Category Archives: Uncategorized

Provincial Growth Plan & Nuclear Plans on Collision Course

Posted on by

* N.B. Press release below. Oshawa Express article Nuclear safety, intensification don’t mesh.
September 27, 2016 (Toronto)

Environmental groups asked the Minister of Municipal Affairs Bill Mauro today to respect international safety guidelines and protect public safety by restricting population growth around the ten aging nuclear reactors operating in the rapidly growing Greater Toronto Area (GTA).

“The government’s growth plans put public safety at risk. Encouraging population growth around nuclear reactors makes it difficult to evacuate people in the event of a Fukushima-level nuclear accident,” said Jacqueline Wilson, counsel with the Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA).

CELA, Durham Nuclear Awareness (DNA) and Greenpeace say the government has ignored international safety standards, the Fukushima disaster, and repeated advice from experts over the past thirty years, which all say high populations densities will undermine the province’s ability to safely evacuate the public in the event of a nuclear accident.

Ontario encourages residential growth in downtown Pickering and Oshawa, which are both less than 10 kilometres from the aging Pickering and Darlington nuclear stations. The Fukushima accident caused a 20 km zone around the station to be evacuated.

The groups are concerned by the disconnect between the government’s growth policies and its recent decision to extend the lives of Pickering and Darlington reactors. Next month, Ontario Power Generation begins a decades-long $12 billion project to repair the Darlington reactors to keep them operating until mid-century.

“Ontario’s growth plans are on a collision course with its plans to keep the Pickering and Darlington nuclear stations operating. Operating reactors in the GTA was a bad idea in the first place, but to then encourage growth near these reactors is sheer folly,” said Shawn-Patrick Stensil, a senior energy analyst with Greenpeace.

The groups formally asked the Ministry to review its current growth and land use policies, including the Places to Grow Act, under Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights. The province has three months to respond.

An article published by a group of European risk specialists in the journal Risk Analysis this month estimated another Fukushima-scale accident somewhere in the world within the next century.

Despite its responsibility for public safety, Ontario has yet to modernize its offsite nuclear emergency plans five years after Fukushima.

– 30 –

Information:

  • Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Senior Energy Analyst, Greenpeace, 416-884-7053, shawn.patrick.stensil@greenpeace.org
  • Jacqueline Wilson, counsel, CELA, 416-960-2284, ex 7213, jacqueline@cela.ca

Close Pickering!

Posted on by

The Pickering nuclear generating station was built during the late 1960s.
It’s old.

Like any machine, any human-built installation, it’s deteriorating. It is not exactly in its finest hour, shall we just understatedly say.

The nuclear industry wants to keep it running.

Why?

Because they rake in very considerable profits from it on a daily basis.

Nuclear industry salaries are high. High-high-high. Through the roof, actually. Taxpayer-funded, here in Ontario, no less!

Why close it?

  • Too risky
  • Too costly
  • Too close to huge urban populations
  • Unnecessary
  • Jobs

Okay. So I’m stealing the bullet points in the Ontario Clean Air Alliance’s Close Pickering campaign brochure.

A huge (& growing) number of voices with plenty of knowledge & technical expertise behind them are calling for this aging plant to be shut down.

DNA couldn’t be more on board.

Check out some of the resources listed/linked in here, & decide for yourself!

Let’s stop risking the health & safety of the people of Ontario (not to mention the folks on the U.S. side of the border, downwinders in the event of an accident).

Resources

Recent Articles

YouTubes

Podcast

40 years of being a good neighbor? (nuke engineer/expert Arnie Gundersen)

 

Web Resources

 

p.s. gosh, I plum forgot to mention a teeny-tiny additional issue, applicable to ALL nuclear installations, everywhere.

The waste.

The tons & tons of dangerous, extremely toxic & unimaginably long-lived wastes. That will be around for longer than we mere humans can even (begin to) imagine. Yup.

& for which no solution has yet been found.

Maybe it’s time to stop making more of it. You think? (Plenty of useful info on waste here)

p.p.s. Oops. One more tiny “little” thing. Utterly inadequate nuclear emergency planning. This Web site has plenty of information on that topic. With links to plenty more.

No new nuclear emergency plans in Ontario post-Fukushima disaster. Revised plan now 3 years overdue … & nowhere in sight. Gee. What could possibly go wrong??

p.p.p.s. don’t forget to SIGN THE PETITION!

Chernobyl. 30 years. The ongoing disaster: tons of links!

Posted on by

Many of us have vivid memories from the time when the Chernobyl nuclear disaster occurred. April 26, 1986 (though of course notification about its occurrence was delayed – to its own people, & to the world).

30 years ago, now.

There remains a 30-kilometre “exclusion zone” around the site, though there are people who have chosen to return & continue living within that area & also, as I learned to my surprise recently, many people who now live outside the zone (many who were evacuated from the Pripyat area, to a new town), but who commute to the plant for their work.

Nuclear accidents. They just never really go away, do they??

Fallout is forever, both literally in terms of what goes into the air, water & soils – and also in terms of long-term health consequences.

Many children born today in the areas of highest fallout (Ukraine, Belarus & Russia) suffer significant health problems … way above & beyond thyroid cancer (the only health impact ever acknowledged by the nuclear industry).

Genetic damage comes down through the generations – as the people most affected by the Chernobyl & Fukushima nuclear disasters are learning firsthand.

What many Canadians don’t seem to realize is, this could happen here. This could be us.

A catastrophic nuclear accident could happen at one of Ontario’s nuclear plants, poisoning air, water (Lake Ontario, for example; then, what would we drink??) & the soils in which we grow our food.

I only wish it weren’t so.

Well.

EVENTS

There will be at least 5 events in the days ahead, in the Toronto area, being held to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster that began on April 26, 1986.

April 22nd Echoes of Chornobyl event  – Facebook page

Poster of 3 documentary showings: April 24th, 25th, 27th (please visit Facebook page here & scroll down; having IT issues attempting to attach the poster; apologies!?)

