Weighty sense of deja vu

marke slipp

Comment online since January 9th 2008
I am alarmed that the Nova Scotia government is circumventing due process and allowing mining companies to do "general exploration" that includes exploring for uranium, even though I personally think there is perhaps an economic reason to allow this exploration; I do not think there is a need to open up mining for uranium in the province though.

This current government might have "an open mind" on this, according to Environment Minister Mark Parent, but it really needs to consult the people more than it has when dealing with issues that have a clear and specific moratorium in place. This is NOT a partisan issue. This is an issue that requires dialogue amongst the population and can't be fast-tracked like the Fundy Tidal Power development (awarding permission to companies to proceed prior to even receiving any environmental assessment on the development. I know the words "depending on the results of an environmental assessment" are regularly uttered, but it seems to me it is only as lip service).

The fight for a moratorium on uranium exploration and mining that happened 25 years ago happened while I was out in Alberta. Had I been in Nova Scotia I would lined up shoulder-to-shoulder with the advocates for the moratorium. I also would've been advocating for less use of fossil fuel products and more sustainable energy development. There was clear indication back then that the way we as a civilization were preceding was harming the environment we live in, and fossil fuels were a big contributor to the problems.

It is now 2008. Things have changed. Indeed, there is a need for sources of energy that are non-CO2 emitting. Most of the sustainable energy sources are being developed. And they will certainly add to the complete energy makeup that we are going to have to have as a part of an overall energy strategy that includes reduction of use, as well as efficiency of use as large components of it. This will require the participation of everyone – and much more than we have seen so far.

Of course, efficiency and reduction don’t add anything to economic growth, so the development of new sources of energy become a large component of this new way of doing things. And we all are aware that we here in Nova Scotia could use some additional economic boost to keep our families together here – and not have to go out west to make our living. However, it all requires new thinking as well as an open mind.

So, to the subject at hand: there is new nuclear technology available and no one seems to want to get into any dialogue about it. It is called fast neutron reactors instead of old style reactors that only use 0.7% of the energy contained in uranium (after enrichment). The new reactor technology uses 99% of the energy contained in the uranium fuel rods. As well -- and this is the critical point -- the 99% comes from the "previously used fuel", as George Stanford, my nuclear physicist friend and mentor prefers to call it.

Mr. Stanford and a couple of his colleagues, W. H. Hannum and G. E. Marsh, have written a clear and concise Scientific American article, "Smarter Use of Nuclear Waste," available to all at: If you want to talk about nuclear energy, pro or con, you have to be aware of this technology.

One important aspect of this new technology, as stated above, is that it uses the previously used fuel. Mr. Stanford stated to me that there is enough of this fuel to generate power for the next 300 years before having to mine any more uranium. Uranium mining tends to benefit corporations but reusing the fuel does not make the same kind of profit, for them nor their shareholders. It is the same for storing the 'waste' in places like Yucca Mountain. It is expensive to do this and so there is money to be made doing it.
If there are no future solutions to our energy demands, Mr. Stanford said there is enough uranium on the planet to fuel generators "until the end of time." I questioned him on this, as I know there is a finite amount of uranium on the planet. He conceded that it would only last "until the sun goes nova."

I am not a nuclear physicist. I am not a scientist, for that matter. I am trying to learn, however, what is needed to meet our energy requirements through this period of civilization where there are far more people on the planet at one time than ever before. If there weren’t so many people it is unlikely that we would have the current climatic crisis happening. Perhaps we will only need to use nuclear energy for a century before a new and less invasive form of energy is developed.
The Chinese have a symbol for Crisis that is the same one they use for Opportunity. Perhaps this is the hidden gift contained within all this Climate Change/Global Warming that is going on.

I urge you all to read the article at http://tinyurl.com/34uxob

Elisabeth Kosters

Comment online since January 7th 2008
I share Wendy Elliot’s concern about the risks of nuclear energy, but I am also aware that my own concerns are short sighted. Let’s face the facts:
1. Nova Scotia relies for its transportation energy on petroleum, shipped in from the North Sea and from Venezuela. There are no pipelines from the oil- and gas-rich Canadian West to Atlantic Canada.
2. Nova Scotia gas, produced offshore from Sable and – in the near future – Abenaki, is shipped off to Massachusetts and Rhode Island, where there are enough people to justify the construction of a gas distribution network (gas lines into homes). Hence:
3. for its heating energy, Nova Scotia, in addition to above mentioned imported oil, also relies on coal, shipped in from Colombia

Both Venezuela and Colombia have not really stable governments and both countries are known for human rights abuse. We talk about blood diamonds and in the past we boycotted gold and diamonds from South Africa and Granny Smith apples from Chili. That was all very honorable, but these were boycotts that we could afford – they didn’t affect our daily comfort zones.

The whole world is concerned about global warming, caused – most likely – by the growing amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, which gets there because we burn up fossil fuels at a fast rate. Fossil fuels contain vast amounts of Carbon, which has become sequestered in sedimentary rocks over the past half billion years. We are now putting it back in the atmosphere almost instantaneously, hence weird effects (climate).

In the ‘80s, when the anti-nuclear movement was big and when the moratorium for Nova Scotia was put in place, almost nobody worried about global warming or about the end of oil. Everyone remembered Three Mile Island (1979), shortly followed by Chernobyl (1986). Note that the Chernobyl accident is almost 22 years ago and no nuclear accident has happened since. However, we have pumped immense amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere since then, doing as yet unknown damage to the planet which belongs to our children and grandchildren.

