Author Archives: Mike Buckthought

Climate Change — One Step Forward

Posted on by
Peace and Environment News, May–June 2009
by Mike Buckthought

On April 1, Members of Parliament took a crucial step forward in tackling the climate crisis. The Climate Change Accountability Act (Bill C-311) passed second reading by a narrow margin, with 141 votes in favour and 128 against. Liberal, NDP and Bloc Québécois MPs united to back the private member’s bill introduced by MP Bruce Hyer.

The Climate Change Accountability Act will ensure that Canada adopts firm targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases, to avoid the most devastating impacts of global warming. It follows recommendations of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC urges developed countries to reduce emissions by at least 25% from 1990 levels by 2020, and at least 80% by the year 2050.

The Conservative government has set a target of a 3% reduction by 2020, with no legislation to get us there. Canadians take pride in protecting the environment, but our government has failed to show leadership. Other countries are doing much more.

The 27 members of the European Union are taking action. The EU has committed to reductions of 20% below 1990 levels by 2020, with deeper reductions if developed countries match its commitment. Norway and Costa Rica have promised to become carbon-neutral by reducing and offsetting emissions of greenhouse gases.

In the United States, the Obama administration is investing billions of dollars in renewable energy, and a comprehensive climate bill promises to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. On March 31, the House Energy and Commerce Committee released the draft American Clean Energy and Security Act. It proposes deep reductions in emissions, equivalent to 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050.

Canadians can learn from the best practices of other countries. We need more incentives to encourage homeowners to install solar panels for heating hot water and generating electricity. We can invest in renewable energy and sustainable transport, to create thousands of green jobs and reduce our use of planet-warming fossil fuels.

With the federal government committed to inaction, it is up to opposition parties to pass legislation to tackle the climate crisis. Conservative filibustering delayed Bill C-377, an earlier version of Bill C-311. Although it was eventually passed by the House of Commons and referred to the Senate, Bill C-377 died on the order paper when an election was called in September.

With Bill C-311 having passed second reading, it will go on to the Environment and Sustainable Development Committee for further debate. With only months to go before climate talks in Copenhagen, Parliament has an historic opportunity. The Climate Change Accountability Act will ensure that Canadians do our fair share to stop global warming.

The costs of inaction are staggering. Unchecked climate change could lead to trillions of dollars in economic losses, and the loss of most of the world’s plant and animal species. Millions of people could be affected by droughts, famines, diseases and rising sea levels.

As Parliamentarians debate Bill C-311, they may think about how they will be judged by future generations. If they reject the bill, they will harm our environment and economic future. Supporting Bill C-311 will help set us on a path to a sustainable future.

What you can do: Contact Members of Parliament. Ask your MP to support Bill C-311, to take action on climate change.

For more information, visit Sierra Club Canada’s Climate Crisis Blog: http://www.sierraclub.ca/climatecrisis/

Mike Buckthought is Sierra Club Canada’s National Climate Change Campaigner.

Published in the Peace and Environment News, Volume 24, Number 3, May–June 2009, page 7.

Peace and Eco Briefs, November–December 2008

Posted on by
Peace and Environment News — Insider, November–December 2008
by Mike Buckthought

UK to Reduce GHG Emissions by 80%

The British government committed the UK to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases by 80 per cent from 1990 levels by the year 2050. The new target replaces an earlier commitment to reduce emissions by 60 per cent by the middle of the century. Ed Miliband, Britain’s energy and climate change secretary, emphasized that the recent economic turmoil would not stop plans to deal with the climate crisis. He promised to amend Britain’s energy bill to allow home-owners to generate wind and solar power, and sell the electricity at a guaranteed price. The “feed-in tariffs” will encourage small-scale local generators of electricity to plug into the electrical grid. (The Guardian, October 16, 2008)

Ottawa River Pollution

Recent tests have found 10 toxic chemicals in the Ottawa River. One of the toxins is perfluorobutane sulfonate (PFBS), a chemical that causes problems such as birth defects and cancer. Another toxin is perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), a chemical associated with non-stick coatings on Teflon cookware. It is also found in coatings on paper packaging used for fast food such as pizza and popcorn. Other chemicals found in the river include: bisphenol A, acetaminophen, carbamazepine, lincomycin, progesterone, diclofenac, lasaloid A and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). The report comes at a time when many citizens are concerned about pollution. According to a recent survey, 49 per cent of Ottawa-Gatineau residents believe the Ottawa River is highly or quite polluted. (Ottawa Sun, October 20, 2008; CBC News, October 17, 2008)

