For 44 years, the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station has operated just five kilometres from Toronto’s eastern edge. The Darlington Nuclear Generating Station sits just over 30 km away. While these plants are essential for keeping the lights on in Toronto, councillors are only just beginning to question the city’s readiness for a nuclear emergency.

On Dec. 1, the city’s executive committee asked the city manager to report back on issues with the Provincial Nuclear Emergency Response Plan, Toronto’s own nuclear emergency response protocols and whether it might be appropriate to expand distribution of potassium iodide (KI) pills beyond the current 10-km radius.

In October, Ontario Power Generation (OPG), which operates both Pickering and Darlington, mailed KI pills — which, taken in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster, can reduce the risk of thyroid cancer — to 200,000 homes and businesses within 10 km of the GTA’s two nuclear power plants.

Anyone living within 50 km of the two plants — an area inhabited by more than 4.5 million people, including the entire city of Toronto — can order them free from preparetobesafe.ca. While just over 600 orders had been placed before a Nov. 10 Star story on KI pills, nearly 11,000 additional orders were made by Nov. 15.

“Lessons can be learned from nuclear tragedies in other parts of the world, lessons that can better prepare us and ensure the safety of Toronto residents,” 11 city councillors wrote in their nuclear safety agenda item. “We can also learn from international best practices that shape the emergency response of other regions to ensure we are doing all we can to keep our residents safe.”

Outside city hall, critics are also arguing that the response plan needs to be updated — something the province promised to do after a reactor disaster struck Fukushima, Japan, following a catastrophic tsunami nearly five years ago. Originally drafted in the early 1980s, the provincial response plan hasn’t been revised since 2009.

“Significant work has been done in the past two years related to reviewing and assessing” the response plan, a Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS) spokesperson told the Star. “The objective of this review is to ensure that the PNERP is reflective of a severe, multi-unit nuclear accident comparable to Fukushima.”

The review is expected to be completed this month, with public consultations on a draft plan to begin mid-year. The province would not disclose the details of this new plan.

Although the aging Pickering plant is slated to close in 2020, the multibillion-dollar refurbishing project will extend Darlington’s life by three decades. To critics, a response plan update can’t come soon enough.

Big release of radiation? Big shortcomings

“The province is not planning for an actual big terrible accident like Fukushima,” warns Theresa McClenaghan, executive director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA). “There’s no detailed planning, resourcing or testing for a big accident that has big emissions out to the atmosphere.”

The emergency plan is based on scenarios in which plant operators would be able to contain and control radioactive releases, McClenaghan says.

“They like to think that if something goes really wrong, they can still control events enough to hold onto any radioactive emissions from the plants for a period of time… But based on Fukushima and Chernobyl, you can’t count on something’s going wrong and everything else going right.

The province’s position:

“(I)n a recent study, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) determined that the PNERP would adequately and effectively address a Fukushima type incident.”

Drinking water dangers

“Millions of people get their drinking water from Lake Ontario, but there’s no credible plan on how to deal with tap water contamination in the event of a nuclear accident,” says Greenpeace Canada’s senior nuclear analyst, Shawn-Patrick Stensil.

Both the Darlington and Pickering nuclear power plants sit next to Lake Ontario, and so do three aging nuclear power plants in upstate New York. According to environmental advocacy group Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, nine million Canadians and Americans rely on the lake for their drinking water. Many would be without alterative sources in the event of severe radioactive contamination.

“There’s no planning for this at all,” McClenaghan says. “I have to conclude that they’re assuming that dilution will be the answer.”

The province’s position:

“The PNERP identifies that the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) is responsible for dealing with contaminated water supplies.”

Lack of public awareness

According to a recent poll of 500 people within 10 km of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station, a majority was unaware of decontamination procedures, the location of monitoring stations or emergency shelters or evacuation plans and routes. Some 80 per cent said they had no emergency plan; 58 per cent admitted to being totally unprepared.

“The polling our group did… shows that there needs to be ongoing and consistent education on what people in the GTA need to do to prepare themselves for a nuclear emergency,” says Durham Nuclear Awareness co-ordinator Janet McNeill.

In Toronto, McClenaghan adds, things are much worse. “Until now, as far as I’m aware, there’s been no attempt to reach out to city of Toronto residents about the fact that there are nuclear plants in the GTA.”

The province’s position:

“Public awareness has been and will remain a key focus for all parties engaged in nuclear emergency planning.”

Expand evacuation zones

In the GTA, detailed evacuation plans exist only for those living within 10 km of the Pickering and Darlington nuclear power plants. That zone was established before the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, but in both Chernobyl and Fukushima, a 30-km area around the doomed plants was evacuated. Durham Region Council recently voted to ask the province to consider expanding the 10-km zone.

“It’s completely arbitrary,” McClenaghan says of the 10-km evacuation zone. “It has nothing to do with any evidence.”

Durham Region is also listed as one of the areas slated for dense growth in the province’s Places to Grow plan.

“They are still putting additional population density in this region, which to me is just an appalling circumstance when we have such poor emergency planning,” McClenaghan adds.

The province’s position:

“The evacuation zones were scientifically determined.”

Expand KI pill distribution

In October, residents and businesses within 10 km of the Pickering and Darlington plants received free supplies of potassium iodide (KI) pills to help prevent thyroid cancer in the event of a radioactive release. While this measure is welcome, it lags behind other jurisdictions.

For example, those within 20 km of New Brunswick’s Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station receive pills, while people living within 50 km of Switzerland’s four nuclear power plants get them. On Dec. 1, Toronto’s executive committee voted to study whether the 10-km zone should be expanded to 50 km.

“Even if you did 30-km pre-distribution to every household and 50-km pre-distribution to vulnerable communities and schools, we’d still be far better off than we are today,” McClenaghan says.

The province’s position:

“The current planning basis review is addressing this as well.”