Evidence of meeting #3 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was radioactive.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Researcher, Concerned Citizens of Renfrew County and Area
Yes, there is a definite conflict of interest in having the Minister of Natural Resources responsible for promoting nuclear energy under the Nuclear Energy Act, but also having Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, the regulator, report to a minister who is promoting nuclear energy. That's a problem. It should be the Minister of Environment.
Thanks.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
We're out of time.
We will now begin the second round.
Mr. Dreeshen, you may start. You have five minutes.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer—Mountain View, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair; and thanks to all the witnesses.
First of all, as a proud Canadian, I champion all energy sources we have, whether it be hydro, solar, wind or natural gas, and especially coming from Alberta, I think we have a great renewable industry there that has everything other than a lot of hydro. Certainly championing those things is important.
Of course, the one concern I have, and I'm sure we'll talk about it in future discussions, is the requirements for mining so that we can actually develop energy storage systems so that they're going to be able to work with all these new technologies.
Mr. Gorman, I'd like to talk to you a bit about SMRs, as they've increasingly been seen as a solution to help us achieve net zero. However, as has been coming from some of the discussions we've had here, how about the need for research on this technology for minimizing waste?
We know that on the Moltex stable salt reactor, there's research being done there, the waste-burning SSR-W. We also have Purex, on the processing of used nuclear fuel.
Could you give us an idea how we can discuss that as we talk about nuclear fuel waste and its management?
11:55 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association
Again, I'm not going to comment on the technical matters behind how we're minimizing waste and will leave that to Mr. Van Wart and Ms. Swami, but I will say that you're right to comment on the application of small modular reactors and their importance to regions like Alberta.
As Alberta phases away from coal and natural gas, and as you noted, does not have easy access to water power, small modular reactors are going to be able to play a very important role in decarbonizing the electricity grid but also potentially in the application of its high-temperature heat to create steam for use in SAGD and the extraction and processing of oil and gas so that we create low-carbon competitive products in this more carbon-constrained future.
Noon
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer—Mountain View, AB
Thank you.
Mr. Van Wart, could you fill in some of those places, as far as the reusing of nuclear fuel is concerned?
Noon
Vice-President, Nuclear Sustainability Services, Ontario Power Generation Inc.
Certainly at OPG, we're interested in the opportunity to recycle used fuel. We have partly funded operations at Moltex, the venture in New Brunswick, but we see it as something that needs development. It's down the road and certainly doesn't negate the need for permanent disposal.
One of the areas we are very active in at OPG is waste minimization of our lower-level waste. We currently have a number of initiatives ongoing. We're funding a specific project with McMaster University that's investigating techniques and opportunities to reduce the volumes by recycling, reusing and ultimately compacting the amount of waste we have so we can reduce our environmental footprint and reduce the number of storage buildings we need.
Those are our thoughts. Certainly, recycling fuel is a very interesting area that requires research and development, but it won't negate our need for current disposal.
Noon
Conservative
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer—Mountain View, AB
Certainly, and I respect that.
The reason I ask is that a number of years ago I had an opportunity to speak with some physicists from Atomic Energy of Canada. They had indicated that one of the easiest ways of handling this problem is to be able to reuse it and to take it down so we don't have to worry as much about the half-life aspect of it.
If we could go back to the concept of the small modular reactor so that people understand the footprint that they have—
Noon
Conservative
Noon
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to all of our witnesses today. I hope we will get Mr. Edwards back.
Noon
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
That's great. I was a student in the 1980s at Carleton, and I remember going to some of the lectures and sessions he held.
My first question—and I may have time for one more—is around the expansion of nuclear energy, which, of course, would result in more nuclear waste.
Just to put this on the record, Mr. Chair, I'm open to all technologies that will help us meet our very ambitious emission reduction targets.
I will point out, on the topic of the small modular reactors, that it's not going to help us with our 2030 targets, and, hopefully, there's a promise to assist us with our 2050 targets.
I'm particularly interested in the application of SMRs in our remote communities. The west side of Hudson Bay is very connected to Manitoba, and we're looking at extending our power lines to Rankin Inlet, Arviat and other communities, and it is in the billions with disruptions to wildlife and various environmental impacts.
It's probably Mr. Van Wart who can speak to this. What are the waste storage issues that we might encounter in sensitive remote environments like this?
Could you also talk about the issue of subsidization? We're going to be looking at oil and gas subsidies in our next study.
Thanks, Ms. Collins, for that.
Shouldn't technologies be able to stand on their own two feet without subsidization?
Maybe I will ask Mr. Van Wart or any of our other speakers to comment.
12:05 p.m.
Vice-President, Nuclear Sustainability Services, Ontario Power Generation Inc.
I'm happy to speak about the waste handling and storage, but the subsidization is beyond my area of expertise.
In terms of waste storage and handling, as has been noted in the discussion, most SMR designs are just entering into their detailed design phase. I can speak specifically about OPG. We're working with GE and Hitachi. That's out in the public space.
We are working directly with GE and Hitachi as they work on their detailed design to understand the waste streams, the kind of waste that would be produced at the SMR. Then, as we have done with all of our waste produced from our CANDU reactors, develop safe containers, safe transportation methods and safe interim storage. Then we would look, obviously, to optimize those streams of waste as time goes on and we understand exactly what would be coming up in the design.
It's a little bit preliminary to try to forecast exactly how you would transport and have interim storage, but we're actively working with our SMR developer at OPG.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association
I do. Thank you. I just wanted to offer to respond to the second part of Mr. Duguid's question, if I may, about subsidies.
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association
Yes, and the question of whether technologies should—
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB
No, no. That's okay. That's fine.
I'm anxious to hear about the issue of subsidies.
12:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association
Thank you, Mr. Duguid.
The nuclear industry is not looking for subsidies as it comes to the development and deployment of the first-of-a-kind small modular reactors. We have an integrated ask that is matched in funding and resources by four utilities across Canada—a truly pan-Canadian integrated ask—and is requesting that the federal government contribute financing to the first-of-a-kind related costs for three different streams of small modular reactors, so it's not subsidies.
But what I would say is that at this time the government does provide tax credit and preferable amortization treatment to green technology manufacturers and owners, and the nuclear industry should benefit from those tax credits as well, including any investment tax credit that might be extended to other forms of green technology. I think it's important that this committee consider, as we go forward and deploy more green technologies of all sorts, that small modular reactors be part of this.
12:05 p.m.
Bloc
Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I would like to have the clerk follow up on this request.
Mr. Gorman, you made a number of claims regarding the cost of hydroelectricity produced in Quebec versus the cost of nuclear energy. Something you seem to disregard in singing the praises of nuclear energy is the cost associated with the waste generated by small modular reactors. You also made a claim in relation to the phase-out of natural gas in western Canada.
I would like to have Mr. Gorman provide the committee members with the documentation to back up his claims.
My next question is for Ms. Swami.
Ms. Swami, please know that I do not doubt your good intentions.
Your organization's mandate is to oversee the long-term management of high-level radioactive waste. However, your leaders, the owners, are the organizations that you report to, in other words, the polluters.
How can you fully carry out your mandate when the polluters are the ones calling the shots regarding their own pollution? The fox isn't usually in charge of the henhouse.