To The Toronto Star (published 99/03/24) :

1999 March 10

To the Editor, The Toronto Star:

If it is true that the amount of spent nuclear fuel in Canada would fill three hockey rinks to the top of the boards ("Ottawa lacks clout on nuclear cleanup", March 9), then hooray for nuclear energy. That amount of waste is a drop in the bucket for thirty years' worth of electricity generation. The alternative, coal, would have created a billion tonnes of CO2 gas, a hundred million tonnes of particulates, and fifty million tonnes of acid gas.

Far from being stored in monitored facilities, as with nuclear waste, this waste would have been spewed into the biosphere, and filtered through the lungs of every living creature. If created by natural gas turbines, espoused by environmental groups, the gas emissions drop by half, but the argument remains the same.

In comparison, the creation of a few hockey rinks' worth of nuclear waste over three decades has saved the lives of thousands of Canadians who would have succumbed to lung disease due to coal pollution. The industry itself has led to the development of medical isotopes and cancer therapy machines that have saved millions more lives worldwide. Canada has been a leader in the development of nuclear energy, nuclear medicine, and now nuclear waste disposal.


Jeremy Whitlock

[Response from Nuclear Awareness Project]

[My response to above letter]