Disappearing Sea Ice

Climate change has led to a dramatic warming in the Arctic, and the rapid melting of sea ice. On September 14, the Arctic sea ice cover reached its minimum extent for the year. It is the second-lowest area recorded, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Over the month of September, the sea ice had an average area of 4.67 million square kilometres. That is 34 per cent below the average for the years 1979 to 2000. According to preliminary data, 2008 represents the year with the lowest volume of Arctic sea ice on record. With the loss of sea ice, climate change accelerates. Open water absorbs more sunlight, leading to more warming — and as the ice disappears, polar bears lose their habitat. (National Snow and Ice Data Center, October 2, 2008 http://nsidc.org/news/press/20081002_seaice_pressrelease.html)

Canada’s Costly War in Afghanistan

Canada’s war in Afghanistan is costing a lot more than expected. According to a recent report, the war will cost up to $18.1 billion by 2011. Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page explained that the war could cost significantly more than this most recent estimate. He said not all of the relevant government departments gave enough information. He criticized the lack of transparency: “When compared with international experience, Canada appears to lag behind the best practices of other jurisdictions in terms of the quality and frequency of war cost reporting to their respective legislatures.” The estimate is based on the assumption that 2,500 troops and support staff remain in Afghanistan. Costs could escalate, if the mission is expanded. (Canadian Press, October 9, 2008)

Exporting Cancer: Canada and Asbestos

The Canadian Medical Association Journal is criticizing the federal government for its interference with international efforts to control asbestos. United Nations-sponsored negotiations are set to start on October 27. During the talks in Rome, delegates will consider whether or not to list chrysotile asbestos as a dangerous substance under the Rotterdam Convention. Although Canadians do not use much asbestos any more, Canada exports a lot of the mineral to developing countries. The asbestos is mixed in with cement and other building materials, and causes deadly diseases such as mesothelioma and asbestosis. According to the World Health Organization, the use of asbestos leads to 100,000 preventable deaths annually around the world. (Globe and Mail, October 20, 2008)

Mike Buckthought writes about environmental and social justice issues.

Published in the Peace and Environment News Insider, Volume 23, Number 6, November–December 2008, page 2.

Day of Action to Stop Climate Chaos

Posted on by
Peace and Environment News, November–December 2008
by Mike Buckthought

On December 7, 2008, Canadians from coast to coast will take to the streets to urge governments to stop climate chaos. The national day of action is part of a global movement, with protests planned in many countries. Last December, thousands of Canadians joined the demonstrations, in solidarity with people marching in 80 countries around the world.

The climate crisis is the central challenge of our time. Unless we take immediate action, our planet faces a catastrophic decline in biodiversity. Climate change could lead to the loss of many of the Earth’s plant and animal species.

Reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) talk about some of the consequences of dangerous climate change. If the global mean annual temperature increases by 2.9 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, an estimated 21–52 per cent of plant and animal species could become extinct.

Climate change will also have devastating economic and health impacts, if we do not take action now. Economic losses could total trillions of dollars, and people around the world could be threatened by extreme weather events, droughts and disease. A billion people in Asia could face water shortages. Hundreds of millions of people could be threatened by famine.

During the recent election campaign, there was a focus on recent economic difficulties, and we were warned about the economic consequences of putting a price on carbon. A carbon tax would lead to economic devastation, we were told — though countries such as Sweden have thrived, with carbon taxes in place.

Not everyone has been fooled by the election rhetoric. Climate change is acknowledged to be one of the most critical challenges facing our country. According to a recent poll conducted by Strategic Communications, 71 per cent of Canadians would like all political parties to put climate change at the top of the political agenda — even with a weakening economy.

The IPCC has talked about what is needed to find a way out of the climate crisis. In order to avoid the most dangerous climate change, developed countries need to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 25–40 per cent from 1990 levels by the year 2020. By the year 2050, emissions must be reduced 80–95 per cent below 1990 levels.

