Natural Resources committee  It's a very good and complex question. You're absolutely right about the local support that's required. We could talk about the example in Yucca Mountain in the U.S. versus, say, the repository in Finland, and how local support is incredibly important to success in these. On t

Natural Resources committee  That's an excellent question. Again, I want to be clear and we've been clear with our proposal up front. The way the global isotope market works right now, the establishment of these types of facilities is not a money-making proposition. The way the medical isotope business has

Natural Resources committee  I can offer one overall thought and it's something out of the UDP report. It's quite general, so I don't know if it's specifically what you're looking for, Mr. Trost. One of the things that's clear, and one of the things that was an interesting lesson for me as I went through th

Natural Resources committee  That was the one recommendation—

Natural Resources committee  Again, that was one that was public in the UDP report, asking for more coordination—

Natural Resources committee  Is the question about the different technologies?

Natural Resources committee  So it's whether the market affects the picture.

Natural Resources committee  That's a good question. I think it ties back into the nation's nuclear strategy and the future of nuclear power R and D in the country. Bluntly speaking, perhaps you can think of the NRU as serving three purposes: medical isotopes, nuclear power R and D, and as a source of neutro

Natural Resources committee  Again, it would come back to your public policy goals. If you decided that you wanted to just have an isotope supply sufficient for the country, it's likely that you could a build a reactor in Chalk River that could serve that supply. If you wanted to optimize the reactor at Chal

Natural Resources committee  I think the principal advantage may be, as I said, the synergies with that Canadian Light Source. As I referred to, a number of nations that have built new neutron sources or research reactors have tended to put them next to their synchrotrons. The reason for that is that the sci

Natural Resources committee  Sure. It's not the cheapest proposal out there, I'll say that up front, and that's just to say it's establishing a new reactor. The approach we took involves a couple of things. One, we wanted to build on our existing strengths, and two, we wanted to put together a proposal that

Natural Resources committee  We were one of the 22 proposals submitted to the expert panel established by Natural Resources Canada.

Natural Resources committee  We have not had any formal follow-up yet. We're awaiting the deadline of November 30.

Natural Resources committee  That's a good question. In talking to the regulator and in talking through the building program in Australia, our original proposal suggested that the fastest you could see something come online is probably about seven years. The timeline we've talked about is seven to ten years,

Natural Resources committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to appear before you today. As you heard in the introduction, my name is Richard Florizone and I am a policy fellow in the Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy at the University of Saskatchewa