OPG must consider alternatives to world’s largest nuclear plant at Wesleyville

Numéro de référence
531
Texte

February 11, 2026

SUBMISSION FROM THE ONTARIO CLIMATE EMERGENCY CAMPAIGN

Re:  Impact Assessment Process #89802 

OPG MUST CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES TO WORLD’S LARGEST NUCLEAR PLANT

We urge the IAAC to direct OPG to look at the cleaner, safer and lower cost options (e.g., offshore wind, solar, storage) to building the world’s largest nuclear station.

We are asking the IAAC to require OPG to fully evaluate whether:

  • Energy efficiency could reduce the need for new generation
  • Renewable energy (like wind and solar) could be deployed faster
  • Energy storage could improve reliability without new nuclear risks
  • The alternatives would cost less and reduce financial risks for ratepayers

Recommendation 1   

That the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada direct OPG to come back with a properly scoped project description that provides a detailed analysis of the need and the alternatives to the project as required by Section 22 (1)(d) and (f) of the Impact Assessment Act [IAA]. 

Recommendation 2   

That more time be provided for public comment so that adequate public education can be provided on the missing components of financial cost, risks to health, safety, accidents, security and sustainability of the nuclear option Section (1)(a) IAA.

In addition more extensive consultation with Indigenous communities affected by the proposed nuclear project is required.

The Ontario Climate Emergency Campaign (OCEC)’s 12 point Climate Action Plan calls for Ontario to not build new nuclear reactors. These are the reasons:

  1. There is no need to build new nuclear plants.  Ontario’s electricity needs can be met through renewable energy and battery storage along with existing sources of electricity, and expanded implementation of energy efficiency strategies.
  2. Nuclear plants are very expensive
  3. Nuclear plants have a very long construction timeline.
  4. There are long-term radioactive waste and accident risks associated with nuclear power.
  5. During the extended period of construction (one to two decades) there will be an expansion of reliance on fossil gas plants, leading to massive avoidable greenhouse gas pollution.
  6.  Extended reliance on fossil gas will have major avoidable health impacts.

Burning fossil fuels releases methane gas which is clearly linked to health harms, including respiratory, cardiovascular, neurological diseases, as well as multiple cancers, pregnancy related, harms, and contributes to premature death.

  1. Cutting fossil gas emissions is urgent.  The world is approaching irreversible climate change tipping points.  Ontario must do our part to cut emissions as quickly and deeply as possible, and this must be a criteria in our choice of energy future. ‘Hellish hothouse earth global tipping points’’ Article (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/feb/11/point-of-no-return-hothouse-earth-global-heating-climate-tipping-points)
  2. Gas plants rely on fracked gas imported from the US. When we rely on renewables, battery storage, and efficiency we will have more local control.
  3. Renewables and battery storage offer a practical alternative that is also much healthier and much more affordable for Ontarians
  4. Lifting the moratorium on offshore wind would open up an extremely safe, inexpensive, and plentiful supply of electricity.
  5. There are a multitude of opportunities for the expansion of solar power, both in urban areas (such as rooftop solar, solar over parking lots) and rural (including the beneficial combination of solar panels and sheep farming) Reference: (https://news.oregonstate.edu/news/combining-solar-panels-and-lamb-grazing-increases-land-productivity-study-finds)

When we consider the legacy that we are leaving to our children, how can we possibly support the construction of nuclear plants, which are dangerous, expensive, and leave nuclear waste that must be protected from polluting the environment for hundreds of thousands of years?   We have very practical, very doable, very affordable alternatives which will make a safer climate future a reality for our children and grandchildren. Let’s make the wiser choice.

Lyn Adamson, Co-Chair,

Ontario Climate Emergency Campaign

℅ 60 Lowther Ave. Toronto M5R 1C7

ocec.chair@gmail.com (mailto:ocec.chair@gmail.com)

www.ontarioclimateemergency.ca (http://www.ontarioclimateemergency.ca)

Présenté par
Ontario Climate Emergency Campaign
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)
  • Submission re Wesleyville Nuclear Proposal - Impact Assessment Process #89802 .pdf (124,6 Ko)
  • Étiquettes de commentaires
    Méthode de consultation des Autochtones Qualité de l'air Changements climatiques Accidents / défauts de fonctionnement Opposition générale au projet Santé humaine et bien-être Échéanciers de l'évaluation / processus d'évaluation Solutions de rechange pour le projet Effets cumulatifs Groupes de populations vulnérables (Analyse comparative entre les sexes plus (ACS+)) Droits des Autochtones Contribution du projet à la durabilité
    Date et heure de soumission
    2026-02-11 23 h 06
    Date de modification :