To add to this, an article in yesterday’s National Post by Claudia Catteneo makes these remarks regarding nuclear energy in the oilsands:

“Gary Lunn, the Natural Resources Minister, urged oilsands developers to use nuclear power in the oilsands to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. “Nuclear energy is emissions-free,” he said.

The suggestion is redundant and smacks of government interference in an area it’s not needed.

Oilsands developers have been working for years to find substitutes for natural gas, and some solutions are within a year of becoming commercial. The Long Lake oilsands project, equally owned by Nexen Inc. and OPTI Canada Ltd., will produce first oil using synthetic gas from the gasification of the least-valuable part of the barrel by early next year. Petrobank Energy and Resources Ltd. is now fine tuning its THAI — toe to heel air injection — process for its oilsands project.

In contrast, it will take at least a decade to apply nuclear technology to the oilsands.

Meanwhile, the government is clearly headed for a tougher stance on greenhouse-gas emissions, which can only be bad news for the oilsands developers. Tougher standards are costly and an impediment to growth.”

In today’s Edmonton Journal, an op-ed by three experts in the field also refute Gary Lunn’s claim that Nuclear is a feasible option.  They give a very detailed response to some of the claims that Lunn is making.  Please read the article  for more information: Nuclear Power Not for Oilsands.

After reading through these varied analyses we should be encouraging industry in their technological endeavors and look at how solar, wind, and geothermal may supplement our energy needs.  What do you think?