At the end of March, an international coalition of environmental groups took to the streets in Brussels, Belgium to protest the international Nuclear Energy Summit organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Activists dressed in fairy and wizard costumes brandished neon pink signs stating “Nuclear Fairy Tales = Climate Crisis,” while others lay on the ground covered in pink dust.
Along with the demonstration, over 600 civil society groups, including 11 signatories from New Brunswick, launched a declaration stating that the expansion of nuclear power is not the solution to the climate crisis.
The declaration, Safe, affordable and climate-friendly energy for all, drawn up by Climate Action Network Europe, argues that nuclear power is not the answer to the planet’s multitude of social, environmental, and economic crises. Nuclear energy is too slow to tackle the climate emergency, much more expensive than renewables, and dangerous.
The civil society statement concludes: “We are living in a climate emergency. Time is precious, and too many governments are wasting it with nuclear energy fairy tales. What we demand is a just transition towards a safe, renewable and affordable energy system that secures jobs and protects life on our planet.”
Eleven groups from New Brunswick were among the 130 Canadian signatories: the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick, the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, the Council of Canadians Fredericton Chapter, Extinction Rebellion New Brunswick, Imaginons la Péninsule acadienne autrement, the New Brunswick Anti-Shale Gas Alliance, New Clear Free Solutions, Passamaquoddy Recognition Group (PRGI), Peace NB, Sustainable Energy Group, and the Wolastoq Grand Council.
However, the provincial government has made it clear that nuclear will have a role in the province’s energy transition. In December 2023, the province launched Powering our Economy and the World with Clean Energy. The government commitments include affordability, energy security and reliability, economic growth, and regulatory reform. A core strategy is the addition of “600 MW of small modular nuclear reactors at the Point Lepreau Generating Station by 2035.” The action plan states that the expansion of nuclear through SMRs is “an essential element to meet the demand and achieve a clean energy grid.”
Since 2021, the provincial government has given $25 million to ARC, a company developing a design for a 100-megawatt liquid sodium-cooled fast reactor for the Lepreau site. The federal government gave an additional $7 million to ARC as well as $50.5 million for the Moltex company to develop a 300-megawatt molten salt reactor and plutonium reprocessing facility for the Lepreau site.
Unlike renewables, nuclear energy has a negative experience curve, meaning that the price will rise higher as more nuclear technology is developed. Neither ARC nor Moltex have been clear on how much it will cost to build their reactors; however, bankers at the IAEA summit stated that nuclear energy’s price tag is too high. Nuclear energy projects in Western economies have “suffered numerous construction delays and ballooning costs in recent decades.” Proposed SMRs are supposed to help cut costs, but this is yet to be proven.
Concerns continue about the storage of long-term radioactive waste, the possibilities of a meltdown, and the contamination of the environment through spent fuel reprocessing. The government’s support for the development of SMRs continues to receive backlash from concerned citizens, environmental and social groups, and Indigenous groups around the province and across the country.
In a statement issued by the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, one of the groups that signed the international declaration, president Gordon Edwards said: “Nuclear power is a few decades of electricity followed by a 10 million year headache. No thanks!”
Susan O’Donnell with the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development – New Brunswick (CRED-NB), stated that “dirty and non-renewable energy sources including nuclear and fossil fuels are not required in future because renewable energy with storage is available now.”
The Peskotomuhkati Nation and Wolastoq Grand Council have decried nuclear expansion in New Brunswick. They also do not provide consent for the radioactive waste to be sent to Indigenous land in Ontario, the proposed site for a deep geological repository. “Wolastoqewi-Elders define nuclear in their language as ‘Askomiw Sanaqak,’ which translates as ‘Forever Dangerous,’” due to the potential harm nuclear waste presents to flora and fauna and future generations.
The province’s energy plan leans heavily on nuclear energy, but after the recent events in Brussels, it seems hard to ignore the exorbitant danger, costs, and delays that come with these energy projects. Is nuclear the best path forward for New Brunswick or will it draw us further behind?
Emma Fackenthall is a third-year student studying Environment & Society and English and a research assistant for the CEDAR project at St. Thomas University.
