Sep 2005: ACCN, the Canadian Chemical News

ACCN SEPTEMBER SEPTEMBRE • 2005 • Vol. 57, No./no 8

l�actualité chimique canadiennecanadian chemical news

ACCN SEPTEMBER SEPTEMBRE � 2005 � Vol. 57, No./no 8A publication of the CIC/Une publication de l�ICC

12

14

20

Feature Ar ticles/Ar ticles de fond

24

T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s / T a b l e d e s m a t i è r e s

R E M E M B E R W H E N

�Current� EventsHow can nuclear technology be applied to generate more electricity for Ontario � and the world?

J. M. Cuttler

Powering UpCanada participates in the Generation IV International Forum to develop advanced nuclear technologies .

Stephen J. Bushby and Sylvana Guindon

Managing Used Nuclear FuelHow do you guarantee a community�s safety�10,000 years in the future? The NWMO plans ahead. Way ahead �

Don Wiles, FCIC

Guest Column/Chroniqueur invité . . 2Nuclear Energy—An Essential Part of Canada’s Electricity MixMurray Elston

Letters/Lettres . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Personals/Personnalités . . . . . . . 3

News Briefs/Nouvelles en bref . . . . 4

Chemputing . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Supercharge Your Screen Marvin D. Silbert, FCIC

Chemfusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Canaries of the Chemical AgeJoe Schwarcz, MCIC

Book Review . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Peak Oil and the Fate of Humanity

CIC Bulletin ICC . . . . . . . . . .27

CSChE Bulletin SCGCh . . . . . . .29

NCW News/Nouvelles de la SNC . .34

Student News/Nouvelles des étudiants . . . . . . .34

Events/Événements . . . . . . . . .35

Employment Wanted/Demandes d’emploi . . . . . . . . .35

Careers/Carrières . . . . . . . . . .36

2 L�ACTUALITÉ CHIMIQUE CANADIENNE SEPTEMBRE 2005

Editor-in-Chief/Rédactrice en chefMichelle Piquette

Managing Editor/Directrice de la rédactionHeather Dana Munroe

Graphic Designer/InfographisteKrista Leroux

Editorial Board/Conseil de rédactionTerrance Rummery, FCIC, chair/président

Catherine A. Cardy, MCICCathleen Crudden, MCIC

John Margeson, MCICMilena Sejnoha, MCICBernard West, MCIC

Editorial Office/Bureau de la rédaction130, rue Slater Street, Suite/bureau 550

Ottawa, ON K1P 6E2613-232-6252 • Fax/Téléc. 613-232-5862

[email protected] • www.accn.ca

Advertising/Publicité[email protected]

Subscription Rates/Tarifs d’abonnementNon CIC members/Non-membres de l’ICC : in/au Canada CAN$55; outside/à l’extérieur du Canada US$50. Single copy/Un exemplaire CAN$8 or US$7.

L’Actualité chimique canadienne/Canadian Chemical News (ACCN) is published 10 times a year by The Chemical Institute of Canada / est publié 10 fois par année par l’Institut de chimie du Canada. www.cheminst.ca.

Recommended by The Chemical Institute of Canada, the Canadian Society for Chemistry, the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering, and the Canadian Society for Chemical Technology. Views expressed do not necessarily represent the official position of the Institute, or of the societies that recommend the magazine.

Recommandé par l’Institut de chimie du Canada, la Société canadienne de chimie, la Société canadienne de génie chimique et la Société canadienne de technologie chimique. Les opinions exprimées ne reflètent pas nécessairement la position officielle de l’Institut ou des sociétés constituantes qui soutiennent la revue.

Change of Address/Changement d’[email protected]

Printed in Canada by Gilmore Printing Services Inc. and postage paid in Ottawa, ON./Imprimé au Canada par Gilmore Printing Services Inc. et port payé à Ottawa, ON.Publications Mail Agreement Number/No de convention de la Poste-publications :40021620. (USPS# 0007-718)

Indexed in the Canadian Business Index and available on-line in the Canadian Business and Current Affairs database. / Répertorié dans la Canadian Business Index et accessible en ligne dans la banque de données Canadian Business and Current Affairs.

ISSN 0823-5228

www.accn.ca

Affordable electricity has helped make Canada a powerhouse among the world’s nations. A reliable supply of

electricity, supplied at low cost, has led to a high standard of living and a competitive economic edge.

Nuclear energy is a vital part of that electricity system. Reactors generate about 15 percent of the country’s power needs. Since 1962, reactors have delivered more than two billion megawatt-hours of electric-ity to the grid. That is enough to supply the entire country for nearly four years.

In Ontario, nuclear energy contributes about 50 percent. In New Brunswick, the figure is about 30 percent. Nuclear reactors can provide electricity for five to six cents a kilowatt-hour (KWh). Some operators in North America produce power at costs closer to two or three cents a KWh.

But our electricity infrastructure is aging. Ontario must rebuild and replace 80 percent of its power capacity within the next 20 years. Closing the coal plants in Ontario will remove one-fifth of this capacity.

This will leave a gap that threatens the stability of Ontario’s electricity system. There is a sense of urgency for both Ontario and New Brunswick to make decisions on their reactors. Refurbishing a unit can take up to two years. Building new reactors can take eight or more years, including all the regulatory processes.

In the meantime, electricity consumption keeps rising—1.3 percent or more each year in Canada. More than once this summer, Ontario residents have been asked to cut their power usage to avoid blackouts and brownouts.

Renewable sources, such as wind turbines , produce less than one percent of Canada’s

electricity and cannot bridge the supply gap and supply power at a performance capacity of 20 to 30 percent. Hydro-electric power in Ontario has been fully developed and natural gas prices have tripled in the past decade.

Nuclear energy is an economical electric-ity source. Well-maintained plants mean efficient performance. Plus, stable fuel prices make nuclear power cost effective.

Like all major power generators, nuclear plants create waste. But nuclear waste is not sent into the atmosphere, it has been safely and securely stored and managed at reactor sites for over 40 years.

Nuclear energy is important to the planet for another important reason—reactors do not emit greenhouse gases (GHG) emis-sions, which have been linked to dramatic climate changes, such as melting glaciers and rising Arctic seas. In Canada, reactors have helped the country avoid the pro-duction of more than 1.6 billion tonnes of emissions since 1972 (a figure that would have increased had we relied exclusively on fossil fuel plants). To meet our Kyoto Protocol targets, Canada will need to rely on nuclear energy.

Canada is a world leader in providing low-cost electricity to its citizens. But there is a critical need for governments to make decisions on major new capacity. Electricity is essential to society, so it is important that price volatility does not impact on Canada’s ability to compete or on its quality of life.

GUEST COLUMN CHRONIQUEUR INVITÉ

NUCLEAR ENERGY�AN ESSENTIAL PART OF CANADA�S ELECTRICITY MIX

Murray Elston is the president and CEO of the

Canadian Nuclear Association.

Murray Elston

SEPTEMBER 2005 CANADIAN CHEMICAL NEWS 3

PERSONALS PERSONNALITÉS

Eric Brown, associate professor in the department of biochemistry and biomedical sciences at McMaster University, has been named the 2005 recipient of the Merck Frosst Prize from the Canadian Society of Biochem-istry, Molecular, and Cellular Biology. This award recognizes outstanding achievement by scientists early in their career. Brown, who also holds a Canada Research Chair in microbial biochemistry, is director of McMaster’s high throughput screening laboratory. His work focuses on developing new therapies intended to counter the growing threat of bacterial drug resistance to existing antibiotics.

UniversityL’Université de Montréal est fière d’annoncer la venue, en mars 2005, au département de chimie, en qualité de professeur adjoint, de Christian Pellerin, MICC. Pellerin a reçu sont Ph.D. de l’Université Laval sous la direction de Michel Pézolet et la co-direction de Robert E. Prud’homme, puis a effectué des études post-doctorales à la University of Delaware sous la direction de John F. Rabolt (co-direc-tion de Bruce Chase de la société DuPont). Ses intérêts en recherche portent sur la spec-troscopie de vibration des matériaux, en particulier la mesure rapide et ultra-rapide des changements de structure.

Government

Derek G. Gray, FCIC, was awarded a Paprican /NSERC Industrial Research Chair in Cellulose Properties and Utilization. Gray is a professor of chemistry at McGill University .

Chérif Matta, MCIC, has been recognized for his pioneering research in theoretical chem-istry with a John Charles Polanyi Prize. The Province of Ontario established the prestigious award to support outstanding researchers in the early stages of their careers. In his cur-rent research in the department of chemistry at McMaster University, Matta is using com-putational chemistry to study how electrons are distributed in biological molecules. One of his interests is studying the interaction of electromagnetic radiation and genetic mate-rial to determine how electric fields from cell phones, television sets, computers, and power lines can alter our DNA.

Mark Stradiotto, MCIC, received a sub-stantial NSERC Collaborative Research and Development Grant, in collabora-tion with Boehringer-Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd. Stradiotto is an assistant professor in the department of chemistry at Dalhousie University . He is also a Canada Foundation for Innovation Researcher and the 2005 Dalhousie University Killam Research Prize Winner. He and associate professor, Peter Wentzell, MCIC, are co-winners of the 2004–2005 Dalhousie Undergraduate Chemistry Society Teaching Award for excellence and dedication to improving student life.

DistinctionHugo de Lasa, FCIC, and Norman Epstein, FCIC, were both inducted into the Canadian Academy of Engineering in Calgary, AB, during the Academy’s Annual General Meeting 2005.

de Lasa has been a key figure in furthering the understanding of the science and tech-nology of chemical reactors—especially in pursuit of environmentally friendly processes. He is the founding director of The Univer-sity of Western Ontario’s Chemical Reactor Engineering Centre (CREC). Among his inven-tions are the CREC-Riser simulator, innovative optical probes, and several photochemical pro-cesses. He has been active in organizing major international conferences and is the found-ing co-editor of the International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering.

Epstein is an honorary professor emeritus in The University of British Columbia’s department of chemical and biological

Derek G. Gray, FCIC

Giving Chemists Their DueDear Editor,

Further to Thomas F. Massiah’s letter to the editor on the subject of “With Respect to Chemists,” (ACCN June 2005) I have been asking the same question for many years. Why can’t a certif ied chemist be a guarantor ? I am fortunate that my daughter-in-law is principal of a high school, so I have a guarantor in the family.

Twenty or so years ago, professional engineers were given the right [to be] guarantors . At that time, I asked the same question—why not certified chemists?

I ask again. Let’s get some action on this!

Robert Kennedy, MCIC

LETTERS LETTRES

IndustryCorporate leadership is the key to the long-term “health” of our environment and our energy resources. Companies that imple-ment sustainability plans not only benefit their bottom line, they benefit our standard of living . The fourth annual GLOBE Awards for Environmental Excellence recognized companies that have demonstrated envi-ronmental leadership and a commitment to sustainable business strategies.

Alcan Inc. has been awarded the Corporate Competitiveness Award of the 2005 GLOBE Awards for Environmental Excellence. Alcan is a global leader in aluminum with world-class operations in primary aluminum, fabricated aluminum, flexible and specialty packaging, aerospace applications, bauxite mining, and alumina processing. Alcan strives to optimize shareholder value while contributing to social, environmental , and economic value. Alcan has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions (three million tonnes less CO2 than in 1990) through the re-use of bauxite residue and more innovative packaging. The company works towards more efficient power generation and promotes closed loop manufacturing systems to promote water recycling .

