RE: " Canada: Nuclear `Absolutely' Out "

["Franta, Jaroslav" <frantaj@AECL.CA>]

Franz wrote on Tuesday July 24, 2001 6:18 PM



>But we also have great pollution problems in our major cities - especially

>Toronto - due to fossil fuel use,



The nuclear driven car seems to remain science fiction......



Jaro replies:



One needs to have some idea of where the main pollution problem lies -- for

instance :



The Toronto Star, July 21, 2001

Utilities Top New List of Polluters 

A shocking amount of air pollution is coming from the coal and oil-burning

power plants across Canada and the United States, a new report reveals. The

electricity sector is the biggest industrial polluter in North America,

according to the report from the Commission for Environmental Co-operation,

a NAFTA watchdog agency. [NAFTA = North American Free Trade Accord]

Ontario Power Generation's Nanticoke plant on Lake Erie was ranked as

Canada's top polluter when it comes to on-site releases of chemicals, with

more than 5.1 million kilograms of hydrochloric acid and sulphuric acid.

Those are the two major pollutants reported by utilities, and they combine

with other pollutants to make acid rain. Mitchell renewed the

environmentalists' call for switching OPG's five coal-burning plants to

cleaner burning natural gas, and for greater efforts at conservation to cut

demand for electricity.

BUT there is a problem with the suggested solution - to switch some of the

coal-fired plants to natural gas fuel. OPG spokesperson John Earl said the

Nanticoke station fares poorly on the polluters list owing to its sheer

size, not inefficiency. 



......as for nuclear-driven cars, some are suggesting hydrogen produced by

NPPs -- though others, myself included, are sceptical.

------



>One important application of nuclear in Canada would be to use reactor

>thermal energy (steam) for extracting oil from Alberta tar sands -- instead

>of burning huge quantities of oil & gas just to get more oil out of the

sand

>(the reserves there are comparable to those of Saudi Arabia).



Go ahead, but this would enhance the CO2 emissions again. This contribution

would not reduce, but enhance CO2 emissions.



Jaro replies:

The stuff will come out one way or another.... which way is less polluting &

has less CO2 emissions -- the one that makes steam using oil & gas, or the

one that uses uranium ? 

-------



>For me & my colleagues there is also the issue of whether the Canadian

>nuclear industry will survive -- not very likely if no new CANDUs are built

>this decade....



I talked to a Romanian collegue recently - Cernovoda II is waiting for

completion, plans for #3 and #4 are waiting for acceptance - and funding.

Everything else depends on the future of nuclear power in our world.





Jaro replies:

The good news is Cernovoda II is NO LONGER "waiting for completion" -- many

people here are already being recruited for that job.

But C-3 and C-4 are pure fiction at this stage.



Best regards,



Jaro



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.