“Next generation” nuclear reactors are a dirty, dangerous distraction from tackling the climate crisis

Groups say federal funding of new nuclear reactors is a “dirty, dangerous distraction” from tackling climate change

Ottawa, October 20, 2020 — Public interest groups across Canada are criticizing the federal government for funding small nuclear reactor development and are challenging the government to release the research and data that support its strategy.

Ministers Seamus O’Regan and Navdeep Bains last week announced a $20 million grant to Terrestrial Energy in Ontario to continue developing a molten salt reactor. More funding announcements for new nuclear reactors are expected in the coming weeks.

The federal funding for new nuclear energy is opposed by groups from BC to New Brunswick, including the West Coast Environmental Law Association, Friends of the Earth Canada, Greenpeace Canada, Canadian Environmental Law Association, Environmental Defence, Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick, Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan, Concerned Citizens of Manitoba, Northwatch, Sierra Club Canada Foundation, Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive, Équiterre and the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility.

The groups say “next generation” nuclear reactors are a dirty, dangerous distraction from tackling the climate crisis. Nuclear energy is not green, not clean, too costly and too slow to build.

The groups charge that the federal government is trying to save the nuclear industry rather than saving the environment and protecting health.

The groups say that:

SMR development is too slow to address the climate crisis:

The 2020 World Nuclear Industry Status Report says that developing new nuclear energy is too slow to address the climate crisis – as well as more expensive – compared to renewable energy and energy efficiency.  No SMRs have yet been built and the models being proposed will take a decade or more to develop.

SMRs are more expensive than renewable energy:

A Canadian study found that energy from small nuclear reactors would be up to ten times the cost of renewable energy.  In the past decade, the cost of building solar, wind power and battery storage has gone down dramatically, while the cost of building new nuclear reactors has gone up. Small reactors will be even more expensive per unit of power than the current large ones.

Nuclear power creates fewer jobs than renewable energy:

Renewable energy is one of the fastest-growing job sectors in North America.  An American study found that solar energy leads to six times as many jobs as nuclear power for each gigawatt-hour of electricity generated.

There are better sources of energy:

Minister O’Regan has said repeatedly, without providing evidence, that there is no path to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions without nuclear energy. In fact, on the contrary a new study of 123 countries over 25 years found that countries that invested in renewable energy lowered their carbon emissions much more than those reliant on nuclear energy.

SMRs are dirty and dangerous:

The new “small” reactors, proposed to be built across Canada, will produce radioactive waste of many kinds. Some of the proposed models would extract plutonium from irradiated fuel, worsening concerns about weapons proliferation and creating new forms of radioactive waste that are especially dangerous to manage. The federal government currently has no detailed policy or strategy for what to do with radioactive waste, and no design or location for a deep underground repository where industry proposes to store high-level radioactive waste for hundreds of thousands of years.

The federal government has never consulted the public about small modular reactors, which would create environmental risks and financial liabilities for Canadians.

Public Interest Groups Opposing SMR Funding:

Action Climat Outaouais (Que.)
Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility
Canadian Environmental Law Association
Citizens’ Network on Waste Management (Ont.)
Coalition Against Nuclear Dumps on the Ottawa River (Ont.)
Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan
Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick
Committee for Future Generations (Sask.)
Concerned Citizens of Manitoba
Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area (Ont.)
Environmental Defence
Équiterre
Extinction Rebellion New Brunswick
Friends of the Earth Canada
Greenpeace Canada
The Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative (Sask.)
Leap4Wards, Saint John, NB
MiningWatch Canada
Northwatch
Nova Scotia Voice of Women for Peace
Old Fort William Cottagers’ Association (Que.)
Ontario Clean Air Alliance
Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive (Que.)
RAVEN project at the University of New Brunswick
Saint John Chapter of Council of Canadians
Sierra Club Canada Foundation
Sustainable Energy Group, New Brunswick
VOICES for Sustainable Environments and Communities (N.B.)
West Coast Environmental Law Association (B.C.)

