Evidence of meeting #16 for Science and Research in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was energy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kirsty Duncan
Perfect. Thank you both for being so generous.
We will now go to Mr. McKinnon for six minutes, please.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm going to direct my questions to Mr. Tucker, I believe.
I want to delve into the underlying science here. Most of the reactors that I'm hearing about seem to be basically steam-driven processes. We're using novel materials, high pressures and so forth, based on novel materials and so on and so forth, but it seems to me that it's fundamentally the same technology we've had from the industrial age, except instead of cooking the tea kettle with coal or wood, or some other chemical process, we're using nuclear. It's still a tea kettle, though.
I'm wondering if there's any inkling of any other way of extracting the energy from nuclear fission other than.... Perhaps there's a non-thermodynamic kind of process. I wonder if you could help me out there.
6:55 p.m.
Assistant Vice-President, Nuclear Research, McMaster University
I will start and then, if you don't mind, I will ask Dr. Novog to add in.
Fundamentally, generation of electricity through turbines is achieved by boiling water and making steam. That's true. Having a very clean, reliable, secure source of energy through SMRs to do that is an important transition for our energy sector. There are evolving usage and deployments of SMRs to capture that energy that's produced much more efficiently and effectively. One example of it is the ICE harvest system, the integrated community energy harvesting system, developed at McMaster in partnership with other universities. Our researchers are working now on modelling the evolving SMR designs to much more efficiently capture the waste heat and utilize that in building heating and cooling.
The future of SMR deployment is not only the energy generation of the future; it's also the energy utilization and harvesting of the future. My colleague, Dr. Novog, could probably elaborate on it, if that's acceptable.
6:55 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I teach a course to 200 thermodynamics students, and you can't beat thermodynamics. I would say that some of the reactors, like the one Global First Power is proposing to develop in Canada, actually use a gas cooling system and an energy storage system that is really unique. We haven't had anything like that before whereby we can harvest the energy from the reactor, store it for times when there's peak, and then harvest the energy out. It may not be beating thermodynamics, but it is making sure that we're getting the energy on the timelines we need it.
Those are the exciting things that are happening in SMRs. That's what gets my students moving. They enjoy seeing new applications and changing the paradigm from just producing electricity to producing heat, storing heat, moving heat around, and then taking it out when you need it.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
I'll ask either of you if there is any inkling on the horizon of any other theoretical techniques for extracting the energy—something more direct, I'm thinking. I understand it's probably pie in the sky, but is there such a thing out there?
6:55 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I think the closest we would have are reactors that are gas cooled, or molten salt reactors that can drive very high temperatures and make use of a Brayton cycle, completely removing the steam and the kettle component out of it and using more of a gas turbine technology to get much higher efficiencies.
There have been prototype reactors like that in the past. I think some of those technologies to really move the bar in terms of efficiency are there. They're more advanced than the reactors we've built before.
6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Do we need to be putting focus and energy—and money, frankly—into those more than we are now?
6:55 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
You should never ask a professor that question.
I tried to allude to it in my notes. I think having a coordinated national program.... There are people who can add to this conversation who are used to running gas turbines, for example, in Alberta. There are people who are used to energy storage systems in British Columbia and on the east coast.
What I would advocate for is a national program that links the universities together. That could really distribute the knowledge effectively and move the research forward in an organized fashion.
7 p.m.
Liberal
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Okay, thank you.
I have 50 seconds left, so I'm going to throw this back to you, Doctor. I'm very interested in micro SMRs and the expanded opportunities they can be used for.
Is there some theoretical minimum size that we can foresee for reactors, so that we can expand that even further?
Please go ahead. We have 30 seconds.
7 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I will do it in 30 seconds.
When we look at a community's energy needs, not just for electricity but also for heating and the things you can do with that heat, the five-megawatt reactor size is really appropriate for a very wide range of communities, because they can make use of the heat for many processes. They can use the electricity when they need to, and they can store it when it's not needed.
This is kind of the typical smallest range, the two-megawatt to five-megawatt community-sized reactor.
7 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kirsty Duncan
Thank you to all of you for those answers.
Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas, you have the floor for six minutes.