The awards are sponsored by The Globe and Mail, Report on Business Television, and the GLOBE Foundation of Canada.

Phot

o by

Ow

en E

gan


engineering . He is widely known in Canada and internationally for his long service to the chemical engineering profession. He has been a leader in research on heat exchanger fouling, spouted beds, liquid and three-phase fluidization , and particulate processes, and he has contributed definitive articles that have clarified the respective fields. Epstein has served as president of the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering and as editor of The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering.

Cam Oehlschlager, FCIC, retired profes-sor of chemistry, Simon Fraser University (SFU), will receive the Silver Medal Award for outstanding achievement in chemi-cal ecology at the 2006 annual meeting of the International Society of Chemical Ecol-ogy in Barcelona, Spain. Oehlschlager was a faculty member in the SFU department of chemistry from 1966 to 1998 and is now vice-president of ChemTica Internacional of Costa Rica. The company is well known for its development of insect pheromone sys-tems for the management of insect pests in

PERSONALS PERSONNALITÉS

the tropical Americas, South East Asia, and the Middle East.

Carleton University’s Zhi Yuan (Wayne) Wang, FCIC, has several hectic years ahead of him—and he couldn’t be happier about it. Wang was appointed Canada Research Chair (CRC) in Emerging Organic Materials. Wang develops emerging organic solids and poly-mers, in particular near infrared (NIR)-active organic solids and polymers, for innovation

in optoelectronic, photonic, and communica-tion technologies.

Paul Wiseman, MCIC, has won the Bio-physical Society’s Young Fluorescence Investigator Award for 2005, recognizing novel applications of fluorescence microscopy to biological research. Wiseman is a profes-sor in the chemistry and physics departments at McGill University.

NEWS BRIEFS NOUVELLES EN BREF

Zhi Yuan (Wayne) Wang, FCIC

In MemoriamThe CIC extends its condolences to the families of:

Otto Meresz, MCIC

M. Eugene J. Moreau, MCIC

Canada Wins French Nuclear ContractAtomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) through its part-ners Comex Nucléaire of France and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries of Japan has won a multimillion dollar contract to design, test, manufacture, and install Emergency Core Cooling System (ECC) strainers for the French nuclear util-ity Electricité de France (EDF). EDF is the largest nuclear utility in the world and owns and operates 58 nuclear power plants.

AECL is responsible for the development, testing, and design of the ECC strainers for the specific conditions in the first plants being retrofitted by EDF. AECL originally developed these finned strainers for use in the AECL de-signed CANDUs. They are designed for use in emergency situations to filter debris from the cooling water used to maintain the cooling of the reactor core. The particular expertise lies in providing a large enough surface area to capture the expected debris while maintaining water flow—all within as small an area as possible.

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

ErratumRené Roy was incorrectly identified with a photo of Christian Pellerin, MCIC, on p. 3 of the July/August 2005 issue of ACCN. Nous sommes désolés.


Canada Helps Shape the Nuclear Frontier The Government of Canada signed an inter-national agreement on nuclear energy that will help shape the direction of the industry for the next 20 years. The framework agree-ment, supported by Canada, the U.S., the U.K., Japan, France, and six other countries, is part of the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) that advances long-term multi-lateral R&D on nuclear energy systems.

The driving force behind GIF is to develop nuclear reactor designs for use beyond 2025 that address the challenges facing nuclear technologies today. Canada has played a prominent role in developing the policy framework and providing technical expertise and leadership.

“By signing this agreement … the Govern-ment of Canada will continue to build on its already strong relationship with interna-tional partners and help expand our scientific and technological role in developing nuclear energy systems for the future,” said the Honourable R. John Efford, Minister of Natural Resources Canada. “As a non-emitting energy source, nuclear [power] is an important part of Canada’s energy mix and has an important role to play in helping us meet our climate change and air quality objectives.”

Canada’s participation in this agreement supports this country’s strong technical and policy roles played in GIF to date and rec-ognizes Canada’s role as a world leader in research and development of nuclear power and other energy sources, including the hydrogen economy. It will also facilitate the continued and future involvement of Canadian

industrial and university researchers in the international R&D effort and ensure that Canadian policy objectives are reflected in GIF policy and governance decisions.

This agreement advances Canada’s international leadership role in the natural resources sectors, which are a vital part of Can-ada’s economy and society. It also supports the Government of Canada’s commitment to building on the strength of our country and our people.

Natural Resources Canada

For further information on GIF, turn to “Powering Up” on p. 20.

Photo by Pat Herman


CANDU Office Offers Improved Nuclear SupportAtomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) officially opened its new Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) Services Office in Pick-ering, ON. The new Pickering office brings AECL closer to its largest CANDU customer and improves its ability to deliver existing and future service contracts to Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) Pickering and Darlington Nuclear Generating Stations.

AECL’s new Pickering office will initially employ 30 engineering and technical staff, and this is anticipated to increase signifi-cantly in the coming year.

“Opening this facility today underscores AECL’s commitment to ensuring Ontario’s CANDU fleet continues to play a vital role

in providing Ontario with the electricity it needs, while contributing to cleaner air for us all to breathe,” said AECL president and CEO Robert Van Adel. “With more than 20 smog alerts this year and Ontario ’s electricity system strained to the limit, the need for the CANDU fleet has never been stronge r.”

In addition to enhancing the delivery of AECL’s current services, a strategic focus of the new office will be to support larger OPG projects.

“The Pickering and Darlington units are critically important to ensuring a reliable, affordable, and clean energy supply for Ontario ’s future,” added Van Adel. “The new office clearly demonstrates AECL’s commitment to OPG in supporting and con-tributing to the successful operation of all of their reactors .”


New Tax Boosts Potash IndustryNew tax initiatives announced by the Saskatchewan government will stimulate significant expansion in the province’s potash industry. The changes will result in hundreds of millions of dollars in new capi-tal investment by the industry and more than 200 permanent jobs. To coincide with the announcement , Agrium Inc. and Mosaic have announced plans for potash production capacity and Potash Corp of Saskatchewan is planning to bring back idled capacity.

Camford Chemical Report

Photo courtesy of AECL



The Queen Tours SynchrotronThe Canadian Light Source (CLS) synchrotron facility has hosted thousands of visitors, but none have caused anywhere near the excite-ment and commotion as Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and His Royal Highness Prince Philip. The royal couple toured the facility and the University of Saskatchewan (U of S) on May 19, 2005. News media from Britain and Canada, along with hundreds of Saskatonians, turned out to see them. The royal couple chat-ted with scientists who use the synchrotron facility, met with school children, and went on an extensive “walkabout” to greet the public lined up outside. The royal couple came to Saskatchewan and Alberta to celebrate the two provinces’ centennials.

Canadian Light Source Inc.,

University of Saskatchewan

Landmark Convention to Combat Nuclear Terrorism The International Convention for the Sup-pression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism opens for signature in September this year. Interna-tional Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general, Mohamed El Baradei, welcomed the adoption of the convention. “This is a land-mark achievement [that] will bolster global efforts to combat nuclear terrorism,” El Bara-dei said. “It will be a key part of international efforts to prevent terrorists from gaining access to nuclear weapons.” El Baradei urges all States to “sign and ratify the Convention without delay so nuclear terrorism will have no chance.”

The United Nations General Assem-bly adopted the convention in April 2005 to strengthen the global legal framework to counter terrorist threats. Based on a proposal by the Russian Federation in 1998, the convention focuses on criminal offences

related to nuclear terrorism and covers a broad range of possible targets, including nuclear reactors as well as nuclear material and radioactive substances.

Under its provisions, alleged offenders—such as any individual or group that unlaw-fully and intentionally possesses or uses radioactive material with the intent to cause harm—must be either extradited or prose-cuted. States are also encouraged to cooperate with each other in connection with criminal investigations and extradition proceedings. The convention further requires that any seized nuclear or radiological material be held in accordance with IAEA safeguards, and han-dled in keeping with the IAEA’s health, safety, and physical protection standards.

El Baradei also recalled that the agency is in the process of amending the Conven-tion on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material , in order to broaden its scope, and in so doing, strengthen the current legal framework for securing nuclear material against illicit uses.

International Atomic Energy Agency

Pictured right to left are CLS executive director, Bill Thomlinson; The Queen; U of S chancellor, Tom Malloy; The Duke of Edinburgh; and U of S president, Peter MacKinnon.

Phot

o by

Jona

than

Ruc

hti



Canada and China Team Up on Nuclear Energy

Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabo witnessed the signing of a Memorandum of Under-standing (MOU) that will result in greater nuclear energy cooperation between the two nations . This will establish a framework for collaboration on research and development programs, projects, and activities aimed at furthering a basic understanding of nuclear energy and its applications, and improving the cost and safety of nuclear energy sys-tems. It will also facilitate uranium resource development.

On behalf of Natural Resources Canada, David L. Emerson, minister of industry, signed the MOU, as did Robert Van Adel, president and CEO of Atomic Energy of Can-ada Limited (AECL), Zhang Guobao, vice-minister of the China National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and China National Nuclear Corporation.

“This MOU is very important in further strengthening Sino-Canadian cooperation in the field of nuclear energy,” says Minister Emerson. “It demonstrates our strong com-mitment and interest in collaboration with Chinese scientists and engineers.”

Donated Software Equips NMR LabAndré Simpson, MCIC, is now well-equipped to continue his research on the structural categories of carbon in the environment. Advanced Chemistry Development, Inc. (ACD/Labs) announced a substantial donation of software to the Environmental Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Centre at the University of Toronto at Scarborough. This donation includes ACD/SpecManager SQL, ACD/NMR Predictor Suite, ACD/Structure Elucidator, ACD/LC Simulator, ACD/Name

to Structure, ACD/ChemFolder, and ACD/MS Fragmenter.

Brent Lefebvre, NMR product manager for ACD/Labs, states, “With our cutting edge tools in the hands of academics like Simp-son, the progress of the research is acceler-ated exponentially.”

ACD/Labs has long been committed to helping academia provide future scientists with access to the most current industry-standard software tools, through unique academic software offerings and ongoing research partnerships.

Simpson adds, “the incorporation of ACD/Labs software is critical for our work with very complex natural mixtures. With novel hyphenated NMR approaches it’s possible to create vast quantities of spectral data in a matter of hours, but this data may take years to interpret, and some novel structures may be impossible to solve by manual methods. ACD/Labs’ software helps us manage and interpret this raw spectroscopic data arising from the array of novel chemical structures that are waiting to be discovered in the en-vironment.”

The elucidation of the main components in natural organic matter (NOM), found in aquatic, atmospheric, and terrestrial envi-ronments is imperative to understanding its varied role in processes such as carbon cycling , contamination support, and soil fertility . Due to its insolubility in most organic solvents, NOM is difficult to resolve by con-ventional analytical techniques such as mass spectrometry and chromatography. In recent years, NMR has proven to be the most pow-erful tool for identifying intact structures in complex mixtures of NOM. Multidimensional NMR has made it possible to extract detailed structural information from such mixtures in order to identify ranges of partial structures. Simpson and ACD/Labs have published sev-eral articles in recent years pertaining to their collaborative efforts.

Information about Advanced Chemistry Development and its products can be found at www.acdlabs.com.

