Planning for Nuclear Power

Thanks for the question! We know from other parts of Canada that transitioning employees from a coal plant to a nuclear plant can work. That's why we're developing a workforce retention and training strategy for after 2030. Part of that plan will be specific to working in the nuclear industry.

There are challenges to retrofitting a coal facility with an SMR:

1. There are similar components and processes, but these facilities are designed quite differently. For example - the cooling requirements are close but not quite the same. If we decide to build an SMR near a coal plant, we’ll study if any auxiliary assets can be re-purposed.
2. Our coal plants are nearing the end of their life, so pairing one with a new SMR with a design life of 60 years isn’t a great fit. A better fit may be retrofitting a coal facility to use natural gas to extend the life of that facility.

During this first phase of siting engagement, we were able to reach more than 1,400 participants. We learned about local interests and priorities, listened to concerns and answered many questions about the project.

Here is a direct link to that summary report: September – December 2022 – What We Heard Roll-Up Report 

Our early estimate is that a 300MW facility could require between 120-150 direct jobs to operate, which is slightly more that we see employed at a similar sized coal facility. As our planning progresses and other jurisdictions deploy the same technology we’ve chosen, we'll have a clearer picture of the resources required.

Thanks for reaching out! To determine a suitable site, we’re looking at several technical criteria. We’ll also be taking into consideration what we learn from folks in and around the study areas. So please— keep engaging with us, show your support and encourage people in your networks to attend one of our events. You can see what’s coming up and sign up for them on our key dates page. We encourage you to add some pins to the online map and share your ideas with us as well. This will allow us to share your feedback with on the project with the region.

By getting a picture of how you use the area and your interests, we can plan for a project that takes into account what you value most. Your feedback will help identify reasons a location could be a good fit or a poor fit. It could also identify things that would need to be considered and planned around if a facility were to be built in one of the study areas. 

Great question! SaskPower has studied the potential for nuclear power since the early 1970s. Those studies found that the reactors operating in Canada today are too large for a small grid like Saskatchewan’s. Our system has to be able to handle when a generation unit suddenly trips offline. We plan to be able to handle the loss of our largest unit, which is currently around 350 Megawatts (MW). Soon will be close to 380 MW. If we added a 600 – 1000 MW unit, our current system wouldn’t be able to support it.

The SMR we chose is about the same size as the larger coal and natural gas plants we have on our grid now. The size and modularity of an SMR, compared to a conventional reactor also lowers the financial risk for SaskPower. Although a nuclear facility would still be a large construction project with a high upfront cost, having some elements built in a factory setting and shipped to site does help us reduce the risk of schedule and cost overruns. 

Saskatchewan also has some of the best wind and solar resources.  Long-term, these renewable resources may allow SaskPower to sell off excess power to other jurisdictions, while SMRs contribute to our need for baseload power. 

Thanks for the questions!  We’ve answered them separately here. 

Cost per 300-Megawatt facility – While we don’t know exactly what the cost per 300-Megawatt facility would be, our early analysis is the cost of electricity from SMRs are competitive with the cost of power from other zero-emissions supply options. As we make any decisions on the project, cost to our customers is a major consideration. This includes looking at whether nuclear power from SMRs will help keep rates as low as possible as we transition to a net-zero future.

 Replacing the existing load – We’re not looking to replace our entire grid with SMRs, but they could play an important role in providing us with reliable, baseload power.  The initial feasibility study we did scoped out four reactors on two sites.  If four SMRs were to be developed in Saskatchewan we anticipate there could be some economies of scale.  As other units are deployed within Canada and around the world, we may see increased benefits from the modularity of Small Modular Reactors. 

 Workforce per site – The simple answer is no. If a second reactor was built at the same site, we’d need to increase the number of employees working at that site. That said, the workforce likely wouldn’t double for the second reactor at the site. We are working to get a more accurate estimate of the workforce requirements for operating. 

Thanks for sharing your perspective! Our final decision whether to proceed with nuclear power won’t happen until 2029. In order to make that decision though, we need to do extensive planning and regulatory work now. 

Nuclear power is just one of the options we’re evaluating and it’s important to keep in mind that it’s just one part of what our future power system could include. SaskPower needs a diverse mix of options to have reliable power while cutting emissions and minimizing the impact on rates. This includes looking at all new and emerging technologies, including a number of energy storage options.

The CANDU reactor technology was developed by Atomic Energy of Canada (AECL) in the 1950s and 1960s. In 2011, the Government of Canada sold the commercial reactor division of AECL including design and marketing rights for the CANDU design to SNC-Lavalin. 

The Enhanced CANDU 6 is a 740 MW reactor design that was ruled out as a feasible option for SaskPower in 2010 primarily because of its large generation size which made it uneconomic to reliably deploy in SaskPower’s relatively small grid. AECL did undertake early conceptual design work in the 1980s on a smaller CANDU reactor design in the 300 – 400 MW range but that work was discontinued in the early 1990s. 

SaskPower considered the smaller CANDU design in its feasibility assessment but ultimately concluded that the GE-Hitachi BWRX-300 was a technically and economically stronger option for potential deployment in Saskatchewan by the mid 2030s.

We are committed to providing cost-effective, reliable, and sustainable power for our customers and the communities we serve.  Current climate change policies are increasing the cost to generate power from familiar sources such as coal and natural gas.  There are limited options available to SaskPower to add baseload power to the grid, that is emissions free.  Nuclear power from SMRs does not emit carbon or pollutants that contribute to climate change.  

To move forward with this project the cost of electricity from SMRs must be competitive with the cost of power from alternative zero-emissions supply options.  It’s important to note, we believe we are going to need a mix of options that can complement each other in order to meet our emission reduction targets, while keeping our electrical grid reliable and our rates as low as possible.  

Thanks for the question and sharing your concern on the potential for cost overruns.

Understanding and evaluating this cost and risks is an important part of developing this supply option for Saskatchewan. The SMR project must be competitively priced against other baseload, non-emitting power generation options available in the 2030s to proceed. Based on feasibility work done to date, SMRs have the potential to be a competitive option. Two things that are helping us mitigate cost overruns should, SaskPower decide to construct an SMR are: 

1. The modularity aspect of SMRs in general.  Modular in Small Modular Reactor, means some of the power plant can be built in a factory setting and assembled on site. This reduces the risk of construction cost overruns.  
2. Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) new nuclear project.  OPG is advancing a build of the same GE-Hitachi design that we selected. They are currently targeting to have that unit operational prior to our targeted construction decision date in 2029.