CLICK FOR NEWS UPDATES
CLICK FOR
NEWS UPDATES


Bruce Power To Conduct Environmental Assessment For Two Nuclear Reactors In Area

CD98: Ashley DeGroote - October 31, 2008

Bruce Power says it will conduct an environmental assessment for two new nuclear reactors on the shores of Lake Erie. The only private nuclear generating company in Canada says it will spend three years on the assessment for a new plant at the former Stelco lands in Nanticoke in southwestern Ontario. Bruce has an option to buy the land from Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel, which bought out Stelco, but it won't actually purchase the lands before the environmental assessment is completed. Bruce Power CEO Duncan Hawthorne says looking at new sources of generation in the Haldimand-Norfolk region will give the company and the province a number of options to consider. Ontario's Liberal government hasn't yet committed to building new nuclear plants, but has said it wants nuclear power to generate about 50 per cent of the province's electricity. Both Haldimand and Norfolk councils unanimously passed resolutions supporting an environmental assessment into new nuclear build in their area.

COMMENTS:

Re: Bruce Power To Conduct Environmental Assessment For Nanticoke; keeps Erie warm enough now no more hot water in Erie please the fish and eco-system will suffer. Give it to Toronto and Lake Ontario its polluted anyways besides, they're the ones who use the power let them have the nuke plant.

---------------------------------

Energy Minister Dismisses Nuclear Plan for Nanticoke

CD98: Posted by Kate Buick - November 1, 2008

Bruce Power and the province's energy minister are at odds over the private firm's hopes to build two nuclear reactors in Nanticoke. Energy Minister George Smitherman dismisses the plan, and suggests the added energy supply isn't needed. However, Bruce Power C-E-O Duncan Hawthorne insists supply remains an issue in the province. Local Conservative M-P Diane Finley supports the idea.

COMMENTS:

I'm going to go with Mr. Hawthorne on this one; When all the coal plants are shut, we will have an energy gap. Mr. Smitherman is a tad out of touch with energy reality. Bruce Power and their partners do this for a living and, as a result know the real answers. Wind and solar will not save us, nuclear can.

 

Save us from what?

 

"save us from what?' Well, a shortage of energy; The gap between when we close down the ole dirtys and can user in the next energy blockbuster ( hydrogen?). Or, I guess we could just either accept the brownouts & blackouts crippling the economy or buy from the americans. I am sure they will be glad to sell it to us for a real reasonable price.

If George does for the energy sector what he did for the health care sector, we'd better stock up on firewood and candles.

 

"save us from what?" Save us from myopic; narrowminded, so called "greenies" who will not look at any option other than those (like wind sailors) that is supposed to be free.

After decade upon decade, upon decade of burning fossil fuels in our homes, business and institutions, we need to stop raping the worlds resources and look at renewables and "clean" energy sources.

If nuclear will allow hydrogen powered vehicles; and satisfy other energy requirements, I'm all for it...and I really like the idea of jobs here for our young folks.

Talk to the citizens in the Bruce area and they will tell you they want more nuclear development (they even have a multi-thousand signature petition).

Don't let the negative nabobs direct your thoughts. Yes, get educated on the real facts around this source of power.

Way to step up Di; Don't give up on this.You could be a real hero on this one. Newly elected Lady Di will be working on this one for us. She agrees with a nuclear plant here. Lady Di is not going to say anything until hubby Doug and fearless leader Stephen tell her what she wants and what to say.

 

If the government is against it; then we probably SHOULD do it! Do the opposite of what the government wants and we'll all be doing just fine! .....and if we do have extra power maybe WE can sell it to other states and provinces and get rid of that damn debt charge! The only thing this charge seems to have payed for is huge buyouts for the heads of Ontario hydro.

------------------------------

Community Will Have Their Say on Nuclear Power, Travale

CD98: Jen Waumsley - November 2, 2008

A three-year environmental assessment for nuclear power generation locally has been given the go-ahead. Bruce Power President and CEO Duncan Hawthorne was at the Lake Erie Industrial Park Friday to make the not-so-surprise announcement. Norfolk Mayor Dennis Travale tells CD 98.9 there is potential in this company having a vested interest in Nanticoke and everyone in the community will have the chance to have their say. Hawthorne said seeking new energy sources on our region opens many doors for the province. Travale expects that locals interested in moving away from coal and into nuclear will step forward to have their say on the issue during the next few years as the EA takes place.

COMMENTS:

Nuclear plant, solar farms, wind turbine farms and federal leases already sold on Lake Erie for offshore wind turbines looks like King Tobacco may be replaced by Emperor Electricity!

-------------------------------------------

Barrett: Many Locals Standing By Coal

CD98: Adam Liefl - Nov 3, 2008

Bruce Power's announcement that the company will begin an environmental assessment towards the prospect of building a nuclear facility in Nanticoke has been met with mixed reaction. While about half of the province is powered by nuclear produced energy, locally we rely on coal fired power - which the Liberal Government has plans of phasing out by 2014. Haldimand-Norfolk MPP Toby Barrett tells CD 98.9 he and many locally aren't completely sold on moving on - and that about 70 percent of the calls he takes are people who want to stick with coal and clean the current plant up. Barrett hopes there will be plenty of neutral discussion over the next few years while the EA takes place.

Re: Barrett: Many Locals Standing By Coal

I may switch my vote to nuclear; if they agree to store the waste in Toronto.

