ACTION ALERT: STOP DARLINGTON!

[Oscar]

ACTION ALERT !!! STOP DARLINGTON! (Check for more Links on URL below)

[ http://www.eradicatingecocideincanada.o ... arlington/ ]

We're gearing up for a busy and productive 2013, and as always, there are important things you can do to help us Stop Darlington.

SIGN THE DARLINGTON DECLRATION:

[ http://stopdarlington.org/declaration/ ]

Videos and photos.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has recently posted archived footage from the Darlington hearings in Courtice this past December on their website.

You can access their videos HERE:

[ http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/commissi ... earing.cfm ]

Click on the videos in the left side bar to watch presentations by:

Greenpeace Canada
[ http://vimeo.com/57238563 ]

Green Party of Ontario
[ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Sha_-56 ... ata_player ]

Canadian Environmental Law Association
[ http://vimeo.com/57386121 ]

Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
[http://vimeo.com/57391875 ]

and share them with your friends and family.

And click on the photo to share it and others with your friends on Facebook. (Link on Original URL)

Ask your doctor or nurse to say NO to Darlington.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) is asking doctors and nurses to say NO to Darlington by signing the Darlington Declaration.

Please lend CAPE a hand. Ask your doctor or nurse to sign the Darlington Declaration by sending them HERE:
[ http://stopdarlington.org/declaration/ ]

Want to know more about Darlington's health risks? Watch Dr. Cathy Vakil explain the associated health risks HERE.

You can sign, too.

If you haven't already, please sign the Darlington Declaration:
[ http://stopdarlington.org/declaration/ ]

Almost 2000 individuals and organizations have signed our petition opposing nuclear expansion in Ontario.

Please lend your voice to those who support a green energy future. Click HERE to endorse the Darlington Declaration and share it with your friends.

SEE MORE LINKS ON ORIGINAL URL:

[ http://www.eradicatingecocideincanada.o ... arlington/ ]


Spread the word: Send a letter to the editor.

Help us spread our message and show your support for green energy by sending a letter to your local editor.

Here are a couple examples of anti-nuclear letters sent to The Toronto Star - Linda Hicks wrote saying nuclear risks are too high, and William Shore argues for reasons to be optimistic about wind energy.

Whatever you have to say is important. We need people to speak out against Darlington.

It's going to be a busy year and we're just getting started.

If you haven't already, click HERE to 'like' our Facebook page.

We're on Twitter, too. Click HERE to follow us on Twitter and get updates about our campaign.

Thanks for your support, and if you have any questions or would like to volunteer, email us at stopdarlington@gmail.com.

Cheers.

Michael O'Morrow
Stop Darlington Alliance

[Oscar]

Premier Wynne: Thanks for saying 'no' to new reactors!

[ http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/cam ... saying-no/ ]

The Ontario government announced this week that it is abandoning plans to build expensive and risky new reactors at the Darlington nuclear station.

This is a courageous and laudable decision.

It shows Premier Kathleen Wynne puts the protection of the environment and consumers before the demands of the powerful nuclear lobby.

Greenpeace has fought the plans to build new reactors at Darlington for the past eight years.

Under Premier Wynne’s leadership the government has accepted what Greenpeace has been saying for years: new nuclear reactors are highly risky, expensive and a barrier to the development of a greener energy system.

Premier Wynne’s decision puts Ontario on the path to a greener energy future.

Please take a moment to thank Premier Wynne for her leadership.


= = = = = =

Wynne deserves credit for backing away from nuclear expansion, Greenpeace says

[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... e14798129/ ]

TORONTO — The Canadian Press Published Thursday, Oct. 10 2013, 11:37 AM EDT Last updated Thursday, Oct. 10 2013, 11:41 AM EDT

Greenpeace Canada is applauding reports that Ontario’s Liberal government will back away from plans to spend up to $10-billion to build two new nuclear reactors.

Government sources confirm the Liberals have decided the province will not need the electricity from two new nuclear plants, but they will go ahead with the refurbishment of existing reactors.

Greenpeace spokesman Shawn-Patrick Stensil says if it’s true, Premier Kathleen Wynne “deserves credit for finally ending the charade that new reactors are needed and cost effective.”

Stensil says he hopes the government won’t take the nuclear industry’s cost claims for the Darlington refurbishment at face value, and require a full public review.

Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli’s office won’t confirm the decision, but says “nuclear is and will remain the backbone of our electricity system.”

Ontario currently gets about 50 per cent of its electricity from nuclear generation, but that could change when the government’s long-term energy plan is released later this year.

= = = = = =

Ontario backs away from plans to buy new nuclear reactors

[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e14793803/ ]

ADAM RADWANSKI The Globe and Mail
Published Thursday, Oct. 10 2013, 6:00 AM EDT
Last updated Thursday, Oct. 10 2013, 6:01 AM EDT

Ontario’s government will shelve plans for a major new investment in nuclear power, according to industry and government sources.

Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals have decided against spending upwards of $10-billion to buy two new nuclear reactors as had been planned when Dalton McGuinty was premier, and will commit only to refurbishing existing ones, the sources told The Globe and Mail.

The decision appears to be the latest blow to the nuclear industry, which is already facing a decline in international demand, safety concerns after 2011’s earthquake-induced meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima plant, and the emergence of comparatively cheap natural gas. As the most nuclear-reliant province in Canada and the only one with plans to acquire new reactors, Ontario had been held up as a source of hope for prospective builders, including Candu Energy Inc., the once-mighty division of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited that is now a subsidiary of SNC-Lavalin.

MORE:

[ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e14793803/ ]

= = = = = = =

If not new nuclear plants, what’s Ontario plan?

[ http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/ ... plan.html# ]

News / Queen's Park

John Spears Business reporter, Published on Thu Oct 10 2013

What will power Ontario’s electricity system if the role of nuclear power shrinks?

If the Ontario government has ruled out building new nuclear plants and coal plants — and if natural gas-fired plants are political poison — what’s left for Ontario?

The Liberal government confirmed Thursday that it has scrapped the proposal to spend more than $10 billion to build two new nuclear reactors at the Darlington power station — a decision that knocks 2,000 planned megawatts out of the power supply.

Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli said the government is, however, committed to refurbishing the existing Darlington nuclear station, which supplies about 20 per cent of Ontario’s electricity.

The amount of power knocked out of the supply is significant: Ontario needed about 18,000 megawatts of power on Thursday, a day with moderate weather. On a very hot or cold day, it can need up to 25,000 megawatts.

In addition, the existing Pickering nuclear station, which generates about 3,000 megawatts of power, is due to close at the end of the decade.

Not building the new reactors, while shutting down Pickering, will be a real shrinkage in the role of nuclear energy, which now supplies about half the province’s power.

And it sharpens the question: What’s next?

MORE:

[ http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/ ... plan.html# ]

= = = = = =

New nuclear not needed in Ontario, green groups say

[ http://www.thestar.com/business/economy ... s_say.html ]

Declining power consumption in Ontario means that new nuclear reactors won’t be needed in the province, two environmental groups argue in a new report

By: John Spears Business reporter, Published on Tue Sep 10 2013

Declining power consumption in Ontario means that new nuclear reactors aren’t needed in the province, two environmental groups argue in a new report.

The Pembina Institute and Greenpeace say that conservation and renewable energy will answer the province’s energy needs for the foreseeable future, eliminating the need for proposed new nuclear reactors.

Ontario’s current long term energy plan – now under review – says that the province should continue to get about half its power from nuclear plants. The Pickering nuclear station is due to be retired in 2020.

The province is considering two new reactors at the Darlington nuclear station, each capable of generating about 1,000 megawatts of power.

But the province has also said it will give energy conservation priority over building new power plants.

“We’re talking about a commitment to investing in conservation before new generation, wherever that’s cost-effective,” energy minister Bob Chiarelli said in July.

The Pembina-Greenpeace report argues that committing to the new reactors – whose cost is still unknown – will skew the province’s energy policy away from conservation.

“In order to implement a conservation-first approach rather than a nuclear-first one, the government must clearly direct the Ontario Power Authority to make conservation and efficiency the first priority,” the report says.

The researchers analyzed data and projections from several energy agencies.

They concluded that demand for power in Ontario has dropped about 6 per cent since 2006, and will drop another 3 per cent by 2022.

If demand drops at that rate, they argue, the existing Darlington and Bruce nuclear stations alone could supply 50 per cent of the province’s power, without building any new units.

MORE:

[ http://www.thestar.com/business/economy ... s_say.html ]

[Oscar]

Waterkeeper relieved as Ontario backs away from new nuclear power development

[ http://www.waterkeeper.ca/ ]

[ ***NOTE: Numerous Links at URL above*** ]“

Government sources” quoted in the Globe and Mail and Toronto Star have stated that Ontario will not build a new nuclear power plant in Darlington, Ontario. This is a groundbreaking decision that empowers the province to promote a sustainable, innovative, decentralized energy system.

“The Province’s decision not to build more nuclear power plants will dramatically reduce the environmental footprint of Ontario’s electricity sector,” says environmental lawyer and president of Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, Mark Mattson.

“The decision is 100% consistent with Ontario’s new Great Lakes Protection Act. This marks the first time in a half a century that the province’s electricity plan will actually improve swimmability, drinkability, and fishability of the Great Lakes. We are optimistic that this will usher in a new era of protection for Ontario’s most important natural resource: water,” says Mattson.

The Great Lakes Protection Act passed second reading in the legislature yesterday (October 9, 2013). Major media outlets began reporting this morning that Ontario was abandoning plans to build new nuclear power plants in Ontario.

