COM 0212.068 1996-1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Nuch:ar Sunset: Economic Costs of the Canadian Nuclear Industw http:/A~ww.ecnr.orglsunsetl.htm] V J Many Canadians find it unacceptable that discussion about the disbursement of public funds for the nuclear industry should be conducted behind closed doors in Ottawa. Making this situation worse, is the fact that this secret review is based on the advice of nuclear advocates whose industry colleagues receive the financial benefits. Particularly at a time when social programs are no longer seen as affordable, funding for Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) should be at the top of the "cutting" list. Government subsidies for the nuclear industry should be ended. Ernst & Young an-ived at their $23 billion estimate of the nuclear industry's contribution to Canada's Gross Domestic Product using fundamentally flawed assumptions and faulty methodology. They assumed that nuclear power was the most cost-effective electrical generating option available. This is simply untrue. Cogeneration plants and many energy efficiency technologies are far cheaper to construct and operate, and offer far higher GDP multipliers than nuclear energy. Among other methodological errors, Ernst & Young counted the cost over- runs of nuclear stations as "economic benefits". For example, the 1978 "release estimate" for Ontario Hydro's Darlington Nuclear Generating Station was $3.95 billion, whereas the final cost of the station was over $14 billion. AECL Subsidies When calculated in real, 1995 dollars, total federal funding to Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) since its creation in 192 until March 31 1995, has been about $13 billion. Ernst & Young claim that AECL's total funding to fiscal 1993 was $4.8 billion. This figure, however, is deceptive, since it makes no allowance for inflation, and includes several significant errors. The figure of $13 billion funding to AECL represents a real, cash subsidy, by taxpayers to AECL, and does not include any "opportunity cost", i.e. what the subsidies would be worth if the government had instead invested them in break- even ventures. The opportunity cost for the accumulated subsidies to AECL up to the end of fiscal year 1995 is $120.4 billion. Canada's economy would have been much better off, if the government had simply used the AECL subsidies to reduce the national debt. Direct Employment in the Nuclear Industry Ernst & Y"oung overestimated the number of jobs in the Canadian nuclear of G4 04/OR/97 22:02:40