Science and Research Committee on Sept. 26th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Dear colleagues, I'm going to call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 18 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research.

I'm happy to welcome Ms. Idlout today, Ms. Taylor Roy, Mr. May, Mr. Ruff and Ms. Gallant.

We welcome you to the committee.

Welcome to meeting No. 18 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Science and Research.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

We're really pleased to have this last meeting on small nuclear reactors. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(i) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, February 1, 2022, we are meeting on the study of small modular nuclear reactors.

Here are a few comments for the benefit of our witnesses and members. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike, and please mute yourself when you are not speaking. Regarding interpretation for those on Zoom, as you know, you have the choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English or French.

Now I would like to welcome all our witnesses. We're delighted to have you. You have a really interested committee here.

From Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, we have Amy Gottschling, vice-president, science, technology and commercial oversight. From the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, we have Caroline Ducros, director general, advanced reactor technologies, and Brian Torrie, director general, safety management. From the Department of Natural Resources, we have André Bernier, director general, electricity resources branch; and Daniel Brady, deputy director, nuclear science and technology. Each organization will have five minutes to present. At the four and a half minute mark, I will hold up this yellow card. It will let you know you have about 30 seconds left.

With that, colleagues, we welcome our witnesses.

We will begin tonight with the Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.

The floor is yours.

[Amy Gottschling, Vice-President, Science, Technology and Commercial Oversight, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited]

Madam Chair and members of the committee, let me begin by telling you that today I attended the first day of the Women in Nuclear Canada conference. This year is the largest attendance the conference has ever had, selling out at 500 attendees.

I can tell you that the energy and excitement in the room was invigorating. These women, who make up 23% of the nuclear industry, are mothers, daughters, sisters, students and young leaders who know they have a career in an industry that is making a difference in our world. They know they are supporting a technology that plays an instrumental role in promoting human health and addressing the world's challenges in clean energy and environmental sustainability. These women are our nuclear workforce of today and of the future, a future which includes nuclear as part of its energy mix.

I would also like to acknowledge that this conference has the privilege of indigenous participation and has embraced their beautiful culture, teachings and traditions. I will share what I learned this week with my children. The conference is being held in Niagara Falls, which is situated within the traditional territory of the Haudenosaunee and Anishinabe peoples.

Let me turn now to the matter of SMRs, which is why we are gathered here this evening. As you may know, the Government of Canada, through AECL, designed and built nuclear demonstration reactors, research reactors and the generating CANDU reactors in Canada. Today we no longer build reactors but we support reactor developers through the Chalk River Laboratories, the largest scientific facility in Canada.

As you have seen, in the world of SMRs there are a great variety of designs. Our role, as laboratory owner, is to support reactor vendors in validating those designs. Our broader role is to meet the Government of Canada's requirements for nuclear expertise, certainly for the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, and for another 13 government departments and agencies.

We deliver those roles through our oversight of Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, or CNL. In addition to activities to revitalize our campus, they're performing hundreds of experiments, qualification tests and nuclear technology demonstrations every day.

The foundational sciences of SMR technologies are not new. Universities and research laboratories around the world have been researching, developing and demonstrating these technologies for decades. That the market has rebranded them as SMRs and brought them forward at a time when we need every available technology to solve this climate crisis is a crucial turning point.

AECL is here to support this pivotal moment in time. As we turn our minds to getting Canada to net zero by 2050, AECL has been working to ensure that the Government of Canada maintains and retains strong capabilities in the most promising SMR technologies that the market will bring to mitigate this climate crisis.

AECL has the ability to create a nexus where academia, government and private industry can align to ensure safe and expeditious deployment of nuclear technologies. As an example, last month CNL broke ground on the advanced nuclear materials research centre. This centre will have 23 labs and 12 hot cells, and is a continuation of services that will support Canada's reactors, both large and small, to produce electricity and medical isotopes to 2060 and beyond.

We do not promote nuclear to the exclusion of other renewables—that is not necessary. In fact, they can be complementary. Nuclear reactors like SMRs are quickly becoming catalysts for the hydrogen market due to their reliable source of electricity and heat, both of which are needed to serve the different hydrogen production technologies. Furthermore, SMRs can be switched into and out of hydrogen production as electricity demand fluctuates.

At our Chalk River site, CNL is already exploring how to leverage various clean and renewable energy sources and how they work together in a hybrid energy system. I urge you to consider these exciting developments.

I will conclude by extending an invitation, through you, Madam Chair, to the committee, to come to visit Canadian Nuclear Laboratories and see what AECL is accomplishing for the benefit of all Canadians.

