Footnotes and Bibliography
"When fuel bundles are removed from the reactor, they are very hot, very radioactive and extremely dangerous. An individual standing one metre from a fresh spent fuel bundle would receive a lethal radiation dose of about 200 000 rem per hour." (Ontario, 1980b, p. 3)."Almost 4 percent of the oceanic volume would be needed to dilute the wastes on hand at the year 2000 to levels specified in the Radiation Concentration Guides; this volume is almost double that of fresh water in global storage in lakes, rivers, ground water, and glaciers. Even after a million years, the volume of water needed . . . is significant." (Bredehoeft et al., 1978, p. 2).
Directed by the Legislature to do so, in 1976 the California Energy Commission undertook a thorough investigation of geological disposal; in June 1977, an Interim Report identified hundreds of unanswered technical questions on the subject (California Energy Commission, 1977). By January 1978, it was concluded that "scientific evidence is lacking even to confirm the feasibility of waste isolation in geologic formations." (California Energy Commission, 1978, p. 209). See also Bredehoeft et al. (1978).
"A number of [town] councils have opposed any research in their area.... We have lost some time ... in marshalling the effort required to get the program underway." (Hatcher, 1980).
"The main concerns with continuing delays are that they erode public confidence . . . increase public confusion . . . and add to the overall cost of research." (Ontario, 1980c, p. 8).Over 80 percent of the radioactivity in the ore is left in the tailings, with an effective half-life of 76 000 years (Landa, 1980).
Most of the radioactive isotopes in uranium tailings emit alpha radiation. Recent scientific evidence indicates that at low dose rates, alpha radiation is more effective at causing cancer (per unit dose) than at higher dose rates (Woollard and Young, 1979, 1980; Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, 1980, p. 242).
Thousands of homes and schools in the southwest United States were built from uranium tailings; similar problems have occurred in Canada (Metzger, 1972; Sanger, 1981).
"About 9800 premature deaths [from radon-induced lung cancer] are predicted over the period 1978 to 3000 in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, from tailings that would be generated by the full operation of mills in existence in the United States in the year 2000" (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979, p. 5).
"A US Public Health Service study shows increased bone cancer in communities with 4.2 [picocuries per liter radium-226] in drinking water as compared to communities with 1 [picocurie per liter]. [This concentration] is about 6.5 times less than ... the proposed maximum acceptable concentration . . ." (Woollard and Young, 1980, p. 9). See also Landa (1980).CCNR (1980a, p. 8); NRC (1979, p. 15).
At Elliot Lake, extraction of two pounds of uranium yields a ton of tailings. The price of uranium, down from $40 per pound to $27 per pound (US $), is still dropping (Northern Miner, January 1981). If disposal costs are high, say $30 per ton or more, uranium mining may not be economically justifiable.
. . . back to Nuclear Wastes The contracts guarantee $2 billion in profits for the mining companies, while exempting them from the cost of tailings disposal.
U.S. funding for high-level waste research "was in the order of $160 million to $180 million this past year; in Canada it was $16 million." (Ontario, 1978/81, 24 January 1980, p. 31). As for tailings disposal, "there seems to be an impasse on research.... The national program has not begun." (Ontario, 1980c, p. 33).
"A good deal of the information is . . . not subjected to the normal process of scrutiny by the scientific community.... If you have no connections ... it is impossible to get the information." (Ontario, 1978/81, 24 January 1980, p. 19).
In AECL documents, officials "are pleased to acknowledge the work of the many participants in the program and their cooperation in providing access to, as yet, unpublished information." (Boulton and Gibson, 1979)."On June 5, 1978 a joint statement was tabled . . . in the House of Commons and . . . in the Ontario Legislature.... research on immobilization and disposal [of spent fuel] was assigned to AECL as a federal responsibility." (Ontario, 1980b, p. 13).
This statement, based on Ottawa's green paper (Canada, 1977), was announced before the Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning or the Standing Committee on National Resources and Public Works had a chance to deliver recommendations on the subject . See note 87."AECL compounded its credibility problem by its one-sided, overly positive and broadly pro-nuclear presentations of information." (Ontario, 1980b, p. 26). A classic example of AECL's public relations material is a booklet entitled "Radiation Is Part of Your Life," satirized in the Ottawa Citizen on 9 May 1981 ("Why Worry About Something You Can't Escape? -- AECL" by Don Butler).
Canada (1979). "One of the major problems AECL must overcome is the public's perception that its entire program . . . is biased by its commitment to nuclear power and consequent desire to show that waste disposal is not an insuperable problem." (Ontario , 1980b, p. 26).
"At its inception the program appeared to enshrine the right of any community to veto a proposed repository in its vicinity.... [However], it is most likely that government will ultimately have to choose . . . the siting of what will be perceived as a garbage dump for frightening nuclear poisons." (Ontario, 1980b, pp. 24-25).
"The waste disposal aspect ... cannot be dissociated from the fuel program.... Plutonium is an extremely useful material and we will be dealing in it." (AECL, 1977a, Concluding Remarks by President John Foster). See also Science Council of Canada (1979, pp. 46-50).
In Atikokan, AECL claimed "community approval" without ever holding a balanced public meeting; a petition calling for public hearings and a referendum, signed by 17 000 local people, was totally disregarded (Miyata, 1980) as was an earlier petition signed by 18 000 people in the Thunder Bay area (Canada, 1977/78, Issue No. 37, p. 17).
"Visits to M.P.s and M.P.P.s are carried out under the guise of 'informational briefings'. . . . [Those] briefed were unaware that their questions and comments were being noted as indicative of 'community approval' " (Ontario, 1980b, p. 24).Archie Aikin, ex-Vice-President of AECL and principal author of the government's green paper (Canada, 1977), was one of these (Edwards, 1978a, p. 1).
. . . back to Nuclear Wastes After AECL boycotted an ambitious three-day Conference on Nuclear Waste Management, the Temiskaming Municipal Association (representing 43 townships) voted overwhelmingly against allowing any AECL research to take place in the area.
"There are no criteria .. . no established procedure ... no assurance [of adequate] public hearings . . . no decision on the ultimate responsibility . . . no officially accepted realistic program schedule....
"Even the best and most unbiased public information program is bound to appear weak and confused. It can only reflect the true state of the program." (Ontario, 1980b, pp. 27-28).The Canadian Geoscience Council is "a group representing the major earth science societies in Canada; it is made up of . . . 12 societies . . ." (Ontario, 1978/81, 24 January 1980, p. 5).
Dr. MacQueen of the Geological Association of Canada: "The problem . . . is unique in the history of engineering and science.... it will be necessary to make very long-term predictions . . . acceptable to the scientific and engineering community, in which there is at present considerable skepticism towards nuclear power.... There are major uncertainties...." (Canada, 1977/78, Issue No. 11, Appendix NR-8). "People ... who know about these things . . . should be party to the decisions . . . and they should be . . . referees of the material that is produced. Is it good stuff . . . acceptable . . . scientifically valid . . .?" (Ontario, 1978/81, 24 January 1980: Dr. Strangway.)
"The politics of the situation . . . have partly locked us out of the soft-rock option. We are gambling that the hard-rock option will pay off, . . . it is a gamble . . . not worth taking" (Ontario, 1978/81, 24 January 1980, p. 27: Dr. Barnes).
"Each of the American witnesses . . . pinpointed the lack of criteria . . . as the glaring weakness of the Canadian program. In the words of one, 'developing a proposal without criteria is like drawing the target around a dart after it has been thrown'." (Ontario, 1980b, p. 33).
