Uranium Isn't Missed

I was very upset to read the article in this morning's Chronicle Herald entitled Uranium ban "A Lost Opportunity". The article is based on an interview with Ken Chernin of Acadian Securities. Since Mr. Chernin is in the financial industry, which has a long history of only looking for profits and never taking into the unaccounted costs of environmentally unfriendly business practices, I wasn't as upset with him as I was with NS Natural Resources Minister David Morse.

Minister Morse replied to Mr. Chernin's comments by saying that the "science is credible" and he wants to know what Nova Scotian's think. I was so upset by his comments that I wrote a letter to the editor of the CH. I've included this letter below in the likely case that it isn't published. However, being limited to 200 words, I wasn't able to fit in everything wrong with this article.

My major concern is that our government talks the sustainability-and-green-economy talk, but then turns around and says "nuclear energy is part of the solution". There are many many issues with this.. including

• mining uranium is absolutely devastating to local ecology, causing radioactive pollution to both the workers that mine and contamination of local flora and fauna
  
• nuclear development is extremely expensive, and traditionally requires millions of dollars of government investment and subsidy to even get started
• although little GHG Emissions are emitted in producing nuclear energy, the process of mining Uranium is extremely emission intense
• centralized energy works against renewable energy production
• storage of radioactive waste is still a unsolved issue
• production of nuclear energy causes extremely large amounts of water loss due to vapour.
• Both Uranium mining and nuclear production would have to be done by out of province companies, ensuring that any profits from these activities end up far from Nova Scotia.
  

I wonder if Mr Chernin was considering all these negative aspects when he said "it couldn't hurt".

On top of all these issues is the fact that what our government should be doing is increasing energy efficiency and encouraging locally owned distributed renewable energy, as I mention in my letter below.

Nova Scotians need to be aware that Nuclear Energy is on the agenda of both our current government, and our privately held monopoly utility, and we all need to make it very clear that is isn't on the agenda of the people of this province.

Uranium Isn't Missed

The comments from Natural Resource Minister David Morse in response to the interview with Ken Chernin from Acadian Securities should cause all Nova Scotians great concern. (Uranium Ban "A missed Opportunity" - Oct 12) Mr. Chernin is right that we are missing opportunities in Nova Scotia , but he is wrong that those opportunities lie in spending huge amounts of money to mine and develop Uranium in Nova Scotia. The missed opportunities are the two basic principals that NS should be embracing in order to effectively reduce emissions, and increase sustainability and energy security: renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Minister Morse wants to know what Nova Scotians think about spending “enormous capital expenditures” to locate uranium deposits, and eventually pillage our landscape to spread radioactive waste around our beautiful province. How can he not know the answer to this question???

To remind him: Nova Scotians have made it very clear. They want NS to keep its Uranium Ban, and they want the government to live up to its promises from 2002 regarding renewable energy and come up with a better plan for the $10 Million Clean Nova Scotia budget to encourage efficiency than giving away free CFLs!

It's not just the heat...

An interesting study was recently published this week in the journal Nature. The study showed that yet another affect of man-made emissions of GHG's is increasing humidity. As this article from the Associated Press notes.. "it's not just the heat, its the humidity".. an ironic cliche. The study notes that humidity will raise 6% with every 1 degree raise in temperature. The 40degree humidex they had in Toronto last week starts to make a little more sense now, doesn't it?

Humidity plays a large role on the stress that heat causes on the human body. This was more than evident in the record European heat wave of 2003 that caused over 35,000 deaths; most of which were elderly due to their higher susceptibility to both heat and humidity. Humidity also causes increased evaporation, as well as prolonged heat during the night in urban areas, because of the increased the heating effect on concrete and asphalt structures. Lastly, like many climate change phenomena, it is in itself a contributer to global warming, as water vapour can trap heat in the atmosphere causing yet another vicious circle (similar to the melting arctic ice).

What this article doesn't mention is if the raise in temperature is the only cause of this increased humidity. I wouldn't be surprised if coal and nuclear thermal plants play a large role in adding humidity to the atmosphere. To generate electricity using coal or nuclear, water is boiled into steam which then powers a turbine. Most of this steam then turns back into water and is reheated, or returned from where it came (river, lake, ocean etc). However, about 2L/kWh for coal and 3L/kWh for nuclear is lost as water vapour into the atmosphere. This isn't that huge a problem in Nova Scotia, because we use salt water from the ocean, but it is having extremely negative consequences in Ontario and Alberta, where fresh water is being used. (this steam turbine technology was invented in 1884, in case you wondered about the technology that powers your iPod)

On a very related issue, the Great Lakes are at an all time low, as Ontario plans to bring its second nuclear reactor online and as higher temperatures cause increased evaporation. (here).

