Thank you for helping us meet our fundraising goal!
Ontario is planning to cement itself as the nuclear powerhouse of North America with what could become Canada’s first 21st-century megaproject.
Ontario announced its preliminary plan on Wednesday for the large-scale nuclear power plant near Port Hope, about 100 kilometres east of Toronto. Energy Minister Stephen Lecce described the project as “one of the largest nuclear energy plants in the world.” Once completed, it is expected to generate up to 10,000 megawatts of electricity — enough to power 10 million homes.
Speaking at a press conference, Lecce said Ontario Power Generation has been instructed to begin planning for the new facility at Wesleyville, a site originally designated in the 1970s for an oil-fired power station.
“This expansion of non-emitting nuclear energy will reduce emissions and massively grow our economy, and that's a big advantage,” Lecce said.
Nuclear remains a contentious battleground for the environmental movement with critics deriding its cost, construction time-scale and waste problem. Meanwhile, proponents view nuclear as a stable baseload energy source able to produce energy when renewables are not able to deliver at full capacity.
Proponents of nuclear power, like Jeff Parnell, president of the Power Workers’ Union that represents nuclear, wind, hydro and utilities workers across Ontario, sees the project as filling a major need in Ontario’s energy picture. He says another mega-nuclear project is needed to “fill the hole” of Ontario’s looming energy shortfall. He says no fleet of small modular reactors, like the experimental miniaturized reactors that are undergoing consultation in Darlington, will meet Ontario’s 2050 energy needs.
“If all this comes to fruition, it really solidifies us as the global nuclear leader,” he said in an interview with Canada’s National Observer.
For Parnell, Ontario as a nuclear powerhouse “brings a lot of jobs to Ontario, not just in the generation, but in the spin off; if we have clean, reliable energy, our businesses in Ontario will flourish.”
However, not all clean energy advocates are supportive of the move, with some voicing concerns about the plan’s financial and environmental implications.
Jack Gibbons, chair of the Ontario Clean Air Alliance, says Lecce’s proposal to build new nuclear reactors in Port Hope will cause electricity rates to “skyrocket.”
“It is time for Minister Lecce to rescind the moratorium on Great Lakes offshore wind power and use the Wesleyville [Port Hope] site to connect Lake Ontario wind power to Hydro One’s high-voltage transmission grid,” Gibbons said. “Great Lakes wind power is a cleaner, safer, quicker and lower-cost way to meet our electricity needs than high-cost, slow-to-deploy new nuclear reactors.”
A new report from the Ontario Clean Air Alliance predicts electricity generated by a new nuclear reactor would be significantly more expensive than renewable sources, costing 3.6 times more than onshore wind, three times more than solar, and 1.7 times more than offshore wind. The report also highlights Ontario's abundant renewable energy potential, noting that Great Lakes wind power alone could provide more than enough electricity to meet the province’s energy needs.
Ontario Power Generation (OPG) says it plans to start environmental impact assessments at Wesleyville this year, with hopes of starting construction by the 2030s and commencing operations in the 2040s.
According to Nicolle Butcher, president and CEO of OPG, the environmental assessment process is expected to take three to five years. She said this phase is crucial for understanding the current state of the site, evaluating the environmental impacts of the proposed development, and addressing any concerns before advancing to the next stages of the project.
The Independent Electricity System Operator reported last year that demand in Ontario is rising more rapidly than expected, with projections indicating a 75 per cent increase by 2050.
Lecce said this investment is necessary to meet the growing energy demand as the province moves toward full electrification.
In recent years, the Ford government has also announced refurbishments to existing generating stations in Darlington and Pickering, as well as in South Bruce. The Bruce Nuclear Generating Station, already the largest in the world, announced a project expansion in 2023 of 4,800 megawatts.
The province has received expressions of interest from the Municipality of Port Hope and the Williams Treaties First Nations, Lecce said. To support early-stage planning, the ministry has announced $1 million in initial funding for Port Hope to assess planning and infrastructure requirements.
Olena Hankivsky, mayor of Port Hope, described the proposed new nuclear site as a “once-in-a-generation” opportunity with significant potential benefits for her community.
“There are so many benefits to our community, from supporting a greener future for not just our community, but for the rest of the province in Canada,” said Hankivsky in a phone interview with Canada’s National Observer, adding the town council “unanimously support” further discussions with Ontario Power Generation (OPG).
With the funding announced by the province, Hankivsky said Port Hope will begin evaluating the feasibility of a clean energy project at the Wesleyville site.
The project is expected to take up to 15 years to complete and would require billions of dollars in investment. Lecce noted the project could generate 10,500 jobs province-wide, including 1,700 in Port Hope. Over its 95-year lifespan, according to the government, the facility is projected to contribute $235 billion to Ontario’s GDP.
In a statement to Canada’s National Observer, Williams Treaty First Nations (WTFN) said that the First Nations located closest to the development, such as The Michi Saagiig First Nations of Alderville, Curve Lake, Hiawatha and the Mississaugas of Scugog Island, have had early conversations with the provincial government and OPG.
Discussions have focused on the province’s proposed plans for new nuclear generation at the Wesleyville site, with more “fulsome discussions” needed before conclusions are made on the nuclear site.
The First Nations believe the project will be designed to advance economic prosperity in the region. However, WTFN focus will be on the wellbeing of the community and stewardship of the land.
“There is an enormous amount of work to be done in order to ensure that the land, water and treaty rights will be protected,” the statement said.
“This project will require extensive environmental assessment to ensure the safety and protection of our communities, land and water.”
Matteo Cimellaro and Matin Sarfraz / Canada’s National Observer / Local Journalism Initiative
Comments
Unless there are plans for large swaths of green heavy industry in the region that will draw huge amounts of power to concentrated areas (e.g. low emission steel and cement, electrified manufacturing...), distributed solar and offshore wind will outcompete nuclear on economics and contruction timelines.
There is also the issue of waste. So far no one has been able to build power stations that use the waste products as fuel, recycling it over and over and rendering down to a fraction of the current waste's toxicity. It's there in theory, but working out the bugs and getting long term deep funding is constantly setting it back.
Meanwhile solar, wind, geothermal and batteries are leaping ahead.
Note the illustration sbove. Since when does black smoke come out of the water cooling towers of a nuclear power plant?
I was a nuke advocate for about 45 years, only soured on it recently because it just doesn't pay any more. Gotten too expensive. However - it can be a great asset in a mostly-renewable system, to stabilize the grid; 10GW of nuclear could make another 20GW of solar and wind and batteries "look like" firm-clean generation. If they can get past the environmental concerns (no small trick) it could be a winner. Canada's energy resources are enormous, and we might make a fair business of selling clean power south to people who didn't build much because of their dysfunctional government.
France is powered mainly by nuclear. But they also have hordes of windmills dotting the farmer's fields all over Northern France. Love it or hate it, nuclear power is a fact of everyday life in that wonderful country.
Warning: the average cost overrun for construction of a nuclear power station is 120 %. This is #3 on Bent Flyvbjerg’s list of cost overruns for 25 types of projects. #1 is nuclear storage at 238 %, #2 is Olympic Games at 157 %, and #25 is Solar Power with a mean cost overrun of 1 %. Read Flyvbjerg’s excellent book “How Big Things Get Done”.
Not to forget his co-author, Canadian Dan Gardner, now very active on Substack.
The situation may be different in China, and we'll soon know. I was blown away a year or so back to hear that China had about 20 nuclear projects a-building...nearly all of them different. In contrast to the recent wisdom that we should only have a few nuclear plant designs, and mass-produce them, China is building every kind of nuke, with an eye to selling them to customers who want different things.
If China can crank out nukes in the same 60 months they took to build two CANDU reactors a few years back, there's at least *somebody* who can do it. But if even China, with all their advantages of just sweeping aside studies and objections, can't make nuclear pay, better than renewables and storage, then it's over for nukes.
This is a bloody stupid idea. I'm not happy about nuclear power for the traditional reasons, nuclear waste, risk of catastrophes, they cause a bit more cancer just running than is generally admitted and so on. Still probably better than coal, but that's a very low bar.
But the bottom line is cost. And, opportunity cost. Spending money on nuclear plants means you cannot do whatever else you might have done with it, and almost anything remotely sane will be a better use for the money. Nuclear power is ludicrously expensive and takes an amazingly long time to build. If you're going to build power, renewables are cheaper. If you do it right (work on the grid, build adequate storage and so forth) they are STILL cheaper, and actually more reliable. Nuke plants don't go out of service often in terms of raw numbers of outages . . . but their outages tend to be months or even years long. And it's going to get worse because they're vulnerable to droughts . . . guess what's going to become more common? Droughts!
Just another really stupid idea from Ford. He's got a million of 'em.