The nuclear waste will stay onsite for over 100 years or forever; because it is just too hot and toxic to transport, and there is no nuclear waste dump in Canada.

Tritium fallout will then become a new part of our environment. All things alive who live under this tritium umbrella will be the hidden harbour of this dangerous isotope.

Clean-coal-technology and carbon sequestration are the only alternative to nuclear power here.

This is doable! Come out to the November 20th Energy Symposium at the Jarvis Community Centre to learn more.

I hate to say it but coal IS the future; Its not natural gas or nuclear. Coal is extremely abundant in North America and will become a stronger fuel source in the coming years. People may even be heating their homes with some form of coal. Not like London in the 1800's but a new high-tech form of it.

Instead of trying to ditch Nanticoke at any cost, the government should re-invent it and produce the cleanest burning coal-fired plant in the world. Be an innovator. It will cost $$$ but as nice as wind and solar sound, they can't do it alone and the waste from a nuclear plant cannot be dealt with nevermind if there ever was an accident.

To coal lovers; I guess we're old enough we'll all be dead by the time we heat the earth up 10degrees' in the next 40 years have a good one!!

Sounds like Toby is testing the waters; until Toby sees which way the wind is blowing. He can't go anti provincial Liberal and go against this plan in case the people around here want the jobs that come with it.

And Lady Di - Oh this is a provincial issue just like Caledonia and she will not comment until hubby Doug and fearless leader Harper tells her what to think and what to say.

As long as there is a substitue; such as a modern nuclear plant in it's place, it's time for coal to go the way of the rotary phone.

I often wonder why the McGuinty government didn't put new scrubbers on those coal fired plants? He knew immediately after he was first elected that he could not possibly close those them. So why didn't he make a decision to clean them up? I know in Germany they have technology that makes coal burning one of the cleanest, safest sources of energy. A friend told me they use it in Alberta also. Why spend zillions of dollars studying nuclear, when we already have a good source of energy that simply needs cleaning up? Oh, that would involve making a decision. LOL

If you read the newspapers; you'd know that Diane has already come out in favour of a nuclear power plant and the 1000's of jobs it would bring to Haldimand-Norfolk.

thousands of graves as well; farm land is cheap, caskets aren't

Before McGuinty; Mike Harris had 9 years of majority governments to ram through any legislation that he wanted, scrubbers, nuclear or wind. Toby was right with him in his caucus. If they had started that plant at that time then it would have been built by now.

When did Toby realize that there was an energy need?

Lady Di doesnt live here; so of coure she favours a Nuke plant here. I think we should put it right in Ottawa beside 24 Sussex Drive!

-------------------------------------------

Green Candidate Weighs In On Nuclear

CD98: Ashley DeGroote - Nov 3, 2008

With the possibility of two nuclear reactors being built in Nanticoke in the next few years, the Haldimand-Norfolk Green Party is not happy. Green Party Candidate Stephana Johnston tells CD 98-9 she would like to see the phasing out of all nuclear plants across Canada. She says they are not safe, way too expensive compared to other forms of energy and she says if we can't find a way to deal with the spent energy then we shouldn't be building new plants. Johnston feels the reason they are pushing for this plant is because taxpayers are being loaded with these costs and private individuals are reaping the benefits.

Re: Green Candidate Weighs In On Nuclear

Why would cd989 waste broadcast time on her? Didn't Dr. Hoskins come in 2nd? We just had an election, not one seat was won by the green party... anywhere. "private individuals reaping the benefits", ya great... another conspiracy therory. I'm logged into E*Trade right now, what is the stock ticker steph johnston?

Stephana Johnston stated; they are not safe, way too expensive compared to other forms of energy and she says if we can't find a way to deal with the spent energy then we shouldn't be building new plants. Ms Johnston appears to know as much about nuclear plants as she does about politics.

Ummm ... Bruce Power; the one who receives the profits once operating just might be who she is referring to. When the power plant goes WAY over budget who pays the bill? Maybe you should look at the last reactor built budget vs actual, and who paid the difference. Since you are already on-line.

I'm with Granny Johnston; We should really listen here You should be really really scared the nukes are coming Baby can't we burn straw or tabacco and make all the poor starving farmers rich again

I am not about to welcome NUCLEAR energy to our area either;. It seems as if there are some who just want to ram it through with all the publicity and to try to convince us how great it would be. I believe it is about a lot of money for those few who are involved and they are not giving us all the facts. There are other sources of energy we should be looking at that would benefit the local economy more such as energy from biomass forms.

Can we just put the heavy water back into the lake!!!!

What's to worry about? We can get Homer Simpson as the safety inspector of the plant! Relax people, with our economy the way it is how can we say no to good paying jobs for our kids.

I think she means spent fuel not "spent energy".

Well I think it is a bit late to worry about adding to the spent fuel that already exists. There is already plenty of that around. Adding more only incrementally increases the risk. On the other hand, fossil fuels remain the only realistic near-term and mid-term alternative to nuclear energy. The risks presented by the continued or increased use of fossil fuels is several orders of magnitude greater than that of nuclear energy.

Before she recommends phasing out nuclear I would like her to explain in detail, not in platitudes, how we can meet our near-term energy needs without killing more people with increased air pollution not to mention increasing green house gases.

I'm a huge fan of new energy sources and conservation, but we have to continue to supply our needs until the alternative technologies are feasible.

<< Back to Previous Page