Dear Editor;
It is heartening to hear that the well-intentioned Alberta government is planning on spending $4 billion for carbon sequestration and public transit. But why is this money being spent on burying CO2 from coal power generation when there is no place to put it? The Leduc oil fields would have to be the major repository for it but where else could it go? It makes more sense to invest instead in alternative power generation for the Alberta Tar Sands project which is the single biggest contributor of greenhouse gasses in this country, to the extent that American environmentalists, Barak Obama included, question the validity of importing “dirty oil” from Canada.
Substituting nuclear reactors for the coal and natural gas thermal generation of electricity and steam for the tar sands would eliminate much of the megatons of greenhouse gasses that would be produced over the (hopefully) long lifespan of the project and would go a long way toward fulfilling our Kyoto commitments. It would also serve to prove the viability of our own reactor technology, which will (again hopefully) be in great demand in the near future.
The old Inco mines in Sudbury could serve as a safe long-term site for such a purpose since it lies in the Canadian Shield, which is one of the most geologically stable areas of the world. The deep mineshafts there would be ideal for the recoverable storage of hazardous waste, since the rock is comprised of unfractured granite with little or no groundwater.
Instead of producing inferior medical marijuana, the Sudbury mineshafts could be the source of enough revenue to help eliminate our national debt. It would also eliminate the greatest hurdle to the production of clean, safe, non-polluting energy that the world will need to power the electric and hydrogen vehicles of the future. The alternative is melting glaciers, rising seas and famine. Give us nuclear energy before it is too late.
Michael Sturdy
Armstrong, B.C.