The British Columbia Medical Association has called for "significant medical input" (Transitions, June 1978). "Canadians cannot continue to allow vested interest Ministries and regulatory bodies to promulgate maximum permissible [radiation] dose limits." (Woollard and Young, 1980, p. 277).Dissenting Opinion on the transportation of nuclear wastes (Ontario, 1980b, pp. 34-36). See also Hamilton and Resnikoff (1980).
AECL did some immobilization of liquid wastes 20 years ago. Immobilization of spent fuel is an entirely different problem, on which research has barely begun (Boulton and Gibson, 1979, pp. 19-21). Since AECL plans to eventually separate plutonium (note 107), however, half of AECL's current immobilization budget still goes to the glassification of liquid wastes.
Accidents during immobilization or emplacement can cause severe contamination, making subsequent human access dangerous (note 90).
Prior to the green paper (Canada, 1977), AECL never advocated irretrievable storage (Edwards, 1978a, pp. 35-36).
"Many experts . . . have severe reservations about the safety of [geologic] disposal operations.... Many feel that it will be extremely difficult, and some would go so far as to say that it is impossible, to obtain the guarantees which would be necessary to justify highly active waste being allowed to pass beyond control." (OECD, 1973, pp. 1173-74).
. . . back to Nuclear Wastes "The long-term impermeability of tailings basins ... cannot be guaranteed....
"The Board finds little . . . confidence in the use of synthetic membranes, asphalt, cement or chemical means . . . to inhibit water infiltration in the long term." (Ontario Environmental Assessment Board, 1979).
In 1978, Eldorado Nuclear Ltd. proposed "a bentonite-sand blanket ... with an overlay of 1.7 meters of fill.... There was no evidence that this would ensure the integrity of the blanket.... The effects of freak weather situations . . . cannot be determined without extensive field testing" (Canada, 1978b).Fixing tailings (the slimes) in cement or asphalt is briefly considered by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1979, pp. 8-24).
Difficulties here include "loss of tailings dust during loading, shipment, and unloading"; and avoidance of ground-water contamination. Lining the pit would be costly, "from $100 million to $140 million," and perhaps ineffective. (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979, pp. 8- 17).
Removing the thorium and radium from the tailings would drastically reduce the scale of the problem (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979, pp. 8-24).
"Dramatic examples of large radiation releases from tailings areas in the past [include] the desolated environment around the closed Rum Jungle uranium mine in the Northern Territory of Australia . . . the elevation of Radium-226 levels and acidification of lakes in the Elliot Lake region . . . [and] the failure of the 'state of the art' uranium tailings dam [in Churchrock, New Mexico] in 1979" (Woollard and Young, 1980, p. 90).
International marketing arrangements used to "fix" the price of uranium in the early 1970s (Stewart, 1980) could finance an international program of tailings disposal research by adding a surcharge to the international price of uranium.
"It is difficult to assess the allegations of some critics of nuclear power that the cost of waste disposal will be sufficient to compromise the currently assumed advantage of nuclear power over coal. The Committee could not find in any of the agencies currently responsible for pieces of the program satisfactory and complete answers on financial details." (Ontario, 1980b, p. 21).
The real return to capital invested by Ontario Hydro is approximately 3.5 percent (after inflation). In the private sector it is about 7.5 percent. The Treasury Board recommends the latter figure to evaluate federal investments, so that the public sector does not compete unfairly for scarce capital. But with a large enough return rate, nuclear power becomes uncompetitive with coal. Gibbons (1981) argues that 7.5 percent is large enough.
"A comprehensive international control system for the [strategic materials associated with] civilian nuclear power ... would be possible only in a climate of general disarmament." (United Kingdom, 1976, paragraph 166).
The CANDU is considered the most dangerous power reactor on the world market from a proliferation perspective (Nuclear Energy Policy, 1977, p. 279; Edwards and Dyne, 1979).
See also Kistiakowski et al. (1976).
. . . back to Conclusion Extensive contamination already exists in some parts of Canada (Sanger, 1981; Ontario, 1976).