Half-Life in Fukushima – documentary showings May 2, 4 & 8 (Toronto)

Upcoming event in Washington, D.C. Lessons from Fukushima and Chernobyl: The Risks of “Normalizing” Radiation: A Special Event

Links to Recent News Items

15 things you don’t know about Chernobyl [Greenpeace]

30 Ways Chernobyl and Dying Nuke Industry Threaten Our Survival [Wasserman]

Blind Mice and bird brains: the silent spring of Chernobyl and Fukushima [The Ecologist. Timothy Mousseau’s work]

Chernobyl, and Cesium, at 30

Chernobyl’s children of hope [Greenpeace]

Chernobyl Disaster 30 years on: what do you remember? [the Guardian]

Chernobyl Disaster – 30 years later. Photos

Chernobyl – timeline of a nuclear nightmare

Chernobyl, 30 years on [from Truthout. Good info on medical/health stuff, IAEA / WHO duplicity]

Chernobyl is not safe for humans but animal populations are booming [Globe & Mail]

Chernobyl and Fukushima: Illuminating the invisible  [Greenpeace]

Children of the fall out: Belarus youngsters feel effects of Chernobyl nuclear disaster 30 years on [Daily Record]

Demystifying Nuclear Power: Chernobyl’s Forgotten People/Casualties of Atomic Breakdown [from Fairewinds]

Exiled Scientist: ‘Chernobyl has not finished, it has only just begun’

Mikhail Gorbachev 30 years after Chernobyl – time to phase out nuclear power

Radiation harm deniers? Pro-nuclear environmentalists and the Chernobyl death toll [The Ecologist]

Radioactive Chernobyl Forest Fires: a ticking time bomb [Greenpeace]

Ruined Chernobyl nuclear plant will remain a threat for 3,000 years

The next Chernobyl may be intentional

The Shadow of Chernobyl Looms Large 30 Years Later [Huff. Post, Greenpeace]

TORCH 2016 -Chernobyl Health Report

http://www.ianfairlie.org/news/30-years-after-chernobyl/

Ukraine Children Eat Food Tainted by Chornobyl Radiation  [Toronto Star; great quote from pediatrician Dr. Yuri Bandazhevsky]

‘We have a chance to show the truth’: into the heart of Chernobyl [The Guardian]

We’ve had enough of eating and breathing Chernobyl [Greenpeace]

Audio / Films / Video Recommended

Book VERY Highly Recommended!

Voices from Chernobyl – The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster, by Nobel Prize for Literature winner Svetlana Alexievich

On the DNA site

 

TAKE ACTION!

PETITION

No Nukes News

 

Quotes that spring to mind

“Chernobyl is a word we would all like to erase from our memory. But more than seven million of our fellow human beings do not have the luxury of forgetting. They are still suffering, every day, as a result of what happened…The exact number of victims can never be known.” – former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan

“Uranium is the mineral of the apocalypse.” – Donald Weber

“What Dr. Gerstein shows is that reasonable people, who are not malicious, and whose intent is not to kill or injure other people, will nonetheless risk killing vast numbers of people. And they will do it predictably, with awareness … They knew the risks from the beginning, at every stage … the leaders chose, in the face of serious warnings, to consciously take chances that risked disaster … Men in power are willing to risk any number of human lives to avoid an otherwise certain loss to themselves, a sure reversal of their own prospects in the short run.” – Daniel Ellsberg, quoted in the Marc Gerstein book Flirting with Disaster – Why Accidents Are Rarely Accidental  (also quoted by Arnie Gundersen in the Greenpeace report Lessons from Fukushima)

“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” – Boxer Mike Tyson

** many more here

Three Mile Island. 37 Years. What have we learned??

Posted on by

On March 28, 1979 there was a meltdown at the Three Mile Island (TMI) nuclear plant in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, U.S.A. – though this meltdown was not actually understood and acknowledged by the industry until a few years later. The denial was very big & very stubborn. Risks to the local population were completely downplayed, denied & minimized.

Like so many people, I was pretty much asleep at the time of the TMI accident. I don’t mean literally asleep; I mean I was too busy with my own little life to really pay attention to what was going on in the big world around me (a perhaps somewhat typical citizen absorbed in my own work & personal life, at that time).

But “the authorities” lied to the public so completely about what was really happening in Pennsylvania that day that even if I’d been less self-absorbed, the accident would likely have barely registered on my (or most people’s) personal radar screen.

One thing the accident did contribute to was a chill on new nuclear plant construction (although in the documentary mentioned below, Arnie Gundersen explains that it was actually economics that did in new nukes. That is to say, they are just too damn costly).

Rather than building new reactors in North America, what we do now, mostly, is keep pushing geriatric ones well beyond what they were designed for. Like the ones at Pickering, hmmm? (Many relevant Pickering postings listed on this page). Darlington too, of course. Billions to “refurbish” (i.e., rebuild) them. Refurbishment: what you need to know.

Well. I could go on.

Let’s just say, here are some links I can recommend you check out on this 37th “anniversary” of the TMI meltdown.

Must-see?

The 2012 documentary ‘The Atomic States of America’

Really. You must watch!

It will inform, educate & surprise you … possibly even break your heart (learning about young children who contracted serious, deadly cancers on Long Island, due to tritium leaks/plumes that ended up in their families’ wells).

Interview clips with

  • Arnie Gundersen (Fairewinds)
  • Helen Caldicott (M.D. & decades’ long opponent of nuclear power)
  • David Lochbaum (Union of Concerned Scientists)
  • Alec Baldwin (well-known actor who lives on Long Island)
  • Writer Kelly McMasters (on whose book Welcome to Shirley – a memoir from an atomic town, the documentary is loosely based)
  • Eric Epstein, a stubborn, feisty & articulate activist who lives near TMI & has been educating the public for 31 years (his group: Three Mile Island Alert) — see Nuclear Hotseat link above!!
  • Randy Snell (Shirley resident, father of a daughter who got cancer very young & miraculously survived; he did a ton of work on Long Island to connect the dots & educate others) … & please note, it was not just children who got cancer at astronomical rates.
  • & others in another community deeply affected by tritium leaks from a nuke plant
  • Politicians who still say we need nukes.        Info about the waste issues involved.

++ much, much more.

Just watch!!!!

 ** At the end of the film, it’s mentioned that

  • It cost $1. billion to defuel Unit 2 at TMI in 1990
  • It’s estimated it will cost $836.9 million to decommission & decontaminate it
  • The reactor operated for 90 days.

Other Relevant Postings on this Blog

Well, most of them, really!

But maybe these ones in particular:

 

p.s. the 4 common elements to the 3 big nuke accidents? From the Fairewinds item mentioned above?

Four Lessons from 5 Meltdowns (18 minute video from April 2015 at the Uranium Symposium)

Key overarching one? Expect the unexpected

The 4: 1. Safety systems will fail 2. Emergency planning will fail 3. People will die 4. Risk is grossly underestimated

p.p.s. what have we learned?? Nothing, really. We just keep doing the same damn stupid stuff, over & over, year after year, decade after decade. We think we’re so darn smart, eh? But we are not. We are really, really not.

It’s shocking, really.

Fukushima: 5 years In. What Have We (Not) Learned?

