LETTER to MLAs: SMRs - Fiscal Foolishness

[Oscar]

LETTER TO ALL SK MLAs . . . SMRs - Fiscal Foolishness - Media Release

March 11, 2021

MEDIA RELEASE

On the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster of March 11, 2011 a number of environmental and peace and justice groups have sent a letter to Premier Scott Moe and all the Members of the Legislative Assembly expressing their concerns about the decisions the government is making regarding Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs). Their concerns highlight the environmental, economic, health, social, and cultural negative impacts of SMRs.

The 2020 World Nuclear Industry Status Report [ https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/-Wor ... 2020-.html ] 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.

"There's no financial case for SMRs. They're risky, retro, ridiculously expensive, non-competitive, and totally unnecessary, especially for Saskatchewan" according to David Geary a member of Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan.

Michael Poellet from the Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative noted that "a Canadian study [ https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazine ... and-mines/ ] 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."

Dale Dewar, MD, a member of International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War - SK, added, “Small” reactors will produce radioactive waste. Some of the proposed models "recycle" plutonium from irradiated fuel, increasing concerns about weapons proliferation. They also create new radioactive waste that is even more dangerous to manage and more likely to increase health risks."

The organizations' purpose in writing this letter is to urge the Government of Saskatchewan to join with the 123 other countries from around the world who have found that investing in renewable energy lowered their carbon emissions much more than those reliant on nuclear energy and did so effectively and efficiently without risking the health and environmental and fiscal well-being of its citizens.

Dale Dewar 1-306-554-2985 Michael Poellet 306-653-1929 David Geary 306-244-5246

-30-

- - -


On the 10th Anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear accident, March 11th, 2021

Dear Honourable Member of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan,

Re: SMRs - small modular nuclear reactors.

The nuclear industry, in conjunction with the Government of Canada, has been littering the media with articles declaring these reactors to be “safe”, “green” and eventually “inexpensive”. With an industry record of failure to meet construction targets, failure to contain emissions and failure to ever come in under, or even close to, budget, it is astounding to hear the Saskatchewan government is spending any of our taxpayer dollars on small modular nuclear reactors.

Money spent on nuclear reactors is research and development money unavailable for renewable or sustainable energy – hydro, geothermal, solar, wind and research for new technologies. Nuclear is not sustainable.

“Safe”? What do Chalk River, Pinawa, Idaho Falls, Santa Susana, Waltz Mill, Sellafield/Windscale, Mayak/Kyshtym, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima, to name a few, have in common? They are all locations at which serious radioactivity-releasing accidents have occurred. Billions of dollars have been needed for even partial clean-up.

What about small reactors? A version currently exists on nuclear-powered submarines. But, there have been at least eight core melts on these submarines.

“Green”? Arguably when a nuclear power plant is producing heat to boil water, it would emit little CO2 but it would not be emissions free. All nuclear power plants routinely (not only accidentally) emit numerous radiotoxic fission products and hazardous chemical carcinogens into the air and water.

All activities related to building and running the power plant, including its auxiliary power, emit carbon dioxide. The mining, milling, refining, fuel fabrication, and the very carbon-intensive enrichment process emit carbon dioxide. Finally, no industry that produces more waste than the fuel it consumes can be called “green”.

“Inexpensive”? Like U.S. Atomic Energy Commission chairman L.L. Strauss's promise in 1954 of electricity “too cheap to meter”? The industry has failed to fulfill this particular promise for seventy years – it is unable to do so now. Mining the fuel, transportation, building, security, maintenance and waste management is so expensive that nuclear far outstrips costs of any renewable energy source per kilowatt hour.

Wall Street and US banks will not fund SMRs. Private investment has left the nuclear industry and so should governments. Let’s not “throw good money after bad”.

[ https://wiseinternational.org/nuclear-m ... s-overview ]

[ https://watershedsentinel.ca/articles/m ... -reactors/ ]

[ http://www.cleangreensask.ca/sites/clea ... 202020.pdf ]

[ https://thebulletin.org/2021/02/big-mon ... orruption/ ]

Yours sincerely,

Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Co-operative (ICUCEC), Michael Poellet
International Physicians for Prevention of Nuclear War – SK (IPPNW), Dale Dewar, MD

Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan
Committee for Future Generations
Communities Inspiring Environmental Action, Chris Hrynkow
Council of Canadians Prince Albert Chapter, Nancy Carswell
Council of Canadians Regina Chapter, Jim Elliott
Council of Canadians Saskatoon Chapter, David Greenfield
Project Ploughshares Saskatoon
Qu’appelle Valley Environmental Association QVEA
Saskatchewan Citizens for Tax Fairness, Don Kossick
Saskatoon Peace Coalition (SPC)
Sisters of Mission Service
Sisters of Our Lady of Sion-Saskatoon
Veterans Against Nuclear Arms (VANA)