"One could well view the allowable exposure to the public from nuclear facilities as [tantamount] to allowing an industrially-induced epidemic of cancer." (Woollard and Young, 1980, p. 283).
"Nuclear power is by its very nature potentially dangerous, and, therefore, one must continually question whether the safeguards already in place are sufficient." (Kemeney et al., 1979, p. 9).
CANDU reactors routinely release large quantities of tritium and carbon-14. "Carbon-14 and tritium are of comparable and special concerns for similar reasons. First, they each have long half-lives: 5,730 years for carbon-14 and 12.3 years for tritium. Long half-lives allow them to accumulate in the environment around a reactor and in the global biosphere. Second, they are easily incorporated into human tissue." (Ontario, 1980d, p. 15).
"If nuclear power . . . had been in widespread use at the time of the last war . . . some areas of central Europe would still be uninhabitable." (United Kingdom, 1976, p. 124). See also Fetter and Tsipis (1981).
To avoid bankruptcy, Duke Power cancelled a three-unit nuclear station on which $440 million was already spent. Carl Horn, Chairman of the Board, said "We simply cannot reasonably afford to build them.... It's not my function to liquidate the company." (New York Times, 8 March 1981).
An accident in a multi-reactor complex (Pickering or Bruce) could cause prolonged blackouts ("A Reactor Blockage," Globe and Mail 23 January 1981).
Adams, Ian. (1980) "Nazi A-Bomb." Today Magazine (5 July).Alternatives. (1979) "Soft Energy Paths for Canada, Part I." (Summer/Fall).
Alternatives. (1980) "Soft Energy Paths for Canada, Part II." (Winter).
Anderson, R.S. (1975) "From Saha to Baba." Montreal: McGill University, Centre for Developing Areas Studies.
Argonne National Laboratory. (1975) "A Brief Survey of Considerations Involved in Introducing CANDU Reactors into the U.S." Argonne, Ill.
Atomic Energy Control Board. (1974) "Legislation in Canada Respecting Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage," by J.F.D. McIsaac. AECB 1076. Ottawa.
Atomic Energy Control Board. (1978a) "Five Internal Documents on CANDU Safety." Montreal: CCNR.
Atomic Energy Control Board. (1978b) "Behaviour of Concrete Containment Under Over-Pressure Conditions," by R.J. Atchison, G.J.K. Asmis, and F.R. Campbell. AECB-1154. Ottawa.
Atomic Energy Control Board. (1980a) "Behaviour of Prestressed Concrete Containment Structures," by J. G. MacGregor, D.W. Murray, and S.H. Simmonds. INFO-0031. Ottawa.
Atomic Energy Control Board. (1980b) "Requirements for the Safety Analysis of CANDU Nuclear Power Plants," Draft Licensing Guide No. 39. Ottawa.
Atomic Energy Control Board. (1981) "Long Term Aspects of Uranium Tailings Management," Consultative Document C-1, 8 January. Ottawa. 256 Edwards
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. (1977a) "Seminar: Proposed Canadian Fuel Cycle Program." Chalk River.
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. (1977b) "Nuclear Power: The Canadian Issues." AECL-5800. Chalk River.
Ayres, Russell W. (1975) "Policing Plutonium: The Civil Liberties Fallout." Harvard Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Law Review 10 (Spring): 369-443.
Boulton, J. and Gibson, A.R. (1979) "First Annual Report of the Canadian Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program." AECL-6443. Chalk River: AECL.
Bredehoeft, J.D., et al. (1978) "Geologic Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes -- Earth-Science Perspectives." Geological Survey Circular 779. Arlington: U.S. Geological Survey.
Brooks, David B. (1978) Economic Impact of Low Energy Growth in Canada: An Initial Analysis. Discussion Paper No. 126. Ottawa: Economic Council of Canada.
Brooks, David B. (1981) Zero Energy Growth for Canada. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart.