By contrast, Canada plans to reduce emissions by 3 per cent from 1990 levels, by the year 2020.

During the upcoming climate talks in Poznan, Poland, will the Canadian government show leadership, or will it continue to be a laggard, obstructing international negotiations, as it did in Bali?

Join us on December 7, to call for action on climate change. Canada needs to show leadership by committing to targets for reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases, in line with the recommendations of the IPCC. Canadians must do our fair share to stop climate chaos now.

For information about protests planned during the December 7 Day of Action, contact the Stop Climate Chaos Coalition http://www.climatechaos.net.

Mike Buckthought is Sierra Club Canada’s National Climate Change Campaigner.

Published in the Peace and Environment News, Volume 23, Number 6, November–December 2008, page 8.

PM should try copying these words

Posted on by
Toronto Star, October 6, 2008
by Mike Buckthought

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s campaign has received worldwide media attention following the admission he copied a speech by former Australian prime minister John Howard. If only he would copy the speeches and policies of leaders around the world who are committed to taking action on climate change.

Canadians would be pleasantly surprised if he copied a speech by David Cameron, leader of Britain’s opposition Conservative party. Harper would say, “Since becoming leader of the Conservative party I have sought to push the environment up to the top of the political agenda.”

Echoing a speech by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, he would follow the advice of the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Harper would say, “The report of the IPCC has once again made it crystal clear: climate change is man-made and is accelerating. The impact will be dramatic, unless we take resolute action.”

Merkel talked about the consequences of inaction: “Studies have shown that unchecked climate change is likely to result in at least a 5 per cent reduction and possibly even a 20 per cent reduction in global GDP. Effective action to protect the climate would cost a good deal less.”

During a speech in Tokyo, Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt of Sweden said, “I firmly believe that pricing mechanisms are needed to promote a sustainable society. Setting an appropriate carbon price is essential for the transition to sustainable energy use. This is something that is applied both at EU level, through the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, and nationally through Sweden’s own carbon tax.”

Putting a price on carbon is an effective way to encourage the transition to a sustainable economy. Countries such as Sweden and Denmark are leading the way. Sweden introduced a carbon tax in 1991 and its economy is thriving. In Denmark, thousands of jobs have been created, with many people working to manufacture wind turbines.

Canada’s manufacturing sector is well placed to make the transition, but we need economic incentives. Our political leaders must learn that climate-friendly policies protect the environment and our economy.

The recent debate on climate change has focused on the inconvenience of a carbon tax. What is missing is the sense of what is at stake — the devastating consequences of inaction.

But if we take action now, there is hope. The international community can come together to solve environmental problems. We can learn from the success of the Montreal Protocol. The ozone layer was threatened, because of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons produced by humans. Because the international community committed to taking unified action, the ozone layer is now recovering.

We are electing the government that will represent Canada in the upcoming international negotiations in Copenhagen. Will it show leadership when delegations from around the world come together to stop the climate crisis?

Our government has claimed it is showing leadership, but in reality, Canada is a laggard compared to other countries. Canada is ranked number 53 out of a list of 56 countries according to Germanwatch’s index, which measures the effectiveness of climate change policy. Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions are now 29 per cent above Canada’s Kyoto target.

If Harper copied a speech by California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, he would take immediate action to terminate Canada’s abysmal record on climate change. He would say, “The rich nations and the poor nations have different responsibilities, but one responsibility we all have — and that is action. Action, action, action.”

Canada’s next government must show leadership, by committing to firm reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases. For the sake of future generations, we must take immediate action.

Mike Buckthought is Sierra Club Canada’s National Climate Change Campaigner.

Published in the Toronto Star, October 6, 2008.

Link to the original article.

A Moratorium on New Roads

Posted on by
Peace and Environment News, September–October 2008
by Mike Buckthought and Lori Waller

Ecology Ottawa is petitioning city council to declare a five-year moratorium on spending for new roads and road widening. This funding would be better directed towards public transit, cycling, and pedestrian infrastructure. The City of Ottawa should support sustainable transportation instead of wasting money on new roads.

Ottawa’s motor vehicles produce 1.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, contributing to climate change. From 1990 to 2004, emissions from the transportation sector have increased by 15 per cent. Cars create a toxic mix of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and volatile organic compounds.

Smog is a serious problem in Ottawa. In 2005, air pollution in Ottawa was estimated to cause 290 premature deaths, 3,010 visits to emergency rooms, $25 million in health care costs, and over $18 million in lost productivity. Smog causes asthma and other respiratory diseases, heart diseases and cancer.

Ottawa’s Official Plan talks about promoting environment-friendly modes of transport. However, our city plans to spend $1.5 billion on roadways between 2008 and 2017. This includes $690 million for building new roads and widening existing roads. When roads are widened, traffic expands to fill the available space. The result is more smog, more traffic jams — and more expenses for taxpayers.

This year, the city had to cancel repaving on 20 per cent of the roads that need it because of higher fuel costs. At a time when we can’t afford to fix the roads we have, the last thing we should be doing is building more. We pay increasing taxes to maintain an expanding road network — 6,000 kilometres, and growing.

Narrow, pedestrian-centred streets are easier to maintain, and they encourage a sense of community. They’re also good for business. People are more likely to shop in neighbourhoods where they feel safe walking around. Children are more likely to feel safe playing in neighbourhoods built for people. Widening roads only increases the traffic, making our streets unsafe for children.

Car-centric cities are unsustainable. When roads are built in the suburbs and the countryside, we lose our precious farmland — it’s paved over, to make way for big box stores, and oversized parking lots. Urban sprawl threatens the way of life of Ottawa’s farmers. We must protect our villages, green spaces, and agricultural lands from the urban sprawl that is compounded by roads, which take up a fifth of all land in the urban area. When we grow food locally, we reduce emissions from the trucks used to transport imports from California and other distant places.

A road moratorium could include a cap and trade system. If a new road must be built somewhere, an equivalent length of road could be converted into a pedestrian street. In the future, many roads will become lively pedestrian-centred streets. Over time, we can reduce the total length of the road network — and encourage public transit, cycling and walking instead.

You can write to your councillor and the mayor, and tell them you want a moratorium on the construction of new roads. You can find your councillor’s contact information at: http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/mayor_council/councillors/index_en.html.

Tell your friends about the petition, and ask them to sign it at: http://www.ecologyottawa.ca/take-action/index.php.

Get involved with Ecology Ottawa, and help make Ottawa a more sustainable city. For information, visit http://www.ecologyottawa.ca/.

Lori Waller is Ecology Ottawa’s Environmental Research Associate. Mike Buckthought is a member of Ecology Ottawa’s Steering Committee.

Published in the Peace and Environment News, Volume 23, Number 5, September–October 2008, page 1.

Peace and Eco Briefs, March–April 2008

Posted on by
Peace and Environment News — Insider, March–April 2008
by Mike Buckthought

Londoners Take Action

London is taking action to counter climate change, by charging 25 pounds a day ($50) to drive in the centre of the city. The tax only applies to gas-guzzlers — it does not apply to cars that have lower emissions of carbon dioxide. The new tax will help London reach its goal of reducing emissions of carbon dioxide by 60 per cent, by 2025. London has also announced an ambitious $1-billion plan to encourage cycling and walking. It includes a bicycle rental scheme, patterned after a successful project in Paris. Around 6,000 bicycles will be available for rent, throughout central London. (Globe and Mail, February 12, 2008; The Guardian, February 12, 2008; Toronto Star, February 12, 2008)

Carbon Tax for BC

B.C. Finance Minister Carole Taylor announced the introduction of a carbon tax for fossil fuels to counter climate change. The carbon tax will be introduced on July 1, with increases phased in over a five-year period. The tax will start at $10 per tonne of carbon dioxide, and reach $30 per tonne in 2012, with $5 increases each year. With the tax in place, a litre of gasoline will cost an extra 2.4 cents this year, and an additional 7.2 cents by 2012. People with lower incomes will receive an annual Climate Action Credit ($100 per adult, $30 per child). British Columbia aims to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases by 33 per cent by the year 2020. (Globe and Mail, February 19, 2008)

Replacing Lead Pipes

Ottawa will be looking into speeding up its program to replace the city’s lead water pipes. On January 23, councillors voted in favour of a motion to accelerate the phaseout of the pipes. The lead used in older pipes can leach into drinking water. Lead can cause learning disabilities in children, and miscarriages for pregnant women. The city’s current Proactive Lead Service Replacement Program was established last year, and has funding to replace 150 pipes a year. An accelerated program would eliminate the city’s lead pipes by 2014. (Ottawa Citizen, January 24, 2008)

Canadian Mine in El Salvador

Anti-mining activists in El Salvador have been trying to raise awareness about a mining project backed by Pacific Rim, a Canadian company. Farmers in the northern province of Cabanas are worried about the proposed mine’s consumption of 30,000 litres of water per day. Water is already scarce there, and the farmers worry that there would not be enough water for everyone. But the greatest danger would be the cyanide, commonly used to extract gold. The El Dorado mine project is near San Isidro, 65 km from San Salvador. (CorpWatch, February 1, 2008)

Ban GM Crops

The Union of Concerned Scientists has expressed its concerns about genetically modified (GM) crops. The scientists argue that contamination by GM crops has created serious economic losses for farmers growing non-GM varieties. There are lost opportunities for sales and exports. In the future, GM crops may create health problems for people, and harm wildlife. The Union of Concerned Scientists is asking the US Department of Agriculture to prohibit the growth of GM crops used to produce pharmaceuticals, with an exception made for crops that are not eaten by people or animals. (The Guardian, February 18, 2008)

Mike Buckthought writes about environmental issues.

Published in the Peace and Environment News Insider, Volume 23, Number 2, March–April 2008, page 6.

Envisioning Democracy for Ottawa

Posted on by
Peace and Environment News, May–June 2007
by Mike Buckthought

In April, Mayor Larry O’Brien announced his plan to transform Ottawa, proclaiming the start of “1,000 days of change.” He called for closed-door meetings, to be held at the Pineview Golf Club. And what would be discussed, at a golf course? The city’s priorities, for the next few years. City councillors were invited, but he forgot to include the public — until there was an outcry.

An exercise in participatory budgeting? Not exactly. When a corporation creates long-range plans, it holds retreats in the country, and executives talk about profits, and increased “efficiency.” Mayor O’Brien has called for a more “business-like” approach. This new corporate approach may include the privatization of public services.

There is another approach. We do not need “corporate visioning exercises,” because we already have a long-range plan, called Ottawa 20/20. It was drafted after much public input, and it describes a new kind of city. Not an uncaring city, obsessed with tax cuts, but a city that is able to re-invent itself.

Ottawa 20/20 addresses the chronic underfunding of the arts: “A creative city must be able to sustain a concentration of artists, creative people, cultural organizations and creative industries.”

The Transportation Master Plan recommends increased support for public transit: “The City’s growth management strategy aims to increase transit’s peak hour share of motorized person-trips to 30 per cent. This is almost twice today’s level, and compares well to many large European cities.”

Ottawa has forgotten about its long-range plans — plans that were approved by City Council. Elsewhere, cities such as Toronto and Vancouver are investing billions of dollars to create new transit lines. Ottawa, by contrast, is going backwards — back to the suburban sprawl of the fifties. The 2007 Budget calls for millions of dollars in road construction, and the Province plans to widen Highway 417.

There used to be money for cycling. Now, this so-called “city with swagger” can’t afford to spend $50,000 to teach children how to cycle safely. It doesn’t care all that much about day cares. The idea of keeping up with inflation was kept out of the debate. Back in March, a proposed 2 per cent funding increase was turned down.

The solution to this mess? We need to return to Ottawa 20/20.

How to get from here to the year 2020? Citizens need to have a say in our city’s budget. It is not something to be left to executives, meeting behind closed doors.

We can learn from the experiences of other cities. Participatory budgets have been used in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and other cities around the world. We can learn from their successes and failures.

Citizens in Montréal’s Plateau-Mont-Royal have started the experiment — adapting the idea of participatory budgets, experimenting and innovating. We need to learn from their experience.

Democracy starts here — not behind the closed doors of a boardroom, but in public spaces illuminated by shared ideas and experiences.

For information about activities planned by Imagine Ottawa and the Ottawa Budget Coalition, visit: www.imagineottawa.ca. Ottawa 20/20 is available online: www.ottawa.ca/2020.

Mike Buckthought writes about environmental and social justice issues.