Thank you. Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you so much, Ms. Gottschling, and for your kind invitation to the committee. We are glad to have you here tonight.

We will now go to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for five minutes.

The floor is yours.

[Caroline Ducros, Director General, Advanced Reactor Technologies, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission]

Chair and members of the committee, my name is Caroline Ducros and I am pleased to join you virtually here in Ottawa, the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples. I am the director general of advanced reactor technologies at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, CNSC, Canada's independent nuclear regulator. I am joined today by Brian Torrie, CNSC's director general of safety management.

For the CNSC, safety always comes first. Regardless of the project proposed, we will never issue a licence unless fully satisfied of its safety.

In these brief remarks, I will provide the CNSC's perspective on first, deploying SMRs in Canada to help meet climate change commitments; second, advancing SMR-related science and research in Canada; and third, ensuring the safe deployment of SMRs globally.

SMRs are novel nuclear technologies, seen by multiple Canadian provinces as a means to help combat climate change. Ontario Power Generation's Darlington new nuclear project puts Canada at the forefront of assessing a grid-scale SMR among G7 countries.

The CNSC is committed to safety and efficiency in licensing and regulating SMRs and enabling their safe deployment. For SMRs to be able to help provinces meet climate change objectives, the CNSC must be both efficient and effective. The funding that we received in budget 2022 is accelerating our readiness efforts. Those efforts include ensuring that our regulatory framework is appropriate for SMRs, that we have the right people and that the necessary research is being conducted.

SMRs are being proposed or considered for deployment in areas of Canada with no history of nuclear power generation. That requires early and ongoing engagement by all involved, including the CNSC, to build relationships and trust, especially with indigenous nations and communities and potential host communities.

SMR technologies are different from Canada's homegrown CANDU technology, which the CNSC is accustomed to. There's much to do in short order.

Through our existing research program, the CNSC has extensive ties with Canadian academia on the science and research needed to support safety cases for CANDU reactors and other nuclear facilities. That approach is being leveraged for SMRs. Our budget 2022 funding will enable us to support independent third-party research on key SMR-related priority areas. This research will support our view of proposed SMR designs and projects, and expand workforce availability in the nuclear sector.

Based on a recent visit by CNSC president Rumina Velshi to the U.S. Idaho National Laboratory—their leading centre for nuclear energy research and development—the CNSC would support a recommendation that the government make substantial investment in Canada, so that we can develop similar capacities.

Canada is only one of several countries considering SMRs. The CNSC is taking a leadership role and working closely with international regulators, notably the U.S., the U.K. and international organizations.

Our goal is to harmonize requirements and standards, share reviews and streamline licensing processes as much as possible, while maintaining our regulatory sovereignty. We're helping to advance this work directly through participation in the International Atomic Energy Agency's—IAEA's—nuclear harmonization and standardization initiative, and through president Velshi's role as chair of the IAEA's commission on safety standards, which establishes standards for the global nuclear community. This work will be key for the safe and timely deployment of an SMR global fleet, both in Canada and, especially, in nuclear newcomer countries.

Other regulators, proponents and countries are looking to Canada to demonstrate that SMR projects can be done safely, quickly and efficiently. For SMRs to play the role envisioned by many, dedicated efforts on the part of all involved are needed. CNSC is getting ready to efficiently regulate SMRs, and we will only allow safe projects to proceed.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you so much, Ms. Ducros.

Thank you both for your time and expertise, and for paying attention to the time. We appreciate that.

We're now going to Natural Resources for five minutes.

[André Bernier, Director General, Electricity Resources Branch, Department of Natural Resources]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to speak about small modular reactors in Canada.

Like Caroline, I'd like to recognize that I am joining you today from my home in Ottawa, which is in the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Protecting the health and safety of Canadians and the environment always has been, and always will be, the Government of Canada's top priority regarding nuclear energy.

The Government of Canada has made a commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, and by 2035 in the electric sector.

Today, nuclear energy is an important part of Canada’s energy mix, currently accounting for 15% of our electricity generation, and contributing to Canada’s 82% non-emitting electricity supply.

In the transition to a low-carbon economy, we need access to a variety of technologies. In this context, nuclear power is among those options being considered by many around the world.

As a baseload, dispatchable and non-emitting source of energy, SMRs could also play a role in enabling deeper integration of variable renewables such as wind and solar into Canada's energy mix, especially in regions without significant hydro resources. SMRs are the next wave of nuclear innovation with the potential to play a role in the future of Canada's nuclear industry by providing non-emitting energy for a wide range of applications, from grid-scale electricity generation to use in heavy industry and remote communities.