Advanced Chemistry Development

AECL has a proven track record in China, having successfully delivered two CANDU 6 units under budget and four months ahead of schedule at the Qinshan Phase III site in cooperation with Chinese and international partners. The CANDU 6 nuclear reactor is one of the most successful power reactor designs providing cost-effective, clean, and reliable electricity to countries on four continents. Evolving from the successful CANDU 6, AECL has also developed the ACR—an innovative next generation system for electricity compa-nies around the world.


Photo by Joseph M. Zlomek


Preparing the last “Chemputing” (“The Pivoting Monitor,” ACCN July/August 2005) was a formidable task. I had

only a page to fit all of my thoughts on one of the most practical improvements to “Chem-puting” in many years. Having worked with this new screen technology for a few more months, I’m even more enthusiastic. It has been quite a dramatic change to work with a whole page at once rather than being forced to scroll through a bit at a time. It’s easier to compose on screen. It’s easier to edit what I’ve done, and there is much less need to print out drafts for proofreading.

Now that I have it, I tend to use portrait mode most of the time. My Ergotron Neo-Flex stand outperformed any other stand I have seen. Despite its Chevy price, it runs like a Ferrari. Pivoting the monitor back and forth for text or graphics is essentially effort-less, and I really enjoy the ease with which I can raise or lower the screen to get a better look at the bottom of the page. Environmen-tally conscious readers will be pleased that the old stand was recycled into a customized copy holder and now sits next to the screen it once supported.

The Portrait Pro software behaved flaw-lessly and would still be doing so, had I not added some new bells and whistles to my new computer. My new ATI graphics card not only enhances my graphics capabilities, it also has a rotating feature. I’ve tried both options. Both perform well and the screens look the same. If your motherboard has

integrated graphics, or if you have a graph-ics card without a rotating feature, or if you just don’t want to dig inside—I would recommend Portrait Pro as a simple and reliable way to rotate the screen. If you have a graphics card that can rotate the screen as mine does, I would go that way as it’s a bit faster and doesn’t use any computer RAM.

Portrait Displays has many more ideas to improve the way you live with your screen. I tried two and liked both. As with Portrait Pro, they require simple, one-click installa-tions. Liquid Surf is a program we’ve needed for years to make up for many of those annoy-ing viewing deficiencies inherent with Internet Explorer. Who hasn’t had an image that’s too small to see or so large that the right side gets lopped off when it’s printed? Netscape has a provision to make the screen image fit the printed page. I never found it to be very reli-able. Liquid Surf loads its own IE tool bar. One button sets the magnification from 75 percent to 250 percent. I found that 80 or 90 pecent prevented the image from running off the right edge of the printed page. Going the other way, 150 percent or higher can transform a small item into a full page. The other buttons pro-vide an extended view option to display the page in two columns and a split view that enables viewing two separate pages at the same time instead of jumping back and forth.

Liquid View tries to overcome one of the differences that people rarely think about when they replace the old CRT with an LCD screen. The LCD is an array of individual

pixels . Each screen size has a native resolu-tion based on the number of pixels, and that is the only resolution that should be used with that size of screen. Today’s 19" screens may be big, but running at 1280 x 1024 results in very small text and icons. Going to 800 x 600 is all it would take to make them bigger with a CRT. Doing the same with an LCD can result in a significant loss of sharpness. When it’s enlarged, a single point ceases to be a point as it starts to overlap adjoining pixels. Portrait Pro’s Liquid View keeps the inherent sharpness of the screen by redraw-ing the screen to fit within the pixel spacing. Clicking the icon in the system tray brings up several image-size choices. There are also ad-justments to correct the mouse movements to the resized image and specialized settings for Microsoft Office. Being able to get bigger text and icons is a must for anyone whose eyes are uncomfortable with these high-resolu-tion LCD displays or, for that matter, anyone who has to work on an ongoing basis with programs that are difficult to view.

Visit Ergotron Canada at www.ergotron.com.Visit Portrait Displays, Inc. at www.portrait.com.

You can reach our Chemputing editor,

Marvin D. Silbert, FCIC, at Marvin Silbert and

Associates, 23 Glenelia Avenue, Toronto, ON

M2M 2K6; tel. 416-225-0226; fax: 416-225-2227;

e-mail: [email protected];

Web site: www.silbert.org.

CHEMPUTING

Supercharge Your Screen Marvin D. Silbert, FCIC


These poor souls suffer. That much is for sure. But just what are they suf-fering from? A whiff of perfume, the

scent of paint, the smell of diesel fume, the fragrance of a cleaning agent, or the aroma of newsprint sends them reeling. Symptoms usually include headache, fatigue, breathing problems, muscle and joint pain, irritabil-ity, insomnia, short-term memory loss, and confusion. How can such chemically diverse substances cause such similar symptoms? The explanation sometimes offered is that these people suffer from something called “multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS),” also referred to as “environmental illness,” “total allergy syn-drome,” or “20th-century disease.”

The theory is that an initial exposure to a chemical somehow throws the immune sys-tem into hyperactivity, causing it to become sensitive to tiny amounts of chemicals that are harmless to most people. Sounds sort of plausible, but most allergists and immunolo-gists don’t buy this explanation. Standard immune function tests show no abnormali-ties, and there is no known mechanism that can account for small doses of chemicals with completely different molecular struc-tures simultaneously affecting so many body systems. They therefore raise the possibil-ity that the symptoms may originate in the patient’s mind, triggered by the stresses of everyday life. Stress, they suggest, can cause a variety of symptoms, and chemicals serve as a convenient scapegoat. People become sensitized not by the chemicals themselves, but by press reports that constantly raise the possibility of a link between illness and environmental contaminants.

A small group of practitioners disagree. Some physicians, osteopaths, and naturo-paths argue that MCS is a very real disease caused by the failure of some people’s immune system to adapt to the numerous synthetic chemicals that have been intro-duced into our environment since World War II. These “clinical ecologists,” as some call

themselves, use a variety of techniques not accepted by orthodox medicine to diagnose and treat patients with MCS.

So, is MCS a psychological or a physio-logical disorder? Evidence suggests it could be either one. Personality profiles of MCS patients often show a history of psychologi-cal problems, depression, and anxiety. Some see themselves as prisoners in a hostile world surrounded by chemicals that make them ill and at the mercy of uncaring physicians who try to pass them off as psychiatric cases. Some find relief by retreating from modern life, moving to remote communities, living in houses with walls lined with aluminum foil and furnished with items that release no smells of any kind. They drink only ultra-pure water, eat organic foods, scorn synthetic fibres, and wear masks when they venture outside to protect themselves. Some hang newspapers on a clothesline for hours to allow the smell of the ink to dissipate before bringing the paper into the house. Of course, even if the symptoms of MCS are triggered by the anxieties and frustrations of modern life, they are very real. What can be done to ease these patients’ suffering?

Some clinical ecologists use a technique called provocation-neutralization. Small amounts of a suspect material are injected under the skin, and if symptoms result, a larger dose is injected to “neutralize” the symptoms. The patient usually knows what is being injected and the power of sugges-tion can come into play. Lists of potentially offensive substances are compiled in this way, but studies show that when patients are challenged in a blinded test, they are unable to tell whether the injection contains an of-fending substance or not. It seems that belief in whatever treatment is used, and not the treatment itself, is the criterion for relief.

It would be a mistake to suggest that all cases of MCS stem from an irrational fear of chemicals. Some chemicals, even in small doses, cause a barrage of symptoms in some

unfortunate people. And they don’t have to be chemophobics! The case of a pharmacol-ogy professor (who was not averse to working with chemicals) makes the point. He devel-oped itching and irritation around the face when he worked at his desk. After a few weeks, the situation became worse. His eyes constantly watered, he was tormented by burning and stinging sensations and respira-tory problems. One day he noticed that the odour of his New York Times disturbed him, and he realized that his problems might relate to paper. Emptying his office of most paper helped, but he then started to react to felt-tip pens, gasoline odours, aftershave, and even new permanent press pants. Eventually, he learned that just prior to the onset of his prob-lems, the ventilation system in his office had been turned off for cleaning and had not been turned on again. It seems that the accumula-tion of certain compounds in the air, perhaps chemicals such as formaldehyde used in paper processing, had wreaked havoc with his immune system. A classic case of MCS—and not one of psychogenic origin.

MCS is a miserable affliction, no matter what the cause. Sufferers sometimes claim that they are the canaries of this chemical age, signalling calamities that are destined to become more widespread. Critics say they are more like cuckoos. Both analogies are probably off track. A better comparison would be with the hooded pitohui of New Guinea. This bird harbours a potent neu-rotoxin in its skin and feathers that affords protection against predators. It is fascinating, and rare, but very real—just like MCS.

Popular science writer, Joe Schwarcz, MCIC, is

a chemistry professor and the director of McGill

University’s Office for Science and Society.

He hosts the Dr. Joe Show every Sunday from

3:00 to 4:00 p.m. on Montréal ’s radio station

CJAD and on CFRB in Toronto. The broadcast is

available on the Web at www.CJAD.com.

CHEMFUSION

Canaries of the Chemical AgeJoe Schwarcz, MCICThe plight of MCS sufferers


Peak Oil” or “oil peak” is a popular expression to describe the point in time when oil extraction and produc-

tion naturally start to decline. There is an oil peak for every well, every oil field, and ulti-mately for all economically accessible world oil reserves. Although most Canadian oil fields and tar sands will still produce oil for hundreds of years to come, the global rate of supply of conventional oil has apparently reached its peak, while demand continues to increase beyond availability.

In his recently published on-line Power-Point book, Peak Oil and the Fate of Humanity , Robert Bériault, a retired biotechnology laboratory manager, invites Canadians to carefully consider unforeseen consequences of peak oil to our livelihood in the near future.

This is a timely, original book written in plain language aimed at a non-technical audience to raise public awareness. Public understanding about the ecological and socio-economical consequences of an oil peak is alarmingly low. We are preceded by four gen-erations of blind faith in unlimited economic growth fuelled on cheap, abundant oil, which makes it difficult for anyone today to witness and understand the current reversal. The reader is invited to verify and debunk popular assumptions and acquire a global perspective on uncertainties about the future.

Although Bériault is prudent with claims and encourages readers to reach their own conclusions, right from the beginning he introduces seven strong pieces of evidence that confirm the imminence of a world-scale oil peak crisis while shedding new light on its irreversible consequences.

Already, we can feel the initial effects at the pump. A similar crisis hit North America

in 1973 when the capacity of U.S. oil field production peaked. This time around, there are no known oil reserves or cheap alterna-tive energy resources on the planet. The cost of gasoline will just continue to rise.

One piece of evidence states that in oil field exploitation, the energy return on energy invested (EROEI) was 100 to 1 in 1950, 30 to 1 in 1970, and is now 10 to 1 in 2005. The Canadian tar sands have an EROEI of only 4 to 1! Furthermore , we learn that, “Exploration doesn’t pay anymore. In 2003, oil companies spent $8 billion on exploration and discovered only $4 billion worth of new reserves.”

The fate of chemical professionals is very entangled with the oil industry and its thou-sands of derivatives in the fields of energy, transportation, pharmaceuticals, medicine, ag-riculture, food processing, household materials, and appliances . This permanent oil shortage means endless opportunities to reinvent the manufacturing and transformation industry.

This book is also a direct appeal to Cana-dian scientific and engineering communities for more interdisciplinary dialogue, public forums, and responsible care beyond their chemical and energy industry “silos” onto a socioeconomic scale.