Brown, J.B. and Oncavage, M.P. (1980) "Steam Generator Repair and Nuclear Power Costs: A Generic Problem." Miami: Florida International University.
Burns, M. M. , et al. (1977) "Report to the New Zealand Government." Fact Finding Group on Nuclear Power. Wellington, N.Z.
California Energy Resources Development and Conservation Commission. (1977) "Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing and High-Level Waste Disposal: Interim Report." Sacramento.
California Energy Resources Development and Conservation Commission. (1978) "Status of Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing, Spent Fuel Storage, and High-Level Waste Disposal: Overview and Summary." Sacramento.
California Public Utilities Commission. (1980) "Energy Efficiency and the Utilities: New Directions." Sacramento.
Canada. (1977) Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. The Management of Canada's Nuclear Wastes, by A.M. Aikin, J.M. Harrison and F.K. Hare, Report EP 77-6. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
Canada. (1977/78) Parliament. House of Commons. Standing Committee on National Resources and Public Works. Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence. Nuclear Waste Hearings. Ottawa, 7 February.
Canada. (1978a) Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. Energy Futures for Canadians (Summary) (the LEAP Report), by J.E. Gander and F.W. Belaire. EP 78-2. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
Canada. (1978b) Environmental Assessment Panel. Report on the Port Granby Uranium Refinery Proposal . Ottawa: Environment Canada.
Canada. (1978c) Parliament. House of Commons. Standing Committee on Public Accounts. Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence. "First (Atomic Energy of Canada Limited) Report." Ottawa, 17 March.
Canada. (1979) Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste: The Canadian Geoscience Program, prepared by the Canadian Geosciences Council, ed. C.R. Barnes. Geological Survey Paper 79 - 10. Ottawa.
Canada. (1981a) Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. Nuclear Policy Review Background Papers. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
Canada. (1981b) Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. "Policy Review of the Nuclear Power Industry in Canada." Draft Report. [Draft report available from CCNR in Montreal.]
Canada. (1981c) Parliament. House of Commons. Special Committee on Alternative Energy and Oil Substitution. Energy Alternatives. Report to the Committee. Ottawa.
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. (1977) "Time to Stop and Think." Brief addressed to P.E. Trudeau, delivered to Alastair Gillespie 27 May 1977. Montreal.
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. (1979) "Cases of Misinformation and Attempted Suppression by Canadian Nuclear Institutions and Representatives." Dossier presented to the Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs 5 November. Montreal.
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. (1980a) "Findings on Uranium Tailings and Nuclear Waste Disposal." Montreal.
Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. (1980b) "Democracy on the Rocks: No Public Access to Ottawa's Internal Review of Nuclear Power in Canada." Montreal.
Cohen, Bernard L. (1977) "The Disposal of Radioactive Wastes from Fission Reactors." Scientific American 236 (June): 21 -31.
Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation. (1980) The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, BEIR III. Report to the National Academy of Sciences. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Conway, C., et al. (1978) Energy Planning in a Conserver Society: The Future's Not What It Used To Be . Toronto: Energy Probe.
Edwards, Gordon. (1976) "Nuclear Power: A New Dimension in Politics." Alternatives 5 (Spring).
Edwards, Gordon. (1978a) "Nuclear Wastes: What, Me Worry?" Brief to House of Commons Standing Committee on National Resources and Public Works. Montreal: CCNR.
Edwards, Gordon. (1978b) "Nuclear Wastes: An Overview." Testimony to the Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs, October 1978.
Edwards, Gordon. (1980) "Ontario Legislature Investigates Nuclear Safety." In Nuclear Safety: Two Critical Papers . Montreal: CCNR.
Edwards, G. and Dyne, P.. (1979) Correspondence on Nuclear Weapons and Reactor Grade Plutonium. Montreal: CCNR.
Edwards, G. and Hatfield, R. (1980/81) Correspondence on the Safety of Lepreau-1. Montreal: CCNR.
