Nuclear Waste on Ice

A quote from those flogging the report due next month:

Lessons From Canada on Storing Spent Nuclear Fuel
& High-Level Radioactive Waste

The United States has spent more than $6 billion on the Yucca Mountain repository, and debate still rages over when — or whether — it will open. In contrast, Canada is close to settling on a course for burying its nuclear waste that promises none of the divisiveness that the Yucca Mountain project has spawned.

What can we learn from our neighbors to the north?

This exclusive report compares and contrasts Canada’s central waste depository plan with that of the United States. How Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization,for example, has built incentives and flexibility into its plan, and how it plans to overcome political resistance to a central nuclear waste depository, which has plagued the Yucca Mountain project for so long.

Gary Lunn:
"We have absolutely, explicitly stated that under no uncertain circumstances will Canada ever be taking back spent nuclear fuel at any time from any country," Lunn told the Commons in response to a friendly question from a Conservative backbencher.

Tories take heat for announcing nuclear stand without public notice, debate
November 30, 2007 Bruce Cheadle, The Canadian Press

Lots of celebrating around here tonight, so this may not get that much attention until morning. I promise I will give this due diligence tomorrow. Thank you so much for posting about it! Harper's Cons do everything behind closed doors, hey?

This link is to the CTV politicsblog and it gives a transcript of comments in the House related to the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP).

Quoting Lunn from the transcripts :

...our decision to join the GNEP does not in any way commit Canada to a policy of repatriation of nuclear waste. Indeed, Canada will not consider the repatriation of fuel waste.

...we made it unequivocally clear that we will under no circumstances ever accept any nuclear spent fuel back from any other country

We have absolutely, explicitly stated that under no uncertain circumstances will Canada ever be taking back spent nuclear fuel at any time from any country.

So, what's the problem in the last quote ? Flannel-mouthed ? bad grammar ? Fruedian slip ? or is Lunn saying exactly what he means ? He uses, I believe, something like a double negative. "under no uncertain circumstances" can be the equivalent of 'under certain circumstances'. I think Gary Lunn and all the Conservatives need to be closely watched.
I don't know what the Cons are up to, but they are not forthcoming with their plans.

I would like to see that full report when it comes out. If a person purchased it could they then post it, in it's entirety, on a website ? What would be the copyright implications of that ?

Thanks for the heads-up.