Radioactive nuclear waste buried beside 21% of the world's fresh water supply defies common sense
Reasons To Be Concerned
2. Highly Controversial Dump Site Selection
Ontario Power Generation's analysis of potential sites for low and intermediate level nuclear waste appears to have been superficial at best. OPG's Environmental Impact Statement document contains 3,432 pages, yet written justification for choosing the site is contained in the equivalent of one single page.8
OPG's comment on achievability and acceptability of an alternative site option is reported in a single word, "Unknown".9
Despite the fact that OPG was required under the Environmental Impact Statement guidelines to consider alternative sites, OPG readily admits they did not consider or investigate any other sites for this nuclear waste repository. According to OPG, there was no need to look farther because the Bruce site is "as good as it gets" - and Kincardine is a willing host.
Interestingly, 87% of Ontario's land mass is crown land 10owned and controlled by the Province of Ontario (owner of OPG) and therefore other actual sites within its ownership and control could and should have been investigated.
8 Ontario Power Generation, Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Radioactive Wastes - Environmental Impact Statement: Main Report, Volume 1, 00216-REP-07701-00001 R000, Section 3.4.2 and Section 3.2.5
9 Ontario Power Generation, Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Radioactive Wastes - Environmental Impact Statement: Main Report, Volume 1, 00216-REP-07701-00001 R000, Table 3.4.2-1