National Post (National Edition)

Trudeau's reactor deal risks underminin­g goal of nuclear non-proliferat­ion.

Reprocessi­ng plutonium as reactor fuel

- DIANE FRANCIS Financial Post Read and sign up for Diane Francis' newsletter on America at dianefranc­is.substack.com.

In May, the Geneva-based Internatio­nal Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) called out Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government over a deal he has approved and funded that critics say will undermine the goal of nuclear non-proliferat­ion, according to an article published in the Hill Times and recently republishe­d in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

The article describes how prominent scientists are concerned about the Government of Canada approving a project, and subsidizin­g it to the tune of $50.5 million, that's being developed by a startup called Moltex Energy.

Moltex Energy was selected by NB Power and the Government of New Brunswick to develop its new reactor technology and locate it at the closed Point Lepreau nuclear plant site by the early 2030s. Moltex is one of several companies that are promoting small, “next generation” nuclear reactors to replace fossil fuels in the production of electricit­y.

Moltex, a privately owned company that is based in the United Kingdom and has offices in Saint John, N.B., says it will “recycle nuclear waste” from New Brunswick's closed Point Lepreau nuclear plant for use in its small-scale nuclear reactor. Federal funding and approval was announced on March 18 by Dominic LeBlanc, a New Brunswick MP who serves as minister of intergover­nmental affairs.

The scientists dispute the claim that this is “recycling” and are concerned because the technology Moltex wants to use to extract plutonium, a key ingredient in nuclear weapons, from spent fuel could be used by other countries to make nuclear bombs. Decades ago, the U.S. and many of its allies, including Canada, took action to prevent this type of reprocessi­ng from taking place.

“The idea is to use the plutonium as fuel for a new nuclear reactor, still in the design stage. If the project is successful, the entire package could be replicated and sold to other countries if the Government of Canada approves the sale,” reads the article.

On May 25, nine highlevel American non-proliferat­ion experts sent an open letter to Trudeau expressing concern that by “backing spent-fuel reprocessi­ng and plutonium extraction, the Government of Canada will undermine the global nuclear weapons non-proliferat­ion regime that Canada has done so much to strengthen.”

The signatorie­s to the letter include senior White House appointees and other government advisers who worked under six U.S. presidents and who hold professors­hips at the Harvard Kennedy School, Princeton University and other eminent institutio­ns.

The issue of nuclear proliferat­ion dates back to 1974, when Canada got a black eye after India tested its first nuclear weapon using plutonium that was largely extracted using the CIRUS reactor, which was supplied by Canada for peaceful uses. Shortly after, other countries attempted to repurpose plutonium from reactors and were stopped — except for Pakistan, which, like India, succeeded in creating atomic weapons.

The Hill Times pointed out that, “To this day, South Korea is not allowed to extract plutonium from used nuclear fuel on its own territory — a long-lasting political legacy of the 1974 Indian explosion and its aftermath — due to proliferat­ion concerns.”

The letter to Trudeau concluded: “Before Canada makes any further commitment­s in support of reprocessi­ng, we urge you to convene high-level reviews of both the non-proliferat­ion and environmen­tal implicatio­ns of Moltex's reprocessi­ng proposal including internatio­nal experts. We believe such reviews will find reprocessi­ng to be counterpro­ductive on both fronts.”

The scientists' letter has not yet been answered by the government. However, Canadians deserve to be fully briefed on all this and its implicatio­ns. They deserve to know who owns Moltex, what the risks are to non-proliferat­ion and why taxpayers are sinking millions of dollars into a project that's morally questionab­le and potentiall­y hazardous.

POLITICAL LEGACY OF THE 1974 INDIAN EXPLOSION

AND ITS AFTERMATH.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada