Skip to main content

Canada Nuclear Update

As we reported on Monday, Dwight Duncan, energy minister for Ontario, announced a 20-year plan to upgrade the province's energy infrastructure yesterday, one that includes provisions to build new reactors and refurbish exisiting nuclear capacity, while investing an equal amount of money in renewable energy.

The plan is getting a positive reception. Here's the Toronto Star:
Energy Minister Dwight Duncan has developed a prudent blueprint for ensuring Ontarians will have an increasingly clean supply of power to meet their needs over the next 20 years. The plan is a mix of power sources --— nuclear, hydro, natural gas, wind --— that strikes the best long-term balance considering cost, reliability and environmental concerns.

Under the plan unveiled yesterday, the province has opted over the next 20 years to refurbish existing nuclear plants, build new reactors on those sites, double the amount of renewable power from sources such as hydroelectric and wind, and heavily promote conservation.
And from the London Free Press:
While details remain sketchy, the Ontario government appears to be taking a balanced, sensible approach to meeting the province's future energy needs.

A reliable energy supply is vital to Ontario's economy. And the massive disruption that can be caused in ordinary people's lives was made abundantly clear by the blackout of 2003.

Energy Minister Dwight Duncan's plan calls for a broad mix, including increased nuclear power and a push for conservation -- with less nuclear and more conservation than expected.
And despite the fact that the plan relies on "more conservation than expected," all the usual suspects are lining up in opposition.

Stephen Aplin says he's ready for the debate:
Until now, the Ontario electricity debate has been long on politically correct platitudes about renewable and alternative forms of generation coupled with conservation, and short on credible plans for filling the ten-thousand-megawatt gap between electricity demand and supply. There has been almost no regard for actual, believable numbers -- either in terms of the amounts of electricity Ontarians need to continue living as an advanced, industrial society in a middle-latitude climate, or the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with electricity generation.

In such a void, anybody can say anything -- and they have. But now that the battle is well and truly joined, we'’ll see which arguments stand and which collapse from their own internal contradictions.
Keep your cool my friends, because the facts are on our side. Click here for a statement from Patrick Moore.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Why Ex-Im Bank Board Nominations Will Turn the Page on a Dysfunctional Chapter in Washington

In our present era of political discord, could Washington agree to support an agency that creates thousands of American jobs by enabling U.S. companies of all sizes to compete in foreign markets? What if that agency generated nearly billions of dollars more in revenue than the cost of its operations and returned that money – $7 billion over the past two decades – to U.S. taxpayers? In fact, that agency, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), was reauthorized by a large majority of Congress in 2015. To be sure, the matter was not without controversy. A bipartisan House coalition resorted to a rarely-used parliamentary maneuver in order to force a vote. But when Congress voted, Ex-Im Bank won a supermajority in the House and a large majority in the Senate. For almost two years, however, Ex-Im Bank has been unable to function fully because a single Senate committee chairman prevented the confirmation of nominees to its Board of Directors. Without a quorum

NEI Praises Connecticut Action in Support of Nuclear Energy

Earlier this week, Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed SB-1501 into law, legislation that puts nuclear energy on an equal footing with other non-emitting sources of energy in the state’s electricity marketplace. “Gov. Malloy and the state legislature deserve praise for their decision to support Dominion’s Millstone Power Station and the 1,500 Connecticut residents who work there," said NEI President and CEO Maria Korsnick. "By opening the door to Millstone having equal access to auctions open to other non-emitting sources of electricity, the state will help preserve $1.5 billion in economic activity, grid resiliency and reliability, and clean air that all residents of the state can enjoy," Korsnick said. Millstone Power Station Korsnick continued, "Connecticut is the third state to re-balance its electricity marketplace, joining New York and Illinois, which took their own legislative paths to preserving nuclear power plants in 2016. Now attention should