Planning for Nuclear Power

Share Planning for Nuclear Power on Facebook Share Planning for Nuclear Power on Twitter Share Planning for Nuclear Power on Linkedin Email Planning for Nuclear Power link

We need all options on the table to help us reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions in how we generate power, as soon as possible. Nuclear power from Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) is one of those options.

The Long-Term Supply Plan Draft Summary includes 7 lessons learned during our internal supply planning process and the public engagement process.

Along with the lessons learned we shared 8 recommendations that will help guide SaskPower’s future. Lesson 4 emphasizes the importance of a diverse supply mix to reduce risk and keep our options open. This includes the recommendation that SaskPower develop new low and non-emitting generation technologies to do so. To get there, two actions are identified related to our work on nuclear power.

Read all 7 lessons, view 8 recommendations and learn more at saskpower.com/engage.

Watch the video below to learn more about SMRs in Saskatchewan.

While a decision on whether to build a small modular reactor (SMR) in Saskatchewan won’t be made until 2029, planning needs to happen now. The lengthy planning process requires us to select a specific nuclear technology and potential site.

We've selected GE Hitachi’s BWRX-300 SMR design and shortlisted two sites near the City of Estevan—one on the Boundary Dam Reservoir in the RM of Estevan and the other on the Rafferty Reservoir in the RM of Cambria. We will proceed with detailed investigation through technical and environmental studies of the two sites, leading to final site selection in early 2025.

The Elbow region remains an attractive option for the development of nuclear power. We will continue to explore land options in the region and continue to work with Rightsholders and communities in the area.

Right now, we're in the site selection phase of the project. We have a long list of criteria - some of the key ones are illustrated below.

""

Our goal is to narrow down options for a potential site based on information we collect through studies and engagement activities with communities, stakeholders and Rightsholders in the study areas.

That’s where you come in. We’ll be sharing information and seeking to learn more about each area. We’re interested in hearing about your values and your environmental, social and economic priorities. Your feedback will help identify things that would need to be considered and planned around if a facility were to be built on one of these sites.

We'll compile the feedback we hear through engagement and use it to inform the site selection process and the impact assessment. We also want to know what you’re wondering about and how you’d like to get updates, to help shape our communications and information-sharing.

Visit our SMR Engagement Schedule for upcoming opportunities to learn more about the project and to ask questions.

We need all options on the table to help us reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions in how we generate power, as soon as possible. Nuclear power from Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) is one of those options.

The Long-Term Supply Plan Draft Summary includes 7 lessons learned during our internal supply planning process and the public engagement process.

Along with the lessons learned we shared 8 recommendations that will help guide SaskPower’s future. Lesson 4 emphasizes the importance of a diverse supply mix to reduce risk and keep our options open. This includes the recommendation that SaskPower develop new low and non-emitting generation technologies to do so. To get there, two actions are identified related to our work on nuclear power.

Read all 7 lessons, view 8 recommendations and learn more at saskpower.com/engage.

Watch the video below to learn more about SMRs in Saskatchewan.

While a decision on whether to build a small modular reactor (SMR) in Saskatchewan won’t be made until 2029, planning needs to happen now. The lengthy planning process requires us to select a specific nuclear technology and potential site.

We've selected GE Hitachi’s BWRX-300 SMR design and shortlisted two sites near the City of Estevan—one on the Boundary Dam Reservoir in the RM of Estevan and the other on the Rafferty Reservoir in the RM of Cambria. We will proceed with detailed investigation through technical and environmental studies of the two sites, leading to final site selection in early 2025.

The Elbow region remains an attractive option for the development of nuclear power. We will continue to explore land options in the region and continue to work with Rightsholders and communities in the area.

Right now, we're in the site selection phase of the project. We have a long list of criteria - some of the key ones are illustrated below.

""

Our goal is to narrow down options for a potential site based on information we collect through studies and engagement activities with communities, stakeholders and Rightsholders in the study areas.

That’s where you come in. We’ll be sharing information and seeking to learn more about each area. We’re interested in hearing about your values and your environmental, social and economic priorities. Your feedback will help identify things that would need to be considered and planned around if a facility were to be built on one of these sites.

We'll compile the feedback we hear through engagement and use it to inform the site selection process and the impact assessment. We also want to know what you’re wondering about and how you’d like to get updates, to help shape our communications and information-sharing.