Eggleston, Wilfrid E. (1965) Canada's Nuclear Story. Toronto: Clarke, Irwin.
Emerson Consultants. (1980) Work Sampling Study: Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station. Fredericton: N.B. Electric Power Commission.
Fetter, Steven A. and Tsipis, Kosta. (1981) "Catastrophic Releases of Radioactivity." Scientific American 244 (April): 41-47.
Gibbons, J.O. (1981)Electric Heating: Does It Make Sense for Ontario? Toronto: Energy Probe.
Glauberman, H. and Manion, W.J. (1977) "Technical and Economic Aspects of Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning," presented to the International Conference on Nuclear Power and Its Fuel Cycle, May. IAEA-CN36/16. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency.
Hamilton, Mina and Resnikoff, Marvin. (1980) "Shipping Casks: Are They Safe?" Buffalo: Sierra Club.
Harding, Jim. (1978a) "Review of Recent Cogeneration Studies." Soft Energy Notes 1, No. 2.
Harding, Jim. (1978b) "Decommissioning: A Problem a Long Way from a Solution." Not Man Apart 8 (October/November).
Harding, Jim. (1980)"Selling Savings." Soft Energy Notes 3, No. 4.
Hatcher, S.R. (1980) "Review of the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program." TR-119. Chalk River: AECL.
Hughes, E.O. and Greenwood, J.W. (1960) "Contamination and Cleanup of NRU." Nucleonics 18 (18 January).
Hydro-Quebec. (1980) Une stratégie pour la décennie 80. Montreal, 16 December.
Inter-Church Uranium Committee. (1981) Atoms for War and Peace: The Saskatchewan Connection, proceedings of a Conference held 13-15 February. Saskatoon.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (1979) The Decommissioning of Nuclear Plants . Vienna, December 1979.
Kemeney, J.G., et al. (1979) The Accident at Three Mile Island: Report of the President's Commission. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Kistiakowski, G., et al. (1976) The Peaceful Atom Goes to War, transcript of a TV program transmitted by Granada TV, 29 March.
Komanoff, Charles. (1981) Power Plant Cost Escalation. Nuclear and Coal Capital Costs, Regulation, and Economics. New York: Komanoff Energy Associates.
Lajambe, H. (1979) "Hélio-Québec: l'autonomie énergétique du Québec dans une perspective écologique." (English version: Energy Autonomy for Quebec from an Ecological Perspective.) St. Bruno, Quebec: Hélio-Québec.
Landa, E. (1980) "Isolation of Uranium Mill Tailings and Their Component Radionuclides from the Biosphere -- Some Earth Science Perspectives." Geological Survey Circular 814. Arlington: U.S. Geological Survey.
Leonard and Partners. (1978) Economic Impact of Nuclear Energy Industry in Canada . Study prepared for the Canadian Nuclear Association, September. Toronto: CNA.
Lewis, H.W., et al. (1978) Risk Assessment Review Group Report. A critique of the Rasmussen Report (WASH- 1400) prepared for the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Agency. Washington, D.C.: NRC.
Lisak, D. (1979a) "Quebec's Reactor: How Safe Is It?" Interview with Jean-Paul Dietrich, Hydro-Quebec nuclear safety engineer. Gazette (4 June).
Lisak, D. (1979b) "No One Wants to Own This Nuclear Lemon." Gazette (23 June).
Lovins, Amory B. (1977) "Comparative Capital Costs and the Role of Electrification." In Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable Peace, pp. 133-44. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.
Lovins, Amory B. and Lovins, L. Hunter (1980) "The Irrelevance of Nuclear Power." In Energy/War: Breaking the Nuclear Link, Chapter 4. San Francisco: Friends of the Earth.
MacLeod, G.K. (1980) "Management of Radiologic Emergencies." Presented to a Seminar on the Roles of Local and State Health Departments in the Management of Radiologic Emergencies, 2 May. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health.
