who recounted how his community stopped Ontario Power Generation (OPG) from establishing an anti terrorist training facility in Port Hope. OPG had argued that they needed a site near the nuclear reactor sites of Pickering and Darlington where they could train a Response Force specifically to deal with an inevitable terrorist attack on one of those nuclear sites.

"The single largest cost increase occurred in 1983, when Units 3 and 4 were deferred for two years due to low-growth in the electricity forecast." www.nuclearfaq.ca

500,000 new immigrants arrived in Canada in 2007, prior to the Mulroney changes, the number of new immigrants into Canada was considerably less than 100,000 immigrants per year

Part of the reduction in electrical demand in the 1980's was due to smaller family sizes, with Canadian families reducing the number of children from 4-10 children per family to 1-3 children per family (with government counselling and support). Currently, new immigrant families often have 4-5 children and they continue to have children .. raising the Demand for electricity.