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper brought expert analysis of the Darlington Nuclear New Build project, which showed that there was no demonstrable need for the power, that the site was not large enough for expansion using modern technology and plant design, and that there would be unnecessary harm to fish and fish habitat.

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper provided evidence in our analysis of Ontario’s Long Term Energy Plan showing that nuclear power distorts the province’s energy mix, creates significant unnecessary environmental damage, and holds the province back from being a world leader in energy innovation and sustainability.

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper is a Canadian charity working for a day when every person in our watershed can safely touch the water, when the water is pure enough to drink, and when the lake is clean and wild enough that you could toss in a line anywhere and pull out a fish. -30-

Media inquiries:
Allie Kosela
Community Outreach Manager
allie [at] waterkeeper.ca
416-861-1237


Learn More: (Links are on original URL above):

Ontario backs away from plans to buy new nuclear reactors

Ontario Liberals scrap plan for new nuclear reactors

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper’s comments on Ontario’s Long Term Energy Plan

Need a source for energy issues in Ontario?

Overview of the Darlington New Build

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper’s Darlington New Build submissions

Darlington New Build expert reports

Great Lakes Protection Act passes second reading

[Oscar]

Making wise energy investments for Ontario

[ http://www.therecord.com/opinion-story/ ... r-ontario/ ]

ByTim Weis and Jeff Harti October 31, 2013

This month, Ontario prudently decided that new nuclear reactors will not be part of the province's forthcoming long-term energy plan.

As Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli explained: "It is not wise to spend billions and billions of dollars on new nuclear when that power is not needed."

That decision makes sense. Recent research published by the Pembina Institute and Greenpeace found that there is no need for new nuclear reactors to replace the output of the aging Pickering nuclear generating station. Forecasts we obtained from the independent electric system operator suggest that Ontario's demand for electricity 10 years from now will be pretty close to what it is today.

That said, the government still appears to be committed to refurbishing the 10 existing reactors at the Bruce and Darlington nuclear stations. That process is expected to begin with the Darlington reactors in 2016, and the Darlington project alone will take about eight years to complete (it's more of a rebuild than a refurbishment, really).

Is that a wise investment?

No nuclear refurbishment project in Canada has ever been completed on time and on budget. Even if these refurbishments somehow bucked that trend, the most recent comparable refurbishment project — for the Gentilly-2 plant in Quebec — was abandoned when the estimated cost hit roughly 10 cents per kilowatt hour. At that price, it's possible to deliver the same net result using a portfolio of energy efficiency and green energy technologies, which can be brought online more quickly and easily than refurbished reactors.

Nuclear refurbishment takes a long time — it is an incredibly complex and hazardous process. Referring to these projects as rebuilds instead of refurbishments would be more accurate, as the reconstruction of the Darlington and Bruce nuclear stations will take nearly as much time as building the reactors from scratch (eight years to refurbish compared to about 10 years for a new reactor). But once you've started, you are committed to the costs. You can't half-build a reactor.

Nuclear refurbishment is also expensive. Ontario Power Generation has already awarded $1 billion worth of contracts just for pre-construction work on the Darlington project.

According to Ontario Power Generation, this work must be completed before the project timeline and costs can be determined. Unfortunately, by the time that happens in 2015, Ontario Power Generation will have already signed the construction contracts for the project. Ontario will be locking into the Darlington nuclear rebuild, without ever having publicly reviewed the costs of the project or compared it with alternatives.

In any other context, that would seem unreasonable. Imagine if you were renovating your house, and a contractor asked you to hire him without a full price quote. Never mind that this particular contractor has never delivered on time or on budget in the past — the deal he's offering forces you to commit without seeing the price tag. Why wouldn't you shop around for a better deal, especially when a less risky and more cost-effective option is available?

For Ontario, that option is investing in a diversified portfolio of conservation and renewable energy technologies. The advantage of an efficient and renewable portfolio is simple: it can be built in smaller increments and in less time than nuclear reactors. And unlike nuclear, the deployment of renewable energy can be accelerated or decelerated in response to changes in Ontario's electricity demand.

While the cost of rebuilding nuclear reactors continues to rise, the costs of renewable energy technologies keep falling. Moreover, the construction risks and cost overruns of renewable technologies are borne by investors rather than ratepayers. The same can't be said for nuclear power: Ontarians are still paying off cost overruns from past nuclear projects through the debt retirement charge on their monthly hydro bills, while waste disposal and liability costs are subsidized by various levels of government.

It's good news that the government has decided not to build new nuclear capacity. But it's still unwise to commit billions to rebuilding existing nuclear reactors without considering reasonable low-emissions alternatives.

That is especially true when those alternatives are more flexible, more affordable and less risky than nuclear. Before we're locked into an expensive contract, let's consider our options. It's the wise thing to do.

- - - - -

Tim Weis is the director of renewable energy and efficiency policy at the Pembina Institute, and Jeff Harti is a senior technical and policy analyst at the institute.