While the 'Rest of Canada' continues to build momentum across the entire nuclear supply chain, with even Quebec Hydro reconsidering recommissioning of its Gentilly CANDU nuclear power plant, British Columbia’s NDP remains steadfast in their refusal to unleash the massive potential of the atom within their province.However, there may be a glimmer of hope for British Columbia, as the Rest of Canada just spotted a proverbial flying pig this summer, as Elizabeth May’s Green Party of Canada (GPC) is preparing to vote on ending their opposition to nuclear energy. Bear in mind that Elizabeth May is MP for the southern Vancouver Island riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands. While the GPC is a federal party, it signals that British Columbians are starting to read the writing on the wall when it comes to the CO2 emission reduction potential and climate resiliency that nuclear power affords to those who possess it.It is my opinion that this pleasantly shocking development within the GPC should be viewed as a turning tide in public sentiment within British Columbia Left-of-Center voter base. The question remaining is whether this growing sentiment will achieve critical mass.For the record, I completed high school and my undergraduate studies in British Columbia’s Caribou Country region and like most of my graduate class of 2001, I immediately moved to Alberta as when we were attempting to land our first jobs, the central interior had a +15% unemployment rate.However, there is still a part of my heart that misses the majestic forests, beautiful mountains and rugged landscape of British Columbia. I would return in a heartbeat if I believed that a fundamental cultural reformation among British Columbians had begun in regards to a more positive sentiment towards private sector investment in the energy sector.At this point in my career, I believe that a true sign of such a ground swell was underway would be a widespread grassroots acknowledgement that no form of dispatchable power generation today has the safety and environmental performance record of Canada’s nuclear industry.However, at this point, the province’s crown jewel, BC Hydro, is protected by legislation against competition from Canada’s nuclear power sector setting up shop in British Columbia and has recently committed an additional $36 billion in funding to expand BC Hydro’s capabilities within the province.For Western Standard subscribers from British Columbia with the voting power to change legislation, I wish to impress on you the following considerations as you approach your provincial election cycle this fall.First, I will remind everyone that hydroelectricity requires stable snowfall accumulation during the winter season and that 2 out of the past 7 years, BC Hydro has had to import power to cover for the deficits in winter snowfall. The Achilles heel of hydroelectricity is its lack of climate resiliency.British Columbians should not have all their eggs in one basket when it comes to low emission dispatchable or baseload power.Second, the current bill to BC Hydro’s customers to get Site C hydroelectricity to Kitimat is now estimated to be $19 billion for a mere 1,100 MWe of electricity.Ballooning cost overruns at Site C, together with the estimated $3 billion for the yet-to-be constructed high-voltage transmission infrastructure to connect Kitimat to the Williston substation, makes this one of the most expensive power generation projects in history.Third, the land disturbance footprint of the Site C hydroelectric facility together with its 450 km transmission system to Kitimat will be around 138 km2. Relative to the benefits of 1,100 MWe of electricity produced and transmitted, this equates to around 8 Watts per square meter of land disturbed.Comparatively, Ontario’s Bruce Power CANDU nuclear power plant comes in around 700 Watts per square meter of land disturbance along Lake Huron. Once Bruce Power’s phase C expansion is approved and constructed, this metric will increase to over 1,100 Watts per square meter.Clearly, Canadian nuclear wins over hydrolectricity in terms of land sterilization per unit of power produced.Just think of how many First Nations communities, farmers, ranchers, trappers, loggers and private land holders along the 138 km2 footprint that would benefited had the BC government opted to use nuclear power for Kitimat’s LNG exports?Finally, if British Columbia had a regulatory framework for nuclear energy, the recently sanctioned Indigenous Cedar LNG facility at Kitimat, could have brought to bear floating barge nuclear plant technology to power both its facility as well as Kitimat’s growing LNG community. .In this scenario, British Columbians would not have had to pay out of their own pockets to power the LNG sector.British Columbians need to understand that global marine markets are increasingly viewing advanced nuclear energy technologies as a means of not just powering coastal communities, but also for propulsion for ships.As such, the Ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert can soon expect nuclear-powered ships docking at their terminals.If British Columbia plays its card right, it will get a large LNG export industry plus meet its CO2 emissions reductions targets, without having to go into further debt during this period of high interest rates.While I am hopeful that BC NDP members will follow the lead of the Green Party of Canada and seriously reconsider their official position on nuclear energy, I remain highly skeptical that they will update their regulatory frameworks to allow nuclear energy in the province.