June 16th, 2022 / 7 p.m.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Welcome to the witnesses joining us this evening.
Dr. Novog, I've obviously heard about your project at McMaster University. To be profitable, the small modular reactors will have to be produced in large quantities in order to help offset the gargantuan investments that will have to be made to launch the design and production.
Based on the information available to you, how many of these micro reactors will need to be sold to achieve profitability?
7 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
This is a very good question. On the premise of how many we need to build, I don't run my own business, so I don't know the profitability line, but, historically, when we start building six, eight or 10 reactors of the type we have at Darlington and so on, we certainly improve and learn as we go.
I would estimate that once we start reaching 10, 12 or 14, we will learn enough that we'll be able to do it effectively. We'll be able to move it into communities. That's one of the reasons McMaster, or the Darlington site, is really well suited for some of these early builds, because we already have the site. We already have the infrastructure and the radiation protection people, so we're really well posed to be a first deployment and solve some of those early issues that come up.
7 p.m.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you, Dr. Novog.
According to your data, how many remote communities and mine developers in Canada are likely to be able to afford a modular micro reactor?
7 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
This was addressed in the SMR road map, created and issued, I think, in 2018.
The number of sites is quite large—in the range of hundreds—and, when you look at the cost, the CO2 cost involved in providing diesel, flying it in or ice-roading it in or however the diesel has to get there, the footprint of the diesel energy being produced in these communities is really substantial. I think, when we look at not just solving this climate issue but also using it for water purification and for local agriculture, we can really do a lot of good.
7 p.m.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you very much.
How does the price per unit of energy of a small modular reactor, or SMR, compare with the price of mature renewable energy?
7 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I think the end goal is to make nuclear the lowest-cost option available, because that's what you need for baseload. Mr. Hartwick was mentioning that really what nuclear's needed for is baseload, because it provides a base of electricity at the lowest cost available while the other forms of electricity aren't in service.
When we look at the cost structure, certainly that's what the end goal has to be. Any plan we have to develop SMRs should have a clear target on the price of electricity that can set it up to be baseload generation.
7 p.m.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
From what I understand, there is really no fixed price per unit of energy.
I'm trying to get my head around this. We're looking at this technology. The industry is asking for tens of millions of dollars in financial support. However, we don't have any evidence that this technology will be cost‑effective, since we don't yet know the price per unit of energy.
In these circumstances, how should taxpayers and the government consider a new technology for which we do not necessarily have specific evidence?
7:05 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
Actually, I'd just like to refer back to the SMR road map that was produced by the government in collaboration with industries. It was led by Natural Resources Canada but OPG, Bruce Power and local utilities in Saskatchewan and in the north all provided input. In there, they provide a range of values of the cost per unit of electricity that they were looking at. I don't have the numbers here with me today, but I'm happy to follow up afterwards. I can provide even just the table and figure numbers that you could consult.
7:05 p.m.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you very much, Dr. Novog.
I also noted that McMaster University has signed on to the Canadian action plan for small modular reactors. We can find this plan on the Internet. So McMaster researchers will therefore address broader issues related to SMRs, including cost‑benefit analysis, the advantages and disadvantages. They will also look at what the use of small modular reactors means for taxpayers, both in host communities and in neighbouring regions.
I think these are all critically important issues.
Could you tell me what conclusions you've reached so far?
7:05 p.m.
Professor, As an Individual
I'll turn it over to Dave Tucker, who's been running that feasibility study and the incipience of it to answer that.
7:05 p.m.
Assistant Vice-President, Nuclear Research, McMaster University
That is the feasibility study, the launch of which we have just announced. We're at the very beginning of that, but I think it's a very important step for the country to look at us as a model for community deployment. If we're going to realize the value of SMRs in remote communities and remote industrial sites, we need to start with a willing and experienced host, and McMaster is that host.
That will give us the opportunity to answer the questions and demonstrate the technology, so that a community that's considering it can come, look, see, touch, get the experience and find out how we've done with ours—
7:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Kirsty Duncan
Mr. Tucker, I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, but your time is up.
Thank you, all.
We're now going to go to Mr. Cannings for six minutes.