What "Sustainable Prosperity Act"?

How quickly Premier MacDonald has forgotten his own party's work from the Spring Session. Our government was one of the first in North America to pass legislation focusing on Sustainability, yet our Premier has put his faith in the oil and gas industry to lead this province into the future. MacDonald wrote a column in todays Chronicle Herald (link) proclaiming that our "future looks bright" because Deep Panuke might happen. If Encana decides to proceed with this large offshore project, (which I imagine they will), they will spend 3 years building the facilities, and 13 years pumping Natural Gas from the ocean floor. This may seem like a long time, but every turbine that is installed in the next two years in response to NS Power's RFP will last longer than this offshore project.

The PC Government seems hell bent in pushing the oil and gas industry for more exploration off our coasts, going as far as traveling to Houston and Dallas (home of such sustainability experts as Exxon and Halliburton) to beg them to come to Nova Scotia. Do we want a Premier that is in Texas promoting Oil and Gas, or perhaps one that goes to Denmark and Germany to see how they became world leaders in renewable energy. The Sustainable Prosperity Act pledges that Nova Scotia will become a "world leader in environmentally sustainable technologies" (Bill 146 3b). Did Premier MacDonald think the Texas Oil Patch was the place to start looking for these technologies?

Our government's bias towards Natural Gas has been clear for a while. Earlier in the summer, Premier MacDonald and Energy Minister Dooks pledged $3Million to help Heritage Gas pay for infrastructure costs. Heritage Gas is now giving the KeyNote address at the Green Energy 2007 conference sponsored by the Department of Energy. Natural Gas isn't green, and it isn't sustainable.

Both the Natural Gas industry and the Renewable Energy industry are starting to blossom in Nova Scotia. If a government wanted to be environmentally friendly, and sustainable as well, which industry should it support? Our government has put it's money on the table: 3Million for basic Natural Gas infrastructure, $75 thousand for the NS Wind Atlas.

Minister Dooks recently added in the Chronicle Herald (link) that the Department of Energy has to "protect electricity consumers". Natural Gas is well known to be more expensive than wind energy for electricity production. All year, NSPower has been burning $80/barrel oil at Tuffs Cove because it's still cheaper than Natural Gas. (CORRECTION: since earlier in 2007, Natural Gas has been used instead of Oil, which had been used for the past few years). The argument that renewables must be contained to protect consumers is completely false... it's only the existing fossil fuel interests that it protects.

Despite all this, the funny thing is that the renewable energy industry doesn't need all the handouts and bait money the oil and gas industry gets. All that the renewable energy industry needs is access to customers, something our PC government promised it would do in 2002. My recommendation is to let our poorly funded and under-performing schools have the money, and let renewable energies lead this province into the future.

Turbines = Tourists

I haven't been able to write for the past couple weeks because of a work trip to Ontario, plus a trip to Quebec City for the 2007 CanWEA Conference. I'm still busy catching up with everything, but I wanted to pass this short piece on to you....

Recently, there has been a lot of discussion about wind turbines in Nova Scotia, specifically around the effect they will have on their community. I'm a firm believer that wind turbines need to be designed with proper community input and using sufficient set-backs for noise (something that hasn't been done at some wind farms in NS), but a lot of the more subjective "affects" of turbines I'm not so certain about. One argument is that they are a visual "blight" on the landscape and that they will stop tourists from visiting already popular areas. This article posted earlier this week tells the exact opposite is happening in areas where wind energy is already being developed...

Turbine tourists blown away by country's wind farms

They're cropping up all over Canada and visitors get quite a charge out of seeing the electricity-producing windmills up close, writes Kathryn Young.

Kathryn Young, The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Tuesday, October 02, 2007

So many drivers are gawking at the enormous wind turbines along Lake Erie that they're creating a safety hazard, while in Alberta, TransAlta Corp. responded to visitor demand by creating an iPod audio tour for people keen to learn more about its three wind farms.

Wind farms have surprisingly become tourist attractions across Canada, luring thousands of visitors -- some from as far away as Australia, New Zealand and Europe -- curious about the electricity-generating turbines.

Municipalities are responding by constructing viewing areas, opening interpretive centres, printing maps, welcoming tour buses and selling T-shirts, ball caps, windmill models, pins, aprons, photographs and postcards.... read more

Eco-Logic Sustainable Lifestyle Show

There is an exciting trade show at Exhibition Park in Halifax this weekend. The green lifestyle is becoming more and more popular, so much so that there can be a trade show of associated businesses and organizations. If you are in the Halifax area this weekend, come out to Exhibition Park and have a look at all of the great organizations making a difference in Nova Scotia. While you are there, make sure you stop by booth 144, I'll be there all weekend.

