[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Archive Top]

[cdn-nucl-l] " My nuclear nightmare "



How unfortunate that journalists feel they *must* flaunt their ignorance....

 Jaro
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



http://www.canada.com/montreal/montrealgazette/news/editorial/story.html?id=
c9dfae5a-c563-4590-ad98-101ae33b10fc
Editorial
My nuclear nightmare
The provincial government should use the threat of terrorist attack on
nuclear plants as a reason to close Gentilly-2
HENRY AUBIN 
The Gazette, February 22, 2005
 
It was troubling enough last week to see a Radio-Canada reporter waltz
unchallenged into the inner sanctum of Quebec's mighty dams - able, if he
had wished, to inflict mayhem on the province that would have made the 1998
ice storm seem a picnic.

But the furor over that scoop has had the effect of overshadowing a later
Rad-Can report that I found even more disturbing. In it, a reporter in a
small plane flew to the Gentilly-2 nuclear plant, 150 kilometres east of
Montreal. The plane cruised over Quebec's lone reactor at a height of just
1,000 feet. And then did it again and again before leaving after 20 minutes.

There was no sign of a response on the ground. No police aircraft arrived
from nearby Trois-Rivieres to investigate. No military aircraft.

The radioactivity that an explosives-packed plane could unleash could have
far graver consequences than any power shortage or flash flood resulting
from a destroyed dam. Cancer and birth defects could proliferate across
thousands of square kilometres downwind. Much of eastern Canada could be a
No Man's Land for generations.

Another reason the security problem at Gentilly is so much more serious than
that of any dam is that it defies solution.

Hydro-Quebec responded to the television report by promptly assigning 200
guards to its dams, thereby ending a political crisis that toppled the
energy minister. But it has made few changes at Gentilly. A spokesperson for
the crown corporation said yesterday that the armed, around-the-clock guards
who were at the plant before the report are now making more patrols on the
ground than before. That's it. Protection of the air space is still a joke.

Yet authorities can't do much more. The only effective solution - flying a
missile-equipped aircraft around the site 24/7 - is unaffordable.

Still, there's a bright side to this reminder of Gentilly's hair-raising
helplessness: The timing is excellent. It so happens that Hydro-Quebec is
asking the Charest government for permission to prolong the life of the
reactor, already 22 years old. The original plan calls for it to close in
2013, but Hydro wants to spend a cool $1.2 billion on changes that will let
the plant to stay open until 2035.

Quebec's environmental-review agency, the Bureau d'audiences publiques sur
l'environnement, held public hearings on the proposal before Christmas. It
has yet to make a recommendation to the government. Radio-Canada's
experiment should make it hard for the agency to ignore the matter of
safety.

My main nuclear worry as a Montrealer is not with Gentilly - which is
downwind of the city. I'm more concerned over where the city's prevailing
winds come from. That would be southern Ontario.

Last year, an Ontario task forced headed by former federal finance minister
John Manley said the province faced an electricity crisis unless it built
five new nuclear plants, each with two reactors. Ontario already gets about
half its electricity from 15 reactors at five plants. The McGuinty
government has yet to make a decision on Manley's recommendation, but the
problem that appears to be giving it pause is the possibility of cost
overruns, not safety.

Montreal, of course, is also downwind from much of the United States. The
Bush administration is thinking of adding the equivalent of 50 new reactors
to the country's 103 by 2020.

As memories of the accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl fade,
nuclear energy is discreetly becoming a la mode. It's a way to perpetuate
our energy gluttony without emitting greenhouse gases. What contradicts this
squeaky-clean image is that no safe way exists to dispose of spent nuclear
fuel; the strategy is like building a house without a toilet. Accidents and
terrorism are the two things the nuclear proselytizers want the public to
forget.

One major industrialized country, Germany, has already renounced the nuclear
path. It plans to scrap its plants by 2020.

Quebec has a chance to beat it to the punch. In three weeks, the province's
environmental-review agency will submit to the government its recommendation
on Gentilly's post-2013 fate.

Dismantling Gentilly would entail little deprivation for Quebecers - it
supplies just three per cent of our electricity. But it would make eastern
Canada safer and set an example for the world.

haubin@thegazette.canwest.com

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.4.0 - Release Date: 2/22/2005
 

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>