Nuclear is dirty energy. It leaves an everlasting radioactive legacy.

Nuclear is dirty energy. It leaves an everlasting radioactive legacy. Download our new fact sheet here.

Nuclear is dirty energy. It leaves an everlasting radioactive legacy.

All nuclear reactors create radioactive poisons as unwanted byproducts. We’ve made lots of them at the Point Lepreau nuclear plant on the Bay of Fundy west of Saint John.

The two “small” nuclear reactors proposed for New Brunswick will produce more of the same as well as new kinds of radioactive poisons.

Radioactivity from nuclear reactors and their waste must be securely contained because it is highly dangerous to all living things.

Exposing a living cell to radioactive material can alter its DNA. Chronic exposure can eventually cause cancers and other harmful health effects, including genetic damage that can affect offspring.

Any release of radioactivity at Point Lepreau can harm living things nearby including in the Bay of Fundy.

Used nuclear fuel

The deadliest and most concentrated form of nuclear waste is used (irradiated) nuclear reactor fuel. It must be safely stored for hundreds of thousands of years (essentially forever).

However, no secure long-term storage facility for spent fuel has been approved for use anywhere on the planet.

NB Power is planning to move the Point Lepreau deadly waste in future to a permanent storage facility on Indigenous territory in Ontario. The Indigenous communities in Ontario don’t want it. We must consider permanent storage at Point Lepreau.

“Recycling” used CANDU fuel

At Point Lepreau, irradiated nuclear fuel from the CANDU nuclear reactor is sealed in temporary storage silos. The new “small” nuclear reactor projects plan to open these storage silos. They will remove and dissolve the solid fuel bundles at high temperatures.

Their plan is to access the plutonium and a few other materials inside and make new fuel for the “small” reactors. 

More than 95 percent of the dissolved fuel will be rejected as unusable radioactive waste.

In Canada, this has never been done before on a commercial scale, and never with irradiated CANDU fuel. It raises many safety and security concerns

Some of the most contaminated sites on Earth are the result of large-scale reprocessing of irradiated nuclear fuel to extract plutonium.

Facts about plutonium

Plutonium, a human-made material created during the nuclear reaction, is the primary explosive material in nuclear weapons. 

It is also extraordinarily toxic when inhaled.

Reprocessing makes plutonium more accessible to terrorists for further use in “dirty” bombs (“radiological dispersal devices”) or improvised nuclear weapons.

There would be increased security at Pont Lepreau for the “small” nuclear reactors.

New types of used fuel created

The “small” nuclear reactors will create new types of used fuel.

Smaller in volume, but much more radioactive by weight than the Point Lepreau spent fuel, it will also need to be kept out of the environment of living things for hundreds of thousands of years.

Radioactive building materials

When “small” reactors reach end of life, radioactive steel, concrete, and contaminated equipment will remain radioactive for thousands of years. These dangerous materials cannot be safely recycled.

The radioactive waste from dismantling the “small” reactors will be New Brunswick’s responsibility. Our future generations will be paying for the secure storage and maintenance of this waste for thousands of years into the future.

Conclusion

The only guaranteed long-term solution to the problem of deadly radioactive waste is to stop making it. Moving existing waste to a safe and secure location at Point Lepreau requires planning, but let’s not make the problem worse by producing even more.

We must not fund new nuclear reactors. Instead, we should invest in cheap, clean, safe alternatives that can be quickly deployed to move New Brunswick to a green energy future.

100 groups ask: What will we do with our nuclear waste?

What will we do with our radioactive waste?

 

 

Ottawa – Over 100 public interest and community groups signed on to a joint letter setting out their expectations for a review of Canada’s Radioactive Waste Policy launched by Natural Resources Canada last November. Top on their list: the review must be transparent, and independent of the nuclear industry.

In previous communications, the groups have strenuously objected to the decision by Natural Resources Canada to delegate the development of strategies for the management of radioactive waste to an industry organization, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO). The NWMO was formed by the power companies who own nuclear reactors in 2002 to develop a plan to manage high level nuclear fuel waste.

The letter states:

As public interest groups, many with considerable expertise in nuclear waste management, we consider this Review to be of utmost national importance. The outcomes of the Review process will impact not only the current generation of Canadians but also generations to come. As we have communicated with NRCan staff and in earlier letters to you as Prime Minister of Canada and as Minister of Natural Resources, we have serious concerns about the shape of the review as announced to date.

In particular, a timeline with March 31, 2021 for the end of public engagement is unreasonable and unacceptable. Most Canadians have not yet even been made aware of this review and its far-ranging implications. At the very least, Canadians must be given notice of the Review process and opportunities to participate.

To date, NRCan has populated a web site, posted four discussion papers and comment forums, and held one by-invitation “information session” and a number of bilateral conversations with civil society organizations and others in December 2020. The format and frequency of the Departments interaction with the nuclear industry and nuclear supply companies is unknown.

The letter with the 100+ endorsing groups can be viewed at www.nuclearwastewatch.ca.

CRED-NB pre-budget submission to the New Brunswick government

Today we sent to the New Brunswick government and the opposition parties our submission to the pre-budget consultations. In the throne speech last year, the government missed the opportunity to announce a bold plan for renewable energy and energy-saving retrofits. Instead, the speech mentioned the new nuclear reactors proposed for the province.

Our submission analyses what we should see in the budget for responsible energy development in New Brunswick. Read it here.