Visit our SMR Engagement Schedule for upcoming opportunities to learn more about the project and to ask questions.

What questions do you have for us about the project?

Nuclear power from small modular reactors is a new concept for most Saskatchewan residents. You probably have a lot of questions – share them here. 

Questions may be posted publicly. Please ensure your questions are clear, concise and relevant. You can ask multiple questions, but please submit one question at a time so we can provide clear and direct answers. We’ll do our best to respond within 2 to 4 business days. Please be respectful and follow the moderation policy. Submissions that do not meet these requests may not be answered or posted.

loader image
Didn't receive confirmation?
Seems like you are already registered, please provide the password. Forgot your password? Create a new one now.
  • Share With the development costs of truly clean and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal or MB hydro continuing to decrease, one must wonder why time, money and energy are being wasted on dirty, dangerous, grossly expensive and totally unnecessary nuclear energy. Thousands of safe and good-paying jobs developing these renewable sources would be created; why are the risks to health and the environment - resulting from the millions of tons of 'forever dangerous' nuclear waste already fouling the planet - being ignored in this foolish endeavour? on Facebook Share With the development costs of truly clean and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal or MB hydro continuing to decrease, one must wonder why time, money and energy are being wasted on dirty, dangerous, grossly expensive and totally unnecessary nuclear energy. Thousands of safe and good-paying jobs developing these renewable sources would be created; why are the risks to health and the environment - resulting from the millions of tons of 'forever dangerous' nuclear waste already fouling the planet - being ignored in this foolish endeavour? on Twitter Share With the development costs of truly clean and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal or MB hydro continuing to decrease, one must wonder why time, money and energy are being wasted on dirty, dangerous, grossly expensive and totally unnecessary nuclear energy. Thousands of safe and good-paying jobs developing these renewable sources would be created; why are the risks to health and the environment - resulting from the millions of tons of 'forever dangerous' nuclear waste already fouling the planet - being ignored in this foolish endeavour? on Linkedin Email With the development costs of truly clean and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal or MB hydro continuing to decrease, one must wonder why time, money and energy are being wasted on dirty, dangerous, grossly expensive and totally unnecessary nuclear energy. Thousands of safe and good-paying jobs developing these renewable sources would be created; why are the risks to health and the environment - resulting from the millions of tons of 'forever dangerous' nuclear waste already fouling the planet - being ignored in this foolish endeavour? link

    With the development costs of truly clean and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, geothermal or MB hydro continuing to decrease, one must wonder why time, money and energy are being wasted on dirty, dangerous, grossly expensive and totally unnecessary nuclear energy. Thousands of safe and good-paying jobs developing these renewable sources would be created; why are the risks to health and the environment - resulting from the millions of tons of 'forever dangerous' nuclear waste already fouling the planet - being ignored in this foolish endeavour?

    Elaine Hughes asked 7 months ago

    Thanks for the question. We know that wind, solar, and hydro can play an important role in providing power to our grid.  That’s why about 35% of our current generating capacity (2,075MW) is from these renewable sources.  We are investing in several projects to extend the life of our existing hydro facilities and to bring new wind and solar facilities onlineHere’s a quick overview: 

    Hydro Life Extension:  
    Wind:  
    Solar:  


    While renewable sources like wind and solar are relatively cost-effective, they are also intermittent, their output depends on natural conditions like wind speed and sunlight, which can vary by the hour, day, and season.  

    That’s where nuclear power comes in. Although nuclear projects require significant upfront investment, they offer stable, 24/7 baseload power with zero greenhouse gas emissions during operation. Over a 60-year lifespan, small modular reactors (SMRs) can be a cost-effective and reliable energy solution for Saskatchewan. 

    The potential addition of nuclear power presents an exciting opportunity for our people and our economy. Of course, we know that every energy sources comes with trade-offsWe’re committed to managing nuclear waste responsibly and making decisions about land, water and community with transparency and respect.  

    Canada's nuclear industry boasts a world-class safety record, built on over 70 years of innovation and regulatory excellence.  We expect nuclear power generation to play a key role in providing safe, reliable power to our customers in the future.  

  • Share Where is the uranium mined? From where and how is it transported to ie Estevan? 2. Where in SK are the “archeological locations” where the spent rods (?) will be stored? 3. Who/what body oversees the environmental safety of the uranium transportation and storage? on Facebook Share Where is the uranium mined? From where and how is it transported to ie Estevan? 2. Where in SK are the “archeological locations” where the spent rods (?) will be stored? 3. Who/what body oversees the environmental safety of the uranium transportation and storage? on Twitter Share Where is the uranium mined? From where and how is it transported to ie Estevan? 2. Where in SK are the “archeological locations” where the spent rods (?) will be stored? 3. Who/what body oversees the environmental safety of the uranium transportation and storage? on Linkedin Email Where is the uranium mined? From where and how is it transported to ie Estevan? 2. Where in SK are the “archeological locations” where the spent rods (?) will be stored? 3. Who/what body oversees the environmental safety of the uranium transportation and storage? link

    Where is the uranium mined? From where and how is it transported to ie Estevan? 2. Where in SK are the “archeological locations” where the spent rods (?) will be stored? 3. Who/what body oversees the environmental safety of the uranium transportation and storage?

    Bonny asked 7 months ago

    In Canada, used nuclear fuel—also known as spent fuel—is a necessary byproduct of generating nuclear energy and must be carefully managed to protect people and the environment. Canada has a long-standing record of safely storing spent fuel, and every licensed nuclear activity must include a full lifecycle waste management plan. 

    A lot of the uranium used to generate nuclear power is mined in northern Saskatchewan, home to some of the richest uranium deposits in the world. After mining and processing, it is transported under strict regulatory controls to licensed facilities for fuel fabrication. 

    Once used in a reactor, the spent fuel is first securely stored on-site. Over the reactor’s 60-year lifespan, the total volume of spent fuel is relatively small—enough to fit in a double car garage. The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) has the responsibility and mandate to permanently store all of Canada’s used fuel. The NWMO is developing a Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for used nuclear fuel. Learn more about the DGR project here. 

    The CNSC regulates the productions, possession, use and transportation of nuclear substances in Canada. More information about the CNSC and their role in protecting the health, safety, security and environment is available on their website. 

  • Share How can I invest in this project on Facebook Share How can I invest in this project on Twitter Share How can I invest in this project on Linkedin Email How can I invest in this project link

    How can I invest in this project

    Nadia asked 7 months ago

    Hello, and thank you for your question. At this-point, you cannot directly invest in SaskPower’s small modular reactor (SMR) project, as it is not a private or publicly traded initiative. 

  • Share what is the current cost per MW for the MSR project? is the Hitachi model chose a proven technology, where is one currently operating? How much water per year will it require to be maintained and where will this water come from? how long will the water resource be required? What risks have been identified in light of climate change and lack of water flowing from Alberta in the water need for the reactor? on Facebook Share what is the current cost per MW for the MSR project? is the Hitachi model chose a proven technology, where is one currently operating? How much water per year will it require to be maintained and where will this water come from? how long will the water resource be required? What risks have been identified in light of climate change and lack of water flowing from Alberta in the water need for the reactor? on Twitter Share what is the current cost per MW for the MSR project? is the Hitachi model chose a proven technology, where is one currently operating? How much water per year will it require to be maintained and where will this water come from? how long will the water resource be required? What risks have been identified in light of climate change and lack of water flowing from Alberta in the water need for the reactor? on Linkedin Email what is the current cost per MW for the MSR project? is the Hitachi model chose a proven technology, where is one currently operating? How much water per year will it require to be maintained and where will this water come from? how long will the water resource be required? What risks have been identified in light of climate change and lack of water flowing from Alberta in the water need for the reactor? link

    what is the current cost per MW for the MSR project? is the Hitachi model chose a proven technology, where is one currently operating? How much water per year will it require to be maintained and where will this water come from? how long will the water resource be required? What risks have been identified in light of climate change and lack of water flowing from Alberta in the water need for the reactor?

    cfafard asked 6 months ago

    Affordability and reliability are top priorities for SaskPower as we explore small modular reactors (SMRs) to support Saskatchewan’s growing energy needs. The reactor technology we selected (BWRX-300) is a tenth generation (X) Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) with a 300 Mwe output. This innovative SMR is based on similar large scale nuclear power plants that have been in operation globally for decades. The first BWRX-300 will be built in Canada by Ontario Power Generation (OPG) 

    While nuclear projects involve significant upfront costs, spreading those costs over the lifespan of the facilities make SMRs a cost-effective and stable energy source. The BWRX-300 has a design life of 60-years, which is longer than your typical natural gas and coal power plants.  