Manion, W.J. and LaGuardia, T. S. ( 1 976) "An Engineering Evaluation of Nuclear Power Reactor Decommissioning Alternatives." AIF/NESP-009, November. Washington, D.C.: Atomic Industrial Forum.
Marshall, Eliot. (1981) "New A-Bomb Studies Alter Radiation Estimates." Science 212 (22 May): 900-903.
McKay, Paul. (1981) "The Sword of Islam." Birch Bark Alliance (Winter): 6-7.
Metzger, H. Peter. (1972) The Atomic Establishment. New York: Simon and Shuster.
Middleton Associates. (1977) "Alternatives to Ontario Hydro's Generation Program." Toronto: Government of Ontario.
Miyata, B. (1980) "Nuclear Wastes in Canada: The Atikokan Experience." Brief to the Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs, 15 January. Montreal: CCNR.
Nuclear Energy Policy Study Group. (1977) Nuclear Power: Issues and Choices. A Ford/Mitre Report. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (1979) Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling, NUREG-0511, two volumes. Washington, D.C.
Ontario Environmental Assessment Board. (1979) The Expansion of the Uranium Mines in the Elliot Lake Area, Final Report. Toronto: Government of Ontario.
Ontario. (1976) Ministry of the Environment. Status Report: Water Population in the Serpent River Basin. Toronto: Government of Ontario.
Ontario. (1977/78) Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning. Transcripts. Debate Stage on Nuclear Power. Toronto, Queen's Park. Ontario. (1978) Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning. A Race Against Time. Interim Report on Nuclear Power. Toronto: Government of Ontario.
Ontario. (1978/81) Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs. Transcripts. Hearings on Nuclear Power. Toronto: Queen's Park.
Ontario. (1979a) Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs. Special Report on the Need for Electrical Capacity. Toronto. Ontario. (1979b) Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs. The Safety of Ontario's Nuclear Reactors: Interim Report. Toronto.
Ontario. (1980a) Royal Commission on Electrical Power Planning. Report. 9 volumes. Toronto: Government of Ontario.
Ontario. (1980b) Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs. The Management of Nuclear Fuel Waste: Final Report. Toronto.
Ontario. (1980c) Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs. Mining, Milling and Refining of Uranium in Ontario: Final Report. Toronto.
Ontario. (1980d) Select Committee on Ontario Hydro Affairs. The Safety of Ontario's Nuclear Reactors: Final Report. Toronto.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1973) Radioactive Wastes From Fuel Reprocessing . Paris: OECD.
Patterson, Walter C. (1976) Nuclear Power. London: Penguin.
Puttagunta, V.R. (1975) "Temperature Distribution of the Energy Consumed as Heat in Canada." Pinawa, Manitoba: AECL.
Québec. Ministère de l'énergie et des ressources. (1980) Energy Systems Management. Montreal: Bureau des économies d'énergie.
Rasmussen, N.C., et al. (1975) "Reactor Safety Study." WASH-1400, NUREG 75/014. Washington, D.C.: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robinson, J., et al. (1977) "Canadian Energy Futures: Alternative Energy Scenarios 1974-2025." Workgroup on Canadian Energy Policy. Downsview: York University.
Rogers, J.T. (1979) "CANDU Moderator Provides Ultimate Heat Sink in a LOCA. "Nuclear Engineering International 24 (January): 38-41.
Rogovin, M., et al. (1980) "Three Mile Island: A Report to the Commissioners and to the Public." NRC Special Inquiry Group. Washington, D.C.: Nuclear Regulatory Agency.
Royal Society of Canada. (1979) Nuclear Issues in the Canadian Energy Context, Proceedings of a conference held in Vancouver in March. Ottawa.
Rubin, Norm. (1980) What Keeps Us From Freezing in the Dark: A Break-Down of Canada's Secondary Energy Consumption by Fuel Type (1977) . Toronto: Energy Probe.
Sanger, P. (1981) Blind Faith. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.
