On Wednesday morning, the Province of Ontario and Bruce Power announced they were beginning planning for a massive expansion of “large nuclear” in that province. How big? One quarter more than Saskatchewan has ever produced on its highest usage day. Just one of these reactors would be as large as the four SaskPower is currently considering, combined.
Oh, and while he was here, Jonathan Wilkinson announced federal money for four Indigenous renewable energy projects, plus one at Carrot River. Here’s the first four, and here’s the last one.
There’s no redundancy in one big fat reactor. Just a lot of risk and power in one spot from one source in one location. That’s no way to ‘double ‘ a grid. Smart money goes with smaller molten salt reactors in perhaps seven locations. Less power is lost over long wire journeys, the grid is improved with more versatility , and recycling becomes viable.
The plan is for four new nuclear reactors at the facility, each 1200 MWatts, which is a lot more robust than one big reactor.
Are these the mini package plants found in aircraft carriers? If so the government and utility companies are getting that right.
It works for Ontario because we have about 12 large reactors, another isn’t putting all our eggs in one basket and the grid already exists.
Good point. Electricity transmission is the dinosaur in the living room; virtually unchanged and unchangeable for half a century. Modular is the way to go, eliminating thousands of km of metal wires on metal towers and concrete.
And when are we going to stop kidding ourselves about solar panel “generation”? Has no one noticed that they add heat to Earth unlike fossil fuel generation which only re-configures existing energy.
Hey dot……Well, you could put up a 100 small gas fired gen plants for less and be able to them use the in any circumstance where the primary generation failed to function. There is one out side of Kingston Ontario that could be used as a template. But hey, do not ever do the sensible rational thing.
Insufficient opportunities for graft. Won’t ever happen.
“$4,300,000 for Pisim Energy Limited Partnership to deploy two one-megawatt bi-facial solar arrays located in Weyburn”
Bi-facial. That’s funny. Pisim too.
It’s not the first time I’ve seen that, I wonder if they are water cooled…
uhuh.. and what do you think will happen to these plans when the enviro-crazies blow up the plant at zaporizhzhia ?
I do not give a f***. Kill the crazies.
Ever notice they never build this stuff in large population centres where its needed? You know where they vote left.
It will never happen the eco-teriorists will be out in force. You know in the big population centres.
Surely our great planning experts are aware and have an answer for the following…
o In 2006, the Energy Watch Group of Germany studied world uranium supplies and issued a report concluding that, in its most optimistic scenario, the peak of world uranium production will be achieved before 2040. If large numbers of new nuclear power plants are constructed to offset the use of coal as an electricity source, then supplies will peak much sooner. Thomas Seltmann, “Nuclear Power: The Beginning of the End,” Sun & Wind Energy (Energy Watch Group, November 2009).
o In 2008, mines supplied 51,600 tonnes of uranium oxide concentrate containing 43,853 tU, which means mining supplied roughly 75% of nuclear utility power requirements. The remaining supply deficit used to be made up from stockpiled uranium held by nuclear power utilities, but their stockpiles are pretty much depleted. Mine production is now primarily supplemented by ex-military material – the Megatons to Megawatts program which ends in 2013 – the Russians have stated that the agreement will not be renewed.
o The world only has about 70 years’ supply of reactor-grade uranium left at current consumption. New reactors are projected to add an incredible 42% more nuclear power plants within the next decade to 15 years. That means our uranium supply will fall even faster albeit there is hope as we currently do not have the technology to use most of the energy embodied in uranium or to use thoreum.
o “If all the world’s electricity was nuclear-generated, the supply of accessible uranium would be exhausted in nine years.” (source Dr. Helen Caldicott, http://www.helencaldicott.com/about.htm)
o Sprott has proven really good at seeing the forest for the trees… https://sprott.com/media/6518/sprott-physical-uranium-trust-investor-presentation-q1-2023.pdf
Helen Caldicott has an agenda. I would check her math carefully. Since she is on this list of bullet points, I would check the math in the other citations equally as carefully.
RNrn
This is like those reports of only 46 years of proven oil reserves.
But of as oil gets consumed, companies do more exploration, keeping the amount of oil reserves roughly constant through the decades.
Fast breeder reactors would make the nuclear fuel supply essentially limitless, and such reactors exist and are in use.
But they are not competitive with standard nuclear reactors right now. They will become competetive if uranium becomes scarce.
You’re forgetting about Thorium as a reactor fuel. In the ’50s the focus was on Uranium because a fast breeder reactor can also produce weapons-grade U235. Thorium is more plentiful than Uranium and Brazil and India have lots of it. As a bonus Thorium232 becomes U233 which can be used as fuel in a Molten Salt Reactor. The USA successfully ran experimental Thorium fueled reactors in the ’60s and several countries including China are now building experimental Thorium fueled reactors.
Al, both you and KM are entirely correct. The world has enormous amounts of uranium. this is all indicated in the OECD/NEA Red Book on world uranium inventories. The available supply rises by at least two orders of magnitude with only a modest increase in the cost of uranium fuel. And you are entirely right that after uranium there’s at least ten times as much thorium available for conversion to fissile U-233.
What’s Ojibway for “Glows in the Dark” because native reserves can’t even maintain their water sources?
Interestingly, the word for “We can’t run a water plant” and “Let’s buy another Zamboni and a fleet of F-250’s for the chief’s family again this year” are exactly the same.
“B’ik skrehn tei ve’ey” if I’m not mistaken.
RNrn
Not an intelligent person left anywhere.
It’s not built yet and Guibeault will put in every stop gap and delaying regulation he can.
But in the long run Nuclear is the only way out of the world’s energy needs. Solar and Wind doesn’t cut it.
The engineers at Bruce and Ontario power understand that nuclear is the only way to solve the energy needs down the road. Politicians should get out of the way as their degrees in gender studies and Social Justice nonsense don’t understand the STEM of the worlds energy needs and never will.
SNC Lavalin is salivating.
Lots of money to be made here.
yes. in something they know nothing about . the hunter bidens of canada
The bigger the nuke pile, the more dangerous the nuke pile because the thermal inertia of the pile is enormous, way more than the electrical rating. When these things go sideways, everything inside them reduces the water, even the zirconium cladding. Bigger is not better.
If anybody is looking to build a small modular reactor near Saskatoon, I have a double-deep lot in Vonda that you can use. I’ll even move my firepit out of the way for you at no charge. A town power line crosses my yard, so the grid is already right there! Call me!
We will be long into darkness before the environmental studies have been done let alone throwing more revenue at our native brethren and their lawyers. The site has already gone through that long process years ago. Adding additional units to that expansive site should be a done deal. Minimum 10 years of studies I read before ground is even broken. Easier to just allow propane use expansion. Oh wait I was forgetting we are not allowed to do that anymore let alone that dirty oil.
bverwey