Remember when the NDP hated nuclear? Now that talk has changed

Aleana Young

NDP SaskPower critic Aleana Young says small modular reactors can play a role in our energy future.

The New Democratic Party has a history of some of its MLAs being voraciously against nuclear power development. In particular, Peter Prebble, who was Corrections and Public Safety Minister from 2003-2006 under Premier Lorne Calvert, threatened to quit cabinet if the province did anything along those lines. In a 2005 CBC article, Prebble was quoted as saying, “I would have to step down from cabinet … in the theoretical event that cabinet was to endorse a reactor or a nuclear waste disposal facility.”

When asked what the current NDP stance was on nuclear power, Young said, “Technology changes, and times change. While I know people had strong opinions on that, I know people are going to have strong opinions today. While I’m not one of them, I know it’s important that we don’t dismiss people who have concerns and ask questions out of hand. But if the question is, for the Saskatchewan NDP, can SMRs play an important role in our energy future in Saskatchewan? Absolutely, they can.”

 

39 Replies to “Remember when the NDP hated nuclear? Now that talk has changed”

    1. I wouldn’t trust the commie lite Dippers to run a corner store much less be the government turning Saskatchewan nuclear.
      Reminds me of the old joke about monkeys, matches and dynamite.

  1. Unicorn fart containment system isn’t working? Sun doesn’t shine at night? No wind at -40 degrees? Well gee, who could have foreseen that?

    On the flip side, it is nice that they’re not directly advocating killing people through power limitations (both production and cost). I don’t think that this will last long though because I suspect that they still think that humanity is evil and everyone who disagrees with them must be brought to heel or exterminated.

  2. Peter Prebble is a Gerbil. Grab the bull by the horns Saskatchewan. Build the world’s safest, most efficient, Net Zero Nuclear Reactor using “locally sourced” components, like uranium.

    1. It is possible to build a hydro portable power generator…
      Just makes too much sense and our politicians hate that.
      The largest most expensive and wasteful…not that’s where the money is.
      The millions of gallons of fuel they use in remote locations tells you where the money goes to.

  3. They must have had a lousy turnout to their last convention. If / when they return to power they will pull the plug on any projects after putting billions into them. I love the irony of the NDP being all hot and bothered about the non problem of nuclear power waste disposal in one of the largest uranium producing expanses on the planet. No wonder they are the brain-trust for Liberal policies.

  4. “…it’s important that we don’t dismiss people who have concerns and ask questions out of hand.”

    The translation is simple. Not dismissing people out of hand means endless years of “public consultation” and doing nothing. Aleana is an idiot if she thinks this swerve and weave means anything of substance. It’s mere alphabet soup. Saskatchewan has ageing coal-fired plants for much of its power generation, and the time to do something about replacing them is running out.

  5. It’s interesting how some parties have reversed position on certain issues. In the U.S., for example, the Democrats are more likely to support foreign adventurism than Republicans, and then call Republicans unpatriotic if they don’t go along. And Democrats are now trying to recast themselves as the party of refunding the police, likely as they realize that submerging cities in crime is not a vote winner.

  6. This is encouraging. The pendulum appears to be swinging away from insanity and back towards common sense.

    1. Yabbut, it’s all a temporary illusional veneer with the left, so that you pay no attention to the gender pronoun optional individual behind the curtain who is plotting further societal upheavals.

  7. Canada’s nuclear industry was killed by these same people. Sask must have enough gas to build plants and generate electricity faster, easier and cheaper than a nuke plant.

    1. That the smrs aren’t CO2 emitting is the selling feature the vendors are pushing and will trump any considerations based on reality.

  8. The Saskatchewan government needs to accelerate the transition to nuclear. In this sparsely populated province, there’s lots of places to put a reactor where it will be miles and miles away from cities or towns. Build it and they will come is cliche but when PRPS was built in the middle of nowhere, families moved to Coronach to get high paying, secure crown Corp jobs.

  9. Do understand that “small modular reactors” are at best lab prototypes at this point. They have a lot of potential, but they could well turn out to be cold fusion all over again (and their scalability is very much unproven). Her support of them is just another way to grift taxpayer money to a lobbyist.

    Government should not be in the business of energy R&D.

    1. I doubt a private company will take on a project of this magnitude. There’s not just financial risk but too much government risk, particularly from the federal Trudeau Liberal government. Look what Trudeau did to pipeline and oil sands projects.

      Historically, Saskatchewan Crown Corps have had to take the lead from rural electrification to Shand’s zero effluent power plant to BDPS’s carbon capture facility, potash, uranium .There’s been some spectacularly bad Saskatchewan government investments along the way too but power/energy production innovation has mostly been successful (except wind and solar, of course)

        1. To clarify, my understanding is that the Sask government is not developing any new smr technology. Saskpower would build existing designs, some of which are at advanced stages with prototypes being built by the patent holders.

          It’s important to understand the meaning of modular in small modular reactor technology.

      1. LC
        “I doubt a private company will take on a project of this magnitude.”
        I present you Elon Musk, and Branson, and space exploration.