Canada has the potential to become a leader in the development and deployment of SMR technology and potentially claim a significant share of a projected global market estimated to be $150 billion a year by 2040. To capitalize on this opportunity, Natural Resources Canada helped lead the development of the SMR action plan for the development, demonstration and deployment of SMRs. The action plan now has 119 partners who have committed to over 500 concrete actions.

That said, while the federal government has important responsibilities relating to nuclear energy and the environment, jurisdiction over electricity systems ultimately resides with the provinces and territories. In this regard, I would note that Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and New Brunswick have shown their interest in using nuclear energy to help decarbonize their energy systems, with a premier-level memorandum of understanding to collaborate on SMR development and deployment.

SMRs have the potential to contribute to advancing economic reconciliation through meaningful partnerships with indigenous communities. To that end, we created an indigenous advisory council to the SMR action plan.

To protect the health and safety of all Canadians, our government is committed to continuous improvement with respect to ensuring that safe solutions are in place for managing radioactive waste and decommissioning, now and in the future. This commitment is supported by Canada's independent internationally peer-reviewed nuclear regulator, the CNSC.

As part of its commitment to continuous improvement, the government is evaluating Canada's current radioactive waste policy, and we are developing a comprehensive new policy that further provides Canadians with confidence in the long-term management of all of Canada's radioactive waste, including any waste from future technologies such as SMRs. Results from that engagement are being analyzed, and we plan to release the policy before the end of the year.

Thank you. We would welcome any questions you have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you to all three organizations. We're grateful to have you tonight.

We will begin with our first round of questions. They will be for six minutes.

Tonight we start with Mr. Tochor.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My question is for André from the Department of Natural Resources.

You talked about net zero. With the current trend lines of emissions going up in Canada and not going down, if it's not nuclear, how do we get to net zero by 2050?

[André Bernier]

In the Canadian context, the journey towards net zero breaks down very quickly into a province by province or regional story. The options available, for example, to the hydro-rich provinces are very different from those that are more reliant on fossil fuels.

Certainly it's challenging when you look at things from a system perspective, to look at how you replace the baseload that is provided by coal and natural gas without looking at alternatives that might include nuclear or could include more enlarged hydro. It could also include natural gas with carbon capture and storage, but certainly the fact that you have four provinces that have identified nuclear as one of their priorities and those collectively account for the vast majority of interests in Canada tells us that it's very likely to play a significant role in the journey towards a net-zero economy.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

We always hear about net zero with the current demands, but if EVs take off—the projections do look like that—the demand for electricity is only going to increase. Regardless of what province you're in, and yes, some provinces have more hydro and not to tell the provinces how to generate electricity per se, there's not that much hydro left that is “easy” in many of the provinces. If it's not nuclear, how do we do it? This is the question everyone is asking.

If there have been studies on replacing all of that natural gas with, say, solar, how many acres or how much of Canada would be covered by something like that? It would be enormous. The promise of nuclear is hopefully to use fewer non-renewable resources. I'm just curious here. From the department side of things, what is the plan B then?

[André Bernier]

Thank you for the question.

Looking towards the growth that would come from, say, electric vehicles or industrial electrification heat pumps, for example, there's a wide range of projections for how much electricity use could increase in the coming years up to 2050, but certainly we expect it to be very significant. The challenge is not just decarbonization and reaching net zero by 2035, but also a really significant build out of supply.

In my remarks I showed sensitivity to the leading roles that provinces and territories play in this space. I think I need to continue in that vein in the sense of not wanting to provide a prescriptive view on what any one province must do or not do. I would certainly agree that a lot of Canada's best large hydro sites have already been developed. That's not something that would be easy to expand on a really large scale.

We certainly hope that variable renewables will play a much larger role going forward. Certainly if you couple that with energy storage, a greater connection between provinces and territories, and other things that modernize the grid, the amount of variable renewables can be increased quite significantly, but in the end you still need to have some baseload that is provided by sources such as nuclear. I'm avoiding providing a prescriptive response. I don't think it would be my place to do so, but certainly I am acknowledging that a non-emitting baseload is a critical component of a future grid and that nuclear is one of the prime options for providing that.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I want to switch gears to the regulatory side and the CNSC. It is my understanding that the SMRs will be classified as a class 1A nuclear facility, which is similar to the existing traditional plants out there. Could you expand more on this technology-neutral approach?

How does that break down? What are the benefits and disadvantages of having the same classification for SMRs versus the would-be CANDUs in Canada?

[Caroline Ducros]

The classification for class 1As in the regulations under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act is just what it is. The key is that our regulatory framework is both performance-based and prescriptive. The performance-based aspect of it allows it the flexibility to be able to receive applications for novel technologies, including SMRs. The key here is that we would treat any application in accordance with the regulatory requirements for the safety of human health and the environment, and in keeping with our international obligations.

