Sam Arnold
January 8th, 2008
A recent letter to the editor about electric heat was wrong on at least two assertions.
The writer argues that electric heat is getting a bad rap and that nuclear power does not produce greenhouse gases.
Replacing inefficient electric home heating systems with more efficient ones using renewable energy will reduce future power demands, and help New Brunswick come closer to both Kyoto targets and the accord that will replace Kyoto.
It’s a fallacy that nuclear power does not create greenhouse gases. Advocates of nuclear power all but ignore the reality that huge amounts of carbon are generated to get the uranium out of the ground, distributed, used and waste-managed.
They overlook the facts that during construction of a plant carbon is produced in large quantities and that uranium supplies are becoming more costly to mine because the more accessible supplies are being depleted, much like oil.
They also ignore the adverse health effects of both uranium mining and nuclear power, as well as the fact that a solution to the safe long-term storage of nuclear waste has still not been found.
We already have 30 years of nuclear waste in temporary concrete storage silos at Point Lepreau. A second reactor will more than double this waste as well as all the risks.
Ironically, the power generated from the second reactor is destined for the New England market, not New Brunswick. They will get the power, and we will inherit the risks.
Is this the kind of self-sufficiency that the Graham government hopes to achieve? I hope not.
Sam Arnold
Leave a Comment
No comments yet.
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
