Nuclear reactor<\/p>\n
In his letter of Feb. 9, 1996, entitled Nuclear power, Keith
\nBradley of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited makes several
\nstatements nobody would dare make publicly in Canada. I shudder
\nto imagine what he tells Indonesians in private.<\/p>\n
For example, he says "Reviews of the safety of Canada's CANDU
\nnuclear power program...by several independent public
\ncommissions, including Greenpeace and other NGOs, ...have found
\nthat the nuclear power plants are safe and economic." Of course,
\nGreenpeace and other environmental NGOs, including Energy Probe,
\nhave found no such thing. Indeed, the only recent independent
\npublic commission was canceled before it could issue any report
\nat all. That commission was set up to review Ontario Hydro's plan
\nto build ten more CANDU reactors. It was canceled when Ontario
\nHydro decided to build none, and formally withdrew its proposal.
\nBy that time, the commission had received evidence from
\nGreenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Energy Probe and others,
\nshowing that the plants are neither acceptably safe nor economic.<\/p>\n
It is true, as Bradley says, that the laws of the province of
\nOntario required Ontario Hydro to pay the full costs of that
\nhearing, including lawyers and expert witnesses representing both
\nmy organization and Bradley's, and that these costs totaled tens
\nof millions dollars. But those tens of millions saved Ontario
\nfrom wasting tens of billions on more CANDU reactors. Indonesia
\nwould do well to imitate Ontario's recent success at canceling
\nnuclear expansion, rather than imitating our earlier mistakes.<\/p>\n
Not surprisingly, Bradley doesn't mention that Ontario Hydro
\nhas recently admitted that its twelve CANDU reactors are only
\nworth about half of what they paid for them (even after
\ndepreciation), or that Hydro has begun shutting down reactors
\nprematurely in order to safe on repair costs, or that Hydro has
\nbeen forced to pay some of its largest corporate customers'
\nmillions of dollars a year to prevent those customers from
\ngenerating their own cheaper power with gas turbines, instead of
\nbuying Ontario Hydro's nuclear-inflated power. And he doesn't
\nmention that Ontario Hydro's recent rate increases, made
\nnecessary by the debt on their CANDU reactors, prompted the
\ngovernment of Ontario to set up an Advisory Committee to try to
\nfigure out how to introduce competition into the monopoly
\nelectricity system. Here in Ontario, we increasingly refer to
\nCANDU reactors as "stranded assets" - stations that could not pay
\ntheir own interest charges if customers had the right to shop
\naround for power.<\/p>\n
Bradley points out, correctly, that Canada's largest city,
\nToronto, is within 50 kilometers of over half of Canada's nuclear
\npower plants. But he doesn't mention that Canada has a special
\nfederal law that prevents the victims of any CANDU nuclear
\naccident from suing for damages.<\/p>\n
NORMAN RUBIN<\/p>\n
Director, Nuclear Research<\/p>\n
and Senior Policy Analyst<\/p>\n
Toronto<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/nuclear-reactor-1447899208", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }