We should ban these outside energy experts. Every time one shows up at a Utility and Review Board hearing to remind us how muddled our energy practices are, it makes us look bad. This time it's about the planned $200-million-plus wood-burning power plant at Port Hawkesbury.
As if it wasn't enough that the project will devastate the forest even more than it already is, that burning wood is apparently as bad as burning coal and won't reduce greenhouse gas, and that a similar plant in New England was apparently built for half the projected cost, along comes U.S. renewable energy consultant Barry Sheingold to tell us that Nova Scotia Power Inc. hasn't done its homework on the project.
Part 1 of Pushing back on the nuclear path outlined three post-Fukushima nuclear battles in Ontario. They were the campaigns to stop the construction of two new reactors at Darlington Station, the life extension of 10 more reactors in Ontario, and efforts to prevent economically desperate communities in Northern Ontario from becoming dumping grounds for Canada's radioactive waste.
In this final part, we're headed to Eastern Canada to outline the ongoing efforts to oppose nuclear in Quebec and New Brunswick.
Point Lepreau: Down the re-furbishment rabbit hole
Being true to my inner technology geek, I have compulsively followed energy issues for years. Energy discourse is not for everyone, however. I've realized this the socially awkward way by bringing up Ontario's electricity future in casual conversation at house parties.
But with the recent one-year anniversary of the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster, forecasts abound on the prospects of nuke power surviving yet another devastating public relations catastrophe. However, in all these stories about nuclear meltdowns and the future of nuclear energy, I was struck by a significant gap: where is the Canadian content?