Alternatives to, and cost of, nuclear power

As an introduction to construction of a massive new nuclear generation plant, Ontario Power Generation's Initial Project Description of its proposal to build an up-to 10,000 Mw nuclear generating station at its Wesleyville site near Port Hope, Ontario, is seriously deficient:

 *There is no estimate, or even mention, of the costs of this project: some estimates are in the $250-$300 billion range, and there is no mention of how these costs would impact ratepayers. Absent this information, how can ratepayers and other interested parties evaluate the impact of the project on their electricity bills over at least two decades of construction and beyond - not to mention the financial impacts on their children and grandchildren?

*There is no mention of the consideable body of research documenting the health impacts of nuclear generation on individuals living near nuclear plants: see https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40983508 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40983508/)/ (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40983508/) for an example;

*Although Section 22 of the IAAC's enabling legislation requires consideration of alternatives, in its IPD, OPG says this may not be necessary (IPD, p.9). Section 22 contains no qualifying statements, and there does not appear to be any basis for dismissing this requirement.

Let us assume that OPG's statement that it is not REQUIRED to assess alternatives, is for some unstated reason technically accurate.

In the face of an emerging climate change crisis, wind and solar generation appear to be the emerging generation technologies of choice worldwide, and their costs are dropping as more jurisdictions mandate them. At a minimum, OPG should be required to provide comparative cost, safety and other necessary comparative data in order to satisfy the people of Ontario that all options for new generation have been properly, objectively and completely evaluated.