Energy Policy Circle
Energy Policy Circle
For a great overview on Canada's current nuclear waste policy and actions (based in DGR - Deep Geological Repository), visit http://www.knownuclearwaste.ca/key-points.html
For a great potential basis for an alternative to DGR, a "rolling stewardship model", please consider the Anishinabek First Nation and Iroquois Caucus joint statment from 2017 (see 5 points at the bottom of the article): https://www.anishinabek.ca/2017/05/02/joint-declaration-between-the-anishinabek-nation-and-the-iroquois-caucus-on-the-transport-and-abandonment-of-radioactive-waste/
Also, here is some information on Rolling Stewardship from Dr. Gordon Edwards #roll" target="_blank">http://www.ccnr.org/#roll
Finally, with respect to the NWMO - Nuclear Waste Management Organization, Elizabeth May in her March 31 2021 letter to Minister Seamus O'Reagan states:
"The federal government has failed to fulfill the oversight role that the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act set out. The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is an industrial association of the generators and owners of nuclear fuel waste, namely Hydro Quebec, New Brunswick Power and Ontario Power Generation. The role of the NWMO contradicts the recommendations that an “arm’s length” agency be formed, that is independent from the nuclear industry, to investigate approaches for managing Canada’s used nuclear fuel. As a result of the NWMO’s direct involvement with the nuclear industry, this organization is neither seen as trustworthy or credible in defending the public interest, even when operating within their mandate, as delineated in the Nuclear Fuel Waste Act. Resulting strategies must be the product of the federal government’s engagement with Indigenous peoples, the Canadian public, and civil society. Strategies should not be formulated by the NWMO."
Related meetings:
Nuclear and all thats energy
I want to be part of our future. I want to be a candidate in the Huron-Bruce riding. I want to reform and re-structure our commitment to our energy future. As a person who wishes to run as a Candidate in a pro-nuclear riding, I need the GPCs help. Nuclear is one of the largest, if not the largest economic contributor to the Huron-Bruce riding. I believe I can win this riding if we just come at nuclear from a different angle. I have a voice and influence in this riding, and I can win here. I have been raised in Huron-Bruce and currently still live here.
I want to shift our hard stances on Nuclear and energies. We need to develop a more attractive approach. Using words in our press releases such as Oppose and Abandon are too divisive. We need to get Green seats in order to make a difference and we cannot get those seats if we are acting like authoritarians on issues. There always needs to be a clear path displayed for voters to show them we are not just being radical, but we have a solution for the future. Radical shifts and views seldomly work!
Please meet with me to and help raise my voice to the GPC leadership. I’m not asking for a 180 degree turn on views. I am asking that we do not draw hard lines in the sand and make a stand that will affect the way of life and security that so many rely on.
The GPC says that nuclear doesn’t offer many jobs. I disagree! Look at all the jobs to design, develop, maintain, and regulate. Look at the number of primary, secondary, and tertiary jobs the nuclear industry supports. I really think the current views of the greens is a little narrow and lacks vision. Perhaps I am the one who is lacking in vision and needs my eyes opened with a new perspective. But we need to have this conversation.
When it comes to the nuclear and oil/gas industries I understand people’s distaste. I am hard pressed to allow for subsidies for any industry. If an industry can not effectively self-regulate fiscally then that tells me the world doesn’t support its cost. Let’s, let a true open market decide. Instead of abandoning nuclear and oil/gas we should ensure they are paying a production tax that goes directly to investments in research and development for new technologies and industry waste management/regulation. If an industry requires federal regulation, then there should be an automatic tax on that industries production that pays for that regulation. The taxpayers should never be responsible for these additional burdens. I think we should let the open market determine if nuclear is too expensive.
So please instead of building walls and discriminating against industries that sustain so many people’s way of life, lets use our platform to encourage the reform of our countries energy programs. Let’s stand for restructuring our commitment to these industries.
Let’s move away from hard stances and work with industries to develop our dream of a clean future.
Thanks,
Josh
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
1 comment
April 19, 2022
The Energy Mix weighed in on the Liberal's 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan released a week ago by Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault.
[link to "Easier Ride for Fossils..." article: https://www.theenergymix.com/2022/03/30/easier-ride-for-fossils-but-9-1b-in-climate-action-funding-as-ottawa-releases-2030-plan/
Not once was the word 'nuclear' mentioned.
If the Liberals and NDP need small nuclear reactors (SNRs) as the infrastructure for electric vehicles (EVs) across Canada then they're doing a good job of hiding that fact. The GPC should, I believe, attack on that point.
Moreover, the Federal government's SNR plans directly compete with—and seem set to outlaw—changing the trucking sector's alternative of using renewable natural gas (RNG), a technology that's proven to reduce emissions by 98% AND providing more power. I'm not an expert—my brother Charlie is—but I believe for the sake of carbon reductions and good policy, the GPC must develop this angle as part of the attack on SNRs.
"SNR vs RNG" is a debate the Liberals and NDP can't win!
Add your comment
Sign in with your account or sign up to add your comment.
Loading comments ...