Are there truly enough alternatives to cheap oil to keep up the current mass production, transportation, and consumption of fertilizers, gasoline, and medication? Optimism cannot be founded on the usual assumptions of steady economic growth, social stability, and healthy ecological habitat anymore.

We learn that in the last century, the foun-dation of our technological civilization has been entirely based on economic growth. This growth requires constant increases in eco-nomic productivity derived from increasing

energy consumption. With China and India matching the pace of progress and affluence of the West, the widening gap between energy demand and supply is gobbling up any remain-ing reserves and resource safety margins.

We are attending the end of global eco-nomic growth with a reversal into a new trend of worldwide systemic economic decline compounded by the unaccounted for disappearance of ecosystem services and life supporting habitats.

History shows that these cycles of prosperity are natural to every civilization. Not one has escaped the fate of decline. If peace and co-operation are to prevail during a steady, long-term economic decline, then a more visionary management approach is required than would be during a period of economic growth.

Science and engineering are more crucial than ever in such times of limitation. Creativity must now be channelled into efficiency , recycling, diversification, adapta-tion, autonomy , and sustainability through complete integration of human activity within natural processes. Among other initiatives, green chemistry and engineering stand as a flagship to our future.

Peak Oil and the Fate of Humanity asks fundamental questions, and encourages the reader to reach his/her own conclusions while daringly showing where the current trends will lead us—if left unchanged.

The author welcomes readers’ comments and contributions to this interactive book.

Pierre Lemasson, MCIC, is the information

technology and divisions development manager

of the CIC. He also teaches philosophy for the

International Organization New Acropolis.

Book Review

By Robert Bériault, an on-line PowerPoint book, www.peakoilandhumanity.com

PEAK OIL AND THE FATE OF HUMANITY

“

Image reprinted with permission from “A Report on Energy Trends Green House Gas Emissions and Alternative Energy” by ExxonMobil, February 2004.

To celebrate the CIC’s 60th

anniversary this year, ACCN will

feature photos, articles, stories,

letters, and other memorabilia

related to the chemical industries .

This special retrospective will

appear in each issue in this

section called REMEMBERWHEN.

Submit YOUR memories to

[email protected].


RE

ME

MB

ER

WH

EN

From ACCN, April 1985


RE

ME

MB

ER

WH

EN


A change in our current course is appropriate in light of the projected shortage of electricity generating capacity in Ontario . The August 14, 2003 blackout revealed that

“nothing works without electricity.” Rapidly escalating energy costs are clear evidence of this, as oil supply and demand move out of balance. This leads to an increased demand for natural gas (which is also being used to generate increasing amounts of electricity in the U.S.) and to the extraction of increasing amounts of oil from the Alberta tar sands.

Ontario is also turning to gas-fired power generation, which esca-lates in cost as we bid against the Americans for limited supplies of gas. Increasing electricity prices damage the Ontario economy. Busi-nesses are forced to close or move to other provinces. Increased use of nuclear energy could be part of the solution to these problems.

Most Ontarians have supported nuclear energy use for the last 30 years. That support has declined recently due to the negative images being disseminated about nuclear technology. There are rela-tively few positive messages—especially about nuclear power. As a result, the Ontario government seems reluctant to urge the refurbish-ment of old nuclear plants (such as Pickering NGS) and the construc-tion of new ones.

Generally, the negative images are not factual. They have been designed to shift public opinion away from support of nuclear energy . Such a shift would result in decisions that would lead to phasing out

nuclear generation in favour of wind and gas-fired generation. Wind-mills operate irregularly —only about 20 percent of the time. They require a back-up—typically more gas-fired generation. This article provides factual information about nuclear energy as it relates to clean

“CURRENT” EVENTSHow can nuclear technology be applied to generate more electricity for Ontario � and the world? J. M. Cuttler

The Pickering nuclear generating station is focusing on plant life maintenance and life extension.


environment, affordable electricity, sustain-ability, and social acceptance.

Clean environment

The mining and processing of uranium ore into nuclear fuel are, of course, carried out in accordance with Canadian regulations. Nuclear power plants, under strict regulations, provide more than half of the electricity used in Ontario. The environment around these plants is very clean, especially the air. Emis-sions of radioactivity are typically more than a hundred times below the regulatory limits.

Those who advocate nuclear phase-out have created an issue about the management of the small volume of used fuel from 30 years of electricity supply. They raise concerns about the potential release of radioactivity far into the future. The used fuel is stored at our nuclear sites in robust, sealed contain-ers, made from steel and reinforced concrete, which will remain leak tight for thousands of years. Long before then, future generations of Canadians will recycle the used fuel in advanced nuclear reactors to release the vast amount of energy that still remains in this fuel. In these breeder reactors, the long-lived radioactivity will be transformed into much shorter-lived radioactivity, which will also be managed safely. The amount of this material is small compared with the amount of natu-rally radioactive material already in the soil we cultivate, the water we drink, and the air we breathe.

Affordable electricity

The cost of electricity from nuclear plants, which includes allowance for plant decom-missioning and managing the used fuel, is comparable with the cost of electricity from coal-fired plants. The cost is much lower than the cost of electricity from gas-fired plants. With the restoration of capacity factors to

levels in excess of 80 percent, Ontario Power Generation (OPG)’s partial unit electricity cost for nuclear power has improved to about 4 cents/kWh (with a target of 3.5 cents/kWh in 2006). OPG receives about 5 cents/kWh. Without these nuclear plants, the average cost of electricity in Ontario would be compa-rable to the average cost in the State of New York or Michigan—about twice as high as the 5 to 5.8 cents/kWh we currently pay.

Anti-nuclear activists focus on the high capital cost of nuclear power. Current plants cost about $2,000 per kilowatt of capac-ity and they last more than 25 years before refurbishment is needed. Since the aver-age home uses approximately a kilowatt of power, a homeowner’s share of the capital cost of our nuclear plants is about $2,000. This is roughly the same cost as a home gas furnace or a central air conditioner. The capital cost of a nuclear plant would appear affordable if it were presented in this manner. A way has to be found to pay for nuclear plants in the same period of time that homeowners pay for their gas furnaces and air conditioners.

If stable conditions were assured, the potential for significant profit would induce businesses to invest in nuclear plant construction . Advances in technology over the past 30 years enable the capital cost of future plants to be reduced. Because of low fuel costs, the operating cost of nuclear plants will remain below the operating cost of gas-fired plants. Ongoing improvements in nuclear plant management are reducing operating costs.

Sustainability

Just one CANDU fuel bundle, 10 cm in diam-eter and 50 cm long, provides the electricity consumed by an average household for about 100 years. Because current reactors fission only one percent of the nuclear fuel, an enor-mous amount of energy remains in the used bundles. Within a century, it will likely be economical to build advanced reactors and recycle our used fuel.

How long can nuclear energy sustain us? Bernard Cohen has pointed out that the usual assessment of the world’s uranium resources, lasting a few thousand years, is based on the quantities available at the current market price.1 Using breeder reactors, it will be eco-nomical to extract uranium from the oceans

and still keep the fuel cost below one percent of the cost of electricity. This fuel supply is sustainable because new uranium is being carried into the seas by rivers, allowing at least 6,500 tonnes of uranium to be with-drawn each year. This amount is adequate to generate approximately ten times the world’s present electricity usage. Fission of uranium is consistent with the definition of a “renew-able” energy source in the sense in which that term is generally used.

Nuclear power is generally regarded as a low-cost source of “base load” electricity with hydro and fossil plants employed for “peaking.” But naval reactors are designed to “load-follow,” and nuclear plants can be built to do the job of the coal-fired plants.

Social acceptance

For more than 30 years, Ontarians have accepted nuclear power to supply a large fraction of their electricity. It supplied two-thirds in the early 1990s. The rise of environmentalism brought prominent, on-going efforts to discredit this technology. Provincial government actions impaired Ontario Hydro’s capability to manage its nuclear plants. This was compounded by employee culture and management prob-lems, which impacted negatively on plant construction and plant life management. Such problems are common in many large organizations and damage their performance. Strong corrective measures have been taken that are restoring excellence and public con-fidence in our power utility.

Emissions of radioactivity

are typically more than a

hundred times below the

regulatory limits

Coal18%

Gas/Oil/Wood7%

Hydro25%Nuclear

50%

ELECTRICITY GENERATION IN ONTARIO (2004)

Source: Independent Electricity System Operator (Ontario)


There are many examples of well-managed nuclear projects, including Canadian ones. Nuclear stations worldwide are generally very well managed, but this good news does not attract media attention. Technical problems have been identified over the past 30 years, in this relatively new technology, and solutions to all of these problems have been found. The operating lives of many nuclear plants have been and are being extended. This positive message needs to be shared with the public for continued social acceptance.

An unwarranted scare has been cre-ated about the safety of our nuclear plants. Analysis of plant design and operation over more than 30 years has demonstrated that

nuclear power is a very safe method of gen-erating electricity. Concerns have been raised from time to time about potential exposures to ionizing radiation from the reactors. Plant workers receive radiation exposures that are well below harmful levels, and any radia-tion received by nearby residents is a tiny fraction of the natural radiation they receive. Figure 1 compares natural with human-made radiation.

An enormous amount of research has been carried out on the effects of radiation on health for more than a century, and radiation is used extensively in medicine. The radiation level below which no adverse health effects have been observed is well known2,3, and

employee exposures are maintained below this level. Biologists know that the greatest cause of cell damage (many orders of magnitude greater than other natural causes) is the oxygen we breathe. All living organisms have a damage-control biosystem that prevents, repairs , and removes cell damage, or they would not survive very long. Radiation biologists know that a low dose of radiation (less than about 0.30 Gy)* increases the activity of this biosystem (resulting in less cancer incidence), while a high dose of radiation decreases the activity of this biosystem (more cancer). There is extensive evidence of beneficial health effects (radia-tion hormesis) following exposures to low

Figure 1. Comparing human-made radiation with natural radiation6

* 1 Gray = 1 joule of radiation energy per kilogram of living tissue

doses and low dose rates of radiation in every living organism.4

Theodore Rockwell5 points out that the nuclear community agonizes over its inability to communicate its message to the public, but it cannot overcome a basic problem. “Our credibility is continually undermined by osten-sibly authoritative statements that no amount of radiation is small enough to be harmless and that a nuclear casualty could kill as many as hundreds of thousands of people. That mes-sage we have communicated, and therefore the public and the media are not wholly to blame for the resulting public fear of radiation and all things nuclear. We cannot expect people to believe our assurances of safety so long as we acquiesce in terrifying messages to the contrary. … Although the case is persuasive that the worst realistic nuclear casualty is less harmful than that of nuclear power’s serious competitors, the evidence has not yet been as-sembled into an overall documented statement and evaluation. … The action urgently needed

now is to prepare the case, and then discuss it within our own ranks. … Until that happens, the status quo will prevail.5”

References

1. Cohen B. L., “Breeder Reactors—A Renewable Energy Source,” in Am J Phys 51:1, January 1983.

2. Health Physics Society, “Radiation Risk in Perspective,” Position Statement January 1996, and reaffirmed March 2001, www.hps.org/documents/radiationrisk.pdf.

3. American Nuclear Society, “Health Effects of Low-Level Radiation,” Position Statement 41 June 2001, www.ans.org/pi/ps/docs/ps41.pdf.

4. Cuttler J. M., “What Becomes of Nuclear Risk Assessment in Light of Radiation Hormesis?”, Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Society, Toronto, June 6–9, 2004, www.ecolo.org/documents/documents_in_english/risk-cuttler_04.doc.

