Ontario Municipal Election 2022

Responses from City of Pickering Municipal Election Candidates

Candidate responses to:

1. Do you believe that OPG should build above-ground, attack-resistant, reinforced concrete vaults at the Bruce, Darlington and Pickering Nuclear Stations for the safer interim storage of its high-level radioactive nuclear wastes?

2. Do you believe that OPG should immediately start dismantling the Pickering Nuclear Station after it is shut down and complete this work as expeditiously as possible?

Mayor

Brad Nazar

Question 1: Undecided

Question 2: Yes

I selected undecided because I’m fine with a structure being built, but I don’t want more OPG buildings at Pickering waterfront. My concern with OPG creating more structures near the waterfront would be the impact it could have on a quicker return to public use after the closure of the facility. An interim structure turning into a permanent one. If this structure were to be built, I would want it away from the Pickering waterfront so there is one less barrier to returning the waterfront to the people.

Returning the waterfront to the people of Pickering should be done as quickly and safely as possible after the shutdown of Pickering.

Kevin Ashe

Question 1: Undecided

Question 2: Yes

Regional Councillor

Ali Marani

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Both of these questions have to be answered with more than yes or no. With respect to storage, I think our goal should be to implement the NWMO’s suggestion to build a deep geological repository for the long term internment of spent nuclear bundles. It is important to remember than CANDU reactors use solid state fuel that is neither gaseous or combustible under normal conditions. While reinforced concrete holding areas are a good interim solution, I would be more inclined to encourage OPG and Bruce Power to expedite construction of a permanent repository.

With regards to decommissioning Pickering Nuclear, this process will take decades. Removing the spent and in-use fuel alone is going to be a drawn out process, especially considering the security that will be required to move that quality of high-grade material. The various turbines, pipes and tubing, pumps etc that make up the internals of the plant will be radioactive and will require specialized equipment to safely disassemble and remove without endangering public health. The eventual dismantling of the buildings and remediation of the ground will not happen until all potentially hazardous materials are gone from the site. I don’t expect this to happen quickly. I am in favour however, or beginning the decommissioning process immediately once the plant’s CNSC Certificate expires in 2028. I don’t see, however, how we can safely complete this process by 2035 as you’ve suggested.

Gary Strange

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Undecided

I believe the station should be repurposed and I would prefer to see what those alternatives are prior to supporting immediate dismantling. I participated in a forum several years ago on this subject and would like to better understand what alternatives are now available as options.

Maurice Brenner

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Speaking specifically regarding the PNGS, these are the longest serving CANDU Reactors and upon its shutdown it will take decades for full dismantling. But the process must begin commencing with the shutdown.

Peter Rodrigues

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

I am shocked that after many decades, there is no final solution about nuclear waste!

Councillor

Anthony Yacub

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: No

There are plans to build a cancer treatment centre with isotopes using the same facility. I would support the idea of creating sustainable, well-paying jobs to keep up with the cost of living whilst striving to tackle a challenging issue such as cancer. We as a City should do our part to help conquer cancer which takes our closest family and friends.

I support transitioning away from Nuclear Power to this Cancer Research Facility.

Damian Williams

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

In the safest way possible

Darshan Sritharan

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Dave Currie

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Radioactive waste should not be stored in Pickering and any decisions made related to the Pickering Nuclear Station must have the safety of residents as the top priority.

George Turner

Question 1: No

Question 2: No

OPG is the current organization to ask that question. They are the experts in that topic

Lisa Robinson

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Mara Nagy

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Tony Harold

Question 1: Undecided

Question 2: Yes

Safe storage of radioactive materials is of paramount concern. However, are above ground, attack proof, re-inforced concrete storage facilities the best method for dealing with such waste storage, or are there other alternatives that are of the same or better capability?

The dismantling of the Pickering NS must be done very carefully in order to ensure a safe environment for all. There is the added concern of the workers and their employment at the plant. While on balance there may be an offset due to workers required to dismantle the plant, there are still job losses, as, for example, an accountant cannot be instantly transferred to a construction worker. To that end, what is the Ontario Clean Air Alliance’s position on the future of the current workforce at the PNG in light of OCAA’s desire to immediately dismantle the plant?
Please respond.
Thank-you

Zeynab Kazi

Question 1: Yes

Question 2: Yes

Question 1 Background Information:

The total radioactivity of the nuclear wastes stored at the Bruce, Darlington and Pickering Nuclear Stations is 700 times greater than the total radiation released to the atmosphere by the Fukushima accident in 2011.

The International Joint Commission’s Great Lakes Water Quality Board is calling for Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) nuclear waste storage facilities to be “hardened” and located away from shorelines to avoid them being compromised by flooding and erosion.

According to a report prepared for OPG, the total capital cost of building above-ground, attack-resistant, reinforced concrete vaults at the Bruce, Darlington and Pickering Nuclear Stations would be approximately $1 billion. This safer interim solution can be fully paid for by OPG’s nuclear waste storage fund, which has a market value of $11.3 billion.

In Germany, six nuclear stations have hardened storage facilities. The concrete walls and roofs of these facilities are 1.2 to 1.3 metres thick.

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization is still decades away from having an operational long-term storage site for high-level radioactive waste, and its plans are opposed by many Indigenous communities and organizations in the areas it is considering. This means that safer interim storage solutions are needed for the waste that is stored at our nuclear stations.

For more information, please read our report: A Safer Interim Storage Solution for Ontario’s Nuclear Wastes.

Question 2 Background Information:

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) wants to delay the dismantling of the Pickering Nuclear Station for 30 years after it is shut down even though the International Atomic Energy Agency says that immediate dismantling is “the preferred decommissioning strategy” for nuclear plants.

While delaying the station’s dismantling for 30 years is in OPG’s financial self-interest, it is not in the best interests of its workers, the City of Pickering, the Town of Ajax or Ontario’s economy.

Immediate dismantling will allow the existing Pickering Nuclear Station workers, who know this one-of-a-kind station best, to be involved in its dismantling. It will create 16,000 person-years of employment at the Pickering site over the first decade after it is shut down.

Immediate dismantling will also permit most of the 600-acre waterfront site to be returned to the local community by 2035 for parkland, recreational facilities, dining, entertainment, housing or other employment uses.

OPG already has more than enough money in its nuclear decommissioning fund to pay for the immediate dismantling of the Pickering Nuclear Station.

In January 2020, Pickering City Council unanimously passed a resolution calling for the Pickering Nuclear Station to be dismantled as “expeditiously as possible” after it is shut down.

For more information, please read our report: Making the Right Choice for Pickering’s Waterfront.