Peace and Environment News, Volume 22, Numbers 4–5, May–June 2007, page 1.

learning to love Bytown

Posted on by

learning to love Bytown

by Mike Buckthought

because of skating on the canal,
because the canal is surrounded
by parks

because snow is better than rain
because rain thaws much of my town
in the spring

because spring is followed
by summer, and summer brings
bicycling by the canal

because by and by, it becomes
less boring.

Published in The Delicate Art of Paper Passing, March 2006.

une poésie concrète

Posted on by

une poésie concrète

by Mike Buckthought

four wooden pegs, a length of string
and freshly poured concrete

a rectangular prison removed from
the world, but still in its embrace.

poetry emerges as the iambic
pounding of construction crews

slipping across a desolate landscape,
surveying the wreckage of the

suburban dream. from concrete boxes
to apartment blocks, a cold metallic

sheen. cars as corpuscles, creeping
through the smog and tangled arteries.

Published in The Delicate Art of Paper Passing, March 2006.

Pulling the Nuclear Plug

Posted on by

You wouldn’t think they’d want to build a nuclear power plant near an active earthquake fault. They almost did until the Turkish government pulled the plug.

Briarpatch, September 2000
by Mike Buckthought

The year is 2020. At the turn of the century, a now-defunct corporation called Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) urged Turkey to buy nuclear reactors, at a time when other countries were shutting them down.

Chernobyl can’t happen again, they said. But it has. On a warm summer day, an earthquake struck a nuclear power plant on the Mediterranean seashore.

During the first week, radioactive fallout headed southeast, silently sowing destruction in Turkey, Cyprus, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Israel.

Over the next month, it spread to other countries around the Mediterranean. Over the decades, tens of thousands of people could develop cancer — and thousands of babies could suffer from birth defects caused by radiation.

This scenario is based on atmospheric modelling conducted by scientists at the University of Athens. Researchers looked at what could happen if an earthquake damaged a nuclear power plant at Akkuyu Bay in southern Turkey, if one were built there.

Devastating earthquakes are common in Turkey. Over 18,000 died after last year’s quakes, and this year there have been more quakes north of Ankara, the country’s capital. This hasn’t stopped the Turkish government — along with three international consortia — from trying to build a nuclear plant at Akkuyu Bay.

AECL has offered to sell Turkey two CANDU reactors in its bid, along with a $1.5 billion loan from Canadian taxpayers, courtesy of the government-owned Export Development Corporation.

Competing bids came from two international consortia: Nuclear Power International, which includes Siemens (Germany) and Framatome (France) — and another consortium, consisting of Westinghouse (USA) and Mitsubishi (Japan).

Fortunately, there is now some doubt that the plant will ever be built. As a result of mounting opposition to nuclear power, the Turkish government repeatedly delayed announcing a decision about a bidder. Finally, on July 25, Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit shelved the project, citing its enormous costs.

“It would be better if we consider building nuclear power stations after we have solved our economic problems,” says Ecevit in a newswire from the Anadolu Agency. He says Turkey will now concentrate on alternatives, and reconsider building nuclear plants ten to 20 years from now.

Anti-nuclear activists have played a crucial role in exposing the dangers of reactor exports — and have helped raise awareness through demonstrations, press conferences, and postcard campaigns.

“A nuclear plant at Akkuyu will be a ticking time bomb,” says Dave Martin, research director for Nuclear Awareness Project. “A large earthquake near the site could spread radioactive contamination through the eastern Mediterranean, affecting 130 million people.”

Critics like Martin warn of the environmental dangers, and point to alternative sources of energy such as wind and solar power, and natural gas — as well as the possibility of increased efficiencies in the transmission and use of electrical energy.

“Nuclear power really isn’t a sustainable energy option, and is really not a viable one for Turkey,” says Martin. “It’s risky, it has serious safety and environmental problems — not just the risk of a catastrophic accident, but there’s still the unsolved problem of radioactive waste management.”

Officials from AECL dismiss the risks, saying CANDU reactors have safety systems to deal with earthquakes. We are told that there are independent monitoring systems that would shut down a reactor affected by an earthquake — and nuclear plants are said to be carefully sited away from seismically active areas.