5. Rockwell T., “The Realism Project: It’s Time to Get Real,” American Nuclear Society , Nuclear News December 2004, pp. 10–12.

6. Rockwell T., “Creating the New World: Stories and Images from the Dawn of the Atomic Age,” (Bloomington, Indiana: 1st Books Library, 2003), Figure 7.1, p. 150.

Jerry Cuttler, DSc, PEng, FCNS, led a team that

designed the reactor control, safety system, and

radiation instrumentation for the CANDU 6,

Pickering B, and Bruce B electricity generating

stations for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

(AECL). He is a longstanding member of the

Canadian Nuclear Society Council and was

president from 1995 to 1996. For the past ten

years, Cuttler has assessed the effects of ionizing

radiation on health and has drawn widespread

attention to the beneficial effects of low doses. He

retired from AECL in July 2000 to form Cuttler &

Associates Inc. and provides consulting services.

Nuclear science has contributed to the development of technologies that benefit Canadians and people around the world every day. Apart from electricity production, nuclear science has applications in medicine, scientific research and biotechnology, agriculture, and industry. Some of the most common consumer products rely on nuclear technology for their efficiency and reliability, such as calculators , computers discs, smoke detectors, and even cosmetics!

Learn about this and much more at www.aecl.ca.

Photos courtesy of Bruce Power SEPTEMBER 2005 CANADIAN CHEMICAL NEWS 17

NUCLEAR SCIENCE




Many nations around the world believe that nuclear power must play a vital role now and in the future to meet the growing demand for energy. They recognize that nuclear

power provides safe and economical baseload power, without the emission of greenhouse gases. For nations without domestic fossil fuel reserves, nuclear power also provides energy security.

Canada is participating in the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) to perform R&D in pursuit of nuclear reactor systems that can be deployed around 2025. We join the ranks of Argentina, Brazil, France, Japan, Korea, South Africa, Switzerland, the U.K., and the U.S. The European Union joined GIF in 2003.

Currently, there are 438 nuclear plants in operation around the world (18 in Canada). These reactors and those to be introduced over the next few years—referred to as Generation II and Generation III+ designs, respectively—will provide electricity well into the 2020s and beyond. However, in order for nuclear power to be retained and/or expanded as part of the non-CO2-emitting energy mix for the longer term, countries are considering now the next generation of reactors—Generation IV (Gen IV)—because of the expense, time, and effort required to develop and demonstrate the viability of advanced nuclear technologies.

In a move reminiscent of the UN-sponsored “Atoms-for-Peace” col-laboration of the 1950s and 1960s, ten countries joined together to

form the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) in January 2000. The role of GIF is to foster multilateral development of “future-generation nuclear energy systems that can be licensed, constructed, and operated in a manner that will provide competitively priced and reliable energy products while satisfactorily addressing nuclear safety, waste, prolif-eration, and public perception concerns.”

GIF developed a charter that was signed in 2001 to facilitate the multilateral collaboration. In February of this year, Canada was one of five GIF nations to sign the world’s first binding agreement on nuclear cooperation, the so-called GIF Framework Agreement. The next level of agreements is currently under negotiation.

A key component of the GIF effort to date has been the production of a “Technology Roadmap.” A copy is available on the U.S. Department of Energy Web site at www.energy.gov. In the preparation of the Road-map, a multinational team of experts considered nearly 100 different reactor types, from which six were selected as the best candidates for meeting the Generation IV goals. The Roadmap broadly outlines the R&D and time required to demonstrate the viability of each of the six reactor “Systems,” which include:• Sodium Fast Reactor (SFR);• Lead Fast Reactor (LFR);• Molten Salt Reactor (MSR);• Gas Fast Reactor (GFR);

Canada participates in the Generation IV International Forum to develop advanced nuclear technologies. Stephen J. Bushby and Sylvana Guindon

POWERING UP

Of the 438 nuclear plants in operation in the world, 18 are in Canada. Above: a Canadian contract worker is silhouetted in one of Bruce Power�s nuclear generators.

Photo courtesy of Bruce Power


• Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR);• Super Critical Water-cooled Reactor

(SCWR). For each of these reactor systems, a compre-

hensive R&D plan has been written that forms the basis for the multilateral cooperation. GIF will be a task-shared collaboration —unlike initiatives that are cost-shared (such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER)). That is, a country will identify its interests in performing specific elements of an R&D plan, and fund its participation in that task. Each country will contribute the results from its work to a multilateral steering committee consisting of the other GIF mem-bers interested in that system. The steering committee will assimilate the results to de-velop the reactor system to the pre-commercial phase. Eventual commercialization of one of these systems will be an industry action.

Canada has identified its interest in col-laborating on the VHTR and SCWR. In fact, we play a leadership role in the development of the latter, which is a natural evolution of CANDU technology.

Improved economics is one of the advan-tages of both the SCWR and VHTR systems. In part, this is due to improved thermo-dynamic efficiency, since both reactors will operate at much higher temperatures than current designs (~ 310°C, ~ 11 MPa). The SCWR will have a reactor outlet temperature of ~ 550°C at 25 MPa (well above the ther-modynamic critical point of water, 374°C, 22.1 MPa). The VHTR, which uses He as a coolant rather than water, has a proposed coolant outlet temperature of 1,000°C.

The higher outlet temperatures have the added benefit of enabling the direct produc-tion of hydrogen via thermochemical means. It has been recognized for some time that an electrolytic cell powered by electricity generated from a nuclear plant is a sustain-able method for producing hydrogen without attendant GHG production. However, with a conventional reactor, hydrogen production would necessarily occur at off-peak hours when the generated electricity would not be needed for the grid. With the VHTR and SCWR, hydrogen production and electricity generation could occur in parallel. The cur-rent U.S. administration consider hydrogen production by nuclear power an essential part of their future energy strategy. They are seek-ing funding to construct a prototype VHTR at their Idaho Falls Laboratory by ~ 2015.

Within Canada, Natural Resources Canada is developing a “National Program on Gener-ation IV Technologies.” Broad participation in the program (expected to begin in early 2006) will be sought from university, government, and industrial laboratories.

The National Program will have three main thrusts:• participation in the multilateral develop-

ment of Gen IV reactor systems;• production of hydrogen by nuclear

power;• non-electricity-based applications.

The latter is intended to capture research on other co-generation oppor-tunities such as desalination, medical isotope production, and using steam from a

Gen IV reactor to help recover bitumen from the oil sands.

Stephen Bushby has held various technical and

management positions in the nuclear industry

since 1993. He is currently on Interchange

to Natural Resources Canada where he is

responsible for developing the National

Program on Generation IV Technologies.

Sylvana Guindon has held various

management positions at Ontario Hydro,

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, and

Natural Resources Canada. She is currently

the director of the Nuclear Energy Division at

Natural Resources Canada.

Photo courtesy of Canadian Nuclear Society

A view of the endface of one of the large CANDU reactors at the Bruce B nuclear generating station near Kincardine , ON. The ends of over 300 channels contain the nuclear fuel. Heavy water coolant flows through these tubes and then to steam generators to produce the steam that drives the turbines to produce electricity.




Canada has about two million bundles of used nuclear fuel cur-rently in storage. Each bundle contains about 19 kg of uranium, along with a chemically challenging collection of radionuclides

(Table 1). Some of these radionuclides have short half lives, many are longer, and some are very long indeed. A major question arises as to how to manage this potentially dangerous material. While it is quite safely stored now, we can only rely on the continuity of societal moni-toring for a few hundred years. What happens after that?

The evolving proposal

The proposal, as put forward by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) in their Environmental Impact Assessment (1993), has been modified slightly, but remains essentially the same—bury the spent fuel bundles, enclosed in a metal container, surrounded by a clay buffer, in a pluton deep in the Canadian Shield. It was calculated that this should provide protection far better than was required by the Atomic Energy Control Board (now the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission). That requirement stipulated that there should be no higher radiation risk than would produce a one-in-a-million chance of fatal cancer to the most exposed community, 10,000 years in the future (ambient radiation poses a risk considerably higher than that).

In essence, a multi-barrier system would be in place, consisting of designed “engineered barriers” and selected “natural barriers.”

The engineered barriers would include the clay buffer, the metal container, the metal cladding on the fuel pellets, and the fuel form itself. The natural barriers would include the backfill of concrete and crushed rock, the pluton (optimally at least 50 metres thick) the remaining geosphere, and the biosphere.

The container, originally planned to be titanium, and later copper, is now expected to be a copper-covered steel welded drum, to contain 70 or so fuel bundles of about 20 kilograms each.

The fuel itself would be one of the most important barriers in that, under the reducing conditions expected at the depth of 700 metres , it would release most of the radionuclides only congruently, as the fuel matrix itself dissolves. It is estimated that this ceramic uranium dioxide would dissolve at the rate of one percent in 100,000 years. A few other radionuclides would escape more readily, having migrated at the high operational temperature to the fuel surface or to grain boundaries. Of these, most will be trapped by the clay buffer, and only two are likely to migrate very far: chlorine-36 and iodine-129.

These two radionuclides, whose half lives are 310,000 years and 17 million years, respectively, are likely to migrate through the pluton and through the geosphere unhindered by chemical interaction. This

How do you guarantee a community�s safety�10,000 years in the future? The NWMO plans ahead. Way ahead � Don Wiles, FCIC

Photo courtesy of the Canadian Nuclear Society

MANAGING USED NUCLEAR FUEL

Above: MACSTOR concrete dry storage containers for spent fuel at the Centrale Nucléaire Gentilly 2 near Trois-Rivières, QC. Nuclear fuel is initially stored in water-filled bays for several years. After five or more years, it is cool enough to be placed in these concrete containers that provide full protection from the remaining radioactivity. The NWMO will make recommendations this fall on the very long-term management or disposal of spent fuel.

diffusion will take many thousands of years, as long as the pluton is not seriously frac-tured and the ground water moves slowly. Present geological indications are that these conditions can be met by judicious selection of the pluton.

The Nuclear Waste Management Organi-zation (NWMO) was created by the Uranium Power Industry in late 2002, in response to the federal government’s Nuclear Fuel Waste Act. Its mandate is to examine all aspects of nuclear fuel waste management and report back after three years. This organiza-tion was created at arms length from both government and industry. It is supported financially by the industry. No manage-ment option was excluded, but three were especially recommended for study—storage at the current reactor sites, storage at a cen-tralized site, and deep geological disposal.

During the past three years, the NWMO has held many discussions with groups across Canada, and several workshops with selected experts. I am pleased to have been selected to participate in several of the latter, and am happy to report back to the CIC.

Its first year of operation was described in the NWMO’s November 2003 report, “Asking the Right Questions.” This report concentrated on identifying the concerns of Canadian citizens and didn’t seem to show much progress. However, later observations

indicate that a valuable foundation had been laid for later deliberations.

The second report, “Understanding the Choices,” was issued in November 2004. This document examined the nuclear waste proposals in terms of eight objectives: • fairness; • public health and safety; • worker health and safety; • community well-being; • security; • environmental integrity; • economic viability; • adaptability.

The overarching objective is “to select an approach for the management of used nuclear fuel that is the most socially accept-able, technically sound, environmentally responsible, and economically feasible, and which reflects the ethics and values of Cana-dian society.”

Having eliminated many possible approaches on the basis of insufficient supporting evidence, the nine-member assessment team created a series of “influence diagrams” delineating all those aspects and functions of society that might have an im-pact on each of the eight objectives.

