Nuclear power in Alberta?

So Alberta is thinking about nuclear energy now, something which is sparking debate in B.C. I am actually surprised because I figured more new coal plants would be the power generating method of choice.

With the Americans virtually demanding huge increases in production on the oilsands front, that will take massive amounts of power, and water. I would imagine that the power will come from the proposed nuclear plant.

That’s fine, but Western Canadians don’t really have that much experience with nuclear power. On the surface it seems like a great idea: little waste, no greenhouse gases and loads of cheap power.

I suspect that nuclear waste pales in comparison to the volume of coal slag and greenhouse gases, by weight, but what it lacks in volume, it makes up for in terms of danger. I’d much prefer having my yard paved with slag from a coal burner than radioactive waste, but that’s not saying much.

The other danger that nuclear reactors pose, and some communities in Ontario are going through, is the release of tritium. Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen that is found in heavy water, which cools reactors. Canadian CANDU reactors, the type proposed for the Peace River area, apparently produce far more tritium than other types of reactors.

From the reading I’ve done, it seems some of the tritium can be recycled, but the rest is just sprayed into the air! This document from the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility discusses the dangers of tritium. It’s interesting.

I’ve done a little writing on this tritium problem before.

Reviewing that post, it was interesting to see that the Canadian government’s idea of a safe level of tritium is 10 times that of the US and 7 times that of the World Health Organization. Sounds to me like our government is in the pocket of the nuclear industry, doesn’t care about the health of Canadians or both.

I think the residents of the Peace River and everyone downstream from this potential power plant needs to seriously consider the long-term health effects before they even consider the economic benefits. It might be nice to have lots of good paying jobs, but when your kids, grandkids and people around you are dying of cancer and other wonderful diseases, maybe that job isn’t worth so much.

In the current environment, I don’t believe our federal or provincial government really pay that much attention to the health effects of industry until it’s too late, or is just the focus of bad publicity. Releases of toxins from these plants are inevitable, but what levels are really acceptable? I think the WHO and the US could give some advice to the Canadian government on these issues. How weird is that? We knock Americans for their apparently frivolous attitude to the environment, yet they have stronger environmental laws than Canada. I guess Canadians would like to think they’re better than Americans (on environmental issues) even if we aren’t.

On the economic side of things, I’m sure that nuclear power looks like a really cheap way of generating power. I don’t have a huge amount of time to research this today, but I do have some thoughts.

Having been an accountant in the past, I’m well used to the type of thinking that only focuses on the immediate capital and startup costs involved in a purchase, rather than the full life-cycle accounting that should be done on major projects. I bet it looks really good from that standpoint on this project.

But what about the almost inevitable environmental damage that will likely result? If tritium is allowed to be released in similar quantities to other CANDU reactors, is anyone going to factor in the increased healthcare costs and the costs of premature deaths into the equation?

How about the cost of disposing of the waste in a safe manner? Is that being factored in?

This project is apparently going to cost about $6 billion, but will likely cost even more. I know how that goes. Also, is this company going to be publicly subsidized at all? Perhaps it would be a good idea to force the company to also post a substantial bond (in the hundreds of millions, if not a billion) so that it can’t run away from any environmental problems that might arise from the project.

I don’t think that these kinds of projects should be publicly subsidized. It would be ironic if in pro-business Alberta that a company like this does poke its nose into the public purse. But then, the oilsands do tend to make politicians in Alberta a little crazy. It seems that just letting them do whatever they want up there is the norm.

I would be interested to see a real, honest comparison of all different options to generate the same amount of power. It would be good to factor in the environmental costs and the full life-cycle costs into coming up with a dollars per kilowatt figure. Maybe if people in Peace River saw that kind of analysis, they might want to go with something else.

I might be willing to give nuclear power serious consideration if I trusted Canadian governments to do what is necessary to protect the health and welfare of Canadians rather than protecting the welfare of corporations. Until that happens, I will remain a skeptic that this project could be done safely, on budget and without public funds.