    SaskPower is closely following OPG’s SMR project to identify ways to improve efficiency and reduce costsOPG has recently announced a $20.9 billion budget for their Darling New Nuclear Project, which will see four BWRX facilities built on that siteTheir first unit is expected cost a total of $7.7 billion which includes some common costs for infrastructure that will support the following three units. Based on OPG’s numbers, their later units are estimated to come in under $5 billion. We deliberately chose not to be the first to build an SMR so that we could benefit from learnings and identify ways to lower costs on our own project. Cost is and will continue to be a primary consideration when we make our final investment decision whether to proceed with building an SMR. 

    The SMR will use surface water for cooling which is similar to existing coal and nuclear plantsDepending on the cooling technology and the waterbody used, water consumption can be kept low. SaskPower will work with our regulators, including the Saskatchewan Water Security Agency and the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada to ensure sustainable water use, including long-term effects such as climate change are considered as we further evaluate the suitability of our waterbodies for potential SMR operation. 

  • Share 1. SaskPower has stated that they won’t make a final decision to proceed on SMRs until 2029 and will consider the success of Ontario in completing their SMR project by then. Is the Ontario SMR project currently looking like it is still on budget and on time? 2. Now that SakPower intends to run there coal fleet past 2030 their will be a lot of extra base load power available that wasn’t expected just a short time ago. Does this mean we can delay making a decision on building SMRs until more utilities adopt this new-to-North America technology. 3. Does the recent trade/tariff spats with the United States give SaskPower concern regarding SaskPower relying on another country to provide enriched fuel for the SMRs? We don’t have this risk if we build Natural Gas Generation. 3. Since we now seem to be okay running our conventional coal plants until the 2040’s, is SaskPower willing to go rogue and build conventional CCGT gas generation going forward? If so, are they less risky and cheaper than SMRs? on Facebook Share 1. SaskPower has stated that they won’t make a final decision to proceed on SMRs until 2029 and will consider the success of Ontario in completing their SMR project by then. Is the Ontario SMR project currently looking like it is still on budget and on time? 2. Now that SakPower intends to run there coal fleet past 2030 their will be a lot of extra base load power available that wasn’t expected just a short time ago. Does this mean we can delay making a decision on building SMRs until more utilities adopt this new-to-North America technology. 3. Does the recent trade/tariff spats with the United States give SaskPower concern regarding SaskPower relying on another country to provide enriched fuel for the SMRs? We don’t have this risk if we build Natural Gas Generation. 3. Since we now seem to be okay running our conventional coal plants until the 2040’s, is SaskPower willing to go rogue and build conventional CCGT gas generation going forward? If so, are they less risky and cheaper than SMRs? on Twitter Share 1. SaskPower has stated that they won’t make a final decision to proceed on SMRs until 2029 and will consider the success of Ontario in completing their SMR project by then. Is the Ontario SMR project currently looking like it is still on budget and on time? 2. Now that SakPower intends to run there coal fleet past 2030 their will be a lot of extra base load power available that wasn’t expected just a short time ago. Does this mean we can delay making a decision on building SMRs until more utilities adopt this new-to-North America technology. 3. Does the recent trade/tariff spats with the United States give SaskPower concern regarding SaskPower relying on another country to provide enriched fuel for the SMRs? We don’t have this risk if we build Natural Gas Generation. 3. Since we now seem to be okay running our conventional coal plants until the 2040’s, is SaskPower willing to go rogue and build conventional CCGT gas generation going forward? If so, are they less risky and cheaper than SMRs? on Linkedin Email 1. SaskPower has stated that they won’t make a final decision to proceed on SMRs until 2029 and will consider the success of Ontario in completing their SMR project by then. Is the Ontario SMR project currently looking like it is still on budget and on time? 2. Now that SakPower intends to run there coal fleet past 2030 their will be a lot of extra base load power available that wasn’t expected just a short time ago. Does this mean we can delay making a decision on building SMRs until more utilities adopt this new-to-North America technology. 3. Does the recent trade/tariff spats with the United States give SaskPower concern regarding SaskPower relying on another country to provide enriched fuel for the SMRs? We don’t have this risk if we build Natural Gas Generation. 3. Since we now seem to be okay running our conventional coal plants until the 2040’s, is SaskPower willing to go rogue and build conventional CCGT gas generation going forward? If so, are they less risky and cheaper than SMRs? link

