The Great Lakes Nuclear Dump: Ontario Power Generation’s Plan to Bury Nuclear Waste on Shores of Lake Huron
STOP THE GREAT LAKES NUCLEAR DUMP FACT SHEET
100
27
10
155
27
10
155
1. Ontario Power Generation (OPG), a multi-billion dollar corporation wholly owned by the Province of Ontario, plans to build a nuclear waste dump at the Bruce Nuclear Power Plant site, Municipality of Kincardine, Ontario “located approximately 1 km inland from the shore of Lake Huron at the surface and more than 400 metres below the deepest near-site point of Lake Huron.” http://tinyurl.com/arc34y2 , page 55 OPG owns all Ontario’s nuclear plants and all radioactive nuclear waste created.
2. Low and intermediate level radioactive nuclear waste will be buried in the nuclear waste dump. Intermediate level nuclear wastes are highly radioactive and many remain toxic for over 100,000 years. Some are as dangerous as nuclear spent fuel. No scientist or geologist can provide a 100,000 year guarantee that this nuclear waste dump will not leak.
3. Approval of the nuclear waste dump in the Municipality of Kincardine (DGR1) will set precedents (toxicity of waste, proximity to lake, geology) and smooth the way for the much publicized second underground nuclear waste dump for the high level nuclear spent fuel involving 21 communities (DGR2). Kincardine’s DGR1 is the Trojan Horse in our midst.
4. OPG is paying $35.7million to Saugeen Shores, Huron-Kinross, Arran-Elderslie, Brockton, Kincardine. All are adjacent to the Bruce Nuclear Power Plant site. $10.5 million has already been paid even before approval to construct the dump is received. OPG can unilaterally cancel payment if municipality fails to support the nuclear waste dump proposal. http://tinyurl.com/b2qtcya
5. 40 million people in 2 countries rely on the Great Lakes for drinking water. http://tinyurl.com/aq7q5hw .
6. OPG’s Environmental Impact Statement document contains 3,432 pages; justification for choosing the Kincardine site is contained in the equivalent of one single page. OPG’s comment on acceptability of an alternative site option: ”Unknown”. http://tinyurl.com/av6jexb .
7. An underground nuclear waste dump in limestone is unproven and unprecedented.
8. Nuclear waste dumps in other countries are leaking. http://tinyurl.com/aup4wwm
9. OPG’s proposal presently undergoing an Environmental Assessment (EA). Public hearings expected in the spring of 2013. EA Joint Review Panel will report to the federal Minister of the Environment, who in turn will report to the Canadian federal cabinet, the ultimate decision maker. Decision anticipated within 9 months.
10. Nuclear waste will be buried in the dump over a 35-40 year period. Ten years of pre-closure monitoring to be followed by unmonitored, unspecified institutional control and then abandonment.
11. In the words of Rod McLeod, a former Deputy Minister of the Environment (Ontario) “…the OPG proposal is very unwise.” http://tinyurl.com/amoepsw, Petitioner comment #960
12. According to William Fyfe, a retired University of Western Ontario professor and an international consultant on nuclear waste ”You do not put nuclear waste near things like the Great Lakes or the great rivers in case there’s a leakage that you haven’t expected.” http://tinyurl.com/arggzco
13. OPG states “Taking into account the findings of the EA studies, including the identified mitigation measures, it is OPG’s conclusion that the DGR Project is not likely to result in any significant adverse effects on the environment .” http://tinyurl.com/av6jexb, pg xv
14. 40 million affected Canadians and Americans situated throughout the Great Lakes Basin that can and will be impacted if things go wrong were not consulted or informed and receive nothing but risk and uncertainty.
2012 Stop The Great Lakes Nuclear Dump Inc.
Nuclear Waste Dump Fact Sheet
No comments:
Post a Comment