Commentaire
As a resident of the Ottawa valley, where nuclear is big historically, I have to say I’m vehemently opposed to further nuclear energy development. We are still to this day dealing with fights about nuclear waste storage and the health impacts of the industry on workers, citizens, and nature associated with or surrounding these sites. It has led to serious distrust in the community between neighbours and government authorities, tourists questioning the cleanliness of the water around the facilities, etc. It is a dark mark on the region.
We saw the distinct advantage of Quebec in developing hydro at the same time Ontario attempted to develop nuclear. Nuclear has already proven itself to be costly, contentious l, and a failure in Ontario. Hydro, while imperfect, is a much better option. Building modern facilities with government and indigenous partnership is the route we should go to provide a battery for Ontario electricity for long into the future. The Quebec model should be our idealized goal but with incentives for home level or community scale renewable projects in specific communities as a balance to hydro power when operating.
Natural gas is still a GHG, but spending more to develop a hydroelectricity system while drastically increasing investment in renewables such as wind and solar is worth it, no matter the up front cost or the continued reliance on natural gas while building out the system. People of means are willing to pay a bit more when promised with a totally renewable system down the road.
Large subsidies should go to individuals wanting to outfit their home with solar panels, with a goal of every individual house producing a portion of their own energy.
Soumis le 23 février 2023 11:00 AM
Commentaire sur
Consultation sur l’étude de la SIERE sur les voies de la décarbonisation
Numéro du REO
019-6647
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
82597
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire