Towards full liability for nuclear
power plant operators
A new report commissioned by Greenpeace analyses the Harper
government's proposed Nuclear Liability and Compensation Act (NLCA)
and shows how the legislation would significantly short change
Canadians on compensation in the event of a serious nuclear
accident.
The report documents how the Harper government's proposed
legislation would, if passed, artificially cap the liability of a
nuclear operator for accidents at $650 million - a miniscule
fraction of the likely actual cost of a nuclear disaster. This cap
on liability represents a hidden subsidy for nuclear power, a
massive unaccounted liability for the Canadian tax-payer and
creates an unfair playing field for safer green energy
technologies.
The nuclear industry claims its reactors are safe, but it
withholds information on reactor accident risks while requiring
this special favour from the federal government to do business - a
law protecting nuclear operators from paying the realistic costs of
compensation for victims of a nuclear accident.
Protecting the nuclear industry, not
Canadians
The Harper government's proposed cap on the liability of the
nuclear industry would mean that Canadian victims of a nuclear
accident would receive significantly less industry compensation
than citizens in other western countries.
- American victims of nuclear accidents can count on over $10
billion in industry compensation.
- Members of the Paris Convention - most of Western Europe -
require that nuclear operators have at least $1.2 billion (€700
million) in insurance to compensate victims.
- Germany has no limit on the liability limit of nuclear
operators and requires nuclear operators to have €2.5 billion in
financial security to compensate victims in case of an
accident.
- Japan requires nuclear operators make available $1.2 billion to
compensate victims of nuclear accidents
- Sweden is proposing to nuclear operators guarantee at least
€1.2 billion in compensation with no cap on their liability.
Harper's Hidden Tax-Payer
Liability
The NLCA would expose the federal taxpayer to billions in
possible liabilities by shifting the responsibility for cleaning up
after nuclear accident from reactor operators to the federal
government. Any damages incurred beyond the liability cap of $650
million would be paid by the federal taxpayer.
- Industry studies show that the just the health costs for a
catastrophic accident at the Pickering B nuclear station just east
of Toronto would exceed $52 billion. A similar accident at the
Bruce A nuclear station on Lake Huron would cost $49 billion in
health costs.
- A smaller scale accident at the Pickering B nuclear station
considered "credible" by the nuclear industry and its regulators
would cause $1.2 billion in health cost damages alone.
- Government studies regarding the impacts of nuclear terrorism
contract the government's claim that the $650 million cap is
adequate. A federal government study on the economic impacts of a
dirty bomb spreading a limited amount of radioactive material by CN
Tower estimated costs of clean up at $28 billion.
- The Harper government has failed to carry out and release any
studies to tell Canadians how large this tax-payer liability or how
it could be reduced or eliminated.
The nuclear industry doesn't trust its
safety: Why should the public?
The industry's desire for special protection Act shows the
private lenders, insurers and even reactor vendors lack confidence
in safety of Canada's nuclear reactors.
- Special protection for the nuclear industry began in the 1950s
because American nuclear reactor designers feared being sued for
catastrophic damages caused if one their reactors had an accident.
The insurance industry refused to fully insure the nuclear industry
so governments stepped in to protect nuclear operators and
vendors.
- Before they occurred, the nuclear industry and its regulators
claimed that the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island and
Chernobyl could not happen. Following the accidents nuclear
regulators sought to downplay the potential for future accidents by
withholding information on accident risks instead of requiring
existing plants be able to withstand a full range of realistic
events.
- All current and proposed reactor designs in Canada contain
fundamental design flaws that leave them vulnerable to catastrophic
radiation releases following an accident or terrorist attack.
- The Harper government fired the president of Canada's nuclear
safety regulator after she imposed modernized international
standards on Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) reactors.
Don't nuke green energy!
Canada has committed to implement the polluter pays principal
and require polluters to pay all the clean up costs of their own
pollution. The NLCA breaks this principal and requires Canadians
to pay for the nuclear industry's pollution. This hidden subsidy
pushes cleaner, safer and more cost-effective green energy options
out of the electricity markets.
- The hidden subsidy to nuclear operators would range from 5.4 to
11.0 c/kWh.
- Based on the electricity output of Canada's reactors in 2007,
the NLCA would provide an implicit subsidy to nuclear operators of
$4.8 to 9.7 billion.
- Unlike the nuclear operators, renewable energy and clean energy
operators pay their own insurance.
- Despite receiving billions in direct and hidden subsidies like
the NLCA over the past 50 years, the nuclear industry has failed to
lower its costs while green energy sources have innovated and
become cost-competitive.
What does Greenpeace want?
- A level playing field for green energy. Reactor operators must
be required to assume responsibility for the risks they impose on
society just like green energy operators.
- Canadian victims of nuclear accidents deserve to be compensated
by the nuclear industry at minimum on a level on par with other
Western countries.
- All subsidies to the nuclear industry need to be publicly
reported.