Monday, July 16, 2007

John Tory : Born to Run

There is an excellent article in Toronto Life about John Tory, entitled Born to Run. I think it's fairly balanced - highlighting his challenges and his strengths.

It is something of a short bio - it talks about his personal history and his early involvement in politics as Premier Bill Davis' principal secretary. It talks both about his successes and his failures. It even includes a small point for those who keep head counts of politicians at public events.

Well worth the read.

4 comments:

Felix Taylor said...

Thanks for the link James, I also put the link on my blog as well.

JimBobby said...

Whooee! Ginty's a lyin' snake, no two ways, Jimmy. My biggest troublem with Ginty is his sellout to the nuke industry. Here in Nanticoke, we got a PC MPP who's against turnin' Nanticoke coal-fired station into a nuke plant.

Since yer a PC and a Tory backer, I'm wonderin' if you know whether Johnny's been bought by Bruce Power, too? The Con Diane Finley's in their pocket. They don't care who they buy off. They ain't usin' their own money, afterall.

What's Tory's position on the $40 billion expansion of nuclear power in Ontariariario?

JimBobby

Jim said...

JB,

I'm not going to blow emissions up your arse ;). I'll leave that for the other guys.

The PC Party supports the use of nuclear energy. They will replace older reactors with new ones. They don't believe the capacity currently used can be easily replaced.

That said, the PC's do not have a plan to turn existing coal plants into nukes. They want to utilize "clean scrubbers" and "burying emissions" on existing dirty plants. I'll be honest, I can't pretend to be an expert on these things - I'd be interested in hearing your viewpoint.

In a nutshell, their main plan is to clean up existing sources of dirty energy, simultaneously reducing government use of electricity and increase alternative energy sources. Throwing in tax incentives for every day folks to reduce energy consumption for good measure.

It's not as likely an aggressive plan as some would propose, but it's one I think is achievable - it's certainly better than anything the feds or the Libs have offered.

Page 47, of the plan talks at length about this.

JimBobby said...

Thankee fer the reply. I don't think nuclear has proven itself and I see it as an extremely poor investment for Ontario. The portion of our monthly hydro bill marked as "Ontario Hydro Debt Repayment" is entirely the result of previous government investment in nuclear.

It's expensive to start with but experience has shown that nuke projects and repairs invariably come in behind schedule and over budget. The current repairs being made to 2 reactors at Pickering were to have been completed for this summer's A/C season. Now, we're told to conserve and the blame is placed on delays. The new completion estimate in September.

After 60 years of nuclear energy production, we still have no permanent solution to hazaerdous waste. This waste is the fuel for a dirty bomb and must be kept secure from terrorists for quite a while -- 5000 years. How can we commit our great-great-great-grandchildren to such a responsibility?

Nuclear does not help with climate change. 20,000 gallons of water are heated each minute by each reactor. How's that ging to affect Great Lakes overall temps and ability to support existing species?

Lake levels are expected to decrease in the future and we may not have enough water to cool the reactors. This happened in France in 2003 when reactors had to be turned off at the height of their worst ever heat wave.

On top of all that, uranium prices have sextupled since 20001 and are expected to redouble again this year. Uranium extraction projects in eastern Ontario are getting opposition for First Nations groups. Uranium needs to be hauled on our highways and railways, through populated areas.

2 weeks ago, a uranium truck turned over in a ditch in rural Saskatchewan. REmember hearing about it? Probably not. Like almost all nuclear-related accidents, the press gets littleother than reassurances from the industry. Happened again yesterday in Japan.

I would urge John Tory to take a long hard look at nuclear. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. We can't afford to waste time and money on such a collossal failure of a technology.

JB