Natural Resources Committee on June 4th, 2026

[Dale Austin]

I'm happy to do so.

It takes roughly 18 to 24 months from the time we mine uranium to the time it finds its way into a nuclear reactor. We mine uranium and mill it in northern Saskatchewan. It goes to Blind River, Ontario, to be refined and purified. At that point, it goes to our conversion facility in Port Hope, Ontario, where it's converted into two different things: uranium dioxide, UO2, which we use for fuel for CANDU reactors; and uranium hexafluoride, UF6. which we then ship them on to the next stage in the fuel cycle, which is uranium enrichment. At that point, they get turned into nuclear fuel and put into fuel bundles.

That's my 45 seconds on the nuclear fuel cycle.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Before I continue, where is the uranium enrichment done?

[Dale Austin]

Uranium enrichment currently occurs in seven countries right now. I'll read them. It's done in Russia and China, but if we exclude those, the commercial enrichers are France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Currently, there are more than 30 countries in the world that have civil nuclear programs. Those five enrichers supply fuel to those 30 countries. Not every country that has a civil nuclear program has enrichment capabilities.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Do we not have uranium enrichment?

[Dale Austin]

We do not have uranium enrichment here in Canada.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Should we? I guess this is part of the future strategy. What do we need to do, as the federal government?

[Dale Austin]

Should we enrich? That will depend on the business case.

Cameco is a publicly traded company. As I said in my remarks, we have uranium technology that we are trying to stand up right now.

Enrichment in Canada will only happen if there is a business case for it, and the business case for enrichment in Canada is based on a significant number of light water reactors being built here. Even then, I would say it is a long-term plan for enrichment. Significant federal government work would be required to make the policy, regulatory and treaty changes to become an enriching country, but that shouldn't stop us—and it hasn't stopped Canada from deploying light water reactors.

Enrichment from secure allied partners is available, as I said, in France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. Cameco deals with those enrichers on a daily basis as part of our commercial operations.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

We're thinking of the future. We never know what will happen. We have a shortfall there. What kind of investment would we need? Is it a 10-year window or a 15-year window?

[Dale Austin]

You would need an investment in time and effort from the federal government in order to become an enriching country. You would need an investment in light water reactors to set the business case. In Cameco's case, we would have to make sure that the business case supported a multi-billion-dollar investment in an enrichment facility.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Shannon Stubbs]

Thank you for the completion of that round.

I'll keep myself together this time, unlike at the last meeting.

We will go, for five minutes, to our colleague Monsieur St-Pierre.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for keeping it together. I appreciate it.

I would like to thank the witnesses.

If I may, I shall put my questions to you in my preferred language.

My first question is for Mr. Christidis.

How might an increase in the industrial carbon price benefit the nuclear industry?

[George Christidis]

May I have a clarification on the question on the rates? I didn't quite catch the question. Excuse me.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

If you want, I'll translate. I'll try again in French for the next question.

How does the industrial carbon price affect the nuclear industry? How can it benefit the nuclear industry?

[George Christidis]

When there is a price on carbon and there is an effort to reduce emissions, all clean, non-emitting technologies including nuclear obviously get an impetus in terms of their potential growth. You saw that in hydro and you see that in renewables. Nuclear would be part of those technologies as you're looking to do that type of reduction of emissions and, of course, if there is a price.

I would argue, based on the question, that we're also leaving this space where it's just the carbon conversation. We're seeing an increased need and desire in industry and in terms of national security goals for a stable, reliable energy source that has a strong economic and social cohesion bent to it. The argument or conversation is now a combination of reducing emissions with the carbon price and, increasingly, reliability, jobs and economic growth.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Our government introduced an electricity strategy a few weeks ago with the goal of doubling the electricity grid by 2050.

Can you quickly comment on the role of nuclear with regard to the doubling of the grid?

[George Christidis]

That's exactly the point, so I thank you for that question.

Without large and small nuclear technologies, meeting those very ambitious goals will be very difficult. There have been jurisdictions domestically, but also internationally—I have pointed to Germany, for example—that attempted to do those types of efforts without nuclear, only to find themselves dependent on a 70% import of Russian natural gas.

There is a conversation to be had on the important role of all technologies coming together to achieve what's best in each province. Each province will assemble the right combination of technologies to address its economic, environmental and social goals. We've always argued that there is a role for all, and we have a role in that as well. We are seeing ourselves as a very strong partner in those conversations.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Mr. Christidis, a few years ago there was a lot of buzz around SMRs, or small modular reactors. Can you provide data? Where are we in terms of the technology uptake in Canada? Can you speak to where SMRs have evolved in the Canadian market over the last couple of years? Do you have any data or any reports that you can submit to this committee that speak to the current role and the projected role of SMRs in our economy?

[George Christidis]

I could certainly follow up with more information.

Very quickly, four SMR units are being built at Darlington by Ontario Power Generation and its partners. SaskPower is building another four in Saskatchewan. They've gone through a process of identifying a location. They have to go through regulatory. Alberta has held an engagement process to look at both large and small technologies. I should add that large nuclear is now very much a part of the conversation domestically.

The SMR projects in Ontario and Saskatchewan are linked to the SMR projects in Poland and eastern Europe, where they're looking at working with the Canadian supply chain to look at those opportunities as well. It's a very robust and very growing part of our sector.

[Eric St-Pierre, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

We know that indigenous communities are often remote. They're shipping in diesel and paying enormous prices for that diesel. What role do SMRs have in energy sovereignty for indigenous communities within Canada?

[George Christidis]

Thank you for the question.

We'd say that indigenous communities would look at the opportunity of nuclear technologies if it fit their needs and if it fit what their vision is of themselves. We would argue that the small and very small reactors, in the future, would be the types of technologies, along with other technologies, that those first nations could consider for their own futures.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Shannon Stubbs]

Thank you, gentlemen. You were right on time.

Now for two and a half minutes, we will move to our colleague Monsieur Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Christidis, I'm sorry; I didn't mean to cut you off just now. I'm still a bit perplexed when it comes to nuclear energy, though.

I was just looking for a study that had previously been presented to us at a committee meeting. I believe it was carried out by Hatch. I couldn't find the study, but in some old notes I had, I saw that the cost of solar energy is 2.5¢ to 10¢ per kilowatt-hour; for wind energy, it is 3¢ to 12¢ per kilowatt-hour; for hydroelectric power, it is 3¢ to 10¢ per kilowatt-hour. However, in the case of nuclear power, we are talking about 10¢ to 22¢ per kilowatt-hour. It is therefore a fairly significant investment from the outset, and that's without taking waste management into account.

I know there are challenges associated with intermittent energy sources such as solar and wind power, but storage capabilities are still advancing quite rapidly. In fact, the Chinese are currently demonstrating this.

I understand what you're saying about jobs, but in the long term, is investing in nuclear power worth it?

[George Christidis]

Thank you for the question.

Because you mentioned China, China's building 60 nuclear reactors. Across the international stage of countries that need more electricity to reduce emissions, they have all baked-in nuclear.

In terms of the price of nuclear, I'd argue that it's almost a region-by-region conversation. In Ontario, the IESO, which is a system operator, has hourly updates of the cost of power and where it comes from, and nuclear is very competitive.

Madam Chair, I could share the website. It shows you the competitiveness.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

That is what I would like you to convey to the committee. If you could provide the committee with figures showing that nuclear power can be competitive, we could include them in our report.

What I have seen so far is rather the opposite: when a nuclear project is developed, costs spiral out of control, they are high, and waste management is uncertain. If you could provide us with information that contradicts this, we could take it into account when drafting our report.