Evidence of meeting #50 for Natural Resources in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was plant.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Denise Carpenter  President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association
Duncan Hawthorne  President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power
Mark Cooper  Senior Research Fellow for Economic Analysis, Institute for Energy and the Environment, Vermont Law School, As an Individual
Pierre Tremblay  Senior Vice-President, Nuclear Programs and Training, Ontario Power Generation Inc.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

The Gentilly-2 refurbishment will not be built to any standard above 7.5 or 8. Do we know what the standard is going to be for the Gentilly-2 construction?

4:10 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

For the existing plant, you mean?

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

For the refurbishment.

4:10 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

We're not changing the regulatory requirement for earthquakes as part of the refurbishment of G-2.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

When did—

4:10 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

It already has seismic qualification, as do all of our plants.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

To what level of an earthquake, do you know?

4:10 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

I couldn't quote that; the regulator could tell you. I know what it is for our plants, but I couldn't tell you what it is for theirs.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

So what is it for your plant?

4:10 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

It's six and a half.

4:10 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

So what happens above six and a half?

4:10 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

Well, there isn't a credible design basis fault that would give you a quake larger than that. That's the issue. As I said before, the issue is what a credible design basis fault is. What is the largest quake we've seen in the region? What are the driving things? This was my point earlier about the environmental assessment.

I can tell you right now that if we have a level 9 quake, everything is going to fall down. It's all about the probability of having such a thing. You have to bound everything in life with reasonable assumptions.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

I suppose that's what the Japanese said in terms of reasonable assumptions. When they were designing those reactors, they said it was outside of a reasonable assumption to assume a 9.0 quake.

I'm not suggesting a 9.0 earthquake is going to hit Ontario or Quebec or other places where there are nuclear reactors. I guess I wonder why you don't go up to a standard of a 9.0. Does it cost a lot more? Does it make the reactor unfeasible?

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

The reality is that it might, but I can't answer that. Everything we do is based on risk assessment. This quake that hit Japan is a one in 10,000 years quake. That was how it was determined. We can say okay, you've had one. The reality is that the plant withstood the earthquake. It was actually the tsunami that was the problem.

Now, perhaps there's a conversation that if you have a record earthquake, doesn't that mean you're going to have a record tsunami—and you'll have no argument from me there. But the point is you're talking about a plant that's sited in the Pacific Ring of Fire, a highly seismically active event.

While we might question their design calculations, I don't think we should draw a parallel with Canada. We've got to be reasonable. The idea that we would design for a set of circumstances that no one believes is credible—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Sure.

Here's a question to Ms. Carpenter. You talked about full-cost accounting for nuclear power. What is the current liability limit for accidents in Canada?

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association

Denise Carpenter

Well, Mr. Cullen, you would know that it's $75 million. The industry has been advocating to increase that—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

To what?

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Nuclear Association

Denise Carpenter

There are several numbers. There's $630 million—

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

As far as we're concerned, this thing has died on the order paper at least four times. If it was up to me, it would be $650 million now—

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

So $650 million is what you—

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

—and it would have been some time ago.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

You feel that a liability limit of $650 million is a reasonable figure.

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

The number that was advocated was $650 million. We supported it.

4:15 p.m.

NDP

Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Current estimates out of Japan for the accident there are going to run somewhere north of $180 billion.

4:15 p.m.

President and Chief Executive Officer, Bruce Power

Duncan Hawthorne

Yes, related to the earthquake and tsunami damage, not the nuclear facility.