While the 'Rest of Canada' continues to build momentum across the entire nuclear supply chain, with even Quebec Hydro reconsidering recommissioning of its Gentilly CANDU nuclear power plant, British Columbia’s NDP remains steadfast in their refusal to unleash the massive potential of the atom within their province.However, there may be a glimmer of hope for British Columbia, as the Rest of Canada just spotted a proverbial flying pig this summer, as Elizabeth May’s Green Party of Canada (GPC) is preparing to vote on ending their opposition to nuclear energy. Bear in mind that Elizabeth May is MP for the southern Vancouver Island riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands. While the GPC is a federal party, it signals that British Columbians are starting to read the writing on the wall when it comes to the CO2 emission reduction potential and climate resiliency that nuclear power affords to those who possess it.It is my opinion that this pleasantly shocking development within the GPC should be viewed as a turning tide in public sentiment within British Columbia Left-of-Center voter base. The question remaining is whether this growing sentiment will achieve critical mass.For the record, I completed high school and my undergraduate studies in British Columbia’s Caribou Country region and like most of my graduate class of 2001, I immediately moved to Alberta as when we were attempting to land our first jobs, the central interior had a +15% unemployment rate.However, there is still a part of my heart that misses the majestic forests, beautiful mountains and rugged landscape of British Columbia. I would return in a heartbeat if I believed that a fundamental cultural reformation among British Columbians had begun in regards to a more positive sentiment towards private sector investment in the energy sector.At this point in my career, I believe that a true sign of such a ground swell was underway would be a widespread grassroots acknowledgement that no form of dispatchable power generation today has the safety and environmental performance record of Canada’s nuclear industry.However, at this point, the province’s crown jewel, BC Hydro, is protected by legislation against competition from Canada’s nuclear power sector setting up shop in British Columbia and has recently committed an additional $36 billion in funding to expand BC Hydro’s capabilities within the province.For Western Standard subscribers from British Columbia with the voting power to change legislation, I wish to impress on you the following considerations as you approach your provincial election cycle this fall.First, I will remind everyone that hydroelectricity requires stable snowfall accumulation during the winter season and that 2 out of the past 7 years, BC Hydro has had to import power to cover for the deficits in winter snowfall. The Achilles heel of hydroelectricity is its lack of climate resiliency.British Columbians should not have all their eggs in one basket when it comes to low emission dispatchable or baseload power.Second, the current bill to BC Hydro’s customers to get Site C hydroelectricity to Kitimat is now estimated to be $19 billion for a mere 1,100 MWe of electricity.Ballooning cost overruns at Site C, together with the estimated $3 billion for the yet-to-be constructed high-voltage transmission infrastructure to connect Kitimat to the Williston substation, makes this one of the most expensive power generation projects in history.Third, the land disturbance footprint of the Site C hydroelectric facility together with its 450 km transmission system to Kitimat will be around 138 km2. Relative to the benefits of 1,100 MWe of electricity produced and transmitted, this equates to around 8 Watts per square meter of land disturbed.Comparatively, Ontario’s Bruce Power CANDU nuclear power plant comes in around 700 Watts per square meter of land disturbance along Lake Huron. Once Bruce Power’s phase C expansion is approved and constructed, this metric will increase to over 1,100 Watts per square meter.Clearly, Canadian nuclear wins over hydrolectricity in terms of land sterilization per unit of power produced.Just think of how many First Nations communities, farmers, ranchers, trappers, loggers and private land holders along the 138 km2 footprint that would benefited had the BC government opted to use nuclear power for Kitimat’s LNG exports?Finally, if British Columbia had a regulatory framework for nuclear energy, the recently sanctioned Indigenous Cedar LNG facility at Kitimat, could have brought to bear floating barge nuclear plant technology to power both its facility as well as Kitimat’s growing LNG community. .In this scenario, British Columbians would not have had to pay out of their own pockets to power the LNG sector.British Columbians need to understand that global marine markets are increasingly viewing advanced nuclear energy technologies as a means of not just powering coastal communities, but also for propulsion for ships.As such, the Ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert can soon expect nuclear-powered ships docking at their terminals.If British Columbia plays its card right, it will get a large LNG export industry plus meet its CO2 emissions reductions targets, without having to go into further debt during this period of high interest rates.While I am hopeful that BC NDP members will follow the lead of the Green Party of Canada and seriously reconsider their official position on nuclear energy, I remain highly skeptical that they will update their regulatory frameworks to allow nuclear energy in the province.
