Climate change

Letter to Mark Carney ~ Pour une gestion transparente et responsable des déchets radioactifs

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

December 12, 2025

English version follows below.

Lettre-Déchets-Nucléaires-PatrickBonin_vfDownload

Towards a transparent and responsible management of radioactive waste

December 2 2025

Several political parties and civil society organizations are dismayed to learn thatCanadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has decided to consolidate radioactive waste (forwhich the federal government is responsible) at the Chalk River Laboratories site. This decision was made without consultation with First Nations or the public, and without parliamentary debate. Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) is only a private contractor,not a government agency.

For the population, there is no public accountability and concern is growing. Why concentrate everything at Chalk River? CNL is not intending to permanently store high- or intermediate-level waste at Chalk River. Those wastes will likely be moved again. Chalk River is an unsuitable location for radioactive waste consolidation because it islocated on the Ottawa River and the area is prone to seismic tremors.

Used nuclear fuel has the highest level of radioactivity; it is being transported to ChalkRiver from nuclear reactors in Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec for interim storage pending the construction of a proposed deep geological repository (DGR). CNL intendsto have the same used fuel eventually transported to the DGR. But such a repositorystill does not exist and may never be licensed or approved. Whether the DGR isultimately built or not, issues surrounding the transportation of radioactive waste have to be addressed.

There are increased risks and costs of transporting used fuel twice: first from thenuclear power plants to Chalk River, and then from Chalk River to a second destination.This leads to extra safety risks and a waste of public money. The government is justmoving the waste around at great expense and added risk without solving the problempermanently, as there is still no proven safe solution despite 45 years of effort.

The proposed transportation of intermediate-level waste to Chalk River from thedecommissioning of nuclear reactors is similarly ill-advised.

Public concern was heightened by the news of the secretive transport of tonnes of usednuclear fuel from Bécancour, Quebec, to Chalk River during the summer of 2025, alongpublic roads and bridges, without any explicit authorization or opportunity for publicconsultation or even proper notification.

• We call on the federal government for a moratorium on the shipment of Canadianradioactive waste to Chalk River because of the increasing risk of radioactivecontamination and the lack of an acceptable due process.

• We call on the federal government to ban all imports of radioactive waste from othercountries, including disused medical sources, discarded tritium light sources, or usednuclear fuel.

• We call on the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to conduct a strategicassessment of the transportation of high- and intermediate-level radioactive waste onpublic highways, in accordance with section 95 of the Impact Assessment Act. Theresults of this assessment would contribute to future impact assessments of nuclearfacilities. The goal would be to examine, for example, the cumulative impact at ChalkRiver and to provide a framework for upcoming environmental assessments of nuclearpower plants and reactor decommissioning projects.

Patrick Bonin, M.P.Bloc Québécois critic for the Environment and Climate Change

Elizabeth May, M.P.Green Party of Canada

André BélangerFondation Rivières

Alain BranchaudSNAP Québec

Ginette Charbonneau Physicist and spokesperson for le Ralliement contre la pollution radioactive

Et al….

Press conference in Montreal to denounce the Chalk River nuclear waste project

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

BROAD COALITION PRESS CONFERENCE TO DENOUNCE THE CHALK RIVER NUCLEAR WASTE PROJECT

Montréal, May 26, 2025 – Kebaowek First Nation invites media representatives to a major press conference bringing together a powerful coalition of Indigenous leadership, major environmental organizations, municipal and regional elected officials, and members of opposition parties from both the federal and provincial governments. This united front will denounce the controversial Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) for nuclear waste at Chalk River and demand that the federal and Quebec governments take a firm and public stance against the project.

Speakers will highlight the unacceptable environmental risks, the ongoing violations of Indigenous rights and international law (UNDRIP), and the widespread mobilization of communities across Quebec and Ontario.

Prior to the press conference, media and guests are welcome to attend a special in-person and livestreamed panel discussion featuring Kebaowek First Nation and Indigenous Climate Action moderator who will explore the impacts of the NSDF project and will provide essential context.

