Nuclear energy is on the outlook for Alberta's future: Is it a real possibility?

Artistic rendering of an example of a small modular reactor at the Darlington site in Ontario. (OPG)

Optimism about the future of clean energy in Alberta was at a high earlier this week following an announcement from Edmonton-based Capital Power Corp. and Ontario Power Generation (OPG).

The two companies signed an agreement to assess the feasibility of deploying and developing Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) to help power Alberta’s electricity grid.

The announcement came just days after a province-wide emergency alert was issued urging residents and businesses to conserve as much electricity as possible with the risk of rolling power outages at a high due to unprecedented demand on its electrical grid with extreme cold gripping much of the province.

You might also like:

But the announcement left some questions unanswered: how soon could these reactors be built and go online?

How can we be sure SMRs are even a real possibility for Alberta? What are the dangers and concerns associated with such a project?

And, perhaps the biggest question is, how much would the feasibility study and eventual development cost?

Cost concerns

In a joint statement sent to Daily Hive Urbanized, Capital Power and OPG said that the cost of an SMR project varies with the technology selected, site specifics, and other factors.

“Currently, the parties have not completed their feasibility assessment and don’t have the requisite information to provide a reliable estimate,” read the statement.

“In general, SMRs are cost competitive with other green generation alternatives such as wind and storage or solar.”

That concern was also brought up by Allison Macfarlane, a professor and director with UBC’s School of Public Policy and Global Affairs.

The problem with nuclear power, she told Daily Hive Urbanized, has always been that it’s really expensive.

“It’s very, very capital intensive, and you look at any prospective projections of costs of different energy sources, and nuclear is always at the very high end because of the high capital,” Mcfarlane said.

She chaired the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 2012 to 2014.

“If it’s not ready to go commercial for 20 years, it has to compete in the marketplace 20 years ahead, when one imagines that renewables will be even cheaper than they are now.”

A rendering of the BWRX-300 Small Modular Reactor (GE Hitachi)

Mcfarlane explained that by the time a company gets to commercial deployment, it has to have all the supply chains in order.

“You need fuel for these reactors. You have to make sure you can get the fuel,” she said.

“Then, of course, you have to have a plan for the waste and everything in between.”

Canada does use a fair amount of nuclear energy, with 15% of the country’s electricity coming from that source.

There are 19 reactors, most of which are in Ontario; however, none of those are SMRs.

A concept that’s only on paper

The provincial government welcomed the announcement, saying that the potential for SMRs could be an answer to Alberta’s search for the right energy mix.

Nathan Neudorf, Alberta’s minister of affordability and utilities, said the partnership is an exciting and important step forward in the province’s efforts to decarbonize the grid while maintaining on-demand baseload power.

Others, however, were more cautious of the news because of the novelty of the technology, that it’s largely untested, and the unknown associated costs.

“Most of the discussion of the reactors in Canada are reactors that exist only on paper; they’ve never been built,” Macfarlane said.

She explained that any kind of newly engineered technology, including nuclear power reactors, is initially designed on paper or a computer; then you build a scale model.

“When you build a scale model, you realize you’ve made errors in computer design. And so you fix those errors,” Macfarlane said.

“And then you have to scale up to full scale, and when you scale to full scale, of course, there are things that change; parameters that change … And so you have to make changes again.”

A diagram of the model of the unit of the Ontario project (GE Vernova)

According to the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), there are more than 80 SMR designs and concepts globally.

Most of them are in various developmental stages, and some are claimed as being near-term deployable.

There are currently four SMRs in advanced stages of construction in Argentina, China, and Russia, and several existing and new nuclear energy countries are conducting SMR research and development.

In Canada, OPG is building North America’s first fleet of SMRs at its Darlington New Nuclear site in Ontario.

The construction of the first of four SMRs at the Ontario project will be completed by the end of 2028, according to OPG, and the unit will be online by the end of 2029.

Pending regulatory approvals to build three additional units, the company said, the total output of the Darlington New Nuclear Project would be 1,200 megawatts (MW), which is enough electricity to power about 1.2 million homes. This is also roughly the same output capacity as BC Hydro’s new C$16 billion Site C hydroelectric dam in northeastern British Columbia, which will reach completion in 2025.

In contrast, the first SMR unit at the Ontario project will cost roughly C$1 billion.

A brand-new conventional nuclear power plant carries a significantly higher cost. For example, in 2024, the project of two new additional nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle in Georgia — the first new reactors built in the US in decades — will be fully commissioned, carrying a cost in excess of US$30 billion. Its combined output capacity of 2,234 MW will be twice the capacity of one SMR unit or the Site C dam.

Currently, the closest nuclear power plant to Western Canada is the Columbia Nuclear Generating Station, located in southern Washington state.

site c dam bc hydro construction progress july 2023

July 2023 construction progress on the Site C dam. (BC Hydro)

Nuclear energy, Alberta, and SMRs

SMRs are a new class of nuclear reactors that are significantly smaller in size and power output than conventional nuclear power reactors.

They use nuclear fission to produce energy for electricity, hybrid energy systems, district heating, water desalination, and steam for heavy industry applications.

According to the IAEA, proposed SMR designs are generally simpler than existing reactors, and the safety concept for SMRs often relies more on passive systems and inherent safety characteristics of the reactor (low power and operating pressure, for example).

This essentially means that no human intervention, external power or force is required to shut down systems.

The agency said that these increased safety margins, in some cases, eliminate or significantly lower the potential for unsafe releases of radioactivity to the environment and the public in case of an accident.

SMRs have a power capacity of up to 300 MW(e) per unit, which is about a third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear power reactors and have reduced fuel requirements than existing plants.

According to the Government of Canada’s SMR action plan, this technology has the potential for a range of applications, from grid-scale units that can provide non-emitting reliable electricity to smaller units suitable for heavy industry and powering remote communities.

On its website, the government said that several provinces are actively pursuing SMRs.

A rendering of an SMR. (GE Hitachi)

As part of the feasibility assessment, OPG and Capital Power said they will review a range of technologies, including the BWRX-300 that OPG has selected to build at their Darlington New Nuclear Project.

Capital Power and OPG will complete the feasibility assessment within two years while continuing to work on the next stages of SMR development.

The companies said they expect that SMRs could come into the province beginning in the 2030s.

Nagwan Al-Guneid, Alberta NDP Energy & Climate Critic for Electricity, Utilities and Renewables, said that while there is a need to make Alberta’s electricity supply stable and reliable, there needs to be a level of certainty associated with such projects.

“If these new reactors prove they can be commercially produced, safely and cost effectively they may be part of Alberta’s future, but we need to make sure we are doing due diligence and not signing contracts on wishful thinking as nuclear energy has a long history of cost overruns,” she said.

“It will likely take over 10 years for small modular reactors to be ready for commercial use. If the UCP plans to move forward with this plan, Albertans deserve to know how much it will cost and how we are going to pay for it.”

You might also like: