|
APRIL 9th, 2008 |
IN THIS ISSUE: |
|
1)
CHECK OUT OUR NEW FRIENDS THE URANIUM 'EWES'
Check out our new friends the Uranium 'Ewes', created by cartoonist David Spivey. To view a new cartoon every week go to the front page of the CCAMU website. http://www.ccamu.ca 2) MESSAGE FROM CHIEF DOREEN DAVIS OF THE SHABOT OBAADJIWAN FIRST NATION The court date for Chief Doreen Davis and Earl Badour is April 17, 2008. They will be asking Judge Cunningham to amend the order for their law suite against the two levels of Governments. They will only be in court for about one hour and do not feel that they need support on this day. It will be more important to be prepared for the first week of June 2008. Chief Davis thanks everyone for their continued support. For more information on how you can help the Shabot Obaadjiwan in their fight with the government contact Chief Davis at chiefdoreen@frontenac.net 3) KINGSTON SESSION OF THE CITIZENS' INQUIRY INTO THE IMPACT OF THE URANIUM CYCLE To see photos
by Garth Gullekson of this event go to, The Kingston session of the Citizens' Inquiry into the Impacts of the Uranium Cycle was a success. Once again, almost 200 people came out to hear what presenters had to say about uranium. The panel, which consisted of Janet Gutowski, Central Frontenac Mayor; Fraser McVie, retired civil servant; Laurie McKnight Walker, United Church Minister; Jamie Swift, writer and Cameron Smith, Toronto Star writer, heard 40 presenters in a packed hall at Queen St. United Church in Kingston during the afternoon and evening. McVie, Smith and Gutowski were a part of the panel at the Sharbot Lake event. The bios for McKnight-Walker and Swift are as follows: Rev. Laurie McKnight-Walker: served in the United Church ministry for 24 years; 4 years Queen St. United Church and other ministries mostly in rural communities in Ontario where agriculture/lumber/nuclear industry/military were the key economic realities. Served on several community boards in Kingston- Kingston Community Chaplaincy, Social Issues Networking Group and Hospice Palliative Kingston. Jamie Swift: has worked independently, writing books, magazine and newspaper articles and reviews for over twenty-five years. He has been a regular contributor to CBC-Radio's Ideas and a lecturer at Queen's University School of Business. It was a
very musical event in Kingston with songs sung by The Three Sisters, Ellen
Hamilton, Jan Laurey and Michelle Girouard. Media was present at this event and included CKWS TV and CBC radio. OPP officers were in attendance and there was much discussion about this. The officers were asked to identify themselves and state their reason for being at the event. They explained that: 1) They were there as local citizens interested in educating themselves about the issues. 2) They were required to be there because of the injunction handed down by Justice Cunningham. (To see this injunction go to our website and click on the Legal tab) 3) The OPP have been following the situation at the Robertsville protest and they had been ordered by their superior to attend. Many people took exception to the police presence, stating that the event was not a protest and therefore did not require police. One speaker asked the panel to note that the police presence intimidated people and was not appropriate. Another person stated that the Inquiry did not go against the injunction, so the second reason did not make sense. The officers were also asked if they would be taking notes on presenters and they confirmed that they would be. those present were informed that the police reports can be obtained under the "Freedom to Information" act. CCAMU would like to thank our Kingston team: Cathy Wills for acting as our host. Many hours of preparation went into the Kingston event. Susan DeLisle for all of her help in organizing food, media and much, much more. Anne and Eric Joss for providing dinner for the organizers and panelists. Once again CCAMU thanks Donna Dillman, Marilyn Crawford and Wolfe Erlichman for their hard work on the Inquiry Committee. Hello there Uranium News! Congrats on the success of a super Inquiry yesterday. I wanted to send along the Postcard Project website once more: www.thepostcardproject.wordpress.com Thanks very much, Michelle Girouard (Editors note: Michelle was one of the many presenters at the Kingston Inquiry.) 5)
CHRISTIAN PEACEMAKER TEAMS PRAYER VIGIL 200M SOUTH OF THE PROTEST SITE
Ottawa Public
Hearings: The City of Ottawa passed a motion to petition Dalton McGuinty to enact a Moratorium on Uranium Exploration and Mining in Eastern Ontario on 27 Feb 2008. Ignored so far. 7) HIGHLANDS EAST MUNICIPAL COUNCIL (HALIBURTON AREA) CALLS FOR MORATORIUM Highlands East Municipal Council has passed a resolution supporting a moratorium on uranium mining. Please note that there is a review to license the Pickering Power Plant in Ottawa. Submissions have to be in by April 14th. Go to this web site for all details. Lets bombard them with letters. www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/commission After months
of discussion between council and community members, Highlands East Municipal
Council has passed a resolution supporting a moratorium on uranium mining
and exploration in Highlands East! (Editors note: this resolution will
appear on the CCAMU website within the next few days. Look under the Political
tab and then Municipality subtab.) 8) CONFLICT RESOLUTION RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO MINING EXPLORATION In Ontario Provincial Ministries have their own policies and requirements that conflict with each other on occasion. The Ministry of Northern Development and Mining (MNDM) both regulates and promotes mining of various types in Ontario . Prospecting is promoted whereby current regulations can allow them to continue to the mine viability stage after much work but possibly with much anguish and duress by the various concerned parties involved. If a mine were to be disapproved on the basis of risk or other competing priorities at that stage, then all that time and effort would have been wasted by those same parties involved. The above is an ineffective use of resources, energy and stress on others when there are conflicts. Most of these conflicts could be avoided if MNDM, and other ministries collaborated in order to determine the high risk or conflicting land use requirements within the province. MNDM could then disallow prospecting in the first place on those areas that require protection or are known to be under review while aboriginal land claims are settled. The type of mine prospect should also be taken into account depending on the associated risks involved. (i.e.: uranium, gold, zinc, etc). Some examples where conflicts may arise are - Source Water Protection in highly vulnerable and populated regions. - Community Proximity Health Risks - First Nations' Land Claims. - Conservation requirements e.g.: A2A (The Algonquin to Adirondack Conservation Initiative) - Alternate land use plans by other ministries and municipalities. It is important for the Province to grow its economy, however if ministries were to pre-plan and determine potential areas of conflict then prospectors could target alternate areas and be more effective to the industry. The general public would also be more productive in their particular work since disputes or competing priorities with a particular mining prospect can be avoided in the first place. Howard Robinson
With great concern have I listened to Dispatches about a so called "nuclear renaissance". For starters, I have no idea why you would hide the fact from your audience, that the new built effectively not even makes up for all the old (actually wrecked long before their projected retirement in most cases) nuclear plants being phased out. The whole show sounded, as if you were paving the way for something, Mr. Rick McInnes Ray. I can only assume you will air another show, portraying the other side, the absolutely insanely expensive side of nuclear energy. In my entire career as a science journalist I have not listened to such one sided report as yours from Sunday, 6th of April 2008. You managed to assemble the entire choir of nuclear propaganda pushers without even considering to let have independent scientists contribute to this very important topic. Instead you feature "scientistic" directors, paid by, surprise, the French nuclear industry, already flirting with turning Saskatchewan into the atomic waste dump of the planet. The two gentlemen from MIT would have required two people from Pembina or any other institution - none of that followed, though. When it finally was time to have a look at how Uranium mining procures the dirtiest fuel on earth for the new nukes, you then have the audacity to completely exclude the process in front of your doorstep 90 minutes north of Ottawa, where native leaders are jailed for their believes as if Canada had never signed the charter of rights, and instead point your righteous finger at the poor conditions in India and South Africa. I would like to ask you: What is your mandate? Are you really that ignorant or are you following your own secret agenda? If you have shares in mining or nuclear companies, you should declare a conflict of interest and not author such one sided propaganda. FYI: The provincial government of Ontario, Canada under Premier Dalton McGuinty is in the process of giving away a pristine, remote area of hundreds of lakes to the mining industry. Although there are native titles on this land (the Supreme Court has already decided on how to proceed in that case and none of that is respected here), federal and provincial institutions proceeded to give out licenses to Uranium and Platin mining companies. The province of Ontario will most likely to have to compensate both sides -outrageously arrogant mistakes paid for by the Ontario taxpayer. Native leaders who refused to accept the injunction of a provincial court but continued to protect their native land by blocking access to the proposed mining site and in doing so, OBEYED their spiritual conviction and exercised their freedom of speech, have been jailed and fined with maximum sentences (the CBC reported). It is hard to see where the constitutional rights of Algonquin and Kitchenuhmagkosib Innuwig are respected in this conflict. The protest has been completely peaceful and very established NGOs (Christian Peacekeepers, David Suzuki, Greenpeace, Amnesty International, MiningWatch) have been siding with natives and white settlers who watch the property values of their homes slide down helplessly, because of stakes running not only through their back yards but even through the lakes and rivers. 14 municipalities have passed notions for a moratorium on Uranium mining in Ontario, including the capital Ottawa, however in a meeting with the Premier, McGuinty appeared to not be aware of 90 percent of this Uranium being exported - I'd like to ask DIspatches: What are u guys going to drink after the Canadian government destroys all water reservoirs on the short term benefit of mining, pushing new, unnecessary and expensive nuclear energy plants and wasting humongous amounts of potable water on the tar sands in Alberta? Please have a look at the following web pages of grassroots and First Nations organizations to scoop greater detail for what the inhabitants of the Land'O'Lakes are facing in Ontario, the most populated province of Canada: With best regards and the hope, your efforts might help to ease this CRYING INJUSTICE and IGNORANCE, Sincerely M. Molthan 10) ST. LAWRENCE COLLEGE STUDENTS REPSOND TO NUCLEAR ARTICLE Don't repeat