Webinar Feb. 23: Transitioning to a Low-Carbon Economy in New Brunswick

Chris Rouse: Transitioning to a Low-Carbon Economy in New Brunswick: Why public investments are better than incentives

Free event, everyone welcome. Tuesday, Feb. 23 at 7pm.

Register to receive the event link and a reminder:

https://unbvirtualclasses.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJwpdeGqqTsuE9S63pfdy_GVFzxQjEyypL7q

Chris Rouse is the founder of New Clear Free Solutions and has been very active in the environmental movement for over 10 years. Chris has a very extensive technical background. He has developed an Integrated Resource Plan for New Brunswick that achieves a 95% Renewable energy solution through public investments. The IRP offers the least cost sustainable solution to our environmental problems that benefits all New Brunswicker both now and in the future.

This event is organized by the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick (CRED-NB), Extinction Rebellion New Brunswick, and the RAVEN project (Rural Action and Voices for the Environment) at the University of New Brunswick.

Groups object to nuclear regulator’s plan to weaken rules for experimental nuclear reactors

OTTAWA, January 21, 2021 – Civil society groups are objecting to plans by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to weaken its nuclear security regulations.  A staff presentation to the Commission today reveals that they have been reviewing the regulations since 2018, with no public consultation.

The presentation says amendments are underway to “remove prescriptive requirements” from the Nuclear Security Regulations and publish the revised regulations by late 2021 or early 2022.

A paper by Natural Resources Canada says that prescriptive regulations are more detailed and stringent, and easier to monitor and enforce.

“While the CNSC asserts its decision making is ‘free from external pressure,’ civil society groups continue to question the regulator’s independence,” said Kerrie Blaise of the Canadian Environmental Law Association. “The CNSC is supporting the nuclear industry’s requests to remove regulatory barriers for Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).” 

Indeed, the federal government’s recent SMR action plan confirms that one of its expected results is that “Revised Nuclear Security Regulations only cover high-level principles similar to other regulations and prescriptive requirements are removed.”

The CNSC presentation shows that Canada’s nuclear regulator intends to change its regulatory approach to accommodate new experimental reactor technologies, known as small modular reactors (SMRs). Other regulations being “enhanced” by CNSC deal with safety assessment, design and licensing of nuclear power plants.

Today’s CNSC meeting will finish with an in-camera closed session to consider a staff presentation entitled, “Regulatory project to amend the General Nuclear Safety and Control Regulations and the Nuclear Non-proliferation Import & Export Control Regulations.”

“We are disappointed that CNSC staff has forged ahead and is now proposing a looser regulatory approach without any consultation with Canadians who would be directly affected if and when one of these new experimental reactors is trucked into their community,” said Brennain Lloyd, coordinator of Northwatch, based in northeastern Ontario.

The plan to expand new nuclear technologies across Canada and into remote mining and Indigenous communities is controversial. The United Church of Canada recently joined with over 100 citizen groups, the Assembly of First Nations, the Chiefs of Ontario, the Anishinabek Nation, and three federal parties in opposing SMRs.

The federal government has been promoting SMRs with its action plan and funding from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)’s Strategic Innovation Fund, saying that “Canada is poised to be a leader in the safe and responsible development” of SMRs.  Yet the government has exempted most SMRs from a federal environmental assessment under the new Impact Assessment Act.

Critics say that SMRs would require billions in public subsidies and fear that their designers also want more relaxed safety and security regulations. Of the more than 50 designs that exist for experimental nuclear reactors, the CNSC is reviewing a dozen under pre-licensing agreements with companies like Moltex Energy and GE-Hitachi.

“The CNSC’s SMR design reviews are taking place behind closed doors,” said Lloyd. “That allows these private sector companies to sell their unproven reactor designs to the regulatory staff without any public scrutiny.”

The CNSC staff presentation also states that CNSC is “supporting” two SMR vendors active in New Brunswick, including the study of how they might extract plutonium from highly radioactive irradiated CANDU fuel. A government report highlighted that reprocessing used CANDU fuel, which has never been done previously in Canada, raises nuclear weapons proliferation risks. 

“We are outraged that New Brunswick is being used for a risky and costly experiment with dangerous radioactive materials, and that we will not have an opportunity to voice our concerns during a federal Impact Assessment,” said Dr. Susan O’Donnell, spokesperson for the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick. 

The CNSC staff presentation suggests that the first SMRs are expected to be constructed soon. Global First Power applied in early 2019 for a license to prepare a site at Chalk River, Ontario (on federally owned land), and Ontario Power Generation has notified the CNSC of its intent to apply for a license to construct new reactors at the Darlington Power Plant by March 2022. 

 – 30 –

Media contacts:

Kerrie Blaise

Northern Legal Counsel, CELA
Email: kerrie@cela.ca

Tel: 416-960-2284 ext 7224 

Brennain Lloyd, Northwatch

Tel: 705-497-0373, cell 705-493-9650

brennain@northwatch.org

Eva Schacherl, CANDOR

Tel: 613-316-9450

evaschacherl@gmail.com

The nuclear industry lobbying club in New Brunswick

Lobbying by the nuclear industry is a key reason why the industry attains so many public subsidies. An analysis of the federal lobby database shows just how powerful the nuclear lobby is. In New Brunswick, CBC reporter Jacques Poitras wrote an article this week about lobbying activity for the proposed nuke projects for the province, in particular by well-connected Liberal party people. As CRED-NB spokesperson Susan O’Donnell says in the article: “It’s a club.” You can read the article here.