Posted on by

March 11, 2016 marks 5 years since the start of this neverending nuclear disaster that has shaken Japan and the world. There are many misconceptions about the nuclear disaster, its causes & its endless repercussions.

Some things, however, are not open for debate.

1. The nuclear disaster has been shown to be “man-made” – could & should have been prevented, in other words, but due to the dangerous collusion among government, nuclear industry & the far-flung “nuclear establishment,” became inevitable. (See posting here, ‘Fukushima: what really happened?’) Another, similar disaster could occur at any time, given the world’s hundreds of aging, decrepit reactors, and this global issue of collusion/regulatory capture.

2. Emergency planning & response were utterly inadequate to deal with the nuclear crisis in Japan. This too is a common feature of all nuclear jurisdictions. Even here in Ontario? Yes. Emergency planning is every bit as inadequate here.

3. Reports on the # of people evacuated vary, but around 160,000 Japanese citizens were evacuated from their homes. The evacuations were messy, ill-planned and poorly executed. Many people died during careless evacuations. Some people were sent into the very areas where the radioactive plume was heading, and some communities were left for weeks in areas with very high levels of contamination before evacuation orders were issued.

Nearly 100,000 people in Japan continue to live away from their homes.

The Prime Minister of Japan recently told his citizens all they need to do is put on a happy face. “The cure for radiation is a smile,” he said.

Shameful.

4. There is much common ground between the effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster (April 26, 1986) & those of the Fukushima accident. Many people are living in areas of high contamination. They are eating food that contains radioactive contaminants. They are becoming ill from both, with a wide variety of illnesses (cancer being far from the only one), & these populations are going to continue facing health risks & consequences for decades. In Japan, people are now being coerced into returning to areas of high contamination. (See Greenpeace reports linked in below.)

Nuclear messes can’t be cleaned up. The industry basically just moves waste around from one place to another. A recent New York Times article ‘Playing Pass the Parcel with Fukushima’ spells this out clearly. The waste in Japan is simply being schlepped around from one location to another. This is not a “solution”! It’s a way of making money for the nuclear clean-up industry (very profitable for them, of course), & it means simply re-contaminating new communities & endangering everyone within range of its transportation & its current (temporary) location (much of it in bags that will last a few years at most). Oh yes, let’s not forget that it is also being incinerated.

Nuclear fallout is forever. It’s long past time for us all to be 100% clear on this point by now, surely!

5.  We do not seem to be learning from these disasters (well, some jurisdictions are! A number of countries are now phasing out nuclear energy, Germany notable among them) … though the lessons are surely as plain as the noses on our faces.

We keep right on using this dangerous energy source that emits poisons into air & water even during routine operations, putting drinking water supplies at risk and creating endless quantities of nuclear wastes there is no solution for. Wastes that will remain toxic & dangerous for longer than human beings have walked on the Earth.

Preposterous.

Shame on us.

Information Links

Below are links to a large # of information sources about the situation in Japan.

These include articles, a news release, recent documentary, & a podcast with voices from Japan.

All of them of very recent vintage.

Events

are taking place all over the world to mark this anniversary.

Interesting & no doubt very partial list here.

Documentary Showings in the GTA (Greater Toronto Area)

The Japanese community in Toronto has shown two documentaries that focus on the impacts of the March 2011 earthquake & tsunami.

The documentary ‘A2-B-C’ (about health impacts to Japanese children from the nuclear disaster) is being shown in

  • Pickering, March 10th
  • Toronto, March 11th
  • Beaches community, March 13th

Following these film showings, the lessons we need to take from the Fukushima accident, for Ontarians, will be discussed by knowledgeable speakers.

(see previous post for more details)

 

Finally…

Never again?

Until the lessons from Chernobyl & Fukushima are truly absorbed & appropriately acted on, the best we can hope for is that the next (inevitable) nuclear accident will not take place in our own backyard.

Given the age of Ontario’s nuclear fleet & our government and the nuclear industry’s determination to keep it on life support?

Faint hope, I’m afraid.

Very faint, indeed.

 

** Many pithy quotations about inadequate nuclear emergency planning & the causes of the Fukushima disaster here

 

The Links

Recent conference: Berlin Congress: 30 years of Chernobyl, 5 of Fukushima

TORCH 2016 -Chernobyl Health Report

Analysis: The legacy of the Fukushima nuclear disaster-Carbon Brief

Court Orders One of Japan’s Two Operating Nuclear Plants to Shut Down

Crippled Fukushima Reactors Are Still a Danger, 5 Years after the Accident

Fairewinds Posts on 5th Anniversary (Arnie Gundersen on a Japanese tour)

(Against the Will of the People; final Fairewinds item from Japanese tour 2016)

Five Years Living with Fukushima – report from Physicians for Social Responsibility

FIVE YEARS AFTER: ‘Don’t abandon us,’ victims of Fukushima nuclear accident say

Five Years After Fukushima, ‘No End in Sight’ to Ecological Fallout

Five years on, cleanup of Fukushima’s reactors remains a distant goal

Five Years After the Fukushima Accidents: Thinking about Nuclear Power and Safety

Former Tepco bosses charged over Fukushima meltdown

FUKUSHIMA AT 5 CHORNOBYL AT 30-Kraft NEIS

Fukushima: A Nuclear Story (1-hour Passionate Eye documentary shown on CBC TV this week)

Fukushima nuclear disaster evacuees establish liaison group for lawsuit plaintiffs

Fukushima – Deep Trouble

Fukushima: Tokyo was on the brink of nuclear catastrophe, admits former prime minister

Fukushima Report: 10,000 Excess Cancers Expected in Japan as a Result of 2011 Reactor Meltdowns, Ongoing Radiation Exposure (from Physicians for Social Responsibility)

Fukushima Keeps Fighting Radioactive Tide 5 Years After Disaster

Fukushima ‘Decontamination Troops’ Often Exploited, Shunned

Fukushima: They Knew

Fukushima’s ground zero: No place for man or robot

Fukushima Five Years On: Not a Comedy of Errors, a Calamity of Terrors

Fukushima Five Years After: Health Researchers Turn Blind Eye to Casualties

Greenpeace items

How is Fukushima’s cleanup going five years after its meltdown? Not so well.

Japanese Citizens Celebrate Victory — Shut Down Nuclear Power Plants (YouTube)

Japan’s nuclear refugees face bleak return five years after Fukushima

No bliss in this ignorance: the great Fukushima nuclear cover-up

Nuclear Hotseat # 246 – Fukushima 5th anniversary – Voices from Japan (podcast)

‪No Nukes News – great compilation item!