nuclear mistake Re: Steven Manders' letter "Energy future must be nuclear" (March 27). This letter brings up some important issues regarding Ontario's energy future and concludes that more nuclear power is the answer. However, when we look at the financial and environmental costs, nuclear power looks much less attractive. Regarding Manders' reference to a "not in my backyard" attitude among people opposing uranium prospecting near Sharbot Lake, they are right to be concerned about the prospect of uranium mining in their community and it should not be acceptable for any community to suffer similar effects. At the very least, communities should have the right to choose or reject this type of "development." After all, they will be left to live with the consequences long after the speculators have moved on. The reality of "peak oil" is a serious threat to Ontario's economy, but not because we use oil for making electricity; oil-powered generators provide less than one per cent of Ontario's electricity. In fact, peak oil presents an even greater challenge to the nuclear industry, which is heavily dependent on oil for mining, processing and transportation of uranium, not to mention the huge amount of fossil fuels required to build nuclear power stations. As oil prices rise, so, too, will the total cost of nuclear power. Also, increasing demand for uranium will drive up the price, which has already increased almost 1,000 per cent in the last five years. There are large amounts of waste and pollution associated with nuclear power, but supporters only mention the minimal emissions from the power station itself. They also ignore the growing legacy of high-level nuclear waste, which, according to the industry's own figures, will cost $24 billion to deal with just for the current waste; never mind all the waste to come. Also, there is no way to make nuclear waste safe, so it will remain a health threat for tens of thousands of years. What right do we have to dump that burden on future generations? Let's not forget that the nuclear lobby sold us on the Darlington nuclear generating station with an estimate that it would cost $3.5 billion to build. When the plant was completed, the total price tag for Ontario taxpayers was $15 billion. Note that there are no private companies willing to take on all the risk of building and operating nuclear power plants. They only get built when the risk, cost overruns and disposal costs are fully assumed by the taxpayers of Ontario. Since we will still need electricity in the future, where will it come from? In reference to Manders' statement that we "cannot use wind energy when it is not windy, and solar power does not work at night," he's right, but none of the proponents of a non-nuclear energy future are suggesting that wind and solar power can immediately replace existing generators. Numerous reports from credible resources (the Pembina Institute, the David Suzuki Foundation, the World Wildlife Federation) suggest that a combination of more renewable energy combined with conservation/efficiency, natural gas generation and imported hydroelectric power from other provinces can meet Ontario's power needs within 15 years. Renewable energy uses a fuel source that is free and inexhaustible. No technology is without effects and we should always strive for zero impact. Renewable power has far fewer impacts than power generated by traditional means. Nuclear power's history has been one of enormous cost overruns, lack of a method for safely disposing of waste and reliability well below industry promises. Ontarians got badly burned with the first foray into nuclear power. It would be a huge tragedy to repeat that mistake, especially when there are proven, clean alternatives with zero fuel costs forever. Hugh McLaren Jr. Louise Cooper Steve Royce Reed Kelly Mark Tooley Energy Systems Engineering Technology, St. Lawrence College
Reuters WASHINGTON, April 7 (Reuters) - Nuclear war between India and Pakistan would cause more than slaughter and destruction -- it would knock a big hole in the ozone layer, affecting crops, animals and people worldwide, U.S. researchers said on Monday. Fires from burning cities would send 5 million metric tonnes of soot or more into the lowest part of Earth's atmosphere known as the troposphere, and heat from the sun would carry these blackened particles into the stratosphere, the team at the University of Colorado reported. "The sunlight really heats it up and sends it up to the top of the stratosphere," said Michael Mills of the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, who chose India and Pakistan as one of several possible examples. Up there, the soot would absorb radiation from the sun and heat surrounding gases, causing chemical reactions that break down ozone. "We find column ozone losses in excess of 20 percent globally, 25 percent to 45 percent at midlatitudes, and 50 percent to 70 percent at northern high latitudes persisting for five years, with substantial losses continuing for five additional years," Mills' team wrote in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This would let in enough ultraviolet radiation to cause cancer, damage eyes and skin, damage crops and other plants and injure animals. To read
the rest of this article go to, |