Will Nuclear Energy Help Canada Meet its Climate Goals by 2050?
Photo Credit: Mike Crawley/CBC
After nearly 15 years of discussions and consultations, Alberta is on track to implement nuclear energy into its electricity grid by 2035. Nuclear energy physicists say this switch will have little to no change in CO2 levels or the results may not be seen for a while, according to Global News. These assumptions stem from previous projects opening their power plants years after the deadline and closing a few years later because of the large amount of money invested.
On Apr. 2, the province announced in a statement that it would allocate $600,000 to study the feasibility of converting fossil fuel generation sites into nuclear reactors. Crown-owned Emissions Reduction Alberta will partially fund the study with revenues collected from Alberta’s industrial carbon pricing system. The province will also invest $33.7 million in 13 projects with funds from Emissions Reduction Alberta (ERA), according to Calgary Tech. These projects are centred around utilizing technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs) to reduce emissions and strengthen the province’s energy grid.
According to the Canadian Deuterium Uranium’s (CANDU) website, SMRs are nuclear reactors that are smaller in size and power output than traditional nuclear power reactors with enhanced safety features. Given their small power output, SMRs are used on small energy grids where power generation needs are less than 300 megawatts electric (MWe) per facility (300 MWe of electricity can power nearly 300,000 homes).
Ontario was one of the first provinces in Canada to repurpose coal power plants into nuclear-powered plants. Over the years, their success has set an example for other countries. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ontario stopped its last coal plant in 2014 and replaced it with nuclear reactors that had previously been shut down. This produced beneficial results for the province, as CO2 production per kilowatt hour (kWh) went from 230 grams to 25 grams.
Alberta aims to have an SMR-based facility in operation in late 2035. Affordability and Utilities Minister Nathan Neudorf commented to CBC that a panel hasn’t been put together to study the implementation of SMRs, and no consultants have been hired. As a first step, the government will draft regulations for nuclear power generation and use in the province and later begin public consultations to spread awareness and interest.
Alberta has been working with the governments of Saskatchewan, Ontario and New Brunswick since 2020 to develop plans to utilize SMRs. Talks for nuclear energy in Alberta began around 2009 when an expert panel highlighted the benefits and challenges that may arise.
At that time, the Minister of Energy, Mel Knight, was strictly against investing in nuclear energy with public funding or subsidies, according to a report by Globe and Mail from 2009. Construction for a nuclear reactor in Peace River was set to happen in 2011 but was soon abandoned after natural gas prices declined, making gas-fired plants more affordable.
Canada’s history with nuclear power plants dates back to decades before the energy source was being considered in Alberta. According to the federal government's website, the country adopted the energy in the early 1960s, and three provinces currently house 22 nuclear power reactors and produce around 15 per cent of Canada’s electricity. Globally, Canada generates approximately 4 per cent of the total nuclear power used.
According to The World Nuclear Association, a nuclear reactor produces energy by nuclear fission, which, in most cases, is the splitting of uranium atoms. This reaction generates a large amount of heat that turns water into steam to run an electricity-generating turbine.
Although most countries worldwide are switching to nuclear energy, Canada faces significant funding and employment challenges, as well as concerns over nuclear waste disposal, according to a report by Ivey Business School. Projects must also comply with many guidelines, such as provincial, federal, and international approvals.
Globe and Mail reported in 2009 that many plans for nuclear generators were put on hold countrywide or terminated completely. As a result, Canada hadn't built a nuclear reactor for nearly 17 years, resulting in a delayed climate goal response.
While nuclear energy discussions are spreading nationwide, BC has already made it clear that nuclear energy will not be included in its renewable energy plans.
In June last year, Premier David Eby told reporters that he is confident that solar, wind, geothermal, and hydroelectricity will continue to benefit the province as they have in the past.
Taco Niet, an assistant professor at SFU’s School of Sustainable Energy Engineering, disagrees with Eby, as studies have shown that wind and solar energy on their own won’t be able to help BC achieve its net zero goals by 2050. He stresses that BC should consider utilizing nuclear energy more in the form of SMRs to follow through with their goals.
When asked about SMRs, Eby commented, “I know the federal government is looking at [SMRs], it might be appropriate for other provinces to look at that kind of initiative because they don’t have what we have here in BC, but we have a massive clean energy resource here.”
While experts like Niet view SMRs as being beneficial, other experts like Ramana consider them a costly and futile investment. Nuclear reactors are more expensive to build than other renewable sources but much cheaper to run, according to the World Nuclear Association.
Ramana says its power output is much less than a normal nuclear reactor, and its cost is not worth it given the amount of power it outputs. Additionally, the SMR may not be ready for BC to implement, as it has taken more than 20 years for it to be processed through the proposal stage in the US. He claims that governments are focusing on the wrong things; they should focus more on how to speed up the construction process rather than building more reactors.