They then attributed a performance value score to each. Deep geological disposal emerged from these scores as the overall favourite, but not by a wide margin. These

results came out in their draft final report, “Choosing a Way Forward.”

At the 2005 meetings at the beginning of February and in mid-July, there was still considerable discussion as to details of the relative reliability of societal monitoring and geological storage. These points were not resolved . However, several participants in the workshop—notably the younger mem-bers—expressed the concern that we really have no experience in forecasting over such a long period of time (10,000 years). This was accommodated in the general discussion by the recommendation that a potentially satisfactory site for deep geological disposal should be investigated and selected, and should be used for centralized interim site storage. During the time of storage, confi-dence in the science and the technology will be built up so that, after one or two hundred years, it is hoped that a deep geological repository could meet with public acceptance. It will be important at the outset to be quite open about the ultimate intent.

The results of this discussion were approved by the assessment team and were accommodated in their draft final report that was circulated in the spring of 2005. A final report, due in November 2005, will be pre-sented to the federal government for their consideration.

Add your own thoughts or join an e-discus-sion at the NWMO Web site at www.nwmo.ca.

Order your own draft copy of the report, “Choose Your Way Forward,” at www.nwmo.ca/Default.aspx?DN=1224,1026,20,1,Documents.

Don Wiles first encountered radioactivity

when he worked as a chemist at the radium

refinery in Port Hope, ON. He studied

nuclear fission at McMaster University, the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and

the University of Oslo. After four years in the

metallurgy department at The University of

British Columbia, he moved on to Carleton

University. He retired in 1990, but has been

active at Carleton since then, and has been

associated with nuclear waste disposal at

several levels. “The Chemistry of Nuclear Fuel

Waste Disposal” was published in 2002 by

Polytechnic International Press.

Photo by Steve McWilliam SEPTEMBER 2005 CANADIAN CHEMICAL NEWS 25

H He

Li Be B C N O F Ne

Na Mg Al SI P S Cl Ar

K Ca Se Ti V Cr Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Zn Ga Ge As Se Br Kr

Rb Sr Y Zr Nb Mo Tc Ru Rh Pd Ag Cd In Sn Sb Te I Xe

Cs Ba * Hf Ta W Re Os Ir Pt Au Hg TI Pb Bi Po At Rn

Fr Ra **

* Lanthanide (Rare Earth) Elememts

La Ce Rr Nd Pm Sm Eu Gd Tb Dy Ho Er Tm Yb Lu

** Actinide (Trans Uranium) Elements

Ac Th Pa U Np Pu Am Cm Bk Cf Es Fm Md No Lw

Periodic Table of Elements

Table 1. The shaded elements are formed in CANDU fuel. They include fission products and neutron capture products.


CANADA�S NUCLEAR INDUSTRY

Unclear on nuclear? Here are some key points about �

• Canada: 60 years in nuclear; Nobel Prize—1994: Bert Brockhouse;• Nuclear energy in Canada is for peaceful purposes—used only in electricity generation,

medicine, agriculture, research, and manufacturing;• Nuclear energy is a $5 billion per year industry—21,000 direct jobs, 10,000 indirect

jobs, 150 firms, $1.2 billion in exports;• In 2004, there were 22 CANDU reactors—17 in service generating ~15% of Canada’s

electricity , cleanly and safely in Ontario (50%), New Brunswick (30%), and Quebec (3%);• Ontario: 20 reactors—15 in service providing about 50% of the province’s electricity

(10,750 MW);• Canada has operated CANDU nuclear power reactors safely for over 40 years;• Canada has the world’s largest known high-grade natural uranium deposits

in Saskatchewan ;• Canada supplies two-thirds of the world’s radioisotopes for nuclear medicine used in

12 million medical procedures a year and supplies 75% of the world’s Cobalt-60 used to sterilize 40% of the world’s medical supplies;

• The total amount of nuclear waste produced in 40 years from nuclear power plants in Canada would fill five hockey rinks up to the height of the boards.

Download this and other valuable information contained in the Canadian Nuclear Associa-tion report, available at www.cna.ca/pdf/CNA-english%20booklet/cna-eng-NEW.pdf.

50 YEARS STRONGThe CIC salutes our 50-year members

We salute the following individuals and acknowledge their long-standing support

and dedication. Each is awarded a certificate and free CIC membership for life.

Our congratulations to this distinguished group of professionals !

Gilles Bellefeuille, MCIC

Douglas Bowerman, MCIC

Richard Garratt, MCIC

Thomas Harrison, MCIC

Victor Harwood, MCIC

Owen Holmes, FCIC

George Jeanneret, MCIC

Frank Jefferson, MCIC

R. Jervis, FCIC

Harry MCAdie, FCIC

Michael Mocek, FCIC

Brian Newbold, FCIC

A. Perlin, FCIC

G. Skinner, MCIC

R. Stewart, FCIC

S. Takahashi, MCIC

Donald Yamasaki, MCIC

From September 2004 to May 2005

CIC BULLETIN ICC


CIC BULLETIN ICC

THE CIC FELLOWS 2005

Andrew J. Bennet, FCICSimon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC

Andrew J. Bennet has given freely and un-selfishly of his time to promote awareness of chemistry among the general public. He has provided valuable instruction to students, both in courses and in a research setting. His research prowess in kinetics and mechanism is highly valued by his colleagues and has led to the solution of significant problems at the interface between chemistry and biology.

Lewis J. Brubacher, FCICUniversity of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON

As a chemistry professor and editor of Chem 13 News, Lewis J. Brubacher has had a major impact on the communications of chemistry to teachers, students, and the public in Canada and throughout the world. His enthusiasm and

willingness to serve have been demonstrated in his work for the CIC Chemical Education Division, National Chemistry Week, university open houses, science fairs, and more.

Martin Cowie, FCICUniversity of Alberta, Edmonton, AB

Martin Cowie’s research is characterized by imagination, thoroughness, and meticu-lous attention to detail. He has established a worldwide reputation and unquestioned leadership in the area of synthesis, structure, and reaction chemistry of ligand bridged homo- and heterobinuclear complexes. His contributions are among the most significant in his area and fortify the international stat-ure of Canadian inorganic chemistry.

Andrew Hrymak, FCICMcMaster University, Hamilton, ON

Andrew Hrymak has made significant con-tributions to the use of finite element and finite volume methods for computational fluid mechanics and polymer processing. He has developed process models and op-timization techniques. As chair, he has led the chemical engineering department at McMaster University to its expansion into bioengineering.

Ronald J. Neufeld, FCICQueen’s University, Kingston, ON

Ronald J. Neufeld is distinguished interna-tionally for his research in bioencapsulation, microencapsulation and microspheres for biomedical, environmental, and industrial applications. He established the CIC Biotech-nology Subject Division in 1988 and is an active member and co-founder of the inter-national Bioencapsulation Research Group.

The Fellowship of The Chemical Institute of Canada was created as a senior class of membership to recognize outstanding merit by those who have made, or who are clearly in the course of making, a sustained and major contribution to the science or to the profession of chemistry or chemical engineering.

The Fellowship selection committee has once again received many high-quality applications. Below are the distinguished CIC members who have been named Fellows in 2005.


CSChE BULLETIN SCGCh

CSChE AWARDS / PRIX DE LA SCGCh

CSChE Award in Industrial Practice

Prix de la pratique industrielle de la SCGCh

The CSChE Award in Industrial Practice is presented for a distinguished contribution in the application of chemical engineering or industrial chemistry to the industrial sphere. The award consists of a plaque and a cash prize of $1,500. Le prix de la pratique industrielle est présenté pour une contribution qui se rap-porte à la pratique du génie chimique ou de la chimie industrielle. Le lauréat recevra une plaque accompagnée d’une bourse de 1 500 $.

Larry E. Seeley, MCICArgento Plata Metals Ltd.

Larry E. Seeley is president, CEO, and a founding shareholder of Argento Plata Metals Limited, a firm that recycles and pro-duces high-value metals such as gallium, indium, and germanium with two plants in Ontario. From 1992 to 2004, Seeley was president, CEO, and a founding shareholder

of Lakefield Research Limited, an interna-tional research, development, and testing firm for the minerals and metals industries worldwide, growing from 120 to over 1,000 employees, with laboratories and pilot plants in Lakefield, ON; Santiago, Chile; Belo Horizonte, Brazil; Johannesburg, South Africa; and Perth, Australia.

Previously, Seeley was with Falconbridge Limited from 1971 to 1995 as corporate vice-president Environment, Health, and Safety; director of Metallurgical Operations in Sud-bury; manager of Corporate Metallurgical Technology; manager of the Sudbury Smelter; and other roles in operations and technology.

He has a BASc, MASc, and PhD in chemi-cal engineering from the University of Toronto and a diploma in business administration from Laurentian University. He was presi-dent of the Canadian Metallurgical Society, chair of the Science Committee of Science North, and has served on the Board of Gover-nors of Cambian College, Science North, the Metallurgical Society, Trent University, and the Peterborough DNA Cluster. Seeley has served on the Engineering Advisory Boards for chemical engineering and metallurgical engineering at the University of Toronto and mining engineering at Queen’s University.

He has been recognized with the 2003 Engineering Medal for Entrepreneurship by Professional Engineers Ontario, the Past Pres-ident’s Memorial Medal, and the Silver Medal and Fellow of the Canadian Institute of Min-ing, Metallurgy, and Petroleum, Honorary Life Member of Science North, Honorary Board Member, Trent University, Canada Council Lecturer of American Society of Metals, and Voluntary Service Award of the Ministry of Citizenship in the Province of Ontario.

Best Paper Published in The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering

Le meilleur article qui a paru dans la revue The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering

The award is for the author(s) of the best paper published in a twelve-month period in The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering (CJChE). Selection is made by a committee appointed for this purpose. The award consists of a free-form page that will be published in an upcoming issue of the CJChE, introducing the author(s) and their current research interests.

Ce prix s’adresse aux auteurs du meilleur article publié au cours des douze derniers mois dans la revue The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering. Chaque année un comité formé à cette fin choisira un gagnant. Le prix consiste en une page libre où les au-teurs se présentent et décrivent leurs sujets de recherche. L’article sera publié dans une prochaine édition de la revue The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering.

For 2005, the best paper is entit led, “Determination of Decompression Wave Speed in Rich Gas Mixtures,” by Kamal K. Botros, Wojciech Studzinski, John Geerligs, and Alan Glover, printed in CJChE, Vol. 82, No. 5, October 2004, pp. 880–891.

For 2004, the best paper is entitled, “Bitumen Recovery with Oily Air Bubbles,” by Vince Wallwork, Zhenghe Xu, and Jacob Masliyah, printed in CJChE, Vol. 81, No. 5, October 2003, pp. 993–997.

The Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering is proud to recognize outstanding work carried out by members of the Canadian chemical engineering community through its awards program.

La Société canadienne de génie chimique est fière de souligner le travail remarquable de membres de la communauté canadienne de génie chimique par l’entremise de son programme de prix.



D. G. Fisher Award Prix D. G. Fisher

Sponsored by / Parrainé par the department of chemical and materials engineering, University of Alberta, Suncor Energy Foundation, and Shell Canada Limited

The D. G. Fisher Award is awarded to an indi-vidual who has made substantial contributions to the field of systems and control engineering. The award is given in recognition of signifi-cant contributions in any, or all, of the areas of theory , practice, and education.

