Science and Research Committee on June 2nd, 2022

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thanks, John.

Through you, Madam Chair, my next question is related to what John just talked about in terms of policies and financing.

You spoke to those two issues in your opening, but you really didn't get into detail in terms of what you were looking for with continued support, I think was the phrase that you used. You just reiterated it there. In detail, can you provide the committee some ideas in terms of recommendations relating to policy and financial support?

[John Gorman]

We have seen some support for specific technologies come from the federal government through the strategic innovation fund, and that has been helpful. However, Canada's advantage at this time in the world, with the development and deployment of small modular reactors, has everything to do with the extreme level of coordination and co-operation we've seen between, in particular, four provinces and four utilities that have put together an integrated plan for the development and deployment of small modular reactors.

We have an integrated ask in front of the government that goes beyond specific technologies and looks at how it is that this integrated ask before the SIF can actually encourage the entire ecosystem to develop in a pan-Canadian way that is not only going to result in the deployment of needed technologies in various areas that help reduce emissions, but also create incredible economic advantage and supply chains throughout the country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you very much, Mr. Collins.

It is now Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas' turn.

You have six minutes, Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

My question is for Mr. Gorman.

Thank you for joining us this evening. Canada has a plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. A number of proponents, including those of small modular reactors, argue that this technology will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero. However, it seems that the technology related to small modular reactors will take several years to commercialize. The very first small modular reactors are expected in Canada toward the end of this decade. So the industry is still far from being able to provide the Canadian network with a substantial amount of energy.

Could you tell us about the technology involved in small modular reactors and whether it will become mature enough to have a meaningful place in the energy transition in Canada?

[John Gorman]

Through you, Madam Chair, I thank Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas for his question.

I think that's a very fair comment.

Small modular reactors, the first of their kind, are being deployed only now, and the first ones, as you rightly point out, are not going to be connected to the grid or used for other off-grid applications until later this decade.

That being said, Canada is a remarkable place that requires small modular reactors for various needs. It's not only the jurisdictions across this country, like Alberta, Saskatchewan and some of our eastern provinces, that need to shift away from fossil fuels to cleaner electricity. We're going to have to double or triple the amount of electricity that we currently generate, and it all has to be clean. It's a huge challenge.

Because of that, some of the first planned SMRs, the ones you referred to that Ontario Power Generation chose, General Electric Hitachi, will be connected to the grid by 2028, but in fact they have a licence to do at least four of those units at the Darlington site.

In addition, Saskatchewan, which also has a challenge in phasing its electricity grid off of fossil fuels, is aiming to—and has stated this publicly—construct four or five units of the same size, perhaps with the same technology. In other places across Canada, we envision that there are jurisdictions that are going to use these bite-sized small modular reactors to meet their electricity needs.

I think an important point here is, just in Canada, on the electricity side, we need multiple units, which is going to mean multiple units being deployed after 2030.

On the heavy industry side—steel, cement, mining, the high-temperature heat that's going to be needed to decrease GHG emissions—that's where you're going to see that some of these other technologies, some of which will be available even before 2028, are going to be deployed in multiples again.

We have a challenge leading into 2030, and that's why we need more wind, more solar and more storage, and we need to deploy it as quickly as possible. However, we also need to be looking beyond 2030 into the massive challenge of doubling or tripling the amount of electricity we have. We need to be able to look at reducing GHGs and heavy industry, cement, steel, oil and gas, etc., and that's a challenge that's going to last beyond 2030 into 2050, so, yes, everything that's on table, everything that's coming—

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Mr. Gorman, I will interrupt you because time is running out. Thank you for giving us that information.

I want to put in perspective this whole technology, which is not well developed, it is not mature.

We want to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and invest in this technology, which is still not developed and is not marketable. According to some arguments in favour of this technology, it could help us reach our net-zero objective by 2050.

I am trying to understand the benefits of developing this technology, which is not mature and is still not operational, as opposed to renewable energies that are already mature and can be used.

[John Gorman]

Through you, Madam Chair, I think the short answer is that we need absolutely every clean energy technology that is on the table now—so conventional, nuclear, water, solar, wind and short-term battery storage—and that is available now. We have to deploy, deploy, deploy, but we also have to recognize that there are technologies that are going to be available later this decade and then scaling up through 2030 to 2050, which are going to help us out of necessity and be needed to meet those net-zero goals. That includes adding small modular reactors. It includes bringing on hydrogen. It hopefully includes bringing on board long-term storage.

The short answer, again, is that this is about math, not theology. We have such a massive challenge in front of us in terms of the amount of clean electricity generation we have to produce that we have to deploy all of these technologies, develop them and then scale them up.

The last thing I would say to you is this: If 20 years ago we had said that solar and wind were under development and not ready for prime time, and we hadn't invested in that worldwide and here in Canada to scale it up, we would not have the solar and wind available to us at an accessible price point now.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I want to go back to your opening remarks.

Of course, I heard the positive words describing that technology—sustainability and reliability. The only word I did not hear you say is “safe”.

Can you tell us more about the potential source of plutonium and enriched uranium in small modular reactors? We know that the concentration will be proportionally higher than in traditional reactors. What can you tell us about that situation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas, I am sorry, but your time is up.

Perhaps you would like to ask for a written response.

Thank you, Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas.

We'll now go to Mr. Cannings for six minutes, please.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you, and thank you to the witnesses for being here. I must say, it's nice to have witnesses here in person. It's a very welcome change.

I'm going to start with Mr. Gorman.

With this narrative, SMRs will be key or at least useful in getting remote communities, especially indigenous communities, off diesel. However, when I speak to indigenous leaders and people who work with indigenous communities on energy issues, they have been unanimous in rejecting this narrative.

On top of that, we've had the Anishinabek chiefs in assembly, the Chiefs of Ontario and other groups who have come out and said they don't want nuclear technology to replace diesel. They want energy systems that they can implement themselves, that they can understand themselves, that they can employ their people to run. They want systems that have proven technologies that are cheap and available now. They want to get off diesel now, not in 2035.

I'm just wondering how you answer those concerns, because it seems to be radically opposed to this narrative I hear again and again that this will get all of these communities off diesel.

[John Gorman]

I would like to start by saying that the nuclear industry writ large, not just our utilities here in Ontario, New Brunswick and across the country but other parts of the industry, such as Cameco, are some of the most active partners with the indigenous people. The nuclear industry takes indigenous relations and partnerships very, very seriously. A tremendous amount of effort is being based on delivering trusted relationships and partnerships.

I would say also that the industry recognizes that small modular reactors are a new concept to northern indigenous communities and that there is going to be a very long and engaged cycle of consultation and learning and listening by both sides as they consider the possibility of using small modular reactor technologies in their communities. Certainly there is no way forward, as Canadians realize now, for deploying anything, let alone a small modular reactor, in a community that does not want it. May I just say, however, that we're at the beginning of those conversations and the learning cycle around small modular reactors. They're new. Some of those conversations are going very positively. We have champion communities that are engaging with us, champion economic development bodies and indigenous development bodies. We have major initiatives under way to consult with indigenous peoples to see how that fits.

The very last thing I'll say, Mr. Cannings, is that wind and solar and available storage technologies are not meeting the needs of indigenous people to get them off diesel. We have to look at other solutions as well.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thanks.

I'd like to quickly move on to our energy needs for the future. In Canada, the group that puts out those projections or scenarios, if you will, is the Canada Energy Regulator. Its report last year on Canada's energy future had a timeline of the various energy sources that would be powering Canada in terms of electricity generation.

For nuclear, it shows, in 2019, 95,000 gigawatt hours—I'm not sure if that's per year—and then by 2050 that will go up to 96,000. That's a gain of 1000 gigawatt hours, which to me doesn't sound like a huge increase compared to their projections for wind, which goes from 32,000 to 188,000. It would be twice as big as nuclear by 2050. Solar would be going from 2,000—and you know solar far better than anyone else in this country, probably—to 62,000 by 2050.

Here are the experts projecting ahead for nuclear, showing, basically, a stagnation, and yet these other energy sources are showing dramatic increases. Could you quickly comment on that?

