SK needs renewable energy not nuclear waste.

Saskatchewan nuclear waster

Petition to oppose Small Nuclear Reactors in Saskatchewan

 

Saskatchewan can meet its energy needs by increasing renewable and sustainable energy technologies and strategies such as solar, conservation, wind, geothermal, run-of-the-river hydro systems, and hydroelectric importation from Manitoba, among other sustainable energy options. Investing in these would create more jobs while producing energy sooner and at a far lower cost.

Nuclear power is not competitive. Its capital costs are exorbitantly expensive. Most types of nuclear power plants have cost two to four times more than their initial estimates. 

Fred Peterson opposing Nuclear power in Saskatchewan

SMR’s are NOT small. Internet images show a single reactor on a truck's flatbed trailer. Those images do not depict how large an actual SMR power facility will be. With containment building, shielding, exclusion zone, turbine, steam generator, etc., it will be as large as any other kind of comparable thermal power plant. For example, the 300 MWe GE-Hitachi SMR proposed for Saskatchewan would be at least as large as the Queen Elizabeth Power Plant in Saskatoon.

Human Health impacts near nuclear power plants are well documented. Nuclear reactors routinely, not only accidentally, discharge carcinogenic radioactive emissions into the air and water. And nuclear reactors sometimes have accidents which widely contaminate the air, land and water

Plus, the waste from nuclear reactors is not like normal household garbage-type waste. It is radioactive and highly toxic. It would be a long-term financial, security, and environmental burden on current and future generations to manage this waste for thousands of years.

Sign here to add your voice of opposition to SMRs in Saskatchewan.

Who's signing

Greg Van Luven
Randy Lebell
Shirley Shumard
Carol Vandale
Maggie Panter
Janice Wilton
John Liss
Lorna Evans
Karen Brander
Judy Schachtel
Pat Keyser
Miranda Hanus
Victoria Obedkoff
Jim Penna
Angela Bischoff
Lynn Oliphant
Trudi Gunia
Jan Norris
Janice Dongworth
Jeanne Corrigal
Linda Murphy
Peter Prebble
Gary Carlson
Wayne Turner
Dennis Woods
Anne Brander
Dale Dewar
Bob Stuart
Larry Neufeld
Steve Lawrence
55 SIGNATURES
GOAL: 500 signatures

Will you sign?


Showing 47 reactions

  • Greg Van Luven
  • Randy Lebell
    SMNRs are a non viable alternative to fossil fuel due to cost, length of time to develop, highly toxic waste with no disposal technology. Renewables are a less expensive solution and immediately deployable. By the time snmrs are up and running solar and wind etc would already be showing progress on reducing green house emissions!
  • Shirley Shumard
  • Carol Vandale
  • Maggie Panter
  • Janice Wilton
  • John Liss
  • Lorna Evans
  • Karen Brander
    Nuclear waste is the problem that has no solution.
  • Judy Schachtel
  • Pat Keyser
  • Miranda Hanus
  • Victoria Obedkoff
  • Jim Penna
  • Angela Bischoff
    SK – don’t fall for the nuke con job – renewables are a fraction of the cost and risk – that’s why renewables are booming worldwide while nuclear is tanking.
  • Lynn Oliphant
  • Trudi Gunia
  • Jan Norris
  • Janice Dongworth
  • Jeanne Corrigal
  • Linda Murphy
  • Peter Prebble
  • Gary Carlson
  • Wayne Turner
  • Dennis Woods
  • Anne Brander
  • Dale Dewar
  • Bob Stuart
    It took billions of years for the radioactivity on Earth to cascade down into enough stability for multi-cellular life. We have no right to stir it up again.
  • Larry Neufeld
  • Steve Lawrence
    We already have a legacy of uranium mine waste that is not being handled well for the long term – we do not need to add, an even more toxic waste and emissions to the environment. If ethics mattered, we would be closing all the uranium mines as well.