– 30 –

Media contacts:

Kerrie Blaise

Tel: 416-960-2284 ext 7224

kerrie@cela.ca

Eva Schacherl

evaschacherl@gmail.com

613-316-9450

 

Why is the federal government funding new nuclear power reactors?

Today, the government made its first SMR funding announcement: $20 million from ISED’s Strategic Innovation Fund for the company Terrestrial Energy to develop its prototype SMR in Ontario.

Anyone interested in evidence-based policy is wondering: Why are they doing this? There is no evidence that nuclear power will achieve carbon reduction targets, while there is considerable research indicating the contrary.

In fact, in today’s funding announcement, federal Natural Resources Minister Seamus O’Regan confirmed that the new reactor will take more than a decade to develop and will contribute nothing to Canada’s 2030 target for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Read the rest of the story on Rabble by author Susan O’Donnell, lead researcher of the RAVEN project and CRED-NB member.

Throne speech signals Canada’s support for new nuclear reactors, opposition builds in New Brunswick

Climate Action Rally in Fredericton at the office of the premier, Sept. 25, 2020.

Read the NB Media Co-op story here.

For more than a year, renewable energy and anti-nuclear activists in New Brunswick and across the country have watched nuclear industry lobbyists re-position their product as the solution to the climate crisis. Indeed, days before the Throne Speech, federal Natural Resources minister Seamus O’Regan claimed that nuclear power was necessary for Canada to meet its net-zero emissions target.

Given its legacy of toxic radioactive waste, nuclear energy would not be considered “clean technology” by most Canadians. However the nuclear industry has been working hard to scrub its image.

Keep science fiction (SMRs) out of the Throne Speech

Science fiction kit for kids

On Wednesday afternoon, the federal minority government will deliver its “throne speech,” outlining its plan of action for the next session of parliament.

The Throne Speech should not be science fiction: Keep Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs) out!

In his September 19th CBC interview, Minister of Natural Reources Seamus O’Regan broadly hinted that small modular reactors might show up in the Throne Speech on September 23rd. A self-acknowledged fan of science fiction, Minister O’Regan should not be allowed to wield his light sabre powers over the Government of Canada’s COVID-recovery plan by diverting taxpayers dollars into private sector nuclear pipe dreams.

Here are the facts:

  • SMRs will delay climate action – 15 years to build untested technology is too long. Lower-cost, proven renewable energy exists now
  • SMRs have no business case and will require billions in public funds – not an option for our fiscal environment already strained by COVID-19
  • SMRs will create more radioactive wastes, different and in addition to what already exist. and won’t “recycle” or reduce nuclear waste stockpiles
  • an SMR “roadmap” was developed with the nuclear industry in 2018 and consultation with the public, announced for 2020, has not happened

The federal government must – at minimum – consult with Canadians and Indigenous peoples before committing large amounts of taxpayers funds to assist the private sector in developing nuclear technologies which – if ever brought to fruition – would generate radioactive waste, link Canada to a plutonium economy and weapons production, and proliferate nuclear risk to locations and communities across Canada.

Who should lead Canada’s consultation on federal radioactive waste policy?

 

Today Susan O’Donnell from the RAVEN project and Gordon Edwards, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, published an article in the Hill Times, making the case for a multi-departmental committee of federal cabinet to oversee radioactive waste in Canada. You can read their article here: Edwards-ODonnell-Hill Times Sept 21 2020.

Coalition expresses concern with lack of EIA for new nuclear projects

cropped-screen-shot-2020-07-01-at-19.27.42.pngToday our coalition sent a letter to Jonathan Wilkinson, federal Minster of Environment and Climate Change. We expressed our concern with the exemption granted to all new small modular nuclear reactor projects from any Environmental Impact Assessment.

You can also read here an article by David Thompson, one of the letter signatories, and Paula Tippett, about the problem with the EIA process.