Le Prix D. G. Fisher est décerné à une personne qui s’est distinguée par ses contribu-tions dans le domaine du génie des systèmes et des contrôles. Il couronne les apports impor-tants au niveau de la théorie, de la pratique ou de l’éducation.

Thomas Harris, FCICQueen’s University

Thomas Harris is currently dean of the Faculty of Applied Science and professor of chemical engineering at Queen’s University. He has a BSc in chemical engineering from Queen’s and a PhD in chemical engineering from McMaster University. Harris has six years of industrial experience, primarily in the areas of process control and statistics, with Monsanto Chemi-cal Company in Decatur, AL, and E. I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company in Wilmington,

DE. His research interests are in the areas of process control and the development and application of statistical methods in chemical engineering. He has given many industrial short courses in these topics.

He is currently the chair of the University Network of Excellence in Nuclear Engineering (UNENE) and the Committee of Ontario Deans of Engineering (CODE). He also serves on the Board of Management of Materials and Manufacturing Ontario (MMO), Advanced Design and Manufacturing Institute (ADMI), the Human Mobility Research Centre (HMRC), the Centre for Water and the Environment (CWE), and the Centre for Manufacturing of Advanced Ceramics and Nanomaterials (CMACN), and was a member of the CSChE Publications Committee.

Process Safety Management Award

Prix de gestion de la sécurité opérationnelle

Sponsored by / Parrainé parAON Reed Stenhouse Inc.

The Process Safety Management Award is pre-sented as a mark of recognition to a person who has made an outstanding contribution in Canada to the Process Safety Management (PSM) Division of the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering, recognizing excellence in the leadership and dedication of indi-viduals who have led Canada in the field of process safety and loss management (PSLM).

Le prix de gestion de la sécurité opérationnelle est décerné à une personne qui s’est distin-guée par ses activités au sein de la division de la gestion de la sécurité opérationnelle de la Société canadienne de génie chimique. Il reconnaît le leadership et le dévouement des personnes qui ont été des chefs de file dans le secteur canadien de la gestion de la sécurité opérationnelle et des pertes.

Gerry Phillips, MCICNOVA Chemicals Corp.

Gerry Phillips, MCIC, a native of Saskatoon, SK, received degrees in chemical engineer-ing and chemistry in 1970 and 1971 from the University of Saskatchewan. Following gradu-ation, he worked with DuPont of Canada in North Bay, ON, and Sarnia, ON, as a proj-ect and plant engineer. In 1979, he obtained his MASc in chemical engineering from the University of Waterloo.

Phillips joined NOVA Chemicals in 1979 as a process engineer prior to the start-up of the first ethylene plant. He later worked as an operations supervisor before taking on the role of safety engineer. This two-year assign-ment turned into a career when the disaster in Bhopal, India, changed the context of Process Safety Management (PSM).

Phillips is presently NOVA Chemicals’ senior loss prevention engineer and has spent the ma-jority of his career developing and advancing the concepts of PSM in North America and Europe. He has served on national and international committees dealing with process safety and risk assessment and assisted in the development of several products related to risk assessment and public safety.


When the Major Industrial Accidents Council of Canada dissolved, he led the establishment of the CSChE PSM Subject Division . He has presented papers and chaired sessions at conferences and work-shops in North America and Europe.

Phillips has been an active member of the CSChE since 1967. He served on the executive of the Sarnia Local Section and on the organizing committee for the Sarnia con-ference. He was the Industrial Liaison on the CSChE Board from 1999 to 2002 and served as the first chair of the PSM Subject Division. He is the 2004–2005 president of the CSChE.

R. S. Jane Memorial AwardPrix commémoratif R. S. Jane

The R. S. Jane Memorial Award is the premier prize of the Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering and is awarded for exceptional achievement in chemical engineering or industrial chemistry.

Le prix commémoratif R. S. Jane est le prix principal présenté par la Société cana-dienne de génie chimique pour souligner la contribution remarquable à la profession du génie chimique ou la chimie industrielle.

James W. Smith, FCIC University of Toronto

James W. Smith was born and was educated in British Columbia. He obtained his BASc (1954) and MASc (1955) in chemical engineering at

The University of British Columbia (UBC). During the summers, he worked in an engi-neering training program at the sulfite pulp and paper mill in Powell River, BC. After leav-ing UBC, he worked for two years at DuPont Canada’s nylon 6-6 plant in Kingston, ON, as a process engineer. In 1957, he was awarded an Athlone Fellowship, and completed a PhD and Diploma of the Imperial College (DIC) in chemical engineering at the Imperial College of the University of London in 1960. Follow-ing two years as a teaching research associate at UBC, he joined the department of chemi-cal engineering and applied chemistry at the University of Toronto in 1962 as an assistant professor, was promoted to associate profes-sor in 1967, and to full professor in 1972. He served as chair of the department from 1985 to 1996, when he retired to become professor emeritus. Smith recruited over 18 members of the academic staff while chair, and is particu-larly proud of finding four outstanding women, all of whom are still with the department. His innovations include the highly successful Annual Departmental Dinner, a system for peer-reviewed performance appraisals, and he initiated a process of continuous improvement in teaching quality. Student teaching evalua-tions consistently rank the department well above the faculty average.

He has remained active in the university as a member of the University Radiation Protection Authority, and as chair of the Departmental Honours Committee. He is president of a spin-off company, Apollo Environmental Systems Ltd, which supplies gas-liquid contactors for the environmen-tal control of hydrogen sulphide in natural, industrial, and biogases. He is a member of TAPPI, the CSChE, the Society of Chemical Industry (SCI), and the ACGIH. Smith is a CIC Fellow and a registered Professional Engineer (PEng) and Designated Consulting Engineer in Ontario . While on the Awards Committee of the SCI, he led the initiation of two awards, the Kalev Pughi Medal for outstanding team-work in R&D, and the Julia Levy Award for the successful commercialization of biomedi-cal science and engineering research.

Smith is the author or co-author of over 100 scientific publications, and is the inventor or co-inventor of over 30 U.S. patents. He has been active in consulting, serving as director (1963–1997) and president (1981–1985) of Chemical Engineering Research Consultants, Limited. He is the chair, director, and share-holder of Thor Technologies Corp. This “spin-off” company is engaged in the development of a high-shear technology for reducing the viscosity and increasing the solids content of Kraft process black liquor.

From 1997 to 2001, he was chair of the SLOWPOKE 2 Nuclear Reactor Committee and Manager of the SLOWPOKE 2 Reactor Decommissioning project. The University of Toronto SLOWPOKE Critical Reactor was a low power system for producing thermal neutrons to be used for affecting the activa-tion analysis of materials, and for isotope production. The principles of careful plan-ning, document control, ALARA, and public consultation were followed and maintained throughout.

Smith is married, grateful to his wife Noreen for her boundless patience, and is very proud of his three children and four grandchildren.

Syncrude Canada Innovation Award

Prix d�innovation Syncrude Canada

Sponsored by / Parrainé parSyncrude Canada Limited

The Syncrude Canada Innovation Award is presented annually to a resident of Canada, who has made a distinguished contribution to chemical engineering before the age of 40.

Le prix d’innovation Syncrude Canada est décerné annuellement pour une distinction dans le domaine du génie chimique par un ingénieur chimiste qui ne doit pas avoir atteint l’âge de 40 ans.



Biao Huang, MCIC University of Alberta

Biao Huang joined the University of Alberta in 1997 as an assistant professor in the department of chemical and materials engi-neering, and is currently a professor. He is a recipient of Germany’s Alexander von Hum-boldt Research Fellowship, the University of Alberta’s McCalla Professorship, and the Petro-Canada Young Innovator Award. Huang has worked specifically in process dynamics and control over the last 12 years. He is one of the leading experts in control loop performance monitoring and process identification, and has published a research monograph in this area. Huang has applied his expertise extensively in industrial practice particularly in the oil sands industry. His research contributions to control performance monitoring have enjoyed appli-cations in chemical, petrochemical, oil and gas, mineral processing, and pulp and paper industries. He has also been actively involved in research activities in fuel cells modelling/control and biomedical cytotoxicity predic-tions. He has served on a number of national and international engineering and science communities including, chair of the CIC’s Sys-tem and Control Division, associate editor of the CJChE, area co-chair for IFAC ADCHEM, and IFAC DYCOPS.

Huang obtained his PhD in process con-trol from the University of Alberta in 1997. He also holds an MSc degree (1986) and BSc degree (1983) in automatic control from the Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Since 1997, Huang has pub-lished over 100 refereed papers in journals and conference proceedings, and more than 30 conference abstracts. He has been invited to speak at a number of institutions as well as workshops worldwide.


RE

ME

MB

ER

WH

EN

LABORATORY HEALTH AND SAFETY

GUIDELINES4th Edition

�The chemical Þ eld and profession

are built on a foundation of trust with

society . An integral part of that trust is

the safe operation of facilities including

laboratories , whether industrial,

academic or government. The education

of engineers , scientists and technologists

must reß ect that level of trust. We all

share in the responsibility for safe and

ethical research , chemical processing

and analysis. �

- Eric Mead, FCICFormer Chair

The Chemical Institute of Canada

Due Diligence recommended laboratory procedures

Lead by Exampleresponsibility for safety policies

Healthy Workplacetraining and information effective safety systems

Prevent Accidents and Illnessesemployer-employee relationships safety audits

An invaluable resource for all laboratory personnel

The latest edition builds on the experience gained

over 20 years since the Þ rst edition was launched

in 1982 by the Ordre des chimistes du Québec.

A team of chemical experts in health and safety

from industry, government and academia have

combined their extensive knowledge to cover a

wide and complete range of topics.

Subject Areas

� Responsibility for safety

� Recommended laboratory procedures

� Storage, handling and hazards of laboratory reagents

� Safety equipment and procedures

� Emergency procedures

� Accidental spills of hazardous products

� Management of hazardous wastes

� Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS)

ISBN: 1-896564-00-394 pages

August 2003$29.50

1.8

88

.54

2.2

24

2LABORATORY

HEALTH AND SAFETY GUIDELINES

4th Edition


A report on the 2005 Summer Institute for chemical engineering educators

CSChE-PSM SUMMER INSTITUTE—ROUND TWO

The second CSChE-PSM Summer Institute was held in Sarnia, ON, from May 29 to June 1, 2005. Building on a successful first Summer Institute in 2004, this year’s event brought to-

gether 34 professors and industrial practitioners from Vancouver to St. John’s, as well as the U.S. The group was composed of first-time attendees and returning professors (chemical engineering educators), observers, and organizing team members. Made possible by the gen-erous financial support of key industrial and government partners, the Summer Institute was co-developed by the CSChE Process Safety Management Subject Division (www.cheminst.ca/divisions/psm) and Minerva Canada (www.minervacanada.org).

The Summer Institute program is aimed at expanding the knowl-edge base in academia concerning the fundamentals of process safety and loss management (PSLM). The basic premise of the Institute is that PSLM can and should be taught in the undergraduate chemical engineering curriculum. Just as topics such as process control, heat transfer, and separation processes form an integral part of a chemical engineer’s education, so too should the principles of PSLM.

