Canada's goin' Nuclear? I'm going back to Germany.

So little old Saskatewan (Ok, it’s huge) is looking into the viability of nuclear power. Fourteen studies have been done, commissioned by ‘Sakspower’ over the last 36 years; and these have finally been made public after a leak to the media.

The reports cited Lake Diefenbaker as a viable location for Western Canada’s first nuclear power plant. No decisions were made as of yet, as ‘reviews of the material’ must of course be made.

The article did not mention if Saskatewan, and the Environmental Society were leaning one way or the other on this issue. I, however, definitely curve towards the NUCLEAR POWER IS BAD, side of things.

I do not want to see any more nuclear reactors in Canada. I cite ethical and environmental reasons. Yes, in the short term, nuclear power is wonderful for the environment. There are no toxic emissions, and our children breathe wonderful, clean air. It’s the long run that sparks terrible, terrible problems: What do we do with all of the radioactive waste that we have generated? I think it’s completely irresponsible to develop carcinogenic materials that scientists have proven will cause cancer for ‘at least 1000 years’ without any sort of reasonable action plan as to its disposal. One suggestion was to place the waste into large holes bore into the Canadian shield.

…..WHAT?

Do you have any idea of what the outcome, or dangers of that, may be? Do you, for a fact, know the resiliance of the shield? No! You don’t! And that’s why that idea is outrageous. The consequences could be *dire* for populations to come, and that’s why our generation has no right to place such a burden on future ones. As well, there’s more than just the waste itself to think about. The reactors don’t have a working life of ‘forever’. They, too, break down. And then how to dispose of them? Nuclear Power Plants will sit vacant and horrifyingly dangerous for hundreds of years; providing both an eyesore and a health risk for all those unlucky enough to be proximate.

Yes: The plant would create jobs. Yes: some countries do use nuclear power, to this date, without issue (France is a good example for anyone who wants to argue in Nuclear Power’s defense). But the instances of danger and pollution seem too high and too obvious to ignore. One Chernobyl, and one Three Mile Island were enough. Disasters already occur in our world with alarming frequency. Why invite the chance for another?

I am all for alternative energy sources: wind power, solar power…environmentally stable, and friendly sources which cut down on emissions and yet don’t pose massive risks to future generations. We would be selfish and foolish to consider Nuclear Power without having more information about its long term effects.




http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/080707/canada/sask_nuclear_studies_2