McNAMARA: How Corrupt Can CNSC President Michael Binder Get?

[Oscar]

McNAMARA: How Corrupt Can CNSC President Michael Binder Get?

From: entwork@hotmail.com
To: info@cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca
CC: smccarthy@globeandmail.com; business@thestar.ca; sbell@nationalpost.com; thomas.mulcair@parl.gc.ca; justin.trudeau@parl.gc.ca; citydesk@thestarphoenix.com
Subject: How Corrupt Can CNSC President Michael Binder Get?
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 16:35:46 -0400

Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) President Michael Binder doesn’t have an honest or moral bone in his body. He’s now trying to revoke the most basic tenet regarding nuclear projects: the requirement for a social licence from a “Willing Host Community” (WHC). He’s been forced to take this step because no community in Canada has been willing to accept a nuclear facility since he was appointed president in 2008.

Binder delivered a presentation on October 8, 2014, to the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary. His power-point stated: “CNSC cannot be expected to reject a safe project due to lack of social acceptability.” This contradicts the CNSC’s mandate and Binder’s signed letter to MP Chris Warkenton in March 2010 which said: “As I have stated publicly on other occasions, a social licence and accepting host community are integral for any successful licence application.”

Another part of Binder’s power-point gives further evidence of his depravity. To underpin his claim that “Evidence does not support nuclear energy risk perception”, he used a chart showing the number of accidents and deaths from various energy sources. Instead of using current data, he relates figures from an Australian report for 1969 to 2000 which shows only one nuclear accident with 31 fatalities, Chernobyl. I wouldn’t expect him to use the figure from the 2010 book published by the New York Academies of Sciences which claimed one million deaths from Chernobyl. However, he should at least have used the 2005 report headed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a nuclear industry organization, which claimed 4000 deaths.

Reputable scientists in the affected areas dispute the findings of the IAEA.

- The United Nations’ International Agency for Research on Cancer claims 16,000 deaths

- The Russian Academy of Sciences claim 60,000 deaths so far in Russia and 140,000 in Ukraine and Belarus

- The Belarus National Academy of Sciences estimates 93,000 deaths and 270,000 cancers

- The Ukrainian National Commission for Radiation Protection claims 500,000 deaths

Binder makes no mention the IAEA estimates that 350,000 liquidators who worked on the cleanup received an average total body radiation dose of 100 millisieverts or about the same as 1,000 chest x-rays. This is five times the maximum dose permitted for workers in nuclear facilities. The Chernobyl Union, says “90,000 of the 200,000 surviving liquidators have major long-term health problems.”

I’m sure it slipped Binder’s mind that 336,000 people lost their homes in the most contaminated areas, 784,320 hectares of farmland was lost to production and logging stopped on almost 700,000 hectares.

Binder claims that none of this is evidence that there’s any risk from nuclear reactors. His only mention of Fukushima was that there were no radiation deaths. This unprincipled behaviour is consistent with the results of the Big Chill Survey (2013) which found “57% of CNSC scientists were aware of cases where the health and safety of Canadians has been compromised due to political interference” and that “94% of the CNSC scientists reported interference with manuscripts and or conference presentations.”

Binder tried to do a little damage control concerning the Big Chill Survey with the final slide in his presentation which stated “We Will Never Compromise Safety.”

Though it’s an obvious lie, it’s superfluous for me to call him a liar. After all, 57% of the scientists in the organization (CNSC) he presides over did it for me.

Pat McNamara

- - - - -


Canadian Nuclear Safety Chief: No Reason to fear nuke dump by Lake Huron

[ http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/m ... /20360987/ ]

Keith Matheny, Detroit Free Press, December 14, 2014

[ http://tinyurl.com/nptkfyl ]

The rising concerns and complaints expressed on both sides of the Detroit River about a proposed underground nuclear waste repository in Ontario - less than a mile from the shores of Lake Huron - appear to be falling on deaf ears.

The public's perceptions of risk from nuclear facilities can be discounted because they are "not in line with facts" and are fueled by "pop culture and myths," according to the head of Canada's nuclear safety regulatory agency.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission "cannot be expected to reject a safe project due to lack of social acceptability," agency president and CEO Michael Binder said during a presentation at the University of Calgary in October titled: "Is Social License a License to Stall?"

Binder's views are relevant to Michigan's nearly 9.9 million residents, as the Canadian government is considering a deep underground storage facility for low- and intermediate-level nuclear waste near Kincardine, Ontario

Opponents question siting a nuclear waste dump next to the Great Lakes, from which 24 million U.S. residents get drinking water. The lakes also make possible Michigan's $2-billion fishing, $4-billion boating and $18-billion tourism industries.

"It's kind of hard to believe he would say that in public, only a few years after the Fukushima incident that we still haven't gotten under control," said St. Clair Shores resident Stephen Kiluk.

But in his presentation, Binder cited the March 2011 disaster at a nuclear plant in Japan following an earthquake and subsequent tsunami as an example affecting the public's "risk bias." He noted that no one died from radiation poisoning as a result of the Fukushima accident.

Presentation by head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (videos)

MORE:

[ http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/m ... /20360987/ ]