Planning for Nuclear Power

Thanks for your question. There’s a lot to consider when looking at nuclear power from small modular reactors (SMRs). Many more years of detailed engineering design work would be required for the CANDU 3 to be ready for commercial deployment. The CANDU 3 is not currently in any phase of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s VDR process and SaskPower is not aware of any utility in the world that is advancing an SMR project using the CANDU 3 design.   

To arrive at our decision to select the GE-Hitachi BWRX 300 , we completed an extensive evaluation of several technologies. We considered many factors including safety, technology readiness, generation size, fuel type and expected cost of electricity.

We also considered Ontario Power Generation’s (OPGs) selection of the same technology for their Darlington New Nuclear Project. They’re planning to have their first GE-Hitachi BWRX 300 SMR operational by 2030. By choosing the same technology, we can learn from OPGs experience. It helps lower our risk of scheduling delays related to the regulatory process and construction of the project. It also helps manage the project’s cost. 

Hello and thanks for reaching out. At this time, we can’t say for certain what Saskatchewan’s grid will look like in 2050 or what percentage of our mix will come from nuclear power. However, as our population grows and electrification increases, we could see our grid more than double in size. When it comes to cost, we’re still working on developing an estimate to deploy an SMR in Saskatchewan. In terms of the amount of power lost per kilometre of transmission, it’s difficult to project because this would depend on the size of the line, voltage, and the amount of power.

Thanks for this question. Managing the risks and opportunities that come with planning for a nuclear fuel supply chain is an essential part of advancing our work on this project. International supply chain risk is manageable for a small number of SMR facilities, as the fuel requirements are relatively low. If Canada deploys more of this technology and becomes more reliant on enriched uranium for energy security, further consideration for enrichment supply chain will be warranted. SaskPower’s selection of the BWRX-300 came from a comprehensive evaluation that considered many factors, including safety, technology readiness, generation size, fuel type, and cost.

Thanks for your question. A lot goes into choosing a site for a potential SMR in Saskatchewan. To start, we looked at regions across the province that could meet the requirements for the technology we selected. We also considered factors like a region’s proximity to existing infrastructure, emergency services, and access to a workforce. Based on these factors, we selected two study regions – one near Estevan and one near Elbow which you’ve referenced. From there, we began to narrow in on specific areas within these regions that could work best. To do this, we completed a suitability analysis and a water intake study in each region. We also introduced a Regional Evaluation Process as a way to engage with groups in each region on the siting process, and other aspects of the project. At this time, we don’t have a more specific location in either region selected. Our goal is to have two potential sites chosen by the end of this year, and a final site chosen by early 2025. To learn more about the siting process, visit our Potential Facility Location page.

Yes! Proximity to existing infrastructure is one of many factors to consider in selecting a site for this project. This includes electricity transmission infrastructure, and we are evaluating some coal and hydro assets that may be usable for an SMR facility within both of our study areas.

To help us understand what locations in the Estevan and Elbow study areas are suitable for a site, we’ve been using over 50 different technical, social, and environmental criteria. We’ve also been engaging with communities, stakeholders and Rightsholders in the study areas to learn from their perspective what locations would and/or would not be a good fit. Our suitability maps available at SaskPower.com are a great resource that demonstrate which areas we’ve identified as suitable. We’ve also launched a survey tool on saskpower.com\engage where you can learn more about the criteria we’re using and share what matters most to you when it comes to selecting a site. Our goal is to have two sites selected by the end of this year, and one selected by the end of 2024 or early 2025.

The GE Hitachi BWRX-300 SMR design we’ve selected will produce 300 MW of baseload energy which would power approximately 300,000 typical Saskatchewan homes.

Hello and thanks for reaching out. SaskPower is committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 50 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, and we’re planning to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. To meet this goal, we need to explore a diverse range of low or no emissions power source options. Our future supply plan needs to provide a mix of intermittent generation options (like wind and solar), peaking generation options, and baseload options (like SMRs). While a decision to build an SMR won’t be made until 2029, it must be demonstrated and competitively priced against other baseload, non-emitting power generation options. We recognize that nuclear power is a capital-intensive generation option at the outset, but over the 60-year lifespan of a facility, this option could be one of the more cost-effective sources available to the province.

In the short term, used, or spent fuel, comes out of the reactor, and is placed in wet storage for initial cooling. Then it is transferred to dry storage casks on site. The dry storage casks are very robust and self-contain all the radiation that the used fuel continues to generate. Once sealed, these dry storage casks protect people and the environment from the hazardous aspects of the used fuel and can be sustainability stored on-site for long periods of time.  But this is still considered interim storage. For permanent disposal, the plan is to send all the dry storage casks to a Deep Geological Repository or DGR that the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is developing within Canada.

The maximum temperature within the reactor is expected to be approximately 300 degrees Celsius. The primary cooling system for the reactor is a closed loop where most of the thermal energy is turned into electricity with a steam turbine. Like our coal-fired and some natural gas power plants, there is some leftover heat in that closed system that needs to be removed from the process.  

Removing leftover heat is done through a separate open loop cooling system. There are technology options on how we design the open loop system. Two main options are being considered for SMRs, known as once through cooling and wet cooling towers. Regardless of which option is selected, its important to understand that the open loop cooling system is physically separated from the nuclear reactor.

Once through cooling and wet cooling towers each have their pros and cons. For once through cooling, the water flow rate is higher - for a facility with two reactors and an output of approximately 630 MW, the cooling water flowrate is expected to be 20 to 30 cubic meters per second. All of this water is returned to the waterbody, but the temperature is increased 10 to 15 degrees Celsius from its original state. The impact this temperature can have on ecosystems really depends on the characteristics of the waterbody. Large water bodies like Lake Diefenbaker will have less of an impact compared to smaller ones because of its natural depth and temperature profiles. 

With wet cooling towers, the cooling water flowrates are much less, but they rely on evaporation to reject the heat – so this is a consumptive use of the surface water.

Outside of the cooling system, small amounts of water are consumed for reasons such as sanitary purposes for the operational staff and some make-up water to the closed loop systems.

As part of the impact assessment for the SMR development project, these issues will be looked at very closely.

The technology to use, harness and control the energy/heat produced from a nuclear fusion reaction is not mature enough to commercialize yet. The scientific research work is underway, and some advancements are being made, but it will still be several decades before this technology is available for commercial electricity production. 

Here are a couple of articles to reference:

DOE National Laboratory Makes History by Achieving Fusion Ignition | Department of Energy

China's Artificial Sun Breaks Record by Hitting 120 Million F in Race for Nuclear Fusion (newsweek.com)

In Canada and around the world, there are very strict regulations on how nuclear materials, including waste, are transported. The containers used for transportation are required to be robust and are designed to withstand external hazards. Canada has a long history of safely transporting nuclear materials.