Recent Blog Entries

Survey found at http://www.energy.alberta.ca/

 Please fill it out. You have until June 1, 2009. 

The survey is mostly choice questions, but I've included here my text responses  from the open ended questions at the end of the survey. I'm pretty sure I missed some things, and might have misworded others, but I'll post it here to see if anyone responds. I'm interested in hearing other Albertans' impressions. 

Weirdly worded questions:

Do you agree or disagree that, even after achieving all possible conservation, we will still need more electricity? 

--->there is so much about this question that I don't like. 

How familiar are you with Alberta's electricity system?

a. I can explain the details to others.
b. I am generally familiar with the system but I cannot explain it to others.
c. I have some understanding of the system but not sure of the details.
d. I have a very limited knowledge.

 ---> I'd say I am generally familiar with the system and can explain it to others in a general way. Put on the spot,  I would most definitely attempt to explain it, but I might need to Google a few things to make sure. Thank god for Blackberries and my notebook. 

 Criteria of concern when evaluating energy options in the survey:

Air quality. Impacts to Water. Impacts to Land. Dependable supply. Lost-cost electricity. Reducing CO2 emissions. Job creation. Impacts on local communities. Support of local communities.  Location of power plant. Safety. health risks. Disposal of waste.

18. Are there any other criteria you believe are important when evaluating energy options?

Support of and impact on all residents of Alberta. Impacts to biodiversity. Ease of waste disposal and longevity of waste life cycle, as well as amount of waste produced by the process.  Land reclamation and life cycle of the power plant itself (i.e. ease of decommissioning, and proposed timelines to decommission). Building codes of the plant itself. Risk assessment in terms of safety to workers/communities/domestic and wild animals/emergencies. The Environmental Impact assessment process, including the decommissioning process. Transparency. Who the private sector owner is and where they are based. Potential for private-public partnership or public ownership. The existence of watchdog organizations. Allocation of power generated (i.e. are there deals in place to export the power? If so, to whom and how much?)  What is the new power being generated for (i.e. to meet Alberta's growing population? Or for other industrial projects?) If power generated is for Alberta's growing population, are measures being taken in other areas to ensure support of growth (i.e. housing, access to clean water, etc). Monitoring and enforcement programs.  Reliability of technology (i.e. tested versus untested power generation). Peer-reviewed science. Infrastructure required to support power generation.

27. What additional information would you have  like to have seen in the Expert Panel or the Workbook? 

 Impacts on biodiversity are not considered at all. Decommissioning technology and science. Current and proposed locations of interim repositories, as well as proposed permanent storage in Canada. Existence of and funding for monitoring and enforcement programs for compliance from energy producers. Risk assessments for energy resources. 

28. Which of the following statements best represents your views?

The province should oppose proposals to  build nuclear power plants in Alberta.

29. And why do you say that?

From what I have read, seen, and heard, impact on biodiversity has not been considered at all to any real extent in the context of nuclear power. Existing programs of enforcement and monitoring have not been mentioned, nor funding for those programs. The life cycle of nuclear waste has not been discussed in enough detail (i.e. whether or not we can create systems that reduce the risk of exposure to radioactivity over 500 to 1000 years) as well as funding for technology and research that can aid in the decommissioning of power plants and prompt land reclamation and waste neutralization. There is also no mention of allocation of the power generated, except for Question 4. I am also disheartened by the fact that Energy Alberta announced in August of 2007 a proposed site, and the Government of Alberta is only just consulting the public. It creates a chasm in my trust for this government, and if I do not trust my government, how can I be sure that monitoring and enforcement of regulations will be upheld? 

30. If the provincial government decided to consider proposals to build nuclear power plants, what are the most important issues about nuclear power plants that should be reviewed?

Impacts to biodiversity (including humans), time lines for decommissioning, waste neutralization, and land reclamation. Capacity of the government to monitor and enforce regulations. 

31. Are there any other additional comments you would like to make regarding the potential  of generating electricity from nuclear energy in Alberta?

If we really do require more power generation, we must either work to increase the reliability of other alternative sources of power, or simply realize that the age of power reliability has passed. Question 30 is in the wrong tense, since the provincial government has obviously decided to consider proposals to build power plants. This is apparent by the existence of this workbook and survey.