        1. No one is trying to kill off space exploration. Governments are trying to destroy reliable, affordable energy.

          Apples and oranges

          1. OTOH … NASA has been 95% repurposed to “fight” climate change. They’ve killed off government space exploration pretty convincingly

  10. Nuclear Power Plants currently under construction (partial list):

    China 21
    Canada 0
    Germany 0
    India 8
    USA 2
    Russia 3
    Iran 1

  11. Why of course why didn’t I think of it??? Elect a coven of Spahn Ranch hippies to direct your Province’s energy future. I mean, the solution was right there in front of us and no one noticed. And you know – at no time in the history of politics has a candidate ever sung from two different song sheets. Nope. It just doesn’t happen.
    I remember Notley serving up the same heapin’ helpin’ of schmaltz back in the day and once elected appointed rabid, anti oil Greenpeace beatniks as policy advisors. Splendid.

    “But, seriously, we’ve been consistent in this. Saskatchewan’s energy future, especially when it comes to power generation,…”
    Consistently absent you mean. But the Saskatchewan NDP manifesto is especially big on expanding solar and not a lick about anything else. *golf clap*

    What we need are grownups. People who know how things work and what it takes to get it done. Cheese enthusiasts aren’t in my wheelhouse. If you’re heading up a tourism portfolio we can talk.
    And depending on who you talk to Saskatchewan is sitting on the largest deposit of high grade uranium in the world, that’s planet Earth folks. This should be a no brainer.
    Then again, I think carbon capture is utter nonsense, so what do I know.

  12. Forget the power plants.
    Saskatchewan needs bombs.
    Nuclear bombs to ensure her independence.
    From grifters to the East and Grifters to the South.
    An alliance with Little Rocketman could be advantageous.

    1. L – Agreed, keep the most reliable and least expensive going, and profitably export enough
      for us to be able to afford the the calculated risk of: an unproven design, cost and reliability.

      The shutdown of coal and any expanded natural gas generation, which are the lowest cost
      energy options possible. This is being done in surrender to the petulant tyrant in Ottawa;
      as he screams “Climate Crisis”, “Great Reset”(hint Emergency Act), “Canada … the first post nation-state”.

      We’ve had 2 plus years of Lockdowns, coerced experimental genetic shots, and medical censorship, as the Sask. Party bowed in obeisance to the Trudeau regime, the W.H.O.
      and the W.E.F. , all this without an accounting of the dead, dying and wounded.

      Then Trudeau shows up in 2022 and offers to pay(with confiscated Sask. $) $10/day daycare(with strings attached). Just to make sure parents are secondary to the state in the mind of children. The Sask. Party bribed with Sask. monies stolen by Ottawa, to a most
      intrusive policy upon which they’ve never campaigned. Only to surrender provincial jurisdiction, yet again…

      Q 1. As compared to what? Q 2. At what cost ? Q 3. What hard evidence do you have?
      – Thomas Sowell

      regardless of the commands
      from the petulant tyrant in Ottawa.

    2. Per the list, only 1 is in operation and 1is under construction. The 30 others are conceptual or under design and not licensed.
      Are the Russians using steam for centralized community heating like the Romanians do with their CANDUs?

      The smr’s are a departure from the CANDUs Canada developed which don’t need enriched uranium fuel . The CANDUS are safe but are costly to build. Still, refurbished 30 year old CANDUs produce power at half the cost of what wind power producers are being paid in Ontario. Are we going to turn our backs on CANDU cuz …there is nowhere to pump the electricity from a 1000MW Advanced Candu into the grid between Alberta, Saskatchewan and northern states? Just who is behind the push for these smrs?

      1. Advanced CANDU does not exist. Its development was terminated when the Canadian federal government broke up AECL in 2014. The ACR was a design abomination which actually needed enriched fuel to operate. To my technical understanding, the reactor had all the possibilities of being an unstable, uneconomic monstrosity just as the HWBWR was developed by AECL and built in the early 1970s as Gentilly 1.

        Second, all SMR designs need enriched fuel.

        Third, you are correct about electricity costs in Ontario. This is why OPG and Bruce Power are refurbishing all their reactors to operate until the mid-2060s.

        Fourth, no one uses nuclear steam for cogeneration. The last use of this was for steam supply for the Bruce heavy water plant, and that ended in 1998 when heavy water production in Canada was terminated.

        Fifth, the push for new SMRs is coming from the Provinces themselves. They need new power generation in Ontario, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Alberta.

        1. Thanks for clarifications. With design issues you mention, the AECL reactor was in the running for a new build at Darlington ~2012 and had passed preliminary reviews by the safety regulator. Yikes!
          Read today that Ontario already has plans to lead the way and build an smr at Darlington vs. those multi 1000 MW units.

  13. “(S)mall modular reactors can play a role…”
    That sounds similar to Mao Tse Tung’s small iron ore processors in every backyard for the great leap.

  14. Like I’m in love with oil and gas.. You cant make electricity as expensive as possible and force me to heat my home and fuel my car with it.. Its insane..

  15. I’m sure she isn’t opposed to it when she is out of power, and then suddenly will find that she’s opposed if she ever gains power

Navigation