Ontario is exploring the possibility of building new, large-scale nuclear plants in order to meet increasing demand for electricity and phase out natural gas generation.
Provincial government consultations on the plan close May 14.
- Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
- Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
- The Weekender: The climate news you need.
A report late last year by the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) found that the province could fully eliminate natural gas from the electricity system by 2050, starting with a moratorium in 2027, but it will require about C$400 billion in capital spending and more generation including new, large-scale nuclear plants, The Canadian Press reports.
Decarbonizing the grid, in addition to new nuclear, will require more conservation efforts, more renewable energy sources and more energy storage, the report concluded.
Still, the IESO said work should start now to assess the reliability of new and relatively untested technologies and fuels to replace natural gas, and to set up large, new generation sources such as nuclear plants and hydroelectric facilities, CP writes.
The province has not committed to a natural gas moratorium or phaseout, or to building new nuclear facilities other than its small modular reactor plans, but it is now consulting on the prospect.
A document recently posted to the government’s environmental registry asks for input on how best to engage the public and Indigenous communities on the planning and location of new generation and storage facilities.
Building new nuclear plants is “one pathway” toward a fully electrified system, Energy Minister Todd Smith told CP in an interview.
“It’s a possibility, for sure, and that’s why we’re looking for the feedback from Ontarians,” he said. “We’re considering all of the next steps.”
Environmental groups such as Environmental Defence oppose new nuclear builds, as well as the continued reliance on natural gas.
“The IESO’s report is peddling the continued use of natural gas under the guise of a decarbonization plan, and it takes as a given the ramping up of gas generation… and continues to rely on gas-generated electricity until 2050, which is embarrassingly late,” said Lana Goldberg, Environmental Defence’s Ontario climate program manager.
“Building new nuclear is absurd when we have safe and much cheaper alternatives such as wind and solar power.”
The IESO has said the system needs the flexibility of natural gas plants to keep the system stable while new and relatively untested technologies are explored and new infrastructure gets built, but also as an electricity supply crunch looms.
Ontario is facing a shortfall of electricity with a nuclear plant set to be retired, others being refurbished, and increasing demands including from electric vehicles, new electric vehicle and battery manufacturing, electric arc furnaces for steelmaking, and growth in the greenhouse and mining industries. That shortage was brought on, in large part, by the newly-elected Ford government’s decision in 2018 to cancel 758 signed contracts for local renewable energy project and rip a finished, fully-built wind farm out of the ground.
But a study produced for IESO by Montreal-based Dunsky Energy + Climate Advisors found that the province can deliver enough distributed energy resources (DER) to clear the supply shortage over the next decade, without having to rely more heavily on methane-heavy gas plants or on nuclear.
Last month, Clean Energy Canada drew on Dunsky analysis to conclude that wind and solar farms with battery backup are both cheaper to build in Ontario than natural gas power plants, without factoring in a 40% cost reduction for renewables that analysts expect to see by 2035.
By contrast, there’s no history or evidence to suggest that new nuclear plants, large or relatively small, will be cheaper than gas. And Ontario ratepayers aren’t the only ones facing serious financial risk due to the outsized cost of the nuclear industry’s latest ventures: In a post published Tuesday, the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick (CRED-NB) warns the province could be on the hook for more than $250 million in development costs if it accepts a “ransom note” from small modular reactor (SMR) start-up Moltex.
“The graveyard of nuclear history is littered with numerous reactor designs that were never constructed because they would not have worked,” write CRED analysts Susan O’Donnell and MV Ramana, after listing a series of major uncertainties with the Moltex design. And they say now is the time to draw the line. Citing economist John Maynard Keynes’ dictum that “[if you] owe your banker £1000 and you are at his mercy; owe him £1 million and the position is reversed,” the two authors note that federal and provincial governments have already put $60 million into the venture.
“Another $250 million, and these governments will really be on their knees,” they warn.
In Ontario, the government consultation also asks whether “additional investment” should be made in clean energy in the short term to decrease reliance on gas, “even if this will increase costs to the electricity system and ratepayers,” CP writes.
But Smith indicated the government isn’t keen on higher costs.
“We’re not going to sacrifice reliability and affordability,” he said. “We have to have a reliable and affordable system, otherwise we won’t have people moving to electrification.”
The main body of this report was first published by The Canadian Press on February 23, 2023.
