Climate Change News Comment from 2008
June 24 - No evidence of radiation effects at TMI
Another letter seemed warranted on the monster mutant plants allegedly found at TMI. More discussion under May 22, "Separating nuclear fact from fiction no easy task" below. (DRP 08/30)
June 14 - Oil roil makes public boil
Claudia Cattaneo had an article titled "Trees are good but oil is better" published in the National Post on 08/06/11. Claudia suggested the public mood is changing in favor of continuing oil sands development. She cited a poll that found 75% of Canadians and 68% of Americans considered oil sands development "a good thing" in response to the question "Generally speaking, do you think that future development of the oilsands is a good thing or a bad thing? I found that encouraging in view of the steady diet of negativism we get from environmental groups and the media on the oil sands. It's nice to see the general public maintains a practical outlook. I found the Post's headlines wanting in an alarmist way and sent a letter. It was published under the above headline on 08/06/14. (DRP 08/06/16)
May 22 - Separating nuclear fact from fiction no easy task
A letter from Joan Wierzba titled "Pro-nuclear panel's fix is in" published in the Lethbridge Herald stated the expert panel members appointed by Alberta Energy to study the role of nuclear in Alberta are all pro-nuclear and thus not appropriate to the task. She also indicated that radioactivity released from Three Mile Island (TMI) was the cause of plant mutations in the surrounding environs. All of this without any citation as to how such conclusions were established! I had worked on a review of TMI in the months following the accident and remembered no evidence of such environmental damage resulting from it. My letter of response was published under the title "Separating nuclear facts from fiction no easy task". Subsequently Ms. Wierzba submitted a second letter which was published with the title "Photos of mutant plants don't lie, but Three Mile Island owners did". Ms. Wierzba cites a 1986 article in the newspaper "The Village Voice" as proof. She kindly provided me with a copy of the article, and another on Chernobyl in the same issue via the Opinion Editor of the Lethbridge Herald. The articles do support Ms. Wierzba's letters. However the speculative stories presented in them have not been supported by science based evidence over the years. Evidence established by US authorities and courts indicates the story has no credibility. Further discussion (See "June 12 - Renaissance: Three Mile Island and the nuclear industry") of the articles is presented in the commentary section of this website. (DRP 08/06/17)
March 30 - Turning carbon emissions into an asset
Professor Dibble from the University of Lethbridge provided some more information on combustion of fuels in a partial response to my letter of March 6 above. He did confirm my assertion that the actual emissions from biofuels differ little from fossil fuels. I had some more to say on the topic of biomaterial use. I think I forgot to submit the letter as I see no evidence it was sent or published. (DRP 08/05/12)
March 6 - Biofuels make for biofools
Virgin Atlantic's public relations chief doesn't seem to understand the basis for claiming biofuels reduce greenhouse gas emissions - as dubious a concept that may be. My letter to the Lethbridge Herald was published under the above title on March 6, 2008. (DRP 08/04/12)
January 10 - National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy
Commentary in the Toronto Star reminded me that our current government lost a lot of transparency on the climate change file when the website of the National Climate Change Process disappeared. I thought the Toronto Star might care. Apparently not as I don't believe my letter was published. (DRP 08/01/27)