Ontario Greens call for affordable alternatives to new nuclear

Submission to the Joint Review Panel regarding Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project

Dear Review Panel,

Ontario needs a long-term, sustainable energy plan that will provide a reliable source of affordable energy with the ability to adapt to emerging technologies. The proposed new large-scale, Darlington reactors will lock Ontario into an expensive, inflexible form of energy generation, and will undermine efforts for conservation, efficiency and Ontario’s growing renewable market.

My concerns with the proposed new nuclear plants at Darlington include both the high financial costs and the damaging environmental consequences.  There are better, more affordable alternatives for a secure energy future in Ontario.

Financial Costs

Given the colossal time and cost overruns associated with every nuclear power project to date in Ontario, it is irresponsible to invest in new, large-scale nuclear generation. In fact, Ontario hydro rate-payers are still paying for the massive cost overruns from previous nuclear installations.

Nuclear power is an inflexible supplier of base load power, requires billions in capital investment and needs a long time to deploy.  This means that nuclear makes it difficult for Ontario to adjust to changes in demand, to use renewable sources of power or to take advantage of more affordable forms of power generation that will emerge from innovative technical advances.  Committing billions to nuclear also decreases incentives for less expensive options such as conservation and energy efficiency.

Nuclear energy should be on an even financial playing field with other sources of generation, which means a legislated guarantee not to pass cost overruns on to Ontario ratepayers or taxpayers.  It is imperative that Ontario commits to a transparent process for estimating the real costs of new nuclear generation by committing to an independent, third party review.   

In addition, Ontario taxpayers should not be on the hook for the insurance liabilities associated with nuclear power generation. Other sources of power generation must pay to insure against liability, and nuclear generators should be held to the same standard.

Environmental Consequences

In addition to the financial burden that new nuclear will place on Ontario taxpayers and ratepayers for years to come, nuclear energy has serious consequences for our environment.

It is a fallacy that nuclear is a source of clean energy. All stages of the nuclear fuel chain, other than actual emissions from generation – mining, milling, transport, fuel fabrication, enrichment, reactor construction, decommissioning and waste management – use fossil fuels.  This means that greenhouse gasses are emitted in each of these steps along the way.

Nuclear power creates radioactive waste, which is dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years.  There is no publicly accepted way of dealing with this waste. We are merely punting the problem down to the next generation – to our kids.  We are already seeing the problems with disposal, as exemplified by the controversy surrounding the shipping of contaminated parts out of Bruce Nuclear overseas through the Great Lakes.

Further, nuclear energy requires significant amounts of water and aggregates. The waste heat from the plants harms aquatic life in the Great Lakes by warming them up.  Uranium mining contaminates the air, water and soil. As richer deposits of uranium ore are depleted, marginal deposits would need to be exploited, which take even more energy and cost to extract.

Clearly, the only way nuclear energy can be called clean is to ignore all the steps in production, and the hazards of the waste disposal.  Between the high price of generation and the environmental consequences, large-scale nuclear is not the best choice for Ontario.

More Affordable Alternatives

Ontario will require new sources of electrical generation, and all new capacity will have costs associated with them. Before committing to new, large-scale nuclear, however, Ontario should prioritize more affordable alternatives.

Conservation and energy efficiency

Energy efficiency and conservation should be at the heart of a financially responsible long-term energy plan. Demand reduction is far more cost-effective and financially responsible than constructing new capacity.

As one of the least efficient users of energy of any jurisdiction in North America, Ontario has the capacity to be more aggressive in its conservation efforts. Investments in energy-efficient homes, buildings and technologies will better position individuals and businesses to manage the impact of rising world prices for energy.

Conservation is the best bang for our buck, helping reduce hydro bills by decreasing demand, and at the same time significantly reducing the money needed for new generation capacity.  Conservation and energy efficiency provide sustainable long-term savings.

Hydro

Hydroelectricity is a less expensive, reliable and clean source of power. Given Ontario’s water resources, research into growing our hydroelectric capacity is a cost-effective and efficient way to replace the need for new nuclear plants. Micro-hydro projects in particular offer an important source of clean power.

Ontario can immediately negotiate hydro imports from Quebec. Current transmission capacity between Ontario and Quebec could displace 75% of the power expected from the Darlington rebuild at approximately 1/4 the price. Completing grid connections to Manitoba and expanding capacity with Quebec to create an east west corridor will facilitate the availability of less expensive imports of hydro from neighbouring provinces.

Combined Heat and Power

Why not capture the waste heat going up the chimney in large buildings and cities and turn it into electrical energy? Combined heat and power projects (CHP) can be done at schools, hospitals, malls and apartment buildings and cost just six cents per kWh to generate electricity. At the same time CHP can provide secure power in case of power outages.

Renewables

With prudent investment in capacity, transmission grid, storage, technology and research, Ontario could generate all of its extra energy needs from other renewable sources. This approach provides more flexibility, security, and avoids expensive investments in new nuclear.

Renewables provide a great opportunity to transition Ontario’s energy system from one that is top down, bureaucratic and centrally managed with a few large generating plants to one that is vastly more distributed with a variety of producers (both big and small) supported by a “smart grid” transmission system.  

Moving to a decentralized, distributed system presents the opportunity to democratize energy generation in Ontario and create a system where all Ontarians have an opportunity to become self-sufficient green energy producers and entrepreneurs.  This will not happen if Ontario locks itself into large scale, centralized nuclear generation.

Conclusion

It’s time for a financially responsible approach to electricity generation that invests in the future, not the past. Building new nuclear is too expensive and environmentally damaging.  There are better alternatives.

Thank you for your consideration of my comments.

With cordial regards,

Mike Schreiner, Leader
Green Party of Ontario

Submitted on February 21st to:

Darlington New Nuclear Power Plant Project
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
160 Elgin Street,
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3
Tel.: 1-866-582-1884
Fax: 613-957-0941
E-mail: Darlington.Review@ceaa-acee.gc.ca