“AECL does not build nuclear reactors on active faults. If we were to build a reactor that was broken open by an earthquake, that would be the end of our business,” says AECL spokesperson Larry Shewchuk.

AECL says the Akkuyu area is safe, but it refuses to release its study of the area. Another report has shown that the proposed site is indeed near an active fault. In 1991, scientists from Turkey’s Dokuz Eylul University published the results of a geophysical survey, identifying the nearby Ecemis fault as an active one.

“To go ahead and build a reactor at Akkuyu Bay without further study would be a totally irresponsible, if not a criminal, decision,” states Dr. Attila Ulug, one of the report’s authors.

Back in Canada, there are more concerns about the faulty siting of nuclear plants. Ontario’s Pickering and Darlington nuclear plants are near active faults. In May, people living near Pickering’s eight reactors experienced some trepidation as a small earthquake rattled the area.

“There are faults underneath and in the immediate vicinity of the nuclear plants,” says Joe Wallach, a geologist who worked for the Atomic Energy Control Board. “There is evidence of geological movement which increases the risk of an earthquake.”

Critics of the nuclear project also express concerns about human rights abuses and the suppression of democratic freedoms in Turkey. Anti-nuclear protests are often interrupted by the police or military — with people thrown in jail for handing out pamphlets or holding a press conference. There are also concerns about Turkey’s treatment of its Kurdish minority, and the occupation of neighbouring Cyprus by Turkish soldiers.

“AECL claims that nuclear power is the power of choice. However, the people in the countries targeted for CANDU reactor exports do not have the power to choose. Countries like China, Turkey, Indonesia and South Korea — AECL’s top marketing priorities — are also top violators of democracy and human rights,” says Kristen Ostling, national coordinator for the Campaign for Nuclear Phaseout.

Another concern for critics of the Akkuyu project is the danger of nuclear weapons proliferation. Canadians often think of themselves as a peace-loving people, but Canada has helped weapons programs in other countries by sharing its nuclear technology.

The United States, Britain, India and Pakistan all developed nuclear weapons with the help of Canadian nuclear exports. Could Turkey be the next country to build the bomb with help from Canada?

It seems there is at least one member of the Turkish government who supports building the bomb. In a March 9 article in the Turkish newspaper Sabah, Turkey’s Transport Minister Enis Oksuz openly expressed support for nuclear weapons.

“When you mention the atomic bomb, they are scared that it kills people. It has not been used since the Second World War. Having such a bomb in Turkey’s hand is security. It provides deterrence,” states Oksuz, a member of the right-wing National Movement Party.

“So-called peaceful nuclear power plants have the potential to contribute to nuclear weapons production, either directly through the production of plutonium, or indirectly through transfer of sensitive information,” Martin warns.

“Canada has contributed to proliferation in both India and Pakistan through the transfer of nuclear technology.”

AECL responds by saying that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) provides safeguards such as inspections of nuclear plants, and monitoring by video cameras. “Canada will export its nuclear reactors only to countries that have signed the NPT,” says Shewchuk.

Martin, however, questions the treaty’s adequacy.

“I would argue that the NPT is a very flawed piece of legislation,” Martin says. “Iraq signed the NPT but simply broke its commitments. And any signatory can opt out of the NPT with only three months notice, and do so legally.”

“A nuclear program in Turkey will inevitably reignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East,” Martin claims. “We cannot put the nuclear genie back in the bottle, but we can help prevent the spread of nuclear weapons by stopping the sale of nuclear power plants.”

Fortunately for the people of the Mediterranean region, the Turkish government has pulled the plug on nuclear power — at least for the next few years. Around the world, there are other hopeful signs of change.

More and more people are embracing environmentally sound, peaceful alternatives to nuclear energy — some recent examples being the decision to phase out nuclear power in Germany, and the cooperation of Greek and Turkish companies to promote wind power. It is hoped that the shelving of the Akkuyu project is another step on the way to a nuclear-free future.

“Turkey has made a wise decision to forgo nuclear power and focus its electricity program on conservation, renewable energy, and high efficiency natural gas. There will be huge environmental, economic and security benefits from this decision,” Martin concludes.

Mike Buckthought is a member of the Radioactivists, an anti-nuclear collective at the Ontario Public Interest Research Group, Carleton University, Ottawa.