Nuclear Harper

Stephen Harper is certainly making his positions regarding climate change and energy clear to Canadians to week.
First, Harper announced that he would delay the opening of the House of Commons until the Throne Speech in October. What this means is that any unpassed pieces of legislation will "die on the house floor". Even though Canadians have repeatedly said that the environment is at the top of their priorities, the revised Bill C-30 - The Clean Air and Climate Change Act (fresh with the efforts of the three opposition parties... who as I've said before represent a majority of Canadians) will be lost. Therefore, this brings the total accomplishments of Canada's New Government to two items: 1) canceling and repackaging the programs of the previous government, while making them more expensive for Canadians and 2) shoveling a small amount of money to the provinces to deal with the problem. Canada needs a strong national program so that all emitters are treated equally. The main argument for the Conservative government has always been that the Kyoto Targets are too steep. However, in a preliminary meeting held in Vienna recently to discuss post-Kyoto targets the targets discussed were 25%-30% below 1990 levels by 2020. This represents a 15%-20% more than Kyoto. Therefore, wouldn't the best plan to avoid the "economic collapse" the Conservatives have continually warned us about be to start reducing emissions and encouraging new technology now???

On top of Harper's negligence regarding GHG Emissions on the domestic front, he is also secretly considering committing Canada to join George Bush's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership on the international front. Press stories earlier this week show that although nothing has been said to parliament or the public, Harper has been working on committing Canada to this group for over a year. The basics of this group would give Canada stronger markets to export its Uranium, however, it would commit Canada to taking the spent radioactive fuel back for storage within Canada. The main reason for this is that the US is running out of room in it's existing nuclear waste storage facility (Yucca Mountain).

Despite how Harper's plan to turn Canada into a storage bin for Bush's radioactive pollution might turn your stomach, the biggest concern about Nuclear energy is the amount of water it uses. According to the Sierra Club of Canada, Nuclear reactors use at least 2.3L of water per kWh. With the Great Lakes at an all time low and much of North America suffering from severe drought, we need to take care of our fresh water sources the best we can. Although Nuclear reactors do emit less GHG's, Canada does not need to destroy its last great resource, fresh water, in order to reduce emissions.

Here in Nova Scotia, there has been a "No-Nuclear" act since the 70's. We need to make sure it stays that way, so that when the change from coal happens, that it's to renewable energy, not nuclear energy.

First Round of Renewable Energy Proposals

On a somewhat historic day, Friday was the deadline for submissions in response to NS Power's Request for Proposals (RFP) of 130MW of renewable energy. This RFP is the first step from NS Power to address the Renewable Standards Portfolio that the NS Government implemented, which states that NS Power must increase the proportion of energy it gets from renewable sources by 10%. At the time, NS Power got 8.3% of its electricity from renewable sources, 7.3% of this was from small hydro energy, and 1% was from wind energy. It is commonly reported that NS Power has to increase it's renewable sources to 20%, but it is in fact only 18.3%. Read the story from the front page of the Chronicle Herald business section here

Projects from all over the province were proposed, and to my knowledge these projects were almost exclusively based on wind energy. The main reason for this, is that although NS Power was told to increase the amount of renewable energy it used, they were told how they had to procure that electricity. Once their legislative requirements are met, NS Power is responsible for the best interests of its shareholders. In order to maximize the profitability of their newly acquired renewable energy, NS Power will be deciding the results from this RFP almost exclusively on a "lowest cost basis". The Ecology Action Centre issued a great press release on the downfalls of this tendering process which was picked up by the Chronicle Herald here. Wind energy is the most cost effective source of renewable electricity, therefore, it is the renewable source of choice under this system. One issue that isn't addressed in the EAC article is that if we are truly committed to moving towards a completely renewable electricity system, we will have to develop a diverse portfolio of renewable energies such as wind, solar, hydro, geothermal and sustainable biomass. What is most cost effective today doesn't relate to what is most sustainable for the future.

Despite these drawbacks, this is generally still a positive step for Nova Scotia. Currently, there is about 60MW of wind energy installed in Nova Scotia, and projects from this RFP will add over twice that. These new projects will be enough to power 40,000 homes. NS Power has publicly committed to announcing the successful projects by October 1st.

I imagine that NS Power will try to use these new projects to promote themselves as being "green" or environmentally friendly. Their public image could certainly use some work. In a recent national survey, NS Power ranked second last in the country. Read all about it here. Despite all of these new projects, the new electricity will only be used to match the increase in electricity in this province, which is approximately 3%/year. NS Power's four coal burning thermal plants will continue to operate uninhibited, emitting enough Greenhouse Gases to make NS Power the 6th largest polluter in Canada.

Stay tuned to NS Power's promotional efforts surrounding these projects, as I'm sure it will be entertaining. October promises to be an exciting month.