Science Matters 1B Suzuki, David Suzuki Foundation Wouldn’t it be great if there were an easy answer to the problem of climate change? And wouldn’t it be great if we could solve our electricity needs at the same time? Yes, it would be, but wishful thinking won’t solve these complex problems. And neither will nuclear power. Last week, the UK’s Sustainable Development Commission urged British Prime Minister Tony Blair to reject building new nuclear reactors as an option to meet electricity demand and slow climate change. Instead, the commission recommended an aggressive expansion of energy efficiency programs and renewable energy. The commission based its decision on eight new research papers. Together, these papers led commission members to conclude that although nuclear power is a low- carbon technology with a good safety record in the UK, the benefits are outweighed by serious disadvantages. These include: the disposal of radioactive waste; the high cost of reactors; the inflexibility of depending on a few large-scale power plants; the issue of relying on constantly increasing energy supply, rather than reducing demand; and concerns over security. This conclusion stands in stark contrast to one provid- ed to the Province of Ontario. by the Ontario Power Authority, which recommends that the province spend $35 billion of taxpayers’ money to subsidize new nuclear reac- tors. Why such different takes on a similar problem? Unlike the UK analysis, the Ontatio Power report both overestimates growth of electricity demand and underesti- mates the potential for efficiency and conservation. It also underestimates the potential of renewable power sources, and overstates the reliability of nuclear power while down- playing the associated costs. In short, it fails to actually analyze what caused the current electricity crisis in Ontario. Without that analysis, the province is acoing itself Pe to repeat the same mistakes again. — In the 1970s, Ontario based i its energy future on nuclear power. However, those reactors suffered from seri- ous and lengthy breakdowns leading to billion-dollar repair bills, not to mention an electricity gap that necessitated stoking up the smog-producing furnaces of the province’s coal-fired power plants=sfaclest by onal brought in from the US. And then there was the cost. Escalating construction costs, over-runs and reliability problems took the shine off nuclear reactors by the late 1970s. Still, Ontario Hydro pressed on through the 1980s—and built the western world’s largest nuclear plant at Darlington. They even man- aged to exempt it from the province’s environmental assessment act. Yet when the electrons were finally flow- ing, this plant, budgeted at $3.4 billion, had cost nearly $15 billion. Proponents of nuclear power portray it as a climate saviour—an easy, shrink-wrapped, turn-key solution to global warming. But we’ve been down this road before and we have Ontario Hydro’s nearly $40 billion debt to show for it. Nuclear power may be low-carbon, but it has far too many other costs to justify investing our future in it. nsive red herring What Ontario needs is an electrical system that mini- mizes the risk of power shortages, unreliable delivery, spik- ing power prices, financial debt and environmental debt— including a radioactive legacy, smog, and greenhouse gases. The cheapest, most effective way to start building that sys- tem is to invest in maximizing energy efficiency. Right now, Ontario currently uses 60 percent more electricity per capi- ta than New York State, so we have a long way to go. But the best part about energy efficiency and conserva- tion is that you don’t have to wait a decade or more for it—you can get started now. Contrary to what its propo- nents would have you believe, nuclear power isn’t easy, fast or cheap. You can’t pop by Wal-Mart for a discount nuclear reactor and even’if you could—would you really want one? Left Overs continued: People who can see both the scientific and political causes and solutions to these problems are our best chance for absolu- tion. So don’t leave us hanging scientists! Tell us how screwed we are, but also tell us how we’ll save ourselves in the nick of time. At least it would make for more interesting stories. What a tragic country... petty regionalism... crumbling military... political instability... Editorial Cartoon by JJ McCulloughh Yeah, and Afghanistan has a lot of problems, too!