Consider all the risks of this project and do a full impact assessment

Numéro de référence
64
Texte

While I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this project, the communication about and timeline for public commentary is inadequate. Considering that nuclear toxic waste is dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years, the proposal of a DGR is not a decision to be rushed or taken lightly. A full impact assessment needs to take place with the risks of waste transportation included. The proposal to bury this waste and abandon it, believing that nothing will go wrong, is irresponsible. When have humans ever built anything that lasts the thousands of years in which this toxic waste will remain dangerous? A DGR is saddling our future generations with the contamination of our waters, and putting at risk all the communities along the transportation route. No matter how careful the nuclear industry claims it is being, accidents can (and always do) happen. A DGR is not a solution to nuclear waste, it is a limp effort to justify continued investment in nuclear energy. Our environment and humanity can't handle anymore shortsighted decisions made without the assessment of all risks involved, including transportation and long term effects.

Présenté par
Andrea Pelletier
Phase
Planification
Avis public
Avis public - Période de consultation publique sur le résumé de la description initiale du projet et possibilité d'aide financière
Pièce(s) jointe(s)
S.O.
Date et heure de soumission
2026-01-18 17 h 46
Date de modification :