SMRs would not be different in that respect in terms of a licensing review than another class 1A, like the CANDU reactors would be. However, the regulatory framework itself would not have to change in that respect. We could look at the SMRs depending on the design safety that is being proposed with a graded and risk-informed approach. This is something that our regulatory framework is robust enough to allow.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Just briefly, how safe is nuclear? Are you proud of the record that our country has with nuclear facilities?

[Caroline Ducros]

Yes, I'm very proud of the record that our country has with nuclear facilities. We have been regulating these facilities for decades—and nuclear power plants—and have done so very safely.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Witnesses, I hope you realize the committee is very interested in what you have to say.

Thank you, Mr. Tochor.

We're now going to Mr. Lauzon for six minutes, please.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I am pleased to take the floor today.

First and foremost, I would like to thank the witnesses. I invite them to listen to the English interpretation so that they fully understand what I am saying.

My first question is for Mr. Bernier.

On June 7, you were called to testify before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development. At that meeting, you responded as follows to a question from my fellow MP, Monique Pauzé, regarding the percentage of renewable energy in Canada:

Putting aside hydroelectricity—which is, of course, the backbone of our system and a renewable source of energy—and focusing on wind and solar, it is, I think, in the neighbourhood of 6%, 7% or 8%. However, as Drew indicated, we expect these to grow very rapidly over the coming years, wind in particular. I hesitate to make a projection as to what role it might play, but there’s a lot of unexploited potential.

You’re expecting a lot of growth in wind. We already have a good system, and there’s a lot of untapped potential in that area. So why should the government invest in the science and research around small modular reactors instead of focusing on the technologies we already have?

[André Bernier]

Thank you very much for the question and thank you for making the link.

Yes, the figure of 7% or 8% is accurate for the amount of the contribution of wind and variable renewables, but it's predominately wind. For the electricity generation in Canada today, the overwhelming majority of that is very much hydro.

Every expectation is that wind energy will increase substantially over the coming years. It's an increasingly mature and competitive technology and one that, especially as you deploy wind over a larger and larger area, you can take advantage of that widespread area so that, when the wind is blowing in one place but not in another, it smooths things out at the system level a little bit better.

Notwithstanding that the expectation is that it will make a much larger contribution going forward, there are limits to how much wind or solar you can deploy and still maintain system reliability. There is a baseload role to electricity generation that wind can't fill at this point with the technology that we have. At some point, if we have better ways of storing energy over the long term—and our hydro dams play a very important role in that regard—this is something where you would be able to store energy and smooth out fluctuations over the course of the day, over the course of the week, over the course of the months or even seasons. Once that happens, I think we can expect wind and solar use to go up even more.

At present, though, we don't have the technology available for wind or solar to play that role of baseload energy to the degree that we would need to maintain system reliability and, for that reason, non-emitting sources such as nuclear, large hydro, natural gas and carbon capture and storage will be part of the mix. For that reason, it's natural to focus on each of those in different ways, and I would refer to my earlier remark that you have four provinces that have indicated that this is a priority for them. That is their jurisdiction, and we're pleased to be able to support that priority of theirs.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you.

Ms. Gottschling, in your remarks, you said that AECL is no longer making small reactors, without giving further details. However, you explained that AECL is now using partners instead of developing the technology itself.

Can you tell us more about it? Why did AECL, which was involved in nuclear development, decide to end its participation? What is the explanation behind that?

[Amy Gottschling]

Decisions were made in the past to separate the technology from AECL and provide exclusive rights to that technology to us and SNC-Lavalin. That decision was made many years ago, and we are proceeding on the path forward.

The AECL of old was set out with the intention to define the nuclear industry, to direct it and to provide a technology push. The AECL of today is here to enable technologies, to provide some services and to be an enabler, a convenor of minds and a trusted adviser. We have the power of a thriving national nuclear lab that can help tackle the challenges and demonstrate technologies.

The AECL of today is here to ensure that we have the capabilities and expertise to responsibly and efficiently deploy any new nuclear technologies in Canada.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you.

One of the four themes and research activities of the Federal Nuclear Science and Technology Work Plan is enhancing national and global security, nuclear preparedness and emergency response.

Anomalous environmental events caused by global warming such as the storm...

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Mr. Lauzon, I'm sorry to interrupt. Would you like to ask the witness to table a response since your time is up?

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Yes, please.

[The Chair, Liberal, Kirsty Duncan]

Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt. My apologies.

Mr. Blanchette‑Joncas, you have the floor for six minutes.