Concentrated Great Lakes nuclear facilities prompt call for action: 100+ groups designate radionuclides as “chemical of mutual concern”
March 2, 2016
admin

Ontario Power Generation's eight-reactor Pickering Nuclear Power Plant, just east of Toronto, on the Lake Ontario shore.As reported in a Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA) and Beyond Nuclear press release:

More than 100 organizations from around the Great Lakes are calling on the Canadian and American governments to list radionuclides as a “chemical of mutual concern” under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The groups’ call is supported by a new report outlining the shortcomings of current efforts to track radionuclides and explaining what needs to be done to properly monitor these dangerous substances in our Great Lakes.

“The Great Lakes basin is a hotbed for nuclear-related activity, with more than 30 nuclear generating stations, fuel processing facilities, waste disposal and uranium mine tailing sites scattered around the four lower lakes,” points out John Jackson, author of the new report.

“We simply don't know what the cumulative impact of these nuclear facilities and waste sites is on the lakes because there is no comprehensive monitoring of radionuclides in Great Lake waters,” says Theresa McClenaghan, Executive Director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association.

Meanwhile, the Canadian Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) continues to search for a long-term high-level radioactive waste disposal site, where highly radioactive fuel bundles from all of Canada's nuclear facilities, including Ontario's 20 commercial power reactors, would be permanently buried. Eight of the nine sites being considered by the NWMO are in the Great Lakes Basin.

“The evidence is that even very low levels of radiation can have serious health impacts, from cancer-causing cell damage to genetic mutations that can trigger birth defects,” says Kevin Kamps of Maryland-based Beyond Nuclear. In the U.S., the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation panel found that “there is no compelling evidence to indicate a dose threshold below which the risk of tumor induction is zero.”

The full press release, report and groups’ submission are available at CELA's website.

Update on March 2, 2016 by Registered Commenteradmin

Colin Perkel at The Canadian Press has reported on this story. John Flesher at the Associated Press bureau in Traverse City, Michigan has also reported on this story. Emily Paskevics at HNGN and Dan Karpenchuk at WBFO (Buffalo, NY NPR) have also run coverage.

Article originally appeared on Beyond Nuclear (https://archive.beyondnuclear.org/).
See website for complete article licensing information.