Volatile news on the ongoing radioactivity threat at the Fukushima plant in the northeast of Japan can fuel a fear of nuclear power and renew support for less controversial energy sources.
Perspective on Safety from Canada's Energy Authorities
In an interview on BNN (Business News Network) on March 20th, 2011, Denise Carpenter, CEO and President of the Canada Nuclear Association, insisted on the safety of Canada’s facilities in the event of a natural disaster.
Carpenter said that "Canada is extremely well-prepared with several back-up systems" designed to prevent a nuclear catastrophe. She added, “Canadian nuclear power plants are located in areas where major earthquakes and tsunami are not expected."
She reminded viewers that Fukushima’s 40-year old technology was designed to sustain earthquakes, which it did. In fact, the 9.0 seism was not the problem, at least directly. Instead, the magnitude of the tsunami immersing waters destroyed the electric cooling system of the nuclear reactors.
Comparatively, the Great Lakes where Ontario reactors are built cannot produce a tsunami of the magnitude of the one that occurred in Japan.
On March 18, 2011, Canada's Energy Minister pointed out to the Toronto Board of Trade that “Ontario nuclear plants have operated safely since the first facility went online more than 40 years ago."
What Lessons will Canada Learn from Japan’s Nuclear Challenge?
“I guarantee you that everything happening in Japan will be closely analyzed,” Carpenter said. “We will be even safer than we are today.”
According to the Energy Minister such lessons will include “reviewing applicable safety procedures, protocols, training, emergency response, and equipment."
Another lesson from Japan’s natural disaster (and the world's costliest) is a renewed attention to infrastructure, such as bridges, possibly at risk during a strong earthquake in Canada.
With reference to "nuclear safety culture being global" (Carpenter) the World Nuclear News reported on March 21, 2011, that some of the 143 nuclear plants in Europe might not pass the safety test. The retro-fitting of facilities elsewhere will further protect Canada from accidental airborne contamination.
Is Nuclear Energy worth the Risk?
Ian Lowe, President of the Australian Conservation Foundation, stated on March 20, 2011:
- After 55 years of nuclear research, there is no safe permanent disposal of nuclear waste
- Nuclear power might reduce greenhouse pollution, but response is too slow for climate change
- Nuclear technology leads to the risk of nuclear material being diverted for improper use
- It is no longer as cheap as originally thought
In a paper published by Stanford University, John McCarthy gives additional facts and his perspective on the two previous nuclear plant disasters:
- 1979 Three Mile Island (U.S.): The nuclear accident destroyed the reactor but the core remained confined, and no death was reported.
- 1998: There were 9012 public nuclear reactors worldwide.
- 1986 Tchernobyl (Russia): The accident due to human error resulted in 31 immediate deaths, 20 square-miles of still inhabitable land, and a radioactive fallout over Europe.
Yet, the "largest estimates of deaths were in the low thousands." Although the incidence of radiation-related cancers still cannot be truly measured, McCarthy points to "the hundreds who have died in each of the several recent earthquakes in countries using stone, adobe, or stone houses."
Arguments in Favour of Nuclear Energy in Canada
The Government of Canada indicates that emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases would be 10% higher in Canada without nuclear power.
Nuclear power produces 15% of the electricity and is one of the means towards a carbon-free economy.
Canada has the world largest high-grade uranium deposits, with more energy potential than the combined annual production of oil and natural gas.
Zero-risk does not exist: Coal mining accidents can kill hundreds, including from emphysema, and dams can fail (McCarthy).
Nuclear technology still provides phenomenal advancement in applications such as medicine
Comparative Overview of Canada’s Alternative (Renewable) Energy Sources
As a perspective on non-renewable energy sources, Canada has the second largest oil reserve in the world, and is the sixth largest producer. Improved technology for oil-sand extraction should reduce cost, environmental impact, and promote production.
Note: On March 21, 2011, the climate and energy department of WWF-Canada ranked ten cities as top performers for climate-change, and “encouraged governments at all levels to follow suit."
Facts from the Government of Canada and Natural Resources Canada:
Hydro-electricity
- Canada is among the world's largest producers of clean, renewable hydroelectric power.
- It produces 60% of the energy generated in Canada.
- It has the potential to more than double its hydroelectric capacity.
Natural gas
- Canada is the world third largest exporter of natural gas.
- Drilling has declined by 7% since 2009 resulting in 4% decline in production.
- Total consumption worldwide increased by 44% in 2010.
- The EIA projects a decrease in consumption from 2020 due to price increases.
Note: In the U.S., drilling had increased by 2% in 2010, but 2011 projections indicate a 1.2% drop due to reduction in the Gulf of Mexico.
Wind Power
- Canada is geographically suited to tap wind power.
- Canada’s energy capacity from wind power can meet 1% of its needs.
Wind power is the fastest growing means of electricity production worldwide.
Solar energy (photovoltaic)
- The favoured form of renewable energy, solar is costly in capital input and maintenance.
- Current projects include low energy solar homes and smart grids.
Bio-mass and biofuels
Biofuel is derived from biomass through the conversion of agricultural and forestry waste into cellulosic ethanol, and from municipal waste.
- Canada is the world largest developer of processes for biofuels.
- Almost 6% of the total energy consumed in Canada is produced from biomass.
A Message from Canada Nuclear Association
- Call the Canadian Nuclear Association whose role is "to help everybody understand"
- Only consider statements from reliable sources
- Don't be motivated only by worry, but by thought and inquiry
Marie-Claude Arnott grew up close to the European Center for Nuclear Research in Geneva.
Sources
- Canada Nuclear Association. What's New.
- Energy Information Administration (Independent Statistics and Analysis). International Energy Outlook 2010.
- John McCarthy. Frequently Asked Questions about Nuclear Energy. Stanford University.
- The Government of Canada: Canada-US Energy Relations.
- World Nuclear News: European Union Energy Commission. "Ministers Authorize Nuclear "Stress-tests."
Marie-Claude Arnott - Marie-Claude Arnott writes about topics that interest her, from experience and with passion.
