• TroyOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are obviously some roadblocks. We still don’t have a good waste storage facility (all efforts to find one have apparently been stalled by NIMBYism or land rights or, ironically, environmentalism). We also have NIMBYism for actual construction of the plants themselves. And the provinces most likely to benefit are Saskatchewan and Alberta, but the oil lobby is too strong there. But, hey, we can dream right.

    • Samus Crankpork@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      We don’t have waste storage for the greenhouse gasses produced by fossil fuel plants either but Nuclear opponents never bring that up.

    • tunetardis
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bear in mind that there is going to be nimby opposition to pretty much any new power project. I’ve seen it where I live with wind farms, for example, and it unfortunately does work, leading to delays, downscaling, and outright cancellation. I guess the thing is that with nuclear or hydro, you tend to run into a few colossal battles to get the things built, whereas with wind, you’re looking at hundreds of smaller clashes. Solar seems a little less contentious, but it’s also the least reliable energy source, meaning you will have to look at large-scale energy storage projects which, again, will attract a nimby element.

    • Obi@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      NIMBY for waste storage? You’d expect Canada to be one of the countries where that’s the least of the issues, what with having infinite land in the north.

      • TroyOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Try convincing any remote community, native or otherwise, that you’re building a nuclear waste facility. And if not near enough a community, then you’re looking at having to build out an entirely new community and infrastructure to supply it.

        There’s been some attempts – research storage facilities like the one in Pinawa, MB, but they’ve all been shut down.

        • Obi@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          For sure I understand it’s more tricky than just going out in the woods making a big pit and calling it a day (though the image I had in my mind was pretty close to that if I’m being honest). Just feels like there’s plenty of space far enough from anyone’s backyard but you make a good point about having to then supply that site.

          Made me question where France was putting theirs and it’s in l’Aube, rural area but definitely not empty by any means. Except for the real nasty stuff that’s being temporarily kept by the producers on-site until they apparently plan to bury them in a deep geological argile formation (projet cigéo).

    • CanadaPlus@futurology.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Good old environmentalism. Never define what it is exactly, and fight yourself getting there as a result. I wonder if there’s a parallel timeline where global warming, species preservation, protecting the public from toxins and being anti-science all have their own separate lobbies, that occasionally collaborate when they align.