Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
First of all, on behalf of the 71,000 men and women who work in Canada’s nuclear industry, from the workers at our TRIUMF research centre in British Columbia, the SLOWPOKE-2 facility at the University of Alberta, Cameco and AREVA in Saskatchewan, and all our power plant workers and researchers in Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick, we commend the people of Japan, who have shown both amazing resilience and fortitude since the devastating earthquake and tsunami almost two weeks ago.
Let me start by saying that while there is no such thing as absolute safety, Canada’s fleet of reactors is safe. Each structure is designed and built to seismic standards, despite being located in areas with low seismic activity and virtually no risk of a tsunami. Safety has always been, and continues to be, the number one priority for our industry.
Our industry is based on worldwide learning and continuous improvements based on a worldwide body of engineering experience.
As a result of the Japanese nuclear incident, the federal regulator is reviewing the safety cases for all of Canada’s nuclear facilities, as is normal when events of this nature occur. We are proud of our safety record, but we are never complacent. The tragedy in Japan will of course be examined thoroughly for lessons we can apply here at home.
My colleague Mr. Duncan Hawthorne will be speaking to you about this in more detail in a few minutes.
Let me turn to the broader subject of energy security. Nuclear energy is an important part of Canada’s diversified electricity supply mix. Indeed, we are a 24-hour baseload power source. We produce 15% of Canada’s electricity and over 50% of Ontario’s.
A major advantage of nuclear power is that it produces massive amounts of electricity reliably, safely, and over long periods of time. With continuous advancements in engineering and learning, we expect to get up to 60 years of life from our plants. However, as with all energy and fuel sources, there are challenges and rewards. Our industry’s cost structure consists of high capital costs and low fuel costs.
First let’s consider the benefits of those capital investments. They are the same as the benefits that come from all large, well-thought-out industrial infrastructure projects, the most important one being jobs. These projects also generate revenues and taxes for communities and benefits for supply chains all across Canada.
With respect to jobs, in July 2010 the Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters showed that just two projects alone, the refurbishment of facilities at Bruce and Darlington, will support 25,000 high-wage jobs for a decade, injecting $5 billion annually into Ontario’s economy and leaving us with better infrastructure that will serve our households and our industries for generations to come.
We must also consider the low operating costs of a nuclear power plant. Once a plant is producing energy, it requires little fuel. And uranium costs are subject to very little volatility in price, so an investment of this sort does not risk price volatility. According to studies conducted by the OECD , the overall cost to the consumer of nuclear power over the life of a power plant is similar to that of large-scale hydro, natural gas, and coal, and is even lower than wind and solar.
Our industry has very few external costs, meaning that we impose few costs on society or on the environment that we aren’t accountable for ourselves. That’s because we occupy small pieces of real estate. We release virtually no emissions into the broader environment. We produce spent fuel and other radioactive materials that are very small in volume and that are very strictly monitored, and we mostly keep and manage them ourselves.
In fact, we are the only industry that can really say that we know exactly where all our waste is. Our regulators make sure that we do. And to us, it’s not just pure waste; it’s a fuel that one day we may be able to recycle. As a net result, we account for the full costs of packaging, managing, storing, and disposing of these materials, which means that those costs are built into and covered by the price of nuclear power today.
On the environmental front, I mentioned that the power being produced is virtually emissions-free. If we did not have the nuclear power plants we have in Canada today, and instead relied on fossil-fuel-based electricity for that output, our country would generate more than 90 million tonnes of greenhouse gases every year. That would add about 12% to our annual greenhouse gas emissions.
Further replacing fossil-fuel-based energy with nuclear energy can have a very positive impact as we strive to lessen our country’s, and indeed the world’s, carbon footprint. Nuclear’s low emissions, low fuel costs, and low real estate needs were already attractive to many countries before we started talking about either capping carbon emissions or putting a price on them. As energy demands increase and we move towards a carbon-constrained world, nuclear energy has a role to play in Canada and abroad. As developing countries look to sustainable and renewable fuel sources, nuclear is a clear choice. It is virtually emissions-free. It is affordable. It can help create jobs at home and in developing countries, which will stimulate economies rooted in innovation and research.
I wish I had more time to talk about innovation and nuclear research and development, and indeed about nuclear medicine, but I don't. These are great sources of pride for our nation. Through these areas, our industry is driving productivity, and ultimately improving our standard of living.
In closing, I will say that with each passing year the global community of people who care about the environment has more and more in common with the global community of people who provide nuclear power generation, those who are continually striving to improve its safety, its economics, and its environmental performance.
With that, I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to be here today.