Dear Editor,

 

Allison Connell’s letter of October 2, 2004, “'Regional' solution exists to solve energy needs at home” is certainly well written but still falls short on certain facts.

 

Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Power share few common threads.  Converting reactor grade Plutonium to the proper isotopic concentration of weapons grade is not a trivial or cheap technology.  Although it is possible, it is definitely not the only way to build nuclear weapons.  In fact, given how other countries have acquired their nuclear weapons it can be seen as a desperate last resort.  This is the important point.  Closing down nuclear power would do nothing to stop proliferation.  It would simply force a country to fall back on other technologies that have been used by practically all other nuclear weapons programs.  If Ms.(?) Connell insists on sticking to regional issues the point can be argued even more strongly. At the end of the Second World War, Canada had the second largest nuclear infrastructure in the world.  We were the second country to operate a nuclear reactor.  Yet to this day we have made the honourable decision to forgo nuclear weapons.  If Pt. Lepreau is refurbished it will make no contribution whatsoever to proliferation.

 

She quotes extensively from two of my favorite books, A Brave New World and 1984.  The result of which bares little in the way of results.  Security at all types of installations, not just nuclear facilities, has been ongoing for years and years.  This is hardly evidence of a “police state”.   She should be worried when riot squads start parading down King Street.  Otherwise security at a nuclear plant is hardly infringing on anyone’s freedom.  Incidentally, since Ms. Connell brings up terrorists it would be informative to bring up several independent studies that have been conducted by institutions such as EPRI and the Center for Strategic and International Studies.  The various analyses conducted reach the same conclusion: terrorist attacks on nuclear facilities are not credible.

 

Ms. Connell accuses the industry of doublethink by saying nuclear is clean air energy.  She is correct in pointing out, for example, vehicles doing work onsite emit Carbon Dioxide.  I find it hard to believe that she is smart enough to point this out and yet assume that other forms of energy generation are completely benign!  Does a wind turbine magically sprout into the air without having to be manufactured?  Fortunately there is an active branch of research called “Life Cycle Emissions Analysis”.  This takes into account all aspects of a particular energy sources manufacture, operation, and decommissioning.  There are several such studies and all come to the same conclusion:  Nuclear Power is indeed clean air energy.

 

Ms. Connell is right in saying that regional power schemes are perfect for wind energy.  These options should be exploited to their fullest potential.  This does not get rid of the need for large-scale centralized power.  Only 30% of demand in Canada is residential.  Even less of that is rural.  We need centralized power.  We have a choice: either continue burning fossil fuel or go Nuclear.  Given that I like fresh air, I know which I’ll choose.