|
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry
Cuttler
To: mkrizanc@nwmo.ca
Cc: Donna Pawlowski
Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 11:12 PM
Subject: Comments on June 2004 NWMO Newsletter Hi Mike,
Thank you for informing me about this
newsletter.
After reading it carefully, I find
it difficult to understand how we can
establish social acceptance of any solution if the public does not have factual
information about the key aspects of the issue. Were the following facts
about used CANDU fuel given to the public or to the representative samples
of citizens?
a) Only 1% of the energy in nuclear fuel
is released in CANDU reactors. The other 99% of the energy could
be released by recycling the used CANDU fuel in advanced nuclear
reactors that future generations of Canadians will build (if nuclear power is
not phased out in Canada, as is being advocated by anti-nuclear
activists.) At the present time, it's not economical to recycle the
fuel.
b) The containers that now hold used
fuel bundles are designed and constructed to be very robust. They
would last more than a thousand years, if Canadians decided to leave them
unopened in a used fuel storage area above ground.
c) After many decades of storage, the
radioactivity of the used fuel (stored in the containers) decreases
greatly.
d) Only high
doses of radiation are harmful. Low doses of radiation actually
reduce risk, that is, they are really a health benefit.
e) Without recycling, just one CANDU
fuel bundle (only 10 cm diameter x 50 cm long) provides all the
electrical power that an average household uses for 100 years, and
the used fuel is easily stored in robust, sealed containers.
So "the problem" of the used fuel is not
really a significant problem. (It is really a problem only for
anti-nuclear activists.) There are no difficult trade-offs that need to be
considered.
Compared to the problem of managing our municipal
wastes and the problem of managing air pollution from our fossil-fired
power plants, managing used CANDU fuel is relatively simple. Why do
you think the anti-nuclear activists are concerned?
Canadian scientists and engineers have given our
grandchildren a very important legacy. It is the technology to release an
enormous amount of pollution-free energy at an affordable cost. And we are
putting our used CANDU fuel bundles in robust sealed containers, so our
grandchildren can recycle this fuel when it is economical to do so.
Sincerely,
Jerry
------------------------------------------------ A major research project undertaken to gauge Canadian values and expectations for the long-term management of used nuclear fuel is complete. The National Citizens Dialogue brought together representative samples of citizens for full-day sessions to learn about used nuclear fuel and discuss many of the difficult trade-offs that need to be considered about its long-term management. It is the first time that such a process has ever been applied to the discussion of used nuclear fuel in Canada. The project was conducted in partnership with the Canadian Policy Research Networks, an independent, not-for-profit public policy research organization with a mission to create knowledge and lead public debate on social and economic issues important to the well-being of Canadians. Five hundred participants in 12 communities across the country were provided with factual background information. Then, in small groups and larger facilitated sessions, they discussed the consequences of various choices, and explored the values underlying their opinions. Several common themes and characteristics for a desirable for approach to long-term nuclear waste management in Canada emerged. Among them:• Safety from harm. This was clearly identified as an overarching requirement. It does not emerge from a sense of fear and doom, but rather a sense of responsibility to this and future generations.• We must deal with the problems we have created. People place a high value on living up to one’s responsibilities. They do not want to impose their problems on their children or grandchildren.• Adaptability. Citizens do not presume we have the best answers today. They want to be open to new learning and to be able to adapt to it.• Sound stewardship. People feel a duty to use all resources with care, leaving a sound legacy for future generations. They want to look at the long-term implications of decisions.• Transparency and accountability. Citizens want to know that those entrusted with responsibilities to protect the public are doing a good job.• Knowledge. People want investment to create new knowledge and to enhance awareness to make better choices.• Inclusion. The best decisions are based on a wide range of views. People don’t want to replace experts, but they want a voice, especially in decisions that impact the safety and security of health and the environment.CPRN will deliver its final report on the National Citizens Dialogue in July 2004. The findings are an important contribution to the social and ethical framework being applied to the assessment of management approaches.
|