[John Gorman]

I would start by saying that the speed at which we're seeing all clean-energy technologies evolve in the face of this climate crisis is enormous. The cycles for development are urgent right now. That's why you're seeing such fast development.

The CER, until this very first year, had never tried to do a future forecast based on anything except existing policies and planned projects. It's new to the game. When it did that study, Ontario Power Generation hadn't announced its technology selection. Westinghouse hadn't announced its technology selection or its projects for deployment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you, Mr. Gorman.

[John Gorman]

Things have just changed very dramatically. We can expect future change that's hard to forecast and predict.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you, Mr. Gorman, and thank you very much, Mr. Cannings.

You have a very interested committee. We have three witnesses who have given us their time, so we want to make sure we're getting all these questions in.

Ms. Gladu, the floor is yours. This is a five-minute round, please.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.

I want to start with Mr. O'Sullivan.

You spoke on the topic of the extension of deployment by three years. The former finance minister has mentioned that Canada needs to become more competitive, and that some of the regulatory burden that's in place is hampering that.

Could you detail some of the regulatory things that are causing this delay in your deployment?

[Rory O'Sullivan]

Certainly. First of all, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is probably one of the highest-regarded regulators in the world. It's their regulatory regime, which is robust and open to innovation, that is appealing to innovative, new and safer technologies.

The one I am referring to is the environmental Impact Assessment Act change, which has increased the timelines for large infrastructure projects.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Is that Bill C-69?

[Rory O'Sullivan]

Yes. Some of the smaller SMR projects are exempt under that licence. We have two megaprojects—the waste recycling facility and the reactor—so we're firmly in that and it is a challenge. It seems to be a very long process. The steps in it make sense and are required, but it's a long time.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Thank you.

I have a question for Mr. Gorman.

Ontario is anticipating having brown-outs because the nuclear upgrades and expansion at the nuclear plants here haven't gone according to schedule. They're predicting brown-outs as early as 2024.

Will there be any concrete, commercialized SMR technology that we can put in place to address that?

[John Gorman]

You're right. The Pickering nuclear plants are scheduled for retirement mid-decade. Given the amount of electricity they produce, it's going to be a tough gap to fill. Small modular reactors, even these first ones that Ontario Power Generation is bringing to Ontario to connect to the grid, will not be available until after that point, which is later this decade.

We are facing a demand for electricity that is coinciding with the Pickering plants coming off. That demand for electricity is growing, so it is a real issue. Of course, you'll have the CEO of Ontario Power Generation here to talk about a strategy for bridging that.

As a little side note here, I'll say that when we talk about doubling or tripling the amount of electricity generation that we have in this country to be able to fuel-switch and electrify things like transportation, electric vehicles, etc., people have a hard time getting their heads around how much electricity that's going to take.

I'll give you an example.

I was speaking to the CEO of one of the steel companies in Ontario, which is going to install an electric arc furnace to power its furnaces. That one company alone is going to require more than a gigawatt of additional electricity just to power its own operations.

This future in Canada in terms of not only creating enough electricity to replace fossil fuels, but also being able to switch these industry players away from fossil fuels for high-temperature heat and electricity is going to be just enormous. We have to start deploying quickly.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

I have a question for Mr. Atkinson.

What can a federal government do to accelerate the commercialization and actual production of SMR units?

[Dr. Kirk Atkinson]

To accelerate these technologies requires not just a commitment, but some significant investment to allow the capabilities to be put into place. One capability often overlooked is actually the workforce that can do the work to make these things happen. We are probably quite behind on that right now, especially when we look further to the west of the country, where we know that in Alberta and Saskatchewan the expertise in nuclear does not yet exist. It resides pretty much in Ontario and New Brunswick, with a little bit of legacy knowledge in Quebec.

Unless we address that aspect, nothing else is going to come through quickly enough, or we're going to rely on other nations to provide to it to us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you so much, Dr. Atkinson, and thank you, Ms. Gladu.

We will now go to Monsieur Lauzon.

The floor is yours for five minutes, please.