Hopefully, Canada will not get bullied by US for selling it cheaply.
Who else can Canada sell excess power to?
No one else I guess. But they could use it themselves, building whatever plants/factories/server farms needed to use it.
Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
191–200 of 500 posts
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#192It's obvious to me there will be a renaisance, but the question is which design will win.
There are so many companies building small modular reactors right and various different designs with different fuels and cooling mediums.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_small_modular_reactor_...
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#193I wonder if anyone will tell them that's an oxymoron.
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#194Always thought it was weird that the Commonwealth Realm nations had never pooled resources to have standardised reactor designs and expertise. Canada and Australia have loads of uranium - seems like an obvious strategic move. Instead, the UK turns to China, lol.
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#195Makes alot of sense. Canada has: - one of the largest uranium reserves - a well respected and safe nuclear design in CANDU - experience with building and refurbishing nuclear reactors(Darlington) and for Ontario itself A need for more baseload to work with the large amount of solar and wind that Ontario has added in the last 10 years. Saskatchewan also now has a potential need for nuclear for industrial use now that…
> Ontario itself A need for more baseload to work with the large amount of solar and wind that Ontario has added in the last 10 years. Chasing baseload is a fool's game. You will always have a mismatch between power needed and power produced. Power storage is necessary to move excess power produced to times of excess power need. e.g., shave the peaks to fill the valleys. Any storage reduces the need for baseload and…
We're talking about Ontario. I live in Ontario. The sky is overcast 8 months of the year. We're not building enough storage to charge for 4 months and drain for 8.
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nuclear is the most expensive type of electrical power generation. Diversity is good, but enough of it is achievable with cheaper options.
The cost is a choice. Not inherent to the power. We could choose literally any day to make it dramatically cheaper.
It's unclear to me exactly why building big projects is so expensive, but it's not just nuclear. In the US, subway expansion, high speed rail, and bridges are also ridiculously expensive. Whatever is causing the runaway costs and schedules doesn't appear to be related to it being a fission plant.
I would love it if somebody who has recently built something like a fission plant could give us a report as to exactly what happened that caused this.
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will Alberta go along?
Will Alberta go (away)? If/when the price of crude goes back down, they'll feel the cash crunch. Curiously, if they leave Canada, they need a path through a foreign country to get their oil out of Alberta.
Alberta needs a pathway through a foreign country to get their oil out right now. Existing pipelines lead to the US, and the Keystone XL expansion Obama halted, Trump resumed, and Biden halted.
An independent Alberta will likely join the US, and of course building a domestic-only pipeline is easier than doing so across national borders.
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will Alberta go (away)? If/when the price of crude goes back down, they'll feel the cash crunch. Curiously, if they leave Canada, they need a path through a foreign country to get their oil out of Alberta.
Alberta needs a pathway through a foreign country to get their oil out right now. Existing pipelines lead to the US, and the Keystone XL expansion Obama halted, Trump resumed, and Biden halted. An independent Alberta will likely join the US, and of course building a domestic-only pipeline is easier than doing so across national borders.
Alberta ships through BC now and I think they’ve gone from half to full capacity. That profit might not survive Hormuz opening and unfortunately much of it leaves Canada.
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#199[flagged]
Re: Canada plans 'nuclear renaissance' with up to 10 reactors built by 2040
#200Interesting to see the general opinion on nuclear swing so far from environmental and safety concerns (whether warranted or not) to pretty broad support for energy independence. I can't help but think its a sign that those concerns were easy to hold when energy was cheap and you could actually trust your neighbors. If that's the case, again huge speculation, it sure makes the concerns feel a bit hollow now.
From the article:
"If our goal is to double our grid and build a low-carbon economy in less than 25 years, there is no credible plan to do that without nuclear energy and the clean, reliable baseload power it provides,"
Reduction in burning carbon and producing greenhouses is the number one concern of environmentalists and is a major driver of the increased acceptability of nuclear power production, especially if safety concerns are met. Also from the article:
> Unlike most other nuclear reactors, Candu reactors don't require enriched uranium. Ottawa says Western allies are turning away from Russia, one of the world's key suppliers of enriched uranium.
The problem of course is that safety has costs and people cut corners, leading to events like Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima.