Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Haldimand "Bruce Power Hires Radiation Specialist"

I find it interesting that this Specialist that was hired by Bruce Power seems to think that the issue that most people are talking about is radiation. What I have heard is a bit different.

Some of the concerns I have heard are the storage of nuclear waste, water usage and what has come up recently is the mining of uranium. Now that in itself is a whole new ball game! I am working on that one.

What I find interesting is that this specialist states "Nuclear" power is the way to go if you want to minimize our carbon footprint! So what is a "carbon footprint"? I'm not quite sure, but I do think it is more than "radiation" from a nuclear plant!

Nuclear experts hired to answer residents' questions
Posted By MONTE SONNENBERG, SUN MEDIA
November 25, 2008

A radiation specialist will be a key player in a series of open houses related to the proposed construction of two nuclear reactors in Nanticoke.

Bruce Power recently hired Doug Boreham, a former professor at Mc-Master University in Hamilton, as its senior environmental scientist. He will answer questions about nuclear power at upcoming open houses in Simcoe, Jarvis, Port Dover and Cayuga.

"One of the biggest obstacles we have to overcome on these projects are people's fears of radiation," Boreham said Monday. "What is the effect on me? What is the effect on my children? What are the effects on future generations? One of my main functions in this process is to dispel the fears people have about radiation."

Boreham and Duncan Moffett, of Golder Associates, gave Haldimand council an overview Monday of the environmental assessment now underway regarding a possible nuclear installation in Nanticoke. The pair are expected to make the same presentation tonight at Norfolk council.

The open houses scheduled for Dec. 1 to 4 will provide Bruce Power with an opportunity to introduce itself to the community. Experts on nuclear power will be on hand to address residents' questions and concerns.

An issue that has dogged the nuclear industry from the outset is the belief that nuclear waste remains highly toxic for as long as 250,000 years.

That, Boreham said, is not true. After 200 years, he said, a person would have to stand in the presence of a spent fuel rod for one hour to absorb as much radioactivity as is delivered by a standard CT scan.

Boreham and Moffett heard Monday that a plant in Nanticoke may be an issue for Dunnville. The town is down stream from the proposed site and draws its drinking water from Lake Erie.

Nuclear reactors use large amounts of water and discharge trace amounts of radioactive tritium in their effluent. The International Congress on Radiation Protection has set the safe limit for these emissions at 7,500 becquerels.

The amount of tritium released into Lake Huron at Bruce Power's plant in Tiverton averages about 50 becquerels. Moffett said Bruce Power is considering a design for the Nanticoke project that discharges no effluent into Lake Erie.

Moffett added that nuclear power should be the choice of those who wish to minimize their carbon footprint.

"If you were to get all your electricity from one of these reactors, your share of waste over a lifetime would fit in a pop can," he said. "If you got all of your electricity over your lifetime from coal, your waste would fit into four dump trucks."

Moffett said, "Nanticoke looks like one of the best possible sites for a power plant" because it is remote, close to a large body of water and located at the entry point of a major transmission corridor.

The first open house will be held at the Lions Community Centre in Port Dover Dec. 1. The Lions Community Centre in Jarvis is up next Dec. 2. On Dec. 3, the Simcoe Recreation Centre plays host. On Dec. 4, the event moves to the Kinsmen Centre in downtown Cayuga. Each event starts at 3 p. m. and ends at 8 p. m.

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1313706

10 comments:

  1. Whooee! I reckon Bruce figgers yer hick council's goona fall fer every whopper they tell. Bein' known as a nuclear expert commands respect and who wants to question anything a bigass perfesser sez?

    One part that got me was the bit about how safe it will be if some poor idjit gets exposed to a fuel rod 200 years from now.

    What they failed to mention is that a single fuel rod is rare, indeed. Fuel rods are welded into bundles. A bundle for CANDU contain 37 rods. The welding job withstands the heat of a nuclear reaction during the time the bundle is in the reactor core. The spent bundles (1 million times more radioactive than the unused fuel) are all kept in a single location on the plant site.

    While the lyin' snake may be correct about how harmful it is to be near a single fuel roid, the real-life situation is that if you're near one rod, you're near a whole bunch more.

    If a couple stones fall off a dump truck and hit a person standing behind the dumper, there won't be much of an injury. If the whole load of stones fall on the person, they're dead and buried.

    The selfsame tagteam of snake oil salesmen was at Norfolk Council last night tellin' more lies. The council was eatin' it all up. After all, these guys are experts, right?

    JB

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for your post JB. You bring up some very good points.

    Were the residents allowed to speak last night in Norfolk?

    Could you post a little more detail as to what they spoke about last night at council? I couldn't get to Haldimand's council meeting on Monday afternnon and I'm sure both presentations were the same.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just to help clarify things for you Donna, a carbon footprint is a way of describing how much carbon dioxide is being introduced into the atmosphere by a particular process. Carbon Dioxide is what plants breath (inhale) and exchange for oxygen which they exhale. Animals in turn breath (inhale) oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. An overbalance on either side will cause damage one way or the other. If forests and other plant life weren't being destroyed at the high rate they are more of the carbon dioxide would be getting utilized and converted to oxygen. Atomic radiation however, in doses infinitely smaller than the amount of carbon dioxide being produced every day can and will kill all life. SO, reducing our carbon footprint is definitely a necessity but replacing it with atomic radiation is like replacing toilet bowl water with battery acid, hardly a solution.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for your post on carbon footprints.

    I am researching mining uranium, this could be quite a "carbon footprint"! What I have read so far is a bit disturbing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Whooee! Well DonnaGal, the public wasn't allowed to ask any questions at Norfolk Council. Big surprise, eh?

    The snake oil boys told a coupla whoppers. They said that one-third of EA's result in denying the project approval. The real number is one-thirtieth. Only 2 EA's in the last 63 have resulted in the project being turned down. The 1/3 ratio sure set minds at ease with the council. Too bad it was a bald-faced lie.

    The other big lie they told was about nuke plants needing to be shut down due to heat waves and a lack of cool enough water. Boreham was asked about it and he said such occurrences DO NOT happen.

    Not true!

    In the past few years, several instances have happened in North America and in Europe.

    Here are some links:

    Heat wave ignites problems in ET

    Michigan Reactor Shut Down Due to Heat

    Heatwave Hits German Nuclear Plants Forcing Shutdown of Obrigheim

    Heatwave shuts down nuclear power plants

    Does anyone think that experts in the nuclear energy field could be unaware of these issues?

    I reckon our councils just don't give a rat's ass whether they hear the truth or not.

    JB

    ReplyDelete
  6. It looks like Bruce Power is not being so truthful! Thanks for the links above. As far as the EA's go jimbobby is correct on that one as well! HMMMMMM

    ReplyDelete
  7. Same ole same ole, so there must be more to this. Why is council trying so hard to present only one side, do not be afraid, (unless we tell you what to fear - like without nuclear you will freeze in the cold etc) and trust us, as we give you only one side. What about conservation? Alternatives? Who after researching would pick nuclear? Fear mongering, (fear of being jobless, no customers etc) needs to be replaced with the real facts about nuclear, and its true carbon footprint from birth to death of a nuclear plant at Nanticoke!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Come on board people, get involved. Or this deadly project will become
    a reality !! You think you are paying a big retirement debt charge already...
    thanks to nuclear....Did everyone know that you, the taxpayer, already pay for storing all nuclear waste in the province of Ontario.....wonder what the
    cost of that is to date?? and will be with all these new plants to come......
    Call your MP, Dwight Duncan, local politician. Stand up and be counted!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.


    Joannah

    http://windscreensite.com

    ReplyDelete