Sant, R.W. (1979) "The Least-Cost Energy Strategy: Minimizing Consumer Costs Through Competition." Energy Productivity Centre, Mellon Institute. Arlington: Carnegie-Mellon University.
Schatz, F. (1980) "Cracking Analysis and Repair Procedure." Report to the N.B. Electric Power Commission, 2 October. Fredericton. 262 Edwards
Science Council of Canada. (1977) Canada as a Conserver Society: Resource Uncertainties and the Need for New Technologies. Report No. 27. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
Science Council. (1979) Roads to Energy Self-Reliance: The Necessary National Demonstrations. Report No. 30. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
Sissingh, R.A.P. and Alpay, C. (1981) "Nuclear Decommissioning Cost Study." Toronto: Ontario Hydro.
Solar Energy Research Institute. (1981) A New Prosperity: Toward A Solar Energy Future . Final Report. Andover, Mass.: Brick House.
Stephens, J.J., Jr. and Pohl, R.O. (1977) "Trace Elements in Reactor Steels: Implications for Decommissioning." Materials Science Centre Report No. 2882. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University.
Stewart, L.R. (1980) "An Analysis and Evaluation of Canada's Role in the International Uranium Cartel." Presented at the Meetings of Canadian Political Science Association, Montreal, 2 June. Kingston, Queen's University.
Torrie, R.D. (1977) Half-Life: Nuclear Power and Future Society. Revised January 1980. Ottawa: InfoEarth.
Transitions. (1978) Periodical Tabloid on Canadian Nuclear Issues. Montreal: CCNR.
Trudeau, P.E., The Right Honourable. (1978) Speech to the United Nations General Assembly, Special Session on Disarmament, 26 May.
Uffen, Robert J. (1977) "Let's Go Slowly on a Nuclear Power Program Until We've Solved Waste Problems." Science Forum 10 (October): 3-8.
United Kingdom. (1976) Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. Nuclear Power and the Environment. Sixth Report. London: HMSO. Chairman: Sir Brian Flowers.
U.S. (1977) Comptroller General. "Cleaning Up the Remains of Nuclear Facilities: A Multibillion Dollar Problem." Report to the U.S. Congress, 16 June. Washington, D.C.: General Accounting Office.
U.S. (1978) Congress. "Nuclear Power Costs." Report of the Committee on Government Operations, 12 April. Washington, D.C.
U.S. (1980) Department of Energy. "Low Energy Futures for the United States," prepared by Technology + Economics Ltd., DOE/PE/ 70047-01, June. Washington, D.C.
Unsworth, G.W. (1977) "Decommissioning of the CANDU-PHW Reactor." AECL-5687. Chalk River: AECL.
Vastokas, R., et al. (1977) "Locating a Fuel Cycle Centre: Comments from Madoc." Brief to the Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning. Montreal: CCNR.
Virginia Electric and Power Corporation. (1980) Steam Generator Repair Program for the Surry Power Station Unit No. 2, Final Report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Richmond, Virginia.
Williams, Robert H. (1978) "Industrial Cogeneration." Annual Review of Energy 3: 313-56.
Wood, G. and Blair, D. (1981) CANDU: A Review of Performance, Cost and Safety, Glendon Energy Series No. 1. Streetsville, Ontario: Glendon Publications.
Woollard, R.F., and Young, E.R. (1979) "Health Dangers of the Nuclear Fuel Chain." A Bibliography/Literature Review. Vancouver: B.C. Medical Association.
Woollard, R.F. and Young, E.R. (1980) "The Health Dangers of Uranium Mining and Jurisdictional Questions." Summary Argument to the B.C. Royal Commission on Uranium Mining. Vancouver: B.C. Medical Association.
Zeigler, Donald J.; Brunn, Stanley D.; and Johnson, James H., Jr. (1981) "Evacuation From a Nuclear Technological Disaster." The Geographical Review 71 (January).
. . . back to Table of Contents