On Forgetting Fukushima

Playing Pass the Parcel With Fukushima

Radioactive waste fire in Namie, Fukushima

The mothers who set up a radiation lab

The NRC Seven: Petitioning the NRC over Safety

When the Unthinkable is Deemed Impossible: Reflecting on Fukushima (by a former member of the NRC – U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission)

14 Groups Call on Canada’s PM to Fix Nuclear Law & Oversight

Five Years After Fukushima, U.S. Nuclear Safety Upgrades Lagging

MARY OLSON’s POSTS from Japan & note: they are must-reads!! These posts describe encounters with people affected by the accident, including evacuees. Ms. Olson makes this very personal. Please read them!

 

Fukushima: 5 years. 3 Documentary Showings

Posted on by

It’s hard to believe, but true: the 5th anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster is fast approaching.
DNA is cooperating with 3 other groups to show an award-winning documentary about the health implications for Japanese children in the wake of the triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi, and to discuss Fukushima’s lessons for Ontario.

The film will be shown in three locations, on three different dates. Details below.

** Note: I’ve seen the documentary. It’s informative, disturbing, moving and powerful. I can’t promise that it won’t elicit some tears. To hear young children discuss radioactive playground structures, and teen-agers predict their own eventual cancers; well, these are sad and sobering things.

 

Lessons from Fukushima for Ontario – 5 years after the worst nuclear disaster

Film Screening + Panel Discussion at 3 locations in Toronto & Pickering

Dates: March 10th, 11th & 13th

Film: ‘A2-B-C,’ directed by Ian Thomas Ash, 2013

** Speakers will discuss the risks of Ontario’s nuclear reactors, emergency plans and plans to rebuild Ontario’s aging nuclear fleet.

Speakers:

  • Angela Bischoff, Ontario Clean Air Alliance (OCAA)
  • Erica Stahl, Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA)
  • Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Greenpeace Canada

About ‘A2-B-C’:

Since the nuclear disasters in Fukushima, Japan, in March 2011, local childhood thyroid cancer cases have risen to 20-50 times above normal. Citing a lack of transparency in the official medical testing of their children and the ineffectiveness of the decontamination of their homes and schools, the children’s mothers take radiation monitoring into their own hands.

The film has won 12 awards internationally.

71 min. English subtitles. www.a2documentary.com

——

Event Schedule: 

Thur. March 10, 6:30 – 8:30 p.m.

Pickering Main Library, One the Esplanade

Donations welcome!

https://www.facebook.com/events/252463191752578/

——

Fri. March 11, 7 – 9 p.m.

Beit Zatoun, 612 Markham, Toronto (Bathurst subway station)

Suggested Donation: $5-10

https://www.facebook.com/events/806452062832978/

——

Sun. March 13, 1:30 – 3:30 p.m.

Beach United Church, 140 Wineva Ave.

Donations welcome!

https://www.facebook.com/events/1696146407291800/

——

These events are sponsored by

 

  • Many quotations about the causes of the Fukushima nuclear disaster here
  • ‘Fukushima: what really happened?’ posting here

A2-B-C Poster w. Quotes

Darlington Hearing: ROBUST public response!

Posted on by

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) has asked the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) for a 13-year licence to continue operations at the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station (DNGS). During this period of time, they intend to “refurbish” (i.e., rebuild) the site’s four reactors at a cost (to taxpayers) of between $8 & 14 billion dollars. Previous posts on this site provide information about the refurbishment – information that most people probably don’t know, as well as a posting with many reasons why a lot of us think there is no need whatsoever for CNSC to give OPG an unprecedented 13-year licence (or even 10).

This posting will provide information about the hearing itself, which took place over a 4-day period, November 2-5, in Courtice – within seeing distance, almost, of the DNGS itself.

You can access video of the hearing here. The Webcast will only be available on the CNSC Web site for three months, to the best of my understanding.

On this page you’ll find links to the written transcripts from the hearing.

For convenience, here are links to each of the days’ transcripts.

There was definitely what could accurately be called an extraordinarily robust response to this hearing. A total of 283 people wrote in, & approximately 65 individuals/groups/corporations presented in person. This is a very significant response, and for OPG & the CNSC to have had to devote four full days to the hearing is a statement about the considerable amount of public engagement & concern that exists regarding this license request.

Topics of concern from citizen groups/individuals included but were not limited to:

  • Accident risks
  • Cost issues
  • Cyber-security
  • Emergency planning deficiencies
  • Environmental impacts
  • Food security concerns (in the event of an accident)
  • Reactor safety: involving some highly technical discussion
  • Seismic issues
  • Transparency & trust (more to the point, the lack thereof)
  • The need to move to renewable energy sources
  • Waste: the vast quantities of new nuclear wastes to be produced by this project
  • Worker exposures / health issues & impacts

I might add that the education level of many of the intervenors is impressive. I’m not sure how many possess Ph.D.’s … but it is quite a few. Citizen intervenors also included at least one medical doctor, several lawyers, & several engineers. This is not an unruly, uneducated bunch of rowdies we are talking about here. Just saying.

As well…

Quite a number of nuclear worker groups, chambers of commerce & corporations also presented at the hearing; not surprisingly, remarks from these quarters were inevitably very positive in tone. Extremely questionable to many of us is this so-called “quasi-judicial” tribunal’s willingness to hear from corporations that stand to profit by bringing in millions of dollars from this massive reactor rebuild project. Such individuals/corporations seem surely less-than-capable of neutral, unbiased or deeply questioning views on the risks of the project or the safety of the technologies involved.

Such, it must sadly be said, is simply the nature of CNSC hearings. This is not the first time I’ve witnessed this extremely questionable practice – it’s become a routine aspect of the proceedings. It is, quite simply, just the way the CNSC does business. CNSC may lay claim to being Canadians’ guardian of “nuclear safety” – but seasoned CNSC watchers find it seems to be far more of a nuclear industry booster than a true guardian of safety. It takes attendance at only one hearing for this to become abundantly clear.

As with every nuclear hearing I’ve attended over the past nine years, I was impressed over & over again at the level of learning, expertise (& also courage) demonstrated by the citizen “intervenors,” as we’re called. Many have considerable technical knowledge & awareness regarding the ins & outs of nuclear technology & its associated risks, clearly the result of many hundreds (if not thousands) of hours, in some cases over many decades.

