The front page of the Leader-Post today says “Saskboy Was Right” (I may be paraphrasing a little). I’m not usually one to toot my own horn (okay, sometimes), but when I do get something (very) right, I feel a blog is an ideal place to note the fact. If Saskatchewan’s Sask Party government had simply come to me for my thoughts on what a nuclear power plant would do for the province, they’d have saved a lot of money and time consulting the public.
It’s at times like this when I miss my blog’s archives (currently offline when I write this, but now back 5 years later), but fortunately there’s Google’s cache available to remind everyone that what I was saying 6 months ago matches the current position of the Saskatchewan Party government. Am I a fortune teller? No, I can just do simple math, and apparently it takes millions of dollars of study for the Sask Party do so the same. Plus I read the news in Ontario, and apparently they don’t pick up the Toronto Star at any point in the week. Maybe they were on vacation at the time, I know I was when I saw it announced by Ontario that it’d cost $25 Billion for nuclear power plants of the kind proposed for Saskatchewan!
I must also point out that the Saskatchewan Chamber of Commerce also thinks that increasing everyone’s tax/power bills, is good for business in the province of Saskatchewan. I am also slightly terrified that an organization with “Chamber of Commerce” in their name, is incapable of doing math as well as me, or is being intentionally dishonest.
A portion of a Google search result, and I couldn’t agree more!
Anti-nuclear opinions dominate uranium forum in Regina
10 Jun 2009 … Ingrid Alesich of Clean Green Saskatchewan said the UDP process “lacks …. Saskboy…
Fortunately I did provide myself to the process, and was among the vast majority of Saskatchewan residents who formally objected to higher energy bills from an adoption of nuclear power generation as the energy plan of the next decade.
Here’s an out-of-print story about CCS technology.
The right wing is decidedly depressed that we’re not going further into debt in Saskatchewan to give a handout to Bruce Power.
The UDP report (a frustrating PDF file with copy-protection!), containing input from Dr. Florizone. He claimed this week that with “clarity” on carbon pricing, nuclear would then possibly become economically viable over coal electricity generation. The Premier of Saskatchewan kindly provided clarity last week, if you’d like to watch. He’s opposed to carbon pricing systems like Cap-and-Trade. Is that clarified for you Dr. Florizone?
Renewable power and energy conservation will always be cheaper and cleaner than nuclear in the long term, that’s the bottom line. Nuclear power is based on uranium, a non-renewable resource, so the supply will always be getting smaller, meaning price will always increase if demand stays constant or increases as predicted.
Kevin at the Leader-Post had a bitter editorial on what was obviously the demise of his nuclear power plant aspirations. Here’s my reply:
I find it offensive that you’d use the word “greenies” and deride renewable energy sources. People are concerned about nuclear power for more than just ecological reasons, it’s also destructive economically. You should look into what Germany is doing with solar and wind energy, and how Ontario recently rejected new nuclear power plants because their more populous province could not afford such foolishness.