This year, the Institute was again hosted by NOVA Chemicals Corp. (Moore polyethylene site) and Imperial Oil Limited. The process of developing collegiality and collaboration was given a great head start on the first evening by Daneve McAffer of Freeborn and Associates Consulting, who facilitated a series of teambuilding exercises. Then it was full tilt into three days of a curriculum designed to meet the needs of both first-time attendees (10 professors) and returning pro-fessors (14 of the 24 who attended the 2004 Institute). The days were long and full of a variety of activities—lectures, videos, interac-tive workshops, discussion periods, and site visits (see below). New friendships were formed and acquaintances from last year renewed as attendees found time in the busy technical schedule for socializing during dinners and an environmentally focused evening cruise on the St. Clair River (see above).

2005 Summer Institute participants ready for play

The following highlights illustrate the richness and diversity of the 2005 Summer Institute curriculum:• Site visits of NOVA Chemicals (polyethylene manufacture) and

Imperial Oil (product and environmental testing, refinery processes, and polyethylene manufacture). This was a great opportunity for participants to reinforce their understanding of the scale and com-plexity of industrial process equipment;

• Sessions designed for specific audiences, e.g. the lecture on process safety management for first-time attendees developed and delivered by Graham Creedy, FCIC, of the Canadian Chemical Producers’ Association, and the workshop on HAZOP studies for returning pro-fessors run by Phillipe Guillard of Dyadem International Ltd;

• A series of module development workshops for returning professors. Under the leadership of Aaron Phoenix, MCIC, of the University of Saskatchewan, returning participants were formed into four teams, each of which was assigned an industrial advisor. Each team was charged with developing a teaching package for integration into the undergraduate chemical engineering curriculum. The module topics had been identified during the 2004 Summer Institute as core ele-ments of a PSLM body of knowledge—Pressure Relief Valves (led by John Shaw of the University of Alberta), HAZOP (led by Frank Collins of the University of New Brunswick), the Dow Fire and Explosion Index (led by André Tremblay of the University of Ottawa), and the Dow Chemical Exposure Index (led by Jerzy Jurewicz of the Université de Sherbrooke and Faisal Khan of Memorial University of Newfoundland). Pre-Institute planning, long hours during the In-stitute, and post-Institute follow-up will ensure that the educational modules are in the hands of educators for use in the fall and winter terms of the upcoming academic year;2005 Summer Institute participants ready for work



• Joint sessions for all Summer Institute attendees. This approach enabled an exchange of ideas and teaching tips among all partici-pants. Particularly noteworthy was the involvement in this year’s Institute of Paul Gallina, a business professor at Bishop’s Univer-sity. Gallina was attending as an observer on behalf of Minerva Canada, whose mandate with respect to health and safety man-agement education extends into both engineering and business schools. David Halton and Renzo Dalla Via, Minerva president and treasurer, respectively, also participated in the joint sessions as well as serving on the Institute organizing committee;

• Coverage of a new subject area—reactive chemistry. Brenda Prine of Dow Chemical Canada Inc. was a most welcome addition to the Institute “faculty,” as she guided her “students” through the world of reactive chemical hazards;

• An international flavour, with participants from the U.S. joining as both lecturers and observers. Ron Willey of Northeastern University attended and gave an insightful presentation on how he incorpo-rates PSLM topics in his teaching activities. Willey is a leader in the Safety and Chemical Engineering Education (SACHE) organi-zation of the AIChE and also brought that group’s perspective to the Summer Institute. Additionally, Mei Li Lin of the U.S. National Safety Council and Mike Cadigan of Noble Corporation brought an exciting new dimension to the Institute with the presentation of the Noble Case Study. Noble Corporation is an offshore drill-ing company recently awarded the inaugural Robert W. Campbell Award (www.campbellaward.org) by the National Safety Council as a result of the company’s commitment to safety as a core busi-ness value. Institute participants engaged in a dynamic, interactive learning exercise led by business professor, Brooks Holtom, of Georgetown University.The success of the 2005 Summer Institute is due to a multitude

of people and organizations: industrial and government sponsors, host companies, participating universities, chemical engineering and

business professors attending for the first or second time, lecturers and observers from industry and academia, members of the orga-nizing committee, Minerva Canada, and the CSChE Process Safety Management Subject Division. There are also a handful of individuals who must be recognized for their unique and significant contribu-tions to the success of not just this particular Summer Institute, but the entire Institute program:• Steve Coe, MCIC, of Irving Oil Limited, for his role as SAChE liai-

son for the Institute and for his commitment to the development and delivery of several curriculum elements, including the educa-tional modules on HAZOP and the Dow indices;

• Manny Marta of NOVA Chemicals Corp. for securing NOVA as one of the two Sarnia host companies and for his tireless efforts in the planning and delivery of just about every aspect of on-site programming, logistics, cost control, and financial tracking;

• Tony Pasteris, MCIC, of Imperial Oil Limited, and chair of the Board of Directors, Minerva Canada, for securing Imperial Oil as the other Sarnia host company and for his vision and implemen-tation of a fruitful partnership between Minerva and the PSM Subject Division;

• Doug McCutcheon, MCIC, of the University of Alberta, for his leadership as chair of the Summer Institute and for accepting the challenge of turning an idea into reality. His dedication to the cause of PSLM education in Canada will serve the organizing committee well as plans begin to unfold for 2006 and beyond.

Paul R. Amyotte, FCICprofessor of chemical engineering

Dalhousie University chair of the education team of the CSChE PSM

Subject Division [email protected]


October 16 –23 octobre 2005


PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF CHEMISTRY

www.cheminst.ca/ncw

We wish to thank our sponsors for their support :

THE SPONSORS (as of August 2005)

GoldCIC Chemical Education FundDow Chemical Merck Frosst Centre for Therapeutic Research

SilverAnachemia Science Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd.H.L. BlachfordL.V. Lomas LimitedRhodia CanadaRohm and Haas Canada Inc.Syncrude CanadaSyngentia Crop Protection (Canada) Inc.

BronzeAtofina Canada Inc.Diagnostic Chemicals Limited.John Wiley & Sons Canada CentreRecochem Inc.Seastar Chemical

NCW NEWS NOUVELLES DE LA SNC STUDENT NEWS NOUVELLES DES ÉTUDIANTS

Grab your friends and get to the CSChE�s Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference in Toronto , ON,

Participate in this year’s exciting Student Program:

• Toronto Blue Jays’ CEO and president and a chemical engineer, Paul Godfrey, will give the plenary lecture;

• oral and poster competitions for graduate and undergraduate students;

• career workshops, graduate studies fair, and career development symposium;

• industrial tours;

• social events;

• attend the general Conference sessions to hear world-class speakers!

Learn more at

STUDENTS: YYOUOU won�t want to miss the CSChE Conference!

www.csche2005.ca.www.csche2005.ca.

O c t o b e r 1 6O c t o b e r 1 6 �� 1 9 , 2 0 0 51 9 , 2 0 0 5 ..

October 16–23 octobre 2005


Canada

Conferences

October 16–19, 2005. 55th Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference , Toronto, ON. Web site: www.csche2005.ca.

October 17–18, 2005. CSCT professional development course—ICPES–Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscopy. Toronto, ON. Web site: www.cheminst.ca/profdev.

October 17–18, 2005. CSCT professional development course—Laboratory Safety. Toronto, ON. Web site: www.cheminst.ca/ profdev.

May 9–12, 2006. Climate Change Conference, Ottawa, ON. Web site: www.ccc2006.ca.

May 27–31, 2006. 89th Canadian Chemistry Conference and Exhibition , Halifax, NS. Web site: www.csc2006.ca.

May 26–29, 2007. 90th Canadian Chemistry Conference and Exhibition , Winnipeg, MB. Web site: www.chimiste.ca/conferences/csc_annual__e.htm.

October 15–18, 2006. 56th Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference , Sherbrooke, QC. Web site: www.csche2006.ca.

October 28–31, 2007. 57th Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference, Edmonton, AB. Web site: www.chimiste.ca/conferences/cic_calendar __e.htm#Engineering.

October 19–22, 2008. 58th Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference, Ottawa, ON. Web site: www.chimiste.ca/conferences/cic_calendar__e.htm#Engineering

U.S. and OverseasDecember 15–20, 2005. Pacifichem 2005 Conference, Honolulu, HI. Web site: www.pacifichem.org.

August 27–30, 2006. Innovation Sustaining Future Business –11th APCChE Congress, Asian Pacific Confederation of Chemical Engineering , Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Web site: www.apcche2006.org/home.htm.

EVENTS ÉVÉNEMENTS

O c t o b e r 1 6 � 1 9 , 2 0 0 5 .

EMPLOYMENT WANTED DEMANDES D�EMPLOI

Experienced professional chemical engineer in DCS control and process with capital project commissioning looking for immediate position preferably in Ontario. Contact Chris Petrus at 705-566-5584.

PhD in physical chemistry with six years’ experience in R&D, product formulation and development of biomaterials and paper additives. Skilled in colloids , spectroscopy, chromatography, pilot process optimization . Adaptable to new challenges in cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, coatings. Contact Andrew at 514-631-2594 or [email protected].


CAREERS CARRIÈRES

UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIADEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY

Department of Chemistry of the University of Victoria invites applications for a tenure-track Assistant Professor position in the areas of Analytical or Physical chemistry with a Chemical Biology focus. The appointee will develop as an outstanding teacher and mentor of undergraduate and graduate students, and will contribute to the development and delivery of the core programs of the Department of Chemistry. As a researcher, the appointee will initiate and expand a creative research program based on external research funding from NSERC, CIHR, MSFHR, and other agencies. We seek a candidate with research expertise that strengthens our emerging emphases on the molecular, supramolecular , and reactivity aspects of biological chemistry and biological or bio-inspired materials chemistry, both within the Department and in collaboration with other research initiatives at the University of Victoria.

Candidates must hold a Ph.D. and have post-doctoral expe-rience. Applicants should send a curriculum vitae, a concise research proposal (5 pages, NSERC format preferred), and a short teaching dossier that outlines the candidate’s teaching experi-ence, subject area of teaching expertise, and goals for course delivery and curriculum development to:

Dr. Tom Fyles, Chair, Department of Chemistry, University of Victoria, Box 3065, Victoria B.C. Canada V8W 3V6 (e-mail: [email protected]).

The candidate should also supply names and complete addresses (fax and e-mail) of three or more people able to act as referees . Applications will be considered after Sept. 21, 2005, with an expected appointment date of July 1, 2006.

The University of Victoria is an equity employer and encour-ages applications from women, persons with disabilities, visible minorities , aboriginal peoples, people of all sexual orientations and genders, and others who may contribute to the further diversification of the University.

All qualified applicants are encouraged to apply; however, in accordance with Canadian immigration requirements, Canadians and permanent residents will be given priority.

Selection criteria:PhD and postdoctoral experienceTrack record - in research - in teachingTeaching – no area specified - undergrad and grad teaching potential - curriculum development - contribution to core programsResearch program - analytical or physical with a chemical biology emphasis - potential impact - feasibility - fundability - “fit” within the Department and at UVic - strategic direction


CAREERS CARRIÈRES



ADVERTISEMENT �For information/comments please see www.chem.ucalgary.ca/csc2000/milestones.htm

56e Congrès canadien de génie chimique

Annonce préliminairedu 15 au 18 octobre 2006

Delta Sherbrooke Hôtel et Centre des congrès Sherbrooke (Québec) Canada

Société canadienne de génie chimique � www.csche2006.ca

Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering � www.csche2006.ca

56th Canadian Chemical Engineering Conference

Preliminary AnnouncementOctober 15�18, 2006

Delta Sherbrooke Hotel and Conference Centre Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada

PM40021620