By contrast, the nuclear boosters often sound more than a little foolish. It’s clear their knowledge is neither deep nor wide, in contrast to that of the citizens with their vast array of legitimate, wide-ranging concerns. It’s also clear that almost no one in the room (the very large “sanctuary” of the Hope Fellowship church in Courtice) – always including at least 20 or so OPG staff to one side, and at least 20 or so CNSC staff to the other, and the members of the tribunal sitting up front (at a long table on an elevated platform; six tribunal members, accompanied by the Commission Secretary & a CNSC lawyer, hold court at this elevated “head table) – really finds what the boosters say terribly compelling. You can sense a lack of real engagement among the audience members (even the paid, mostly quite highly paid, contingent among them, when these boosters are saying their piece). It’s palpable. Again, you have to be there to experience this.

By contrast, when any of the citizen intervenors with their array of numerous, truly sobering & substantial concerns is speaking (for the 10-minute time period they are allotted, no matter their level of expertise), one can sense a very keen interest in what is being said. Truth-telling is a compelling thing; there’s just no getting around it.

I ought to state right here that a person cannot really do justice to a CNSC hearing using words & descriptions; I know because I’ve been trying & failing to do just this for years now. You have to experience a hearing first-hand to grasp how they really work. It’s quite a show, and that’s the truth. In fact, there is an air to it of drama & performance. A great many untruths are spoken with deliberate, sober, straight faces. It can be quite challenging to listen to, a good deal of the time, when one is aware that lies are being spoken boldly left and right.

What I’m going to do next is provide links to a selection of outstanding “interventions” from the hearing, by category.

I’ll give links to the individual or group’s initial written submission & any “supplementary” submissions, as well as to page links for their remarks in the written transcript.

If you’ve never before paid attention to what is aired at a CNSC hearing, I guarantee you’ll be amazed at the quality of the submissions.

By all means, read the entire transcript, &/or watch the whole Webcast!

SUBMISSIONS

By category, some notable submissions:

Accident Risks, Seismic Risks (etc.)

 Cyber-security issues

Emergency Planning Deficiencies (etc.)

** This topic was referenced again & again & again … & then again. In fact, CNSC tribunal member Ms. Rumina Velshi observed at the hearing (see pg. 66 on November 4th) that more than 80% of the submissions received referenced concerns about inadequate emergency planning.

** You really must take a quick read of the CELA supplementary document linked in above! It spells out findings about inadequate emergency responses in the post-Fukushima accident period – in the assessment of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), the global nuclear “regulator” – which it appears Canada’s “regulator” & government agencies at all levels are studiously ignoring!

Environmental Impacts (etc.)

  • Ole Hendrickson (tritium) Nov.4th (p. 289-308)
  • Lake Ontario Waterkeeper Lake Ontario Waterkeeper-supplem Nov.3rd (p. 99-148)

Food Security (etc.)

  • Suhail Barot Nov.3rd (p. 281-292)
  • Belyakov  Belyakov-Supplementary   Nov.3rd (p. 194-206) ** Dr. Belyakov (who was born in Ukraine) also spoke of real-life, long-term consequences of the Chernobyl accident
  • NFU  (National Farmers Union) Waterloo Wellington Local Nov.2nd (p. 263-275). ** This presenter also referenced nuclear waste, nuclear waste transportation issues & real-life experiences in Germany, post-Chernobyl accident

Health / Worker Exposure & Safety Issues (etc.)

  • CAPE-written (Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment) CAPE-supplem Nov.5th (p. 65-77)
  • CCNR (Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility) Nov.3rd (p. 86-113)
  • Frank Greening   Frank Greening-Suppl (written; his letters discussed Nov.3rd p. 315-346) ** note: Greening is an ex-nuclear industry engineer
  • PHCHCC (Port Hope Community Health Concerns Committee), Nov.5th (p. 88-102)
  • Anna Tilman  Anna Tilman-suppl   Nov.4th (p. 145-176)

Limitations of the (alleged) Severe Accident Study

** DNA posting about the (supposed) severe accident study here

Reactor Safety & Technical Issues

  • CCNR Nov.3rd (p. 86-113)
  • Michel Duguay Nov.5th (p. 131-146)
  • Greenpeace  Greenpeace-Suppl Greenpeace-supplem 2  Nov.3rd (p. 5-69)
  • Frank Greening  Frank Greening-Suppl (written; his letters discussed Nov.3rd p. 315-346)
  • Sunil Nijhawan  Sunil Nijhawan-Revised  Sunil Nijhawan-Revised2 Nov.3rd(p. 231-280) ** an extraordinary, I would call it unique, exchange!
  • Anna Tilman  Anna Tilman-suppl  Nov.4th (p. 145-176)

Waste / Waste Transportation (etc.)

  • Beyond Nuclear Nov.4th (p. 339-361)
  • NFU (National Farmers Union – Waterloo Wellington Local) Nov.2nd (p. 263-275)
  • Northwatch  Northwatch-supplem   Nov.5th (p. 10-64)
  • Sharen Skelly Nov.2nd (p. 236-244)
  • Anna Tilman  Anna Tilman-suppl  Nov.4th (p. 145-176)

Please understand: there were many, many additional thoughtful, intelligent, incisive, moving & compelling presentations during the hearing. I simply cannot include nor take the time to re-read them all. The most I can do here is touch on some especially memorable ones, ones that cover a wide range of topics of deep concern. I do encourage you to look over them all!

You can request a CD of the submission pdf’s that includes both original written & supplementary submissions, from CNSC staff, &/or hard copies. Do that by writing to info@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca

To Conclude…

I am not in the slightest convinced that the public concerns raised by all these articulate citizens of Durham Region, Toronto, elsewhere in Ontario (also two from Quebec, one from New Brunswick & one from Washington, D.C.) were really heard – truly listened to & digested – nor do I really expect (based on a now-rather-large number of CNSC hearing experiences) them to be appropriately acted upon.

On the last day of the hearing, what became clear when CNSC staff & OPG made their final comments was that most of the incredibly large number of serious concerns raised by citizen interventors seem to have gone in the proverbial one ear, & right out the other. CNSC staff & OPG staff are quite practiced at dismissing, minimizing & denying safety issues of many (or all) kinds, & in many cases, patronizing even the most intelligent intervenors.

Then … it’s right back to the business of creating nuclear waste … & picking up the generous (very generous indeed!) salaries that this work provides.

Btw, it’s decently possible the word “robust” was used a record number of times in this hearing. One CNSC staffer used it 3 times in a two-sentence span! (see pg. 350 of the Nov. 4th transcript). We seasoned CNSC watchers do know from this word’s exceedingly frequent usage that it is definitely something of a favourite among nuclear industry personnel, both here & in the U.S.

Something we know for sure is very very robust indeed, that the industry seems mostly loath to talk about &/or to skip over with considerable cavalierness (if this is a word), is nuclear waste. Nuclear waste is indeed wildly robust, robust beyond any of our wildest imaginings, even – and there is yet, 70 years into the great nuclear experiment, no solution for it.

None, none, none – not one (unless you consider leaking storage sites here, there & everywhere on our planet, & burning, yes, incinerating nuclear wastes, viable solutions). Consider checking out this item for information about 6000 nuclear waste sites in the U.S.A. Very sobering. & note: that’s only in the U.S.! The total number world-wide must be simply staggering. Truly mind-boggling.

So very much more could be said about nuclear waste. Dear me. But not here, & not now. (Although I can & do recommend you take a gander at this item to get a sense of how much NEW waste this proposed refurbishment project will create.)

Something that is not robust?

Nuclear emergency planning in Ontario. Definitely definitely definitely NOT robust. As many many many citizen & NGO intervenors referenced at this recent hearing.

 

A few memorable/relevant quotations:

“The liar’s punishment is not in the least that he is not believed but that he cannot believe anyone else.” – George Bernard Shaw Irish dramatist & socialist (1856 – 1950)

“The pay [for the professional apologists] has to be relatively high, because the job commonly requires the sacrifice of intellectual honesty.” – John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D. (1918-2007) in “Irrevy” – An Irreverent, Illustrated View of Nuclear Power <pg. 55>

“There has not existed the slightest shred of meaningful evidence that the entire intervention process in nuclear energy is anything more than the most callous of charades and frauds.” – John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D. (1918-2007) in “Irrevy” – An Irreverent, Illustrated View of Nuclear Power <pg. 125>

 “Perhaps you have noticed that every time a radioactive release is known to have occurred, officials announce, ‘but the amount released poses no danger to public health.’ There must, by now, be 100,000 such announcements. How many ‘small’ releases can we have and still have the total ‘small?’” – Dr. John Gofman, M.D., Ph.D. in “Irrevy” – An Irreverent, Illustrated View of Nuclear Power <pg. 101>

** fascinating article about John Gofman here

 

 

Durham Region asks Province to open up & to evaluate expanding nuclear evacuation zones

Posted on by

NEWS RELEASE

Durham Region asks Province to open up and to evaluate expanding nuclear evacuation zones

Whitby, November 8, 2015: Durham Nuclear Awareness (DNA) applauds Durham Regional Council for calling on the province to be more transparent in reviewing nuclear emergency plans, and to consider expanding the current 10 km nuclear evacuation zones around the Pickering and Darlington nuclear stations.

“We’ve been very frustrated by the provincial government’s secrecy and foot-dragging since Fukushima. We applaud Durham Region for reminding the province that it needs to consult openly with the communities most affected in the event of an accident at Darlington or Pickering,” said Whitby resident and DNA member Gail Cockburn.

Durham Regional Council passed a motion on November 4, 2014 asking the province to “provide all non-confidential data and studies used in considering changes to Ontario’s off- site nuclear emergency plans.” It also asks the province “to consider the feasibility of expanding the 10 km primary zone.”

During last week’s Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) hearings on Ontario Power Generation (OPG)’s application to rebuild the Darlington nuclear station, a CNSC Commissioner told Ontario government representatives that 80% of submissions from members of the public voiced concerns about the inadequacy of provincial emergency plans. CNSC staff also said they’d hold their own consultations on off-site nuclear emergency plans if the province refused to act.

Last month, potassium iodide (KI) pills were sent to everyone within the provincially- determined 10 km zone of the Pickering and Darlington nuclear stations. The CNSC imposed this new safety requirement on OPG in 2014 in response to public concern and to the province’s failure to upgrade its nuclear emergency plans.

“The CNSC, Durham Region and DNA all agree. It’s been almost five years since the Fukushima disaster began, and an upgrade to Ontario’s off-site emergency plans is long overdue. Kathleen Wynne’s government needs to publicly and meaningfully consult the public on improving off-site nuclear emergency plans,” said DNA Coordinator Janet McNeill.

The motion was originally put forward in June by Councillor Jennifer O’Connell, who has since been elected Member of Parliament for Pickering, and seconded by Ajax’s Colleen Jordan. The motion was sent to committee for review before being passed by Council last week.

– 30 –

KI: Truth or Lies?

Posted on by

WASSUP?

KI (potassium iodide) is being distributed right now within the 10 kilometre “zones” of the Pickering & Darlington Nuclear Generating Stations (PNGS & DNGS) – two very large nuclear generating stations (10 operating reactors altogether; 6 at Pickering, 4 at Darlington) located east of Toronto, Canada’s largest city.

Direction sign to Nukes

Direction sign to Nukes

<graphic shows distances from downtown Toronto>

(KI distribution is also happening around the very large Bruce nuclear station on Lake Huron.)

This is by order of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), Canada’s federal nuclear “regulator.” More details below.

So, if you live in the 10 K “zone” around PNGS or DNGS, you will be receiving KI pills (by mail).

For the record, 2 things:

  • The DNA group was calling for KI pre-distribution back in 1997 (possibly even earlier) – specifically, for the emergency evacuation zones to be expanded from 10 K to 30 K, and for KI to be pre-distributed to everyone within the 30 K zone.

  • In New Brunswick, every resident has received KI in the 12 K “planning” zone, as well as within the 20 K “planning” zone of the Point Lepreau plant – since 1982 (they are delivered there door-to-door).

More “official” information about this program here.

KI Resources page on this site.

Why KI?

Potassium iodide will protect the thyroid gland from radioactive iodine in the event of a nuclear accident. Children are particularly in need of this protection and particularly susceptible to thyroid cancer if not so protected.

Thus, having KI on hand in the event of a serious nuclear accident is a protective measure.

Having it ahead of time is essential, since during the disruption that inevitably follows a nuclear accident, obtaining KI pills is liable to be a low priority for citizens (& authorities) trying to cope with a plethora of other pressing challenges.

Recent News About Thyroid Cancer – Japan

Last week Beyond Nuclear reported on recent studies about thyroid cancer incidence in Japan since the Fukushima nuclear disaster began on March 11, 2011.

Incidence is up dramatically, particularly in areas well west of the plant, where people were not evacuated.

Plenty of news about this on the Beyond Nuclear site here.

As well, the Toronto Star had an article about this recent research evidence.

KI pills were not distributed in Japan prior to the accident, nor at the time of the accident. A great many things went awry in the wake of the nuclear disaster. Evacuations were botched (including leaving people in what were known for weeks to be “hotspots),” orders to distribute KI fell between bureaucratic cracks, and overall, it is said, the “chain of command” in response to the nuclear disaster broke down.

The posting ‘Fukushima: what really happened?’ has plenty of information about the disaster, as does the earlier posting ‘Fukushima: Emergency Planning? Failing Grade.’ Many quotes about the causes of the nuclear disaster can be found here.