    1. SaskPower has stated that they won’t make a final decision to proceed on SMRs until 2029 and will consider the success of Ontario in completing their SMR project by then. Is the Ontario SMR project currently looking like it is still on budget and on time? 2. Now that SakPower intends to run there coal fleet past 2030 their will be a lot of extra base load power available that wasn’t expected just a short time ago. Does this mean we can delay making a decision on building SMRs until more utilities adopt this new-to-North America technology. 3. Does the recent trade/tariff spats with the United States give SaskPower concern regarding SaskPower relying on another country to provide enriched fuel for the SMRs? We don’t have this risk if we build Natural Gas Generation. 3. Since we now seem to be okay running our conventional coal plants until the 2040’s, is SaskPower willing to go rogue and build conventional CCGT gas generation going forward? If so, are they less risky and cheaper than SMRs?

    Stew asked 5 months ago

    Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) small modular reactor (SMR) project at Darlington continues to make steady progress. In April 2025, OPG was issued a licence to construct on their first unit and construction began in May 2025. Learn more about their Darling New Nuclear Project here. We will continue to work with OPG to apply lessons learned to our SMR project in Saskatchewan. 

    The Government of Saskatchewan has asked SaskPower to assess the possibility of continuing to run our coal facilities beyond 2030. This includes units that have some remaining life, as well as potentially refurbishing units to extend their useful life. The analysis is still in progress and will help  inform future decisions. SaskPower is committed to achieving a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions power system by 2050 or earlier. We expect nuclear power generation to play a major role in providing safe, reliable power to our customers in the future.  

    Current access is fairly reliable for our first SMR buildsWhile costs have increased, the market is currently able to provide the fuel SaskPower needs for its first unitsOPG has fuel contracts in place for their reactor. We will explore fuel supply options as we progress through the planning phase of the project. 

    Combined-cycle gas turbine (CCGT) and simple cycle gas turbine plants remain a practical and proven option, offering lower upfront costs and fast deployment. With the recent additions of Chinook Power Station (2019) and Great Plains Power Station (2024) natural gas accounts for approximately 41% (2,434 MW) of our generating capacity and growing. The Aspen Power Station will bring an additional 370 MW of generating capacity when complete in 2027. As technology evolves, SaskPower is committed to choosing the solutions that best serve Saskatchewan’s long-term power needs. 

  • Share Not a question, but just want to express how happy I am to see progress in nuclear energy and (hopefully) therefore away from coal. Thank you for your contribution to this movement! on Facebook Share Not a question, but just want to express how happy I am to see progress in nuclear energy and (hopefully) therefore away from coal. Thank you for your contribution to this movement! on Twitter Share Not a question, but just want to express how happy I am to see progress in nuclear energy and (hopefully) therefore away from coal. Thank you for your contribution to this movement! on Linkedin Email Not a question, but just want to express how happy I am to see progress in nuclear energy and (hopefully) therefore away from coal. Thank you for your contribution to this movement! link

    Not a question, but just want to express how happy I am to see progress in nuclear energy and (hopefully) therefore away from coal. Thank you for your contribution to this movement!

    Kyle asked about 2 months ago

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts! It's great to hear your enthusiasm for the progress in nuclear power. We believe nuclear can play a significant role in how we generate power in the future, be sure to sign-up for our e-newsletter to continue to follow the SMR Development Project. 

  • Share Will this require and type of heat exchangers? on Facebook Share Will this require and type of heat exchangers? on Twitter Share Will this require and type of heat exchangers? on Linkedin Email Will this require and type of heat exchangers? link

    Will this require and type of heat exchangers?

    Celso asked 7 months ago

    Similar to a conventional coal fired power plant, there are several heat exchangers in a nuclear power plant. Heat exchangers are used in the feedwater system, close loop cooling water system, lube oil cooling system, etc.