Oil has now peaked and we worry about global warming but hardly anyone is willing to live up to the consequences in exchange of a bit of daily comfort. I commuted to Halifax last fall and rode the Green Rider van, an excellent service. They operate 2 vans between Kentville and Halifax and they have a problem keeping 2 vans running, because neither van is full so they are loosing money. Why? Because people would rather be in their comfort zone and drive, hence adding orders of magnitude more CO2 to the atmosphere than if they would either move or share the ride with 10 others.

What would you do if coal and oil suddenly stopped being shipped in to Halifax? How would you heat your home? Use wood? If everyone in Nova Scotia suddenly started using wood, there wouldn’t be a tree left pretty soon. Also, how would you imagine that wood is getting delivered to your home? Or would you rather use Nova Scotia coal? Unfortunately, NS coal, apart from being difficult to reach, is very dirty, it contains a lot of sulphur, which is a horrific air pollutant. This was one reason for closing Nova Scotia coal mines and shipping cleaner coal in. I honestly don’t know whether the pollution created by mining in Colombia and by the transport to Nova Scotia was part of that equation.

None of these figures are my own dreams. This has all been thoroughly researched, most importantly by the group of dr. Larry Hughes at Dalhousie: http://dclh.electricalandcomputerengineering.dal.ca/enen/index.html

It is fashionable to talk of alternative energy and I wholeheartedly agree that we should all try to use more solar and wind power. But most of our homes are not built towards solar energy generation, so unless we can afford major renovations or sell our home and move, the amounts of solar energy that we can realize is going to be limited. The newly published Nova Scotia wind atlas (http://agrg.cogs.nscc.ca/publications/presentations/pdf/windatlas.pdf) shows that locations for wind energy generation are limited and we haven’t even begun to be confronted with major public protest (horizon pollution, noise). Nova Scotia has maxed out on hydro. The new buzz is tidal energy. Even if it would be technically feasible to put 100 in-stream tidal turbines in Minas Passage (without doing significant harm to our unique natural environment or without increasing the risk of coastal flooding in the Minas Basin due to the water set-up that these turbines would generate), then the maximum energy generated from this investment is no more than 2.5% of the current electricity demand in Nova Scotia (official figure from the NS department of Energy).

There is uranium in Nova Scotia. It occurs naturally in specific areas, not just everywhere: geologic processes dictate where it occurs. Go to the Capella Resources website (http://www.capellaresources.com/s/CNS.asp) and you’ll see a ‘simplified geologic map of Nova Scotia, courtesy Atlantic Geoscience Society’. That map has a multitude of colors. Every color indicates different rock of different ages: it’s far from a homogenized, uniform image. A lot of Uranium occurs near Windsor, where exploration was carried out in the 1970s, prior to the moratorium. In that area, it also leaks naturally through groundwater into the wells of people’s homes, locally charging groundwater with uranium amounts that are higher than the officially recommended minimum, hence creating a health hazard. If we don’t research uranium occurrences, we will never know what damage it does without even mining it for nuclear power.

We’re all concerned and we’re all terribly short sighted. We would rather have our children and grandchildren live with the consequences of global warming than give up any comfort ourselves. Nuclear energy production has certain risks. Pumping CO2 in the atmosphere has immense risks and yet we’d rather stick our heads in the sand.

Elisabeth Kosters

Richard Collis

Comment online since January 5th 2008
Well Wendy not of this surprises me.

On Boularderie Island we or some of us suspect are phones have been tapped as we continue to fight the strip mining of Boularderie Island for cheap, dirty, high sulphur and high ash coal all under the direction of the Rodney MacDonald government who still don't know what the heck is going on.

The Tories green policy has been a dismal failure.

Rodney and the Rev Mark Parent continue to be deceptive about what is taking place on Boularderie Island. But the coal mining companies such as Pioneer Coal continue to profit with the blessing of Rodney and Mark Parent.

Every kind of mineral that there is under the feet of all NS is wanted by the mining companies and Rodney is prepared to allow it to be dug up.

I don't believe that the citizens around Digby and the North Mtn are out of the woods yet. That is not over by a long shot....Maybe for the quarry that wanted gravel for its roads but there is more that the USA wants and they will be allowed to mine it.

The USA wants all our natural resources and if the Rev. Mark Parent says otherwise than he is either very naive or very poorly advised.

I don't believe a word that comes out of his hypocrital non-Christan's mouth.

The whole province is for sale and the Tory government under Rodney Mac has no consideration for the environment , the ecology or the people.

All they are concerned about is that their political friends of the Tory party make profit and that the same friends continue to support them with some of those profits.

This Tory government is a deceptive government that will continue to BS the people of this province into believing that the decisions they make are the right decisions for all.

Rodney Mac and Rev Mark Parent continue to turn a blind eye to what is really taking place on Boularderie Island if not all of CBI. This whole island is contaminated from one end to the other and the government allows the practice of the 50s, 60s and 70 and 80s of just cover it over with top soil and make it into a recreactional area...another walking track on a contaiminated site.

What the people don't see , the people will not know about. out of sight, out of mind approach of Rodney and his puppetts to mining companies.

TOO DAMN DECEPTIVE.