|
Sask. 'suitable' dump site |
|
|
|
|
Contributed by Patrick L Smith
|
|
Wednesday, 25 May 2005 |
 David Freeman
Saskatchewan News Network; Regina Leader-Post
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
REGINA -- A federal review on the future of nuclear waste in Canada
says Saskatchewan is "geologically suitable" to dump the hazardous
material, and suggests the province has a "greater responsibility" to
dispose of waste because uranium is mined here.
The draft report, released Tuesday by the industry-led Nuclear
Waste Management Organization, recommends an underground mausoleum --
with a cost of more than $24 billion -- as the end result of a plan to
deal with nuclear waste used as fuel in power-generating reactors.
However, that plan would call for a timetable of nearly 60 years and
see public consultation in choosing a site for the underground facility
take up to 18 years. Saskatchewan, along with Quebec and Ontario, was
on the list of suitable sites because of the ideal storage conditions
in the Canadian Shield, which covers the northern half of the province,
and because of the benefits the province reaps from the nuclear
process.
"We're going to have up to 18 years to discuss this issue," said
Eric Cline, minister of industry and resources, who emphasized the
long-term nature of the recommendation. "Nothing is going to happen
without public consultation. The purpose of the draft report is to get
people talking about it."
Part of that discussion revolves around the suggestion in the
report that provinces that benefit from nuclear power or uranium mining
"have a greater responsibility than do other provinces and territories
to manage the waste stream arising from the nuclear process."
"I think they're making a fair point," said Cline. "If you benefit
from the mining of uranium or the use of uranium in your nuclear
reactors -- you can't then wash your hands of all the other issues."
Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, said the report misses out on some key issues.
"It's obviously a report that doesn't address the main concerns of
Canadians at all because it doesn't even raise the question as to
whether or not we should continue producing this waste," he said from
Montreal. "I think that the real lesson that should be taken out of
this is this industry creates problems that long outlast the benefits.
"In Saskatchewan, your mines are going to be mined out and you're
going to be left with the (tailing) waste and possibly this (fuel)
waste as well," he added. "We're talking about a finite benefit for the
current generation and an endless cost for future generations. I think
what's needed is a much more fundamental question about the future of
this industry."
But Lyle Krahn, spokesperson for the uranium mining company Cameco
Corp., says a community willing to be the site of the mausoleum could
benefit greatly.
"On the whole issue of a nuclear waste facility, I think we would
see it as a real opportunity for some jurisdiction to have a number of
economic as well as scientific and technology benefits from a facility
like that," he said.
"I think the whole debate is a political one, not a scientific
one," he added. "People have known for years what the good options are
for handling wastes. I think it really depends if there is a community
or jurisdiction that can get the public support in favour of that and
if there is a place like that in Saskatchewan, there will be
significant economic and scientific benefits for a project like that.
But it really needs that public support."Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 25 May 2005 )
|
