It may take a bit more than the bones of the brontothere to attract tourists to Saskatchewan (article, 11 Sept 1996). After all, if it only took old fossils to act as a tourist magnet, the most popular spot in Canada would be the Nova Scotia Legislature.
Sent: 13 September 1996. Published: 17 September 1996
In its heyday some 20 years ago, AECL developed a reputation for selling CANDU reactors to regimes that were undemocratic, abused human-rights, and had ambitions to develop nuclear weapons.
Despite the lack of sales and continued public distrust of the nuclear industry, it would appear that old habits die hard, as shown in the recent announcement that AECL has landed a contract with China to sell it CANDU technology (Globe and Mail, 8 November). Of course, AECL might argue that the sale of CANDU technology to China proves that it has made a great leap forward and is dealing with a different type of customer.
After all, China already has nuclear weapons.
Sent: 9 November 1996. Published: 12 November 1996
Defenders of nuclear power, such as Bruce Bigham (letter, 15 November), would have us believe that nuclear energy is the solution to abating greenhouse gas emissions in the developing world. Such claims continue to overlook many fundamental problems unique to nuclear power:
Fortunately there are viable alternatives to nuclear power that are already making inroads into the problem of greenhouse gas emissions in the developing world.
The growing use of photovoltaics (PVs) in developing countries such as India, China, Brazil, Morocco, Malaysia, and South Africa is permitting many of the world's 2 billion people, living in rural areas with limited grid connections, to gain access to essential electrical services. Continuing research is lowering the cost of PVs to the point where they are becoming competitive with existing thermal and nuclear unit energy costs.
Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) are now central to the demand-side management (DSM) programs found in many developing countries. These reduce energy usage (a 20 watt CFL produces more light output than does a 75 watt incandescent bulb [6]) and delay the construction of new generating facilities. In China, the most recent 5 year economic plan (1996-2000) identifies CFLs specifically as a crucial element of the government's energy efficiency efforts. Other countries, such as Indonesia, Thailand, Hungary, and Honduras are all instituting DSM program based upon CFLs; the World Bank is supporting programs in Mexico and Poland.
In light of the activities taking place in the developing world, it is a sad comment on this country that the best effort Canadians can make to abate greenhouse gas emissions is to sell a CANDU reactor to China.
Sent: 21 November 1996. Unpublished
Professor Jovanovich is correct when he says that the Chinese have every right to expect a standard of living that allows them to attain goods such as refrigerators, washing machines, and computers (letter, 21 November). However, he is mistaken in his belief that nuclear power is the only way in which the Chinese can meet greenhouse gas emission targets and achieve the desired standard of living.
Furthermore, his suggestion that because Japan increased its electrical consumption ten-fold in 37 years (1950 to 1987) therefore China can do the same using nuclear power overlooks a number of points. Constructing 1,650 Candu-600 reactors in 37 years means that one reactor must be completed roughly every 8 days. The capital costs of such a program are staggering: anywhere from $27 billion ($1000 U.S. kw/installed) to $80 billion ($3000 U.S. kw/installed) every year. At no time during Japan's post war rise was it spending such sums on electrical generation and attempting to become a military superpower.
Renewable energy and efficient electrical usage are two alternatives that the Chinese can adopt that will allow them to meet their material needs and minimize their greenhouse gas emissions while avoiding the well-known problems associated with nuclear power. Renewable energy (including geothermal, biogas, biomass, wind, and photovoltatic) lends itself well to a country with a large rural population scattered in small villages. While new, highly efficient electric devices (such as refrigerators that use less than one-seventh the electricity of an equivalent North American model and compact florescent lighting that draw about one-third the electricity of an incandescent bulb while emitting the same number of lumens) will reduce the per capita energy requirements. Fortunately, the Chinese government has already seen the benefits of both renewables and electrical efficiency and is already incorporating both of them into their energy future.
Sent: 28 November 1996. Published: 29 November 1996
On 26 November, Prime Minister Chretien signed an agreement with Chinese Prime Minister Li Peng to sell two Candu reactors to China; barely a week later, China's president Jiang Zemin was in Pakistan, announcing that China would build a second nuclear power plant for Pakistan (Globe and Mail, 7 December).
Pakistan already has a Candu reactor, KANUPP, built in the late 1960s. After the explosion of India's `peaceful' nuclear device in 1974, Canada attempted to add various safeguards to its nuclear cooperation agreements (NCAs) with all countries using Candu technology, including India and Pakistan. Pakistan's subsequent refusal to agree to stronger safeguards and its continued intransigence with respect to signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) has resulted in Canada limiting its involvement with Pakistan to safety issues relating to only the original Candu reactor.
Part of Canada's nuclear cooperation agreement with China prohibits the transfer of Candu technology to a third country without prior Canadian consent. By building a second reactor for Pakistan, China is violating the spirit of this agreement. If it is Canada's intention to promote `atoms for peace', the NCA should be rewritten so that countries obtaining Candu technology are prohibited from making subsequent nuclear deals with any regime that does not meet Canada's nuclear safeguards.
Failing this, Canada should get out of the nuclear business altogether.
Sent: 14 December 1996. Published: 18 December 1996
Federal environment minister Sergio Marchi states that in order to solve the climate change problem, we must combine political will and the "incredible environmental technologies that we could only dream about years ago" (Emissions target won't be reached, 13 December).
To which "incredible technologies" is the minister alluding? Fuel efficient cars (rather than wagons and trucks)? Improved public transportation (in place of dependance upon the automobile)? Compact fluorescent bulbs? Cogeneration and district heating?
There is nothing incredible about these technologies, not only could they make a difference, they have been available for many years. What is incredible is that despite the rhetoric started by Prime Minister Mulroney at the 1988 Toronto Conference on the Changing Atmosphere, through the 1992 Rio Conference, and now with Sergio Marchi, Canadian politicians have failed to put their words into action. As a result, Canada's net emissions of carbon dioxide by the year 2000 could be some 18.6 per cent higher than those in 1990 according to National Energy Board data and projections (see L. Hughes and S. Scott, `Canadian Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 1990-2000', Energy Conversion and Management, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 217-224, 1997).
Sent: 23 December 1996. Unpublished