The Sustainability Project's executive assistant, Donna Dillman refused food for 68 days last fall to draw attention to the unanswered questions around uranium, in particular, around a local mining proposal. The outcome of that action is the Citizens' Inquiry into the Impacts of the Uranium Cycle. Donna also facilitates meetings for the Community Coalition Against Mining Uranium (www.ccamu.ca)

Concerns around uranium issues are part of discussions in communities where there is interest.

Nuclear Threat


Few technologies defy the goal of sustainability as thoroughly as does nuclear power. Besides the permitted releases, and occasional spills and accidents, the fuel, uranium, is in limited supply. It could be depleted in 30 to 40 years at present rates of use. It also takes so much fossil fuel to process and manage that, except when generated from the highest grade oars, it results in as much or more carbon dioxide emissions as fossil fuel generation.

The dangers and staggering costs that ended nuclear development two decades ago have not changed. Why are our governments considering it again?

Uranium is a unique element. As the largest naturally occurring atom, it is unstable and inclined to break down spontaneously - releasing radiation and high powered particles. Uranium can be likened to an unstable person, with a gun, who is disposed to firing at random. While encased in rock, uranium and its by-products can do little harm. When extracted, however, and concentrated, the "bullets" from one atom can split other atoms, releasing more high powered particles that, in turn, split more atoms. Unobstructed, this process becomes a chain reaction and produces immense amounts of energy and radiation. When the chain reaction is controlled in a nuclear reactor, the heat boils water and generates electricity.

Using uranium is a very expensive and dangerous way to boil water. Radioactive materials are released during exploration, mining, processing, enrichment and transport. Radioactivity multiplies a million fold inside reactors and decades of research has found no safe way to dispose of the waste. These hazards are further complicated by the dangers of nuclear weapons proliferation.

 

While uranium deposits would be exhausted in a generation, at every step, human nature blinds many of those who hope for jobs or windfall profits. As Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

In 1957, Leon Festinger published "A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance." Having studied hundreds of papers in the emerging field of human psychology, he discovered a recurrent theme; people avoid information that conflicts with their personal interests and/or established views.

"Conflict of Interest" guidelines aim to spare people who might gain unfairly, from the temptation of making decisions with public money.

Nuclear power can make some people rich. It is critical that we consider conflicts of interest when we see information about nuclear power. If nuclear energy were a good investment, why are there no companies willing to build reactors without substantial government subsidies and loan guarantees? If it is safe, why will no insurance agency on Earth insure nuclear plants against possible accidents?

Buyer beware.

We should be asking: "What will the grandchildren do for energy?" and start doing that now.