The Uranium Development Partnership (UDP), appointed to advise the Saskatchewan government on opportunities for nuclear expansion, made its final report public in April with few surprises. The report is more of a business plan for nuclear power than a comparative analysis of energy options for the province. In addition, the assumptions used to justify the UDP’s mandate and its report are flawed.
Myth 1: The report reiterates the industry-created myth that “the nuclear industry is enjoying a global renaissance.” It states that “nuclear power is emerging as an attractive potential part of the overall electricity supply mix in many parts of the world.” Not so! The 2008 World Nuclear Industry Status Report shows that nuclear power has slipped from 16 per cent to 14 per cent of global nuclear capacity since 2005, while renewables have already surpassed nuclear capacity, and are on track to double to 35 per cent by 2030. Even if all the proposed nuclear plants get on stream, it would not be enough to keep pace with the number of plants being decommissioned. As a result, we are going to see a steady and very costly nuclear phase out.
Myth 2: The UDP says “nuclear power generates very low carbon emissions, on par with the cleanest form of renewable energy.” Not so! The nuclear fuel system as a whole is a large user of fossil fuels — from hard-rock mining to plant construction to decommissioning and waste. Taking 10 years to build a plant and another six to nine years of operation to make up for its energy deficit, nuclear power is now widely dismissed for being neither a practical nor cost-effective means to addressing imminent global warming. The International Energy Agency predicts that nuclear power may drop to 10 per cent of global electrical capacity by 2030, since it doesn’t adequately address climate change.
Myth 3: The UDP says “nuclear energy has proven to be cost-competitive.” Not so! Independent research concludes that when capital and other cost estimates (interest, fuel, operations, decommissioning, fuel storage) are included, nuclear power is as much as two to three times the cost of its competitors. The huge capital costs of nuclear power compared to renewables (which the UDP admits in its report) create huge public debt, which must also be taken into account. So must all the hidden and direct subsidies, including insurance liability.
Myth 4: The UDP says “the supply of uranium … is abundant and secure.” Not so! According to the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency, the amount of uranium worth mining will run out in about 80 years. The UDP report admits that Saskatchewan uranium supplies will run out in 45 years.
Myth 5: The report says “the industry has made significant strides in improving the reliability and safety of nuclear power.” Not really! In Ontario, the most nuclear-dependent region in North America, aging and accident-prone reactors are regularly out of service, requiring premature and costly refurbishing, as well as expensive backup from other sources. Furthermore, the type of plant that’s being proposed for Saskatchewan has not been tested anywhere. A precursor to this plant has already been withdrawn from U.S. licensing after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission predicted design and safety issues. Even a leaked SaskPower report, in which the government picked Lake Diefenbaker as a potential site for a nuclear plant, admits, “Population density near the power plant is important, particularly in the event of a severe accident. The general principle is to site the facility in a sparsely populated area that is far from large population centres.”
Myth 6: Although the UDP report admits that emerging renewable technologies “such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass … present new opportunities,” the UDP simply dismisses these by saying they “present technical and economic challenges.” Not really! These challenges are dwarfed by those of nuclear power, which, after more than a half-century of existence, still has no way to address its long-lived radioactive wastes, and continues with its legacy of massive cost-overruns.
But the UDP’s report was never intended as a balanced report on energy options. Its members, which include representatives from Areva, Bruce Power, Cameco and TransCanada Corporation, foretell its conclusions.
Jim Harding is a retired professor of environmental and justice studies and author of Canada’s Deadly Secret: Saskatchewan Uranium and the Global Nuclear System (Fernwood, 2007). He writes a column “Saskatchewan Sustainability” for the weekly chain_ R-Town News and lives on the Crow’s Nest Ecology Preserve in the Qu’Appelle Valley with his dear spouse, Janet. The above is an excerpt from Harding’s analysis of the UDP report. The full analysis can be found at http://jimharding.brinkster.net
[...] the full potential of the uranium value chain in Saskatchewan” is, quite simply, a propaganda piece on behalf of the nuclear industry. It tries to sell the idea that “nuclear industry is enjoying a global renaissance” [...]