Clean Green Saskatchewan


Posted Sun, 03/02/2014 – 12:36

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is not a government panel or an independent third party organization. It is run by the nuclear power industry. They have orchestrated the process with communities like Creighton so that it completely controls the agenda – timelines, deadlines & information flow.

Potential host communities owe it to themselves to obtain as much objective and science-based information from independent sources as possible. The decision to proceed or not must be very carefully weighed because of the huge potential risks. The impacts of radioactive contamination would be felt for many centuries.

For the full article with illustrations see pdf

Consider this:

• This project would not be the economic driver promised by NWMO – it is not like a long term extractive mining venture. The range of jobs indicated by NWMO suggests that competition for these jobs would be national, maybe international. There would be no long term job security for the people of Creighton. In fact the perceived stigma of a nuclear waste dump would negatively impact future tourism, fishing, hunting and vacationing. If it is going to be such an economic boon, why are large cities in Ontario not competing for it?

• When it comes to toxic waste no community is an island unto itself. Towns and RM’s share rivers, aquifers, weather systems, and transportation networks. If a nuclear waste dump is built in Creighton, tens of thousands of truckloads of hazardous radiotoxic material will be travelling to Saskatchewan through Manitoba from nuclear reactors in Central Canada and elsewhere. Statistically speaking, accidents are bound to happen. Countless communities would be put at risk.

• Saskatchewan and Manitoba are globally important food producing areas. Any accident in waste transportation or storage would negatively affect future safety of local food and water supplies as well as sales of Canada’s food crops to the world. Why would we risk our food and water security?

• There are serious scientific deficiencies in the NWMO geologic disposal concept that are not noted in their promotional material, but have been identified in other studies ( see Links…) Extensive drilling & excavating would compromise the integrity of the surrounding rock. Resulting fracturing and faulting will create faster routes for radionuclide escape.

Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) published data and graphs showing how the decay heat from buried high-level nuclear waste will heat the underground rock formations for 50,000 years (thermal pulse). Prolonged heat and chemical reactions will exacerbate damage to containers and the surrounding rock.

• The proposed nuclear waste containment technology is highly speculative –technically, the containers cannot be assured to last as long as the waste is toxic, at least 100,000 years. The computer models used by the NWMO cannot accurately predict the long timescales required. Science simply cannot make such extremely complex long range predictions.

• The waste consists of so called “spent” fuel bundles which are actually millions of times more radioactive and deadly than the fuel bundles were before being irradiated in nuclear reactor cores. They contain more than 200 fission and activation products, most of them highly radioactive materials not found in nature. These are known to cause cancer, immune system damage, genetic defects in offspring and other serious health problems.

• There are sound alternative options for managing high-level radioactive waste. One responsible and viable option gaining acceptance, currently by over 200 organizations, is Hardened On Site Storage (HOSS), with Rolling Stewardship, located on or near reactor sites.

The USA has tried 8 times to site a nuclear waste repository and has failed all 8 times. Germany recently revealed that the Asse Mine, an underground storage facility for nuclear waste, has filed completely and is leaking badly.

Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment in Manitoba did ALL the Canadian field research on Deep Geologic Disposal. Then In 1987 the Manitoba Legislature passed a law forbidding the disposal of high-level nuclear waste in the province. In 2008 the Quebec National Assembly passed a motion, unanimously with no abstentions, banning the storage in Quebec of nuclear waste from other provinces.

Creighton Saskatchewan is being targeted

Let’s not become North America’s nuclear garbage dump!

The NWMO proposal is a massive gamble.

It could mean radioactive contamination of the whole area. If it’s safe, why not leave it where it is?

It’s not worth the risk.

The danger of radioactivity will remain forever –long after the money and jobs run out.

Let’s not sell out our future generations.

Links for additional information:

Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility

CCNR What Scientists Don’t Know About Geological Disposal

Hardened On Site Storage (HOSS)

Hultquist, Water Corrodes Copper

Know Nuclear Waste

NWMO’s Independent Technical Review Group (ITRG) identified problems with the NWMO vertical shaft design copy ITRG Report – see pages 5 & 6

SOS Save our Saugeen Shores

Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump

Harper government targets environmental groups? Global News …

Monday February 17, 2014 — Fundraising expert Harvey McKinnon says the federal government is using the Canada Revenue Agency to try to shutdown and intimidate environmental groups. Is Ottawa really unfairly targeting public interest groups? Find out on Unfiltered with Jill Krop. Also see: Questions about audits of environmental groups CBC February 6, 2014 and Clayton Ruby on ForestEthics Advocacy and Freedom of Speech April 18, 2012.