** Extremely important to note: thyroid cancer is not the only health impact possible. More on this below.

Older News About Thyroid Cancer / KI Pills

As DNA members have learned from the American Thyroid Association 2014 brochure, KI proved to be pretty effective against thyroid cancer in Poland after the Chernobyl accident (April 26, 1986). According to this brochure, KI was distributed to more than 95% of the children within 3 days, & the rate of thyroid cancer “does not appear to have had an increase.” In Belarus, Ukraine and Russia, however, the children were not so fortunate. “As many as 3000 people exposed to that radiation developed thyroid cancer over the next 10 years. Most victims had been babies or young children living in Ukraine, Belarus and Ukraine.” “The region of excess risk extended up to a 200 mi radius from Chornobyl.”

Also mentioned: the cancers were “aggressive” & the associated health care costs continue to place a “heavy burden.”

In reading the book Voices from Chernobyl – The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster (by recent Nobel Prize for Literature winner Svetlana Alexievich) I came across this comment about KI pills post-Chernobyl accident: “Those who could, got potassium iodide (you couldn’t get it at the pharmacy in my town, you had to really know someone).” <pg. 85> Not many could have taken it at the right time in any case, since the government failed to notify the citizenry until several days after the accident took place.

The CNSC KI Directive – Fall 2014

Almost exactly a year ago (after much discussion, Fukushima “enhancements” to the Canadian nuclear plants, &, dare I say, public pressure from NGOs) Canada’s nuclear “regulator” ordered that KI pills be pre-distributed to households within the 10 K “zone” of the country’s nuke plants.

Discussing the “zones” around nuke plants is another whole topic. The zones are pretty much arbitrary, are designated by the industry itself for its own convenience, and, as we have learned from the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters, radioactive plumes are certainly no respecters of man’s artificial boundaries, national borders or regional dividing lines! Radioactivity travels with the winds – far & wide & very unpredictably. Also, this: the U.S. has long designated a 10-mile radius around nuke plants as the emergency zone. Here in Canada? 10 kilmometres. Oops! 10 kilometres = 6 miles. Also, this: when the Fukushima nuclear disaster took place, U.S. authorities advised Americans in Japan to evacuate out beyond 50 miles. Just sayin’.

So, at 4:01 pm on Friday, October 10th last year (the Friday of Canadian Thanksgiving, a long weekend here), CNSC sent out a news release about what they call REG.DOC.2.10.1 & the plan to distribute KI pills. They might have been aiming to miss the media with that late Friday afternoon release, but it didn’t work out that way, and there was a fair bit of media coverage that weekend & early the following week.

Then, 4 days later, on October 14th, CNSC sent out a message with this info: “Four independent third party studies explore and describe the benefits of distributing KI pills in advance to citizens within a 30-mile (48 kilometres) radius of a nuclear power plant, and the need for timely and correct consumption of these pills in the case of a nuclear accident.

The studies indicate such preventative measures can greatly reduce the accumulation of radioiodines in the thyroid gland, as well as the resulting radiation dose. This is an essential measure, since thyroid cancer –, most specifically in children and infants – is one of the most frequently observed consequences of a nuclear accident.

The studies also highlight the need for appropriate administrative policies and increased research on the topic of children and infant consumption of KI pills, to better understand both the effectiveness and the safety of these measures.

Read the studies:  <end of quote from CNSC message>

Note: the media apparently did not receive this info. This was sent merely to the many of us who are on an information list for CNSC messages. Interesting that the press got the 10 K info … but not the info about 10 K probably being insufficient.

Hmmmmmm.

Switzerland

Meanwhile, in Switzerland, in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, the nuclear regulator did modelling to assess the likely impacts of a Fukushima-scale (International Nuclear Event Scale or INES Level 7) nuclear accident.

They carried this out transparently (in stark contrast to CNSC’s “severe accident study” debacle; the severe accident study that was clearly NOT a severe accident study – all thoroughly laid out in the posting ‘Severe Accident Study. Oops. Not really!’), and concluded by sending out KI pills to all Swiss citizens within a 50 K radius of their nuke plants. Info on this here (en français).

The American Thyroid Association, btw, recommends pre-distribution to 50 miles (not kilometres) & comments “No one can predict how far a radioactive iodine cloud might spread” & recommends 3 levels of coverage. Check out the brochure for yourself here.

It also notes that the WHO (World Health Organization) endorses KI distribution and that France, Ireland, Sweden, and Switzerland “not only stockpile KI but predistribute KI to their populations.”

Finally, this brochure states under the heading ‘How Should KI Be Incorporated Into an Overall Emergency Plan?’ “KI is an adjunct to evacuation, sheltering (staying in an unventilated room with the doors and windows closed), and avoiding contaminated food, milk, and water. KI should not take the place of any other protective measures.”

Note! A very important note

In all the hoopla surrounding this discussion taking place in Durham Region these days, it would be very easy to lose sight of a highly important fact: thyroid cancer is not – not by a long shot – the only possible/likely health consequence from exposure to radiation following a nuclear accident.

There are myriad others. Note links below in the Resources section for information about health consequences – not just of exposure following an accident, but from “routine” emissions from nuclear plants.

2nd note: As just stated above, KI does not constitute emergency planning! With all the fuss being made by CNSC, OPG, Ontario’s health ministry and the Durham Region Health Department, a person could be fooled into thinking something of substance is taking place here. Really, it is not!

KI is an “adjunct” and “should not take the place of any other protective measures.”

KI will not prevent an accident from happening. It will assuredly not make you “safe.”

It will also not protect you (or your loved ones) against the many other possible health consequences if an accident does take place. Nor, of course, from so-called Routine Releases.

Conclusion & Resources

I hope it’s becoming clear that it’s probably a pretty sensible idea to develop a healthy skepticism about claims made by the nuclear industry (& our health “authorities”) regarding so-called nuclear “safety” & official readiness/preparations for a nuclear accident (the latter, we note, meaning “off-site” emergency response, being a provincial, regional and municipal responsibility).

If you’re not convinced yet of the need for a little digging, please look through the list of recent postings on this blog that you’ll see over to the right-hand side of the page.

Relevant Resources

CHERNOBYL LINKS

Darlington Hearing: Weigh in … & watch!

Posted on by

CNSC Hearing: Nov. 2-5, in Courtice (west of Bowmanville). ** NOTE: You can watch the hearing via Webcast. Go to www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca to find out how. (Allow yourself a few minutes to sort this out. You may have to fiddle a bit & click on several links before you get to the right spot. There should be a link on the upper right side of the main CNSC page.)

