The Nuclear reactor threats in Ontario

Page - March 12, 2009

Cost threat:

The McGuinty government has estimated the costs of its nuclear plans at $26 billion. This estimate is highly suspect.

Investment analysts say the cost of building nuclear reactors has more than doubled in the last three years.

A truer estimate of the McGuinty nuclear plan is up to $50 billion.

Ontarians are still paying off Ontario Hydro's $31 billion in debt, largely created by building the first generation of reactors.

Every dollar spent on nuclear or on nuclear debt is a dollar not spent on renewable energy.

Accident threat

Canadian-designed reactors have the same design flaw that contributed to the Chernobyl explosion and to the world's first nuclear accident in 1952 at Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's Chalk River laboratories. This design flaw does not meet modern safety standards.

The emergency shut-down systems of Canadian-designed reactors are untested and unproven. Confidence in the ability of these systems to operate in accident situations is low.

A terrorist attack at the Pickering nuclear station would put 2.5 million people in a 30km danger zone at risk. The consequences would dwarf those of the Chernobyl accident in 1986. About 350,000 people were evacuated from a 30 km zone around Chernobyl.

Only in Ontario do millions of people live in the danger zone around an aging nuclear plant. No other government allows that. The McGuinty government shouldn't allow it.

Radioactive waste threat:

Canada's nuclear reactors have produced over 40,000 tonnes of highly radioactive fuel waste.

The Pickering reactor site stores 20,000 tonnes of unprotected high-level radioactive waste.

Dismantling a reactor creates tonnes of a radioactive trash that must be isolated from the environment for hundreds of thousands of years.

Mining and processing uranium for reactor fuel produces waste known as tailings. There are currently over 200 million tonnes of uranium tailings in Ontario and Saskatchewan. This waste remains a hazard for thousands of years and contains carcinogens, such as radium, radon gas, and thorium among others.

Canadian reactors are permitted to release levels of radioactive tritium at levels that are considered hazardous by US and European radiation protection standards.

Terrorism threats:

Canadian reactors were not designed to withstand a terrorist attack and would not meet post-9/11 safety standards, according to a report by a leading nuclear risk expert, commissioned by Greenpeace.

Radioactive fuel waste-toxic for up to a million years-is stored at the Pickering site and other reactors sites and is vulnerable to terrorist attack

Canadian reactors use natural uranium and online fueling. That makes them attractive to countries hoping to acquire the capacity to divert plutonium from used fuel to build atomic weapons. India used a Canadian reactor to build an atomic bomb.

The McGuinty nuclear plan:

Despite the serious concerns, Premier McGuinty is committed to maintaining nuclear electricity at 50 per cent of the Ontario system, at a cost of billions for new or rebuilt nuclear reactors.

The Premier's billions for nuclear power robs renewable energy of the funding, space and support it needs to grow, preventing the growth of a green energy system for the 21st Century.

Green electricity path:

Premier McGuinty claims he wants to expand green energy. Yet, he blocks real growth in renewable energy.

Canada's largest environmental organizations, including Greenpeace, have shown that renewable is doable. They issued a report that says the only way to expand green energy is to replace ageing reactors, starting with Pickering.

The McGuinty government should shut down Pickering and replace the reactors with green energy. It can be done!

- 30 -

For more information, please contact:

Brian Blomme, Communications Coordinator, (416) 930-9055

Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Energy Campaigner, (416) 884-7053