Prominent environmental charities in Canada being audited by CRA (Audio) – February 7, 2014 As It Happens

RCMP and CSIS face complaints of illegal spying on environmental activists opposing oil pipelines – February 6, 2014

7 environmental charities face Canada Revenue Agency audits – February 6, 2014

Green is the new red: Will Potter on the problem of treating environmentalists like terrorists – January 31, 2014

Clayton Ruby on ForestEthics Advocacy and Freedom of Speech April 18, 2012

Prominent Canadian Human Rights lawyer says environmentalists, and Canadians at large, have the right to advocate for environmental protection, and says there needs to be more free speech, not less, on economic development projects that threaten environmental sustainability in Canada.

Here is a collection of interviews on CBC about the changes to environmental assessment review in Canada, and the attempts to silence critics.

ForestEthics Advocacy

Radicals working against oilsands, Ottawa says – January 9, 2012

An open letter from Joe Oliver, Minister of Natural Resources, referring to environmentalists as “radicals” – January 9, 2012

Harper to private group: Stop funding Forest Ethics Charity – April 24, 2012

David Suzuki: New rules make it easier for Canadian government to harm the environment – April 24, 2012

ForestEthics giving up charity status to take Tories on – April 18, 2012

ForestEthics challenges government’s unrelenting crackdown on non-profits by launching two new organizations – April 17, 2012

New BILLBOARD in Saskatoon

Posted Sun, 02/02/2014 – 10:12

This tax issue is not going away.

Cameco continues to give small bits of money to groups to get their name in public view

to make themselves seem like good corporate citizens but

they don’t pay their fair share of taxes.

$800 to $850 million in Canadian taxes

instead they pay 10% through their Swiss subsidiary, see the story on CBC TV

Legal action seeks transparency from Northern Village of Pinehouse regarding uranium contracts

Posted Tue, 01/28/2014 – 00:00

In 2012, the northern village of Pinehouse, Saskatchewan signed a deal with two uranium companies worth $200-million.

Briarpatch, a local magazine, doing an investigative report on the agreement asked to see more public documents about the village’s role in that deal….but the mayor refused. Global News story aired on January 28, 2014

Plaintiffs D’Arcy Hande, and Briarpatch editors Valerie Zink, and Andrew Loewen filed a statement of claim in the Court of Queen’s Bench on January 27th 2014 seeking compliance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act on the part of Mayor Mike Natomagan of the Northern Village of Pinehouse. Mayor Natomagan has refused to release documentation requested under the Act.

Help justice be done for the people of Pinehouse and neighbouring communities, for future generations, and for the land and water on which all life depends, please give what you can to help cover legal expenses.

Donations to the Committee for Future Generations: cheque to Box 155 Beauval SK, S0M 0G0 or by e-transfer to

Saskatoon Change Makers-Friday, January 31st

Posted Sun, 01/26/2014 – 10:22

Upstream and The Broadbent Institute presents Saskatoon Change Makers

This exciting event will feature a variety of speakers sharing their ideas for how to create change, including presentations from the Broadbent Institute, Max FineDay of Next Up, Ryan Meili of Upstream, Erica Lee of Idle No More, and Mitch Stewart of 270 Strategies’ Battleground States Director for President Obama’s 2012 campaign.

An evening of discussion and inspiration will consider the best ways to bring about positive change in the city of Saskatoon!

Doors will open at 6:30pm with rush seating. Tickets, $10.00, available online up until the day of the event, remaining tickets at the door. Students and those for whom the ticket price is a barrier may pay a reduced rate of $5.00.

Roxy Theatre – Friday, January 31st, 2014 – 7:00pm – Tickets: via

No Nuke Dump In Saugeen Shores!

Posted Thu, 01/23/2014 – 13:11

We hope to see the same decision on DGR 1 in Kincardine, and in fact we hope to see the day when there are no further plans to bury nuclear waste in the Great Lakes Basin. Our work is not done:

Huron-Kinloss, South Bruce, and Brockton are too close to population centers, agricultural and recreational economies, and especially Lake Huron, to be a prudent choice for the burial of radioactive waste.

And OPG’s proposed DGR for Kincardine remains a significant threat to millions who depend on the Great Lakes for life and livelihood. We would like to thank all of those who donated their time to support us in many ways.”

Petition – Do not store Canada’s Nuclear Waste in Creighton, Saskatchewan

Posted Wed, 01/22/2014 – 01:54

Please join others and sign the Petition

Why this is important

  • Finding safe ways of storing radioactive wastes so that they do not leak radiation into the environment has proved to be a difficult task.
  • The spent fuel rods from a nuclear reactor are the most radioactive of all nuclear wastes.
  • Harmful to the environment and our community.
  • Could come in contact with human population centers and wildlife, posing a great danger to them.
  • Nuclear power is very expensive and moreover, many alternatives are available which can reduce CO2 emissions far more effectively, for infinite time periods, and at far lower costs, such as wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, tidal, biomass etc.

This committee is working towards making sure that residents’ concerns are addressed.