  • Share I understand the need to eliminate coal and gas power generating plants. I am concerned about how the radio active waste from the nuclear process will be dealt with. How will nuclear waste be managed? on Facebook Share I understand the need to eliminate coal and gas power generating plants. I am concerned about how the radio active waste from the nuclear process will be dealt with. How will nuclear waste be managed? on Twitter Share I understand the need to eliminate coal and gas power generating plants. I am concerned about how the radio active waste from the nuclear process will be dealt with. How will nuclear waste be managed? on Linkedin Email I understand the need to eliminate coal and gas power generating plants. I am concerned about how the radio active waste from the nuclear process will be dealt with. How will nuclear waste be managed? link

    I understand the need to eliminate coal and gas power generating plants. I am concerned about how the radio active waste from the nuclear process will be dealt with. How will nuclear waste be managed?

    Lori Weiler-Thiessen asked 7 months ago

    Hi Lori, thanks for the question.

    Canada has a long history of safely and effectively storing high level radioactive waste. The licensing process for any nuclear activity in Canada – from medicine to research to power generation -- must include a plan for waste management over that activity’s full operational lifecycle.

    In Canada, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) is responsible for implementing Canada’s plan for the safe, long-term management of spent nuclear fuel and waste. Spent fuel will need to be stored in short-term storage at the facility while it cools enough to be transported to the long-term storage facility as developed by the NWMO.

    To learn more, visit Managing Nuclear Waste

  • Share How much water will an smr use in one year? And is it looped or once through. Would a well supply enough on Facebook Share How much water will an smr use in one year? And is it looped or once through. Would a well supply enough on Twitter Share How much water will an smr use in one year? And is it looped or once through. Would a well supply enough on Linkedin Email How much water will an smr use in one year? And is it looped or once through. Would a well supply enough link

    How much water will an smr use in one year? And is it looped or once through. Would a well supply enough

    Jerrod woodcock asked about 1 year ago

    One of the important parts of our planning work is to determine how water will be used in the cooling process of a potential SMR facility. 

    There are many options related to the various cooling processes, with some resulting in more consumption and some less. Understanding these options is a key part of the planning work and ultimately, the goal is to have the smallest impact to the surrounding ecosystem while maintaining a cooling process that is efficient and reliable. 

     A suitable water supply is needed to cool the power production process, outside of any closed loop nuclear process. It is important to understand that the cooling water is kept separate from the nuclear operations of the facility.

    SaskPower has extensive experience in operating thermal generation plants (through coal- and natural gas-fired power stations), and there are reasonable comparisons that can be made when extended to a nuclear facility, as a nuclear power plant operates in a similar way, using steam to spin a turbine. 

    In theory, an underground well could supply cooling water if it was a large enough source, but there are several reasons why using surface water is the typical method (availability and temperature of the water are the primary ones).

    At most existing thermal plants, reservoir water is removed, ran through the cooling process (separate from the nuclear reaction process) and then returned to the reservoir at a warmer temperature. The impact of the warmer water being returned to the reservoir is something that is monitored and measured. 

    Determining a cooling process is a very important element to the detailed site analysis as we look to choose a site next year. We are working with the Water Security Agency who allocates water for things like power generation and irrigation projects.

  • Share Is SaskPower partnering with anyone with experience in the Canadian Regulatory process and in construction or refurbishment of new or existing reactors? on Facebook Share Is SaskPower partnering with anyone with experience in the Canadian Regulatory process and in construction or refurbishment of new or existing reactors? on Twitter Share Is SaskPower partnering with anyone with experience in the Canadian Regulatory process and in construction or refurbishment of new or existing reactors? on Linkedin Email Is SaskPower partnering with anyone with experience in the Canadian Regulatory process and in construction or refurbishment of new or existing reactors? link

    Is SaskPower partnering with anyone with experience in the Canadian Regulatory process and in construction or refurbishment of new or existing reactors?

    Dwight asked about 1 year ago

    Yes, we have established several partnerships with organizations that have significant expertise and experience in the nuclear industry, including Calian Advanced Technologies, Ontario Power Generation, and GE Vernova Hitachi. We recently joined the CANDU Owners Group, although are not currently planning to build CANDU reactors, this will allow us to collaborate with other Canadian nuclear utilities and international nuclear organizations to leverage their technical, regulatory, and research expertise to support our small modular reactor project here in Saskatchewan. In the future, we will be engaging with engineering and construction firms that are experienced with new nuclear projects.

    For SaskPower to be successful in our transition to net-zero, ongoing collaboration with Indigenous communities, industry, utilities, other provinces, and levels of government will be essential. 

Page last updated: 25 Feb 2025, 04:37 PM