Collaborative Proposal Creation
Create, improve and sponsor proposals in a respectful, fully bilingual environment. Grow proposals in the "Hothouse", for promotion to the "Workshop", to become official GPC policy.
Preamble
Nuclear power is one of the lowest-carbon sources of electricity, as recognized by IPCC and United Nations ECE. A majority of Canadians support using nuclear energy to generate electricity.
Proposal text
Green Party of Canada WILL CEASE BLANKET-OPPOSITION TO NUCLEAR POWER AS A SOURCE OF LOW-CARBON ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION.
Type of Proposal
Public policy that the party would represent.
Objective / Benefit
This resolution is intended to withdraw existing GPC policies which oppose Canada's use of nuclear technologies for non-military purposes. GPC policies which impede nuclear by calling for "renewable" energy shall be updated to replace "renewable" with "clean".
If your proposal replaces an existing policy or policies, which one does it replace?
1996 Foreign Aid - repeal
G06-p11 Enhanced Nuclear Policy - repeal
1998 - Peace and Security - repeal
G08-p012 Nuclear Power - repeal
G10-p31 Carbon Free National Feed-in Tariff - Amend: remove "non-nuclear,"
G08-136 Energy Transition Plan - Amend: change "renewable energy" to "clean energy"
G08-p137 Support of Distributed Electrical Power Grid Research - Amend: change "renewable energy" to "clean energy"
List any supporting evidence for your proposal
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe issued a report comparing not just lifecycle carbon emissions for various electricity sources, but overall impact on the environment and human health. Nuclear power was the single lowest CO2eq /kWh electricity source studied. The single lowest impact on ecosystems. And among the very lowest impact on human health. (CO2: Page 8. Ecosystems: Page 57. Human health: Page 58.) https://unece.org/sed/documents/2021/10/reports/life-cycle-assessment-electricity-generation-options
Our World In Data summarizes a modern assessment of various electricity system's safety and cleanliness. While not as in-depth or recent as UN ECE's study, Our World In Data clearly positioned nuclear in 2020 as one of humanity's safest and cleanest energy sources. https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
Despite his continued opposition to nuclear power, Dr. Gordon Edwards acknowledges "Low-carbon emitting technologies include solar, wind, hydro and nuclear" in a 2021 briefing paper. https://www.ourcommons.ca/content/Committee/441/ENVI/WebDoc/WD11891319/11891319/RamanaMV-1-e.pdf
In GPC's "Roundtable on Canada's Nuclear Policy" Dr. Gordon Edward observes that splitting atoms for energy does not release carbon. (Excerpt with my commentary:) https://youtu.be/HKIcnbMMdO0?t=24 (Original video:) https://www.facebook.com/GreenPartyofCanada/videos/934857067289154/
The nuclear supply chain for CANDU refurbishments is 98% Canadian. https://www.opg.com/documents/2021-ontario-nuclear-collaboration-report/
This can be contrasted with other low (but not as low as nuclear) carbon energy sources where components are not domestically produced, such as wind turbines: https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/79fdad93-9025-49ad-ba16-c26d718cc070
Nuclear's domestic, Canadian, supply chain still achieves a cost /kWh only beaten by hydropower. https://www.oeb.ca/sites/default/files/rpp-price-report-20211022.pdf
On April 23, 2023, Dr. Chris Keefer debated Dr. Gordon Edwards on the subject of nuclear power in Canada. This was the "Roundtable on Canada's Nuclear Policy" that GPC members might have experienced, if a single pro-nuclear voice had been allowed to participate. https://youtu.be/LvMC8TK025w
Angus Reid Institute finds increasing support from Canadians for nuclear power. In June 2021, 51% of Canadians said they would like to see further development of nuclear power generation. Now 57% say the same. https://angusreid.org/canada-energy-nuclear-power-oil-and-gas-wind-solar/
This 57% of Canadians supporting nuclear matches a similar trend in the United States, where also now 57% support nuclear power. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/18/growing-share-of-americans-favor-more-nuclear-power/
Germany serves as a cautionary tale that renewables have not replaced their nuclear fleet. This video details use on online grid monitoring tools to evaluate Elizabeth May's statement (made during COP28) that shutting down nuclear power has "freed up" the grid to accept renewable energy, while not also noting that German grid remains high-carbon, and Germany immediately transitioned (upon the closure of their last nuclear power plants) from being net-exporter of electricity to net-importer of electricity. https://youtu.be/8rcMwmGuGSo
Does this proposal affect any particular group and what efforts have been made to consult with the group or groups?
N/A
Jurisdiction: Is this proposal under federal jurisdiction?
Yes
Please indicate the language the proposal is being submitted in.
English
This proposal is being evaluated
Posted on the Continuous Motion Development Vote tab for member review prior to the all-member vote.
Amendments (3)
-
Created at
05/07/2024 -
- 6
-
Created at
27/02/2024 -
- 0
-
Created at
05/07/2024 -
- 0
We're building a new kind of politics. One that is open, participatory, and people-powered
If you believe in what we're doing, please consider making a small donation to help us build it
Related images
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
Susan, [Part 1]
M. V. Ramana is one of those names that jumps out as anti-nuclear. Is like coming across a paper on lifecycle emissions by Sovacool.
Report: Too small to be viable? The potential market for small modular reactors in mining and remote communities in Canada (M. V. Ramana)
"This paper examines the size of this potential market for SMRs by quantifying the electricity demand for remote mining projects..."
Susan, SMR are uniquely positioned to power remote communities in that many SMR are designed to operate 20 years without refuelling. The "pitch" is they would deliver power 365 days a year.
While intermittency is mentioned in the report, there's NO FIRMING COST.
Of course the LCOE will be lower for solar and wind... firming costs are the killer.
Ramana says storage costs are coming down. Ramana says we can still burn diesel or gas and just use solar/wind to burn less of it. If Ramana asserts nuclear is "too expensive" then why not also show an apples-to-apples comparison for a decarbonized micro-grid? (Ramana's report says: The LCOE numbers listed here are not an ‘apples to apples’ comparison because wind and solar do not generate electricity all the time.)
"Too small to be viable" also contains the following assertion:
"In both the United States and France, the two countries with the highest numbers of nuclear plants, costs went up, not down, with construction experience"
...actually, any replication of CONSISTENT REACTOR DESIGN has seen costs go down.
https://progress.institute/nuclear-power-plant-construction-costs/
CTRL-F: multiple reactors using an unchanging design
We see the overall-increasing cost of France's fleet by each reactor design... costs keep going up because France kept switching designs, yet we also see each unchanged design became cheaper. France kept switching designs instead of letting the reactors continue to get cheaper! (Maybe it wasn't clear how it was impacting costs at the time, and is only clear in retrospect?)
Unlike Canada, USA was incredibly inconsistent with every reactor deployment. Every nuclear power plant in USA is like a special snowflake. Vogtle 3 and Vogtle 4 will offer an example of learning-by-doing and we'll see if somehow costs went up and not down as 2 identical reactors are built one-after-the-other.
Southern Company Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders & Proxy Statement 2023:"Our experiences through the construction, testing and start-up of Unit 3 have contributed significantly to improved processes and productivity as we work to bring Unit 4 into service."
For a report on Canadian commercial viability of SMR... why does Ramana cite USA and France to argue there's no learning-by-doing? Canada has an ongoing refurb operation which is clearly showing acceleration as it goes.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-darlington-nuclear-generating-station-refurbishment/
Loading comments ...