[cdn-nucl-l] RE: ANS President Eric Loewen on benefits of nuclear energy

[Bill Garland <garlandw@mcmaster.ca>]

I am not saying that this important issue should not be
discussed at CNS council but you should be aware that it has been on the
agenda a few times in the past and nothing of note was achieved (as far
as I know).  We are not a lobby group and in my opinion should not
be a lobby group.  Stealing from some words I have written to some
CNS Council members in the past on this matter, one of the problems we
keep coming up against in the CNS is with making public statements. 
We do not need to be concerned if we make NPOV statements (neutral point
of view).  If we, as professionals, are explaining something
technical, we do not require the blessing of the CNS any more than
explaining fission requires a CNS policy statement.  As long as CNS
reps stick to the facts, no policy statements are required.  It
seems to me that the degree to which we have 'approved' CNS position
statements is the degree to which such statements are not fact
based.  But I can think of two policy statements that I would
endorse: A policy that commits us to be factual and balanced, and a
policy that commits us to encourage others to think about the facts in a
balanced way.  These are policy statements that are, I suppose,
strategic statements in that they are the basis of being perceived as a
trustworthy, credible society - in short, a professional
society.

If we stick to those policies perhaps we can get past the impasses that
prevented us in the past from issuing CNS statements on current
issues.  If we don't set down wise policies we will just waste time
at Council talking and getting nowhere.

Bill

At 10:41 AM 11/10/2011, Ron Oberth wrote:
> Dear CNS Nuclear Education
> and Outreach Team:  The CNS Education and Communications
> Committee (ECC) would be the ideal group to coordinate and manage op-eds
> by CNS Members with scientific credibility.
>  
> Jeremy – can you put this on the Agenda for the next ECC meeting.
>  
> Ron Oberth
> President
> Organization of CANDU Industries
> PHONE: 905-839-0073
> CELL: 647-407-6081
>
> EMAIL:
> ron.oberth@oci-aic.org
> 1730 McPherson Court, Unit #2
> Pickering, ON L1W 3E6
>  
> From: nuclear_education_outreach@googlegroups.com
> [
> mailto:nuclear_education_outreach@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve Aplin
> Sent: October-09-11 4:14 PM
> To: nuclear_education_outreach@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: ANS President Eric Loewen on benefits of nuclear
> energy
>  
> Maybe individual CNS members should write releases and especially op-eds
> -- when the author's name comes with PhD attached, that adds a lot of
> weight. Maybe the CNS should provide support for this -- e.g. an
> "op-ed committee" that collaborates with expert members in
> writing high quality, professional pieces for submission.
>  
> Noticing how frequently anti-nukes get their op-eds into the Toronto
> Star makes me wonder if Canadian media are more anti-nuclear than
> U.S. media. The Star is the biggest paper in Canada because the
> 416 is the biggest media market in Canada, and the Star dominates that
> market.
>  
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Jerry Cuttler
> <jerrycuttler@rogers.com
> > wrote:
> Steve
> I agree with what you are saying.
> I suppose what the CNS says and does is not news worthy in Canada,
> or
> the Canadian media more anti-nuclear than the American media.
> Should the CNS issue news releases?
> Jerry
>
> On Oct 8, 12:26 pm, Steve Aplin
> <aplin.st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I thought Ontario's energy minister Duguid was pretty good in the
> early
> > post-Fukushima period, saying Ontario won't drop nuclear and that
> his entire
> > family lives in the immediate Pickering area (so it's safe).
> >
> > In the election, I didn't hear any Liberal talk about nuclear, to
> which I
> > attribute their desire to win 416 seats. The "green"
> lobby's energy platform
> > plays well in 416 and atomic power ain't part of that platform.
> >
> > The Liberals won their minority because of 416. Notice McGuinty
> harped on
> > the Green Act incessantly.
> >
> > Whatever outreach drive happens, it has to focus on 416.
> >
> > I went to a Green Drinks event on The Esplanade a year ago. For
> every last
> > person I met (and I worked the room like a politician), the solution
> to
> > energy problems is wind, solar, conservation, etc. Nuclear is a
> dirty word.
> >
> > I go to Green Drinks events here in Ottawa, and always steer the
> discussion
> > toward nuclear. I see a lot of the same faces month after month. All
> used to
> > disagree, now not all do.
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Jerry Cuttler
> <jerrycutt...@rogers.com
> >wrote:
> >
> ** **
> >
> > > I listened to the TV news clip in the ANS Nuclear Cafe: ANS
> President Eric
> > > Loewen on benefits of nuclear energy.****
> >
> > > It's very nice!****
> > > Why doesn't this happen in Canada, especially in
> Ontario?****
> > > What can we do to make it happen?****
> > > Jerry****
>