Planning for Nuclear Power

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.

Hello. Thanks for engaging with us and sharing this article. Your input is an important part of our work. 

Canada has a long history of safely and effectively operating nuclear facilities and storing radioactive waste. The process for any nuclear activity in Canada – from medicine, to research, to power generation – is heavily regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to keep people and the environment safe.  

The licensing process for nuclear activities in Canada must include a plan for waste management over that activity’s full operational lifecycle. In fact, although all forms of power generation result in a waste stream of some sort, nuclear power is the only one that stores and tracks all the waste it generates. It also has a transparent and fully funded plan for safe and responsible long-term management.

We are looking at nuclear power as a means of keeping our rates as low as possible as we transition away from high emitting power source. Understanding and evaluating the cost and risks of SMR’s 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.

Hello and thanks for your question. Conventional CANDU reactors have been evaluated for Saskatchewan over the past decades a number of times. Our grid has always been, and is still today, too small to make large conventional nuclear power an economical choice.

The CANDU SMR design was invited to partake and included in a detailed technology evaluation process in 2020, which was looking for SMR technologies that were commercially ready for deployment by the end of the 2020’s. This comprehensive evaluation process considered many factors including safety, technology readiness, generation size, fuel type, waste, and expected cost of electricity. Local economic opportunity was also considered through this process. Ultimately, we selected the BWRX-300 SMR design which has also been selected for Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) new small modular reactor development at the Darlington Nuclear Facility, near Toronto. Choosing the same technology as OPG, means the same SMR design would first be deployed in Ontario and then in Saskatchewan. This approach helps SaskPower manage project risks from the regulatory, construction and operating perspective. 

Hello and thanks for your support. There is a lot at play moving this project forward. Right now, we’re in the development phase that will inform a decision on whether to construct our first SMR in 2029. As we complete this work, leveraging existing nuclear expertise in Canada is important. Potential partnership with Indigenous businesses and Indigenous people is also important. There is a lot of exciting opportunity in the province right now to shape how electricity will be provided in future. As we continue to build this plan, we encourage you to stay connected, ask questions, and share you’re your input. Thanks again for your support!  

The preliminary business case referenced in the Strategic Plan for the Deployment of SMRs was prepared directly by the provincial government. It focuses more around GHG emissions and the general economics of SMRs, and not necessarily about how they compare with alternative zero-emission baseload generations. 

SaskPower is responsible for developing the business case that compares future supply options and understanding cost and risk is an important part of the process. Any future supply option, including SMRs, must make economic sense for the province to proceed. In terms of evaluating the economics of SMRs as an option, to date, SaskPower has participated in a feasibility assessment study with Ontario Power Generation, Bruce Power and New Brunswick Power. The study assessed the economics, technology readiness levels of three streams of SMRs, the need for cost and risk sharing with the federal government, as well as provincial and industry support. This feasibility assessment from 2021 was one of the deliverables identified in the MOU between the signatory provinces. You can read it here. While a decision to build a first 300 MW SMR won’t be made until 2029, to proceed to implementation, it must be demonstrated and competitively priced against other baseload, non-emitting power generation options.  

When it comes to renewables like wind and solar, we know that they will play an important role in our future supply mix. They perform well in helping us meet our GHG emissions standards and are cost-effective which is a key consideration in our supply planning. But, to meet our goal to achieve a net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions power system that’s both cost-effective and reliable by 2050, we need to explore a diverse range of low or no emissions power source options. We will need a mix of intermittent generation options (like wind and solar), peaking generation options (like natural gas), and baseload options (like SMRs). One can’t do it all.

Saskatchewan based uranium will work with the preferred SMR technology that SaskPower has selected, but it does have to be enriched to a low level and then processed into a suitable fuel assembly. Currently, SaskPower has no plans to pursue uranium enrichment or fuel fabrication as a direct line of business. The nuclear fuel enrichment supply chain is a well established and reliable one, with many options from the USA, France, and other countries. 

In terms of what will happen to nuclear waste, short-term storage occurs at the reactor site. After a cooling period, the spent fuel is moved to dry storage in an approved storage cask where it will be stored in a licensed and approved waste storage structure. Once sealed in the dry storage cask, the spent fuel poses no risk to people or the environment. Later, the plan is to have spent fuel transported to the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) for permanent disposal in a Deep Geological Repository (DGR).

There are many factors to consider when siting a nuclear power facility. Some of these include:

• Proximity to water
• Proximity to a ready work force and basic services
• Certain geological features
• Existing infrastructure like roads
• Proximity to power infrastructure to connect to the grid
• Proximity to communities or industries that use a lot of power
• The locations of potentially environmentally sensitive lands and habitats

We used these criteria to help narrow our nuclear study areas to the Estevan and Elbow regions, so we aren’t considering Prince Albert at this time. The South Saskatchewan River has been assessed and continues to be assessed in terms of suitability for SMR technology. As the power needs of the province change and grow we’ll continue to assess the suitability of various regions to site nuclear and other generation facilities.