Media Release
For release November 28, 1997
Ottawa -- Canada shouldn't get greenhouse gas credits for selling or using
nuclear power, environmental activists said today. Prime Minister Jean
Chrétien has suggested that nuclear energy may be part of his platform
at the climate change negotiations in Kyoto. The Canadian Nuclear Association
boosted the idea in a newspaper ad published across Canada earlier this
week. The ad urged the federal government to include nuclear power as an
"integral part of the solution at the Kyoto conference."
Dr. Gordon Edwards of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility
pointed out that,"Chrétien is crazy if he thinks the nuclear
priesthood has the solution to global warming. Exporting nuclear reactors
just adds more problems to those that already exist by scattering plutonium,
high level radioactive waste and potential Chernobyls around the world.
If Ottawa wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions it should help Canadians
to save money by reducing domestic energy consumption."
According to a U.S. study, every dollar invested in energy efficiency displaces
seven times as much CO2 emissions as the same dollar invested in nuclear
power (Keepin and Kats study). In addition, the Royal Society of Canada
found that "improved energy efficiency is the key to stabilising energy-related
CO2 emissions over the next two decades." (the COGGER panel). Nuclear
power is not even mentioned in the Royal Society study as a viable alternative
energy source to fossil fuels.
Irene Kock of the Nuclear Awareness Project stated, "Nuclear power
is not a solution for climate change. It is a cynical gambit on the part
of the global nuclear power industry to save itself from being phased out.
In addition to the risk of catastrophic accidents, nuclear power is hazardous
because of pollution from day-to-day operations. All stages of the nuclear
fuel chain, including uranium mining, processing, refining, fuel fabrication,
reactor operations and nuclear waste handling, emit radioactive, carcinogenic
pollutants."
She noted that CANDU reactors routinely emit tritium, a radioactive, carcinogenic
form of hydrogen. "Local tritium levels are far above background levels
in the vicinity of CANDU reactors. Exposure to tritium and other radioactive
pollutants increases the risk of cancer and other health problems. Spent
nuclear fuel is instantly lethal and remains toxic for more than a million
years. No agreement has been reached on how to dispose of this high level
radioactive waste, which is currently stored at each reactor site around
the globe."
Elizabeth May of the Sierra Club of Canada stated, "the nuclear industry
and its supporters in government are trying to revive a dying industry
through the climate change negotiating process. Climate change is one of
the most serious problems facing the planet. Not only does nuclear power
not address the problem, it diverts funds away from energy efficiency measures."
Kristen Ostling of the Campaign for Nuclear Phaseout said, "It would
seem that the Prime Minister has his head stuck somewhere between a uranium
mine and an oil well. He should not be acting the part of salesman for
the Canadian nuclear industry, using large sums of public money to finance
nuclear deals. The choice is not between nuclear power or fossil fuel.
The way forward is through energy efficiency and renewables."
Ostling noted that CANDU reactors have a history of accidents and maintenance
problems as well as declining performance. In 1996, Ontario Hydro's 19
operating reactors ran at 66% capacity. In addition, fossil-fuelled generating
stations are typically used in conjunction with nuclear stations, in order
to meet daily peaks in electricity demand. Nuclear stations are not flexible
enough to adjust to changing demand on short notice. Continued use of nuclear
stations requires the continued use of fossil stations.
- 30 -
Campaign for Nuclear Phaseout