To say the least we should all be finding it difficult to understand the Ralph Splettoesser view that democracy

Dear Editor, To say the least we should all be finding it difficult to understand the Ralph Splettoesser view that democracy is at stake in the process of establishing the Deep Geologic Repository (DGR). Democracy at stake, not likely! Each and every step of the process is overseen by the public regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), and is open to public hearing in front of the commission throughout the entire approval process lifecycle and continually after that in the context of licensing and re-licensing. That does not sound even remotely like democracy is at stake in this process. To call the process evil is does not warrant any debate or discussion! To suggest such a thing is ludicrous on its face and grossly insulting to the thousands who make their living in the nuclear industry and the thousands that have benefited from such things as nuclear medicine. I see Mr. Splettoesser does also say, as he has said in numerous letters, that people working in the nuclear industry in this community are gagged by their employers. I have no intention of speaking on the behalf of any employers, but I worked in the nuclear business for three different employers over 31 years and was never once gagged. The facts will bear out that the industry invites critics and supporters alike to engage in the public process of input at CNSC hearings and public meetings alike; something that the authors of the green energy act, for example, never invited. As I look back at Mr. Splettoesser’s letters it is unclear as to what issue he is really attacking. Not that there is anything wrong with talking to multiple issues, but Mr. Splettoesser attacks nuclear power and the DGR simultaneously. Over and over again the record will show that those like Splettoesser, who oppose the nuclear industry, are very good at throwing as much mud out as possible. This mix contains little credible or multi-sourced information, but generally is designed to divert the debate from a discussion of technically relevant items to a confusing mix and match of information intentionally designed to confuse the general public. Like so many in the anti-nuclear movement Mr. Splettoesser invokes Three Mile Island (TMI). The nuclear industry has never hidden from open discussion of TMI and in light of TMI the entire nuclear industry took on an even more deeply embedded openness that continues today in the CNSC public hearing process and its equivalent around the globe. The nuclear core at TMI was destroyed, yet in spite of this about the only thing that was released to the public was mounds of paper; paper that intentionally misleads people about what actually took place at TMI and ignores the fact that the design of TMI prevented danger to the public. Why is this an important detail?-it underscores the limited repertoire of provocative language and exaggeration that keeps the anti nuclear lobby in the news Sweden is indeed experiencing debate on their DGR front, but to suggest that it is significantly different than the debate in our area is to again intentionally mislead. The Swedish nuclear program is still active and seeing a renewal as more people realize that producing electricity from nuclear energy is the future of electrical generation without the production of greenhouse gases. No such claim can be made about wind, solar or other renewables as each is backed up by greenhouse producing generation methods and huge tax subsidies. Mr. Splettoesser and his ilk speak to openness, democracy and public input; all already firmly embedded and the claim that anything other than such a democratic open process exists as it relates to the DGR is plainly untrue and underscores Splettoesser’s ideological bent.