Mining Activity - Uranium and the Environment Activity #2 - The Debate: Using Nuclear Energy in Saskatchewan Background Information It has been proposed by some groups of people that Saskatchewan should use nuclear energy for electrical generation. There have been many news articles written about this issue, illustrating both negative and positive opinions on the subject. Views made from these articles are listed for you. Use these ideas to help answer the question posed in the activity. Viewpoints Positive: There is a growing need for electrical power. There will be less atmospheric pollution in the form of acid rain and the green house effect because nuclear energy generating stations emit little sulphur dioxide and carbon dioxide. Saskatchewan coal is high in uranium content so it is already emitting radiation into the atmosphere when it is burned. There is a limited supply of coal, natural gas and crude oil left, compared to uranium and the amount needed to provide for our energy needs. The risk of a nuclear accident is small when compared to the long term damage to the environment caused by coal-fired plants. CANDU Reactors have many safety features to ensure safe use of uranium as a power source. Saskatchewan has sufficient quantities of high grade uranium to fuel the reactor. (Saskatchewan's uranium resources have sufficient energy potential to supply the province's electrical requirements for about 1500 years.) Water for hydro-power and sites for hydro stations may become more precious than other energy sources. All industry brought to the province means an increase in provincial revenues. Building nuclear electrical generating stations has less impact on ecology than building dams for hydro electrical generation. Increase employment in the area where reactor is built. Negative: New coal plants now use pollution control devices to significantly reduce the amount of sulphur dioxide emitted and subsequently reduce the contribution to acid rain. No long term solution for waste disposal has been established and approved. Disposal of used fuel bundles in Saskatchewan may promote the establishment of a long term storage facility in northern Saskatchewan. Increased risks exist in the area off radiation leaks, occupational health problems of the workers, and unsafe transportation of fuel. There is a possibility there will be further destruction of the wildlife habitat and forests in the area where the reactor is built. The people in the area where the reactor is built could feel frustration if they have the reactor but not the skills to work in the jobs required. We will be forced to conserve the energy we have if out ability to generate electricity does not increase. The money (for the reactor) can be used to develop renewable alternative energy sources such as solar and wind power. (remember that uranium is also a nonrenewable energy resource) There is the possibility of a nuclear accident. Other Issues: What are the alternatives to nuclear power generation? Should Saskatchewan benefit financially from a resource it does not want to use itself? Will Saskatchewan need other energy sources to fill its electrical need in the future? Who would have control of the nuclear reactor if one were built in Saskatchewan (private sector or government)? Where would be a good place to build a nuclear reactor in Saskatchewan? How long will Saskatchewan's uranium resources last if nuclear energy use increases? (it is estimated that there are about 40 years worth of deposits at the current rate of removal) What happens to government revenues if all uranium mining is stopped? How far can we encourage energy efficiency and the resulting conservation of energy? Do the benefits to society balance the risks of the technological development? 1. Your task is to answer the question "Should a nuclear reactor be built in Saskatchewan?" Be sure to read all the viewpoints, then form your own opinion. Your answer should include at least 5 points stating your view, and include factual information. 2. There are many articles in newspapers and magazines available on the topic of nuclear accidents at nuclear reactors. Work alone, or in pairs to find articles on major nuclear accidents. Report back to the class on one of these issues: description of the accident comparison of the nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl comparison of technology of nuclear reactors, focusing on Chernobyl and Three Mile Island why the Canadian nuclear industry promotes the CANDU reactor as the safest nuclear reactor in the world possible long term effects of a nuclear accident effects of the accident on the uranium industry Extensions 1. Write a letter to one of the uranium producing companies in Saskatchewan requesting information about their contingency plan if a spill occurs and what changes would be made to prevent further spills. 2. Research one of the uranium mines in Saskatchewan which has closed down (such as the mine at Uranium City) and the decommissioning procedure that took (or is taking) place, the effect on the environment and the effect on the surrounding community.