SEARCH BLOG: OIL and NUCLEAR POWER
Those crazy Canadians, eh? Here in the U.S., we presume they are all wacko environmentalists and Labatt's drinkers who watch hockey 11 months out of the year [and spend one month walleye fishing]. They aren't going to mess around with "da great white nort."
That's a quaint image, but wrong. In case you haven't heard, Canada is a major supplier of oil and lumber to the U.S. [do they cut down the trees and then drill between the stumps?] Sure, they hunt and fish a lot, too. But Canadians don't appear to be afraid to use their natural resouces [and unnatural ones, too].
The last week I was perusing the Detroit Free Press and came upon an article that demonstrates that point:
The refinery is downstream from a nuclear waste facility. Looks like the water flowing into Lake Erie will be supercharged with radioactive oil spills... or not.
Meanwhile, in the U.S., there is still haggling over the use of Yucca Mountain in the middle of nowhere. Back in 2004 I wrote:
Well, what about the waste? The environmentalists want us to believe that burial of wastes in hundreds... thousands... of feet of rock leaves us in danger. Sorry, that's simply not true (147 page pdf file from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Risk Insights Baseline Report - April, 2004). Now there are those who say that the Yucca Mountain nuclear burial site cannot guarantee, absolutely, 100%, that no radiation will escape into the biosphere. That's correct. There are no absolute guarantees of anything. The question is: does the very minimal risk of a minimal amount of radiation in the atmosphere sometime in the next 10,000 years outweigh the risks of continuing to burn fossil fuels at an increasing rate over the next century?First I say the French are correct and then I say the Canadians are correct. I'd better watch out for Homeland Security.