*** DNA’s written submission to CNSC

What’s It About? Why is this Licence a Bad Idea?

OPG (Ontario Power Generation) is asking for a 13-year licence to refurbish (i.e., rebuild) & continue operating 4 reactors at Darlington Nuclear Generating Station (DNGS) — at huge public expense.

There are many reasons to speak up about this “life extension” project & the 13-year licence:

  • Building these reactors will cost Ontario taxpayers a fortune! At least $10 billion. Probably way more. Heck, the project is already costing us a fortune.

  • Who knows if they will be finished safely & on time? (In 2009, 500 Bruce Power workers were exposed to alpha radiation during refurbishment activities there. Much more could be said about this; feel free to dig around on the topic! Nasty.)

  • OPG’s past licences have never been for more than 2-5 years. Thus, this request is unprecedented.

  • Such a long licence is not necessary; other reactor operators in Canada have neither requested nor been granted such a long term. Bruce Power went through a licensing hearing earlier this year at which they asked for, & were granted, a 5-year licence for similar activities, i.e., refurbishment & continued operation.

  • A licence of this length is a way of reducing public scrutiny over OPG’s operations at Darlington.

  • If DNGS gets a 13-year licence, members of the public would not have the opportunity to oversee what is going on at the plant until 2028. Public hearings allow citizens to review OPG’s operations, and to ask questions. This ensures that OPG remains accountable to its host community.

  • Regular re-licensing hearings allow the public & independent CNSC commissioners to scrutinize both OPG operations & CNSC staff oversight of OPG.

  • Reduced public scrutiny can increase the risk of an accident if OPG & CNSC staff are not regularly – and publicly – held accountable for their actions.

  • Without accountability & transparency, reactor operators & regulators can become complacent, ignoring their responsibilities to ensure public safety. This is often referred to as “regulatory capture.”

  • This is what occurred at Fukushima. Lack of proper scrutiny & oversight (proper regulation) led to the Fukushima accident, assessed to be a “man-made” accident (you can check out this posting for many relevant quotations about the causes of the Fukushima accident).

  • Emergency planning in Durham Region/the Greater Toronto Area is gravely inadequate in the event that a serious accident occurs. The plans have been made under the assumption that only a mild accident with a minor release of radioactivity would take place. All explained more thoroughly here & here. Bottom line? Residents of Durham Region/the GTA are not safe to assume they’ll be well protected in the event of a serious nuclear accident.

  • Most citizens of Durham Region & Toronto actually don’t have a clue what they would do if an accident did take place. People are not well-informed.

  • We don’t seem to be able to count on Canada’s nuclear “regulator” to tell us the truth about nuclear safety, nuclear studies, & so on. The Harper government has turned a nuclear watchdog into a lapdog.

  • Canada’s nuclear regulator claims its staff has conducted a “severe accident study” that indicates a “serious” accident wouldn’t really cause too much of a problem. Problem is, the study is not what it claims to be … not at all. Best to read the previous post to get the lowdown.

  • Nuclear refurbishments create (literally!) tons of new nuclear wastes. We all know there is nowhere safe for any of that stuff to “go.” Plenty of detailed info on that topic here.

  • It just doesn’t seem that OPG’s plans for Darlington are worth the risk.

  • You know what? I haven’t even mentioned Lake Ontario, & what nuke plants do to the bodies of water they are located on. Holy smokes. Major omission. The Lake Ontario Waterkeeper site has some recent info; why not check that out? For sure, Lake Ontario takes a bit hit from this plant. Nor should we be risking the drinking water source for millions of people. Nosirree.

WHY Weigh In?

Those of us experienced with nuclear hearings & nuclear industry dealings find the CNSC doesn’t pay much attention even when a very large number of people tell them their licensees & licensees’ plans can’t be trusted. I say this advisedly, having taken part now in 10 hearings over the past 9 years.

Why do we keep showing up at CNSC hearings when the CNSC doesn’t really seem to be listening?

Because we need to get other people to listen!

Municipal / regional / provincial politicians – who can exert pressure on the Premier of Ontario.

It is up to Ontario’s Premier to sign off on this refurbishment project.

Politicians at the Durham (& Toronto) municipal / regional / provincial levels should speak up on our behalf (& their own!) because

  1. They live here too, so they’re just as much at risk as you & I.

  2. It’s their job & responsibility to protect the citizens who put them there (& who, also, btw, pay their salaries!)

  3. It’s dangerous that so few people & so few politicians are paying attention to serious nuclear risks & seriously deficient nuclear emergency planning.

Nuclear accidents are happening around the world at the rate of one every 10 years. There is no way under these circumstances that OPG should be permitted to operate behind closed doors for 13 years.

Emergency Planning Deficiencies

Current provincial emergency plans are built around the assumption of a minor accident in which no large release of radioactivity takes place immediately. Unsafe, unreasonable assumptions.

Plans for a serious accident, then, are not robust.

In Durham Region, what this means is that DEMO (Durham Emergency Management Office) is only really prepared for the evacuation of people in the immediate vicinity of the plants (Pickering or Darlington).

Not for a big accident – a Level 7 on the INES (International Nuclear Event Scale) – like the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters. Where tens of thousands of people needed to be evacuated … quickly.

DNA has been working to inform local politicians about these gaps & deficiencies, & it seems to have sunk in (with some, anyway) that most people really actually have no idea what to do if a serious accident happens.

We Canadians are so polite, though, aren’t we? Polite to a fault. So polite we do not safeguard our own … safety.

We need Durham Region’s politicians to come right out & say very clearly to the Province: “Dudes. We’re right here at Ground Zero if a serious accident should happen. Doesn’t look to us like emergency plans here are very … robust. You gotta do something about this!”

Heck, even nuke agencies IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), which exists to both promote and regulate nuclear energy; yes … & ICRP (the International Commission on Radiological Protection) have clearly stated that emergency plans need to be clearly communicated to members of the public before any emergency takes place, or they will not be of much use! (Previous post goes into detail on all this.)

Finally…

You need not be a rocket scientist, nor possess a Ph.D., to speak clearly & concisely to the CNSC & express your lack of support for this refurbishment/life extension/13 year licence.

Short & sweet (well, no need to actually be sweet) will do nicely. From the heart is always best!

Just note down the things that irk or concern you the most, & fire it off by midnight on Monday, September 28th. Once again, details on making a submission are right here.

Recent postings:

Please take a look through recent postings on this site for relevant, related information. Each posting lists many additional resources at the end, should you be keen to learn more.

Direction sign to Nukes

Direction sign to Nukes

<these distances from downtown Toronto>