WHAT: WHO:

Expert panel discussion – 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. (ET) Press conference – 11:00 a.m. till noon (ET)

Panel discussion

  • Chief Lance Haymond and Justin Roy from Kebaowek First Nation
  • Algonquin leader Verna Polson of Kebaowek First Nation
  • Forest Ecology and Environmental Researcher Rosanne Van Schie
  • Onagoshi-Lila Haymond, Moderator and Operations Manager for Indigenous Climate Action Press conference
  • Chief Lance Haymond and Justin Roy from Kebaowek First Nation
  • Chiefs from the Anishinabe Nation
  • Chief Francis Verreault-Paul of AFNQL
  • Québec Solidaire and other opposition parties (provincial and federal)
  • Elected officials from City of Montréal, others municipalities and MRCs
  • Leading environmental organizations: Eau Secours, Fondation Rivières, Green Coalition, and others Monday, May 26, 2025

WHEN: The panel discussion will be broadcast live on Zoom here. The press event will also be broadcast live on Stop Nuclear Waste Facebook Page here.

WHERE:

Atrium, Maison du développement durable, 50 Rue Sainte-Catherine Ouest, Montréal, QC
The venue is accessible to media and the general public. Seating is limited, and journalists are encouraged to arrive early.

______________________________________________________________________________

Source: Kebaowek First Nation
For information and interview requests:

Kebaowek First Nation
Mathilde Robitaille-Lefebvre Media relations m.robitaille-lefebvre@seize03.ca 819-852-4762

~~~~~~~

CCRCA comments:

We are immensely grateful to Kebaowek First Nation for its leadership in the fight against the NSDF megadump.  If this is how the Government of Canada thinks radioactive waste should be managed, the world should say “No to Nuclear” – especially from Canada.

The NSDF project was conceived to reduce as quickly and cheaply as possible the environmental liability of around 20 billion dollars in the Public Accounts of Canada created by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. 

That is why private companies contracted to run AECL’s nuclear sites want to put waste in a landfill next to the Ottawa River, as close as possible to the old nuclear reactors and other contaminated nuclear facilities at the Chalk River Laboratories.  Their top priority is to reduce the distance of waste transport – to minimize hauling costs.

Health, safety and the environment were given lower priority than cost savings.

The NSDF megadump fails to meet international safety standards. The NSDF environmental assessment found that nuclear facility types other than a landfill would release less pollution and have fewer impacts on the health and safety of people. It also found the site chosen would be worse for biodiversity than other sites.  

But the proposal was approved anyway by Canada’s nuclear regulator.  The CNSC never turns down nuclear industry projects.

AECL’s radioactive waste will last for time immemorial.  When the Government of Canada hired private companies associated with the U.S. military industrial complex to operate its nuclear sites and deal with its waste as cheaply as possible, the risks to the public became unacceptable, unjustifiable and unreasonable.

Should decisions about managing the Government of Canada’s nuclear waste be made by the military-industrial complex for its own profit and perpetuation?  No, of course not.

Is it possible to terminate the NSDF project and deal with this waste in a better way? Yes, we can do much better. “the federal government needs to act. This reckless plan has been moving forward on autopilot with no government oversight for far too long.  Thank you.

CNSC says climate change is not relevant to environmental assessment of SMRs

hendricksonjones Leave a comment

Canada’s first formal license application for an SMR is the “Micro Modular Reactor” in Chalk River.

CCRCA, and many others provided written interventions to the CNSC on “the scope of an environmental assessment for the proposed Micro Modular Reactor Project at the Chalk River Laboratories” prior to the one-person “Panel of Commission: R. Velshi, President” that rendered its decision on July 26th.

The CCRCA submission noted, in particular, that under the Impact Assessment Act, the proponent would be required to include as a “factor” in the EA ““the extent to which the effects of the designated project hinder or contribute to the Government of Canada’s ability to meet its environmental obligations and its commitments in respect of climate change.”

We added, “the CNSC has proposed that proponents assess the total GHG production as part of CNSC-led environmental assessments” in its fact sheet entitled “Greenhouse gas emission assessments for the Canadian nuclear fuel cycle,”  

The full CCRCA submission is available here.

Somehow, the Record of Decision on the project scope omits any mention of climate change.  

The CNSC’s decision on the scope of the MMR project indicates that climate change is not a relevant factor in the consideration of environmental impact of SMRs.

Here’s our take-away:

  • Reducing GHG emissions is a government priority.  This is reflected in the Impact Assessment Act.  The Minister of Natural Resources says nuclear power is essential to reduce GHGs (no path to net zero without nuclear) 
  • The CNSC did not include GHG emissions as a factor in assessing its first SMR license application – even when requested to do so – and even when its own “interim strategy for environmental assessments” calls for this.
  • The CNSC should not lead environmental assessments of nuclear reactors, including SMRs. 
  • The Physical Activities Regulations under the Impact Assessment Act should be changed to remove exemptions for new nuclear reactors.
Global Warming vs. Climate Change | Resources – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet