Power transmission lines near Pincher Creek, Alta. There's growing interest in nuclear power in Alberta and Saskatchewan as demand for electricity surges.Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press
In Jeremy Harrison’s telling, one of the most crucial decisions in the history of Saskatchewan’s energy sector has already been made: It will build nuclear power plants.
“The government has made the binary decision that we are going to be moving to nuclear baseload power generation,” Mr. Harrison, the province’s Minister of Crown Investments Corporation, declared in an interview.
Saskatchewan, which explored building nuclear plants more than 15 years ago, has only just started. Its Crown power utility, SaskPower, has established a subsidiary called SaskNuclear, and earlier this year the federal government announced a contribution of $80-million to support the utility’s early preparations. The province wants the federal government to pay for three-quarters of the cost of its first reactor.
Opinion: Want a pipeline? Let’s use nuclear power to reduce oil sands emissions
AtkinsRéalis eyeing U.S. market for nuclear technology push
Meanwhile, conversation around incorporating nuclear into neighbouring Alberta’s grid has just begun. A new Nuclear Energy Engagement and Advisory Panel has been set up to advise Alberta’s government about its potential role in advancing a nuclear energy industry, and Utilities Minister Nathan Neudorf is optimistic about how that might roll out.
Alberta’s power market differs markedly from others in Canada, in that it’s privatized. That means the government is “trying to be as agnostic as possible” on what technology might fit into the province’s grid, Mr. Neudorf said in an interview. A small handful of private developers are promoting early-stage projects.
“We want to let the private market do their work and facilitate their pursuit of this, so that we allow for that good competition and the best fit to rise to the top without government tipping the scales one way or the other,” he said.
Alberta previously considered building nuclear plants but later stood down. Concerns about risk to taxpayers prevailed both there and in Saskatchewan, as did anti-nuclear sentiment. But recent opinion polls suggest a change of heart: A 2023 Angus Reid poll found residents of both provinces to be more enthusiastic than respondents in Ontario and New Brunswick, which already have nuclear plants.
Ontario’s decades-long journey to building more than 20 nuclear reactors had rocky periods, but they became the backbone of its power grid. New Brunswick’s lone nuclear station, though, has placed its government in a financial bind, and can be regarded as a cautionary tale for less populous provinces.
If Alberta and Saskatchewan truly are committed to nuclear power, what can they do to avoid the pitfalls that have plagued other nuclear jurisdictions while maximizing the benefits?
New Brunswick's Point Lepreau nuclear power plant in 2018. The province's lone nuclear station has placed its government in a financial bind.Kevin Bissett/The Canadian Press
A moment of optimism
Reactors’ ability to churn out copious quantities of electricity has contributed to perceptions that their moment has finally arrived in Western Canada.
“What power utilities across North America are seeing is almost unprecedented load growth demand, and projections out to 2050 showing potentially doubling of load growth,” Mr. Harrison said.
Mr. Neudorf says three notable changes in the power conversation explain the West’s growing interest in nuclear – concern about greenhouse-gas emissions, optimism that the cost of nuclear is shrinking, and a wider realization that amid geopolitical and supply chain disruptions, “trusted partners may not be as trusted as they were before.”
While both governments remain strongly supportive of burning hydrocarbons for power – Saskatchewan recently unveiled plans to refurbish three coal-fired plants – they present nuclear as an attractive source of “baseload” power. This refers to the amount of energy required to meet an electrical grid’s minimum level of demand – say, during the middle of the night.
Baseload power indeed ranks among nuclear’s strengths.
SaskPower’s plans have gradually evolved over the past several years. It selected the BWRX-300 (an American-Japanese reactor planned for first construction in Ontario) a few years ago and identified potential sites, including in the Estevan and Elbow regions, where it might build two reactors.
EAC Capital Limited Partnership (which operates as Energy Alberta) proposes to build what would be among Canada’s largest nuclear plants near Peace River, Alta., at 4,800 megawatts. It startled some observers earlier this year by commencing an impact assessment with two federal regulators, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. It plans to commission its first reactor a decade from now, with the other units entering service in 2038, 2040 and 2043.
But in August the company asked the CNSC to suspend the impact assessment, asserting a need for additional time to consult Indigenous communities.
Chief executive officer Scott Henuset says while the “entrepreneurial attitude of Albertans” is the driving force behind the project, there are wider opportunities for Western Canada if it embraces nuclear. Alignment between the provinces and the Northwest Territories would create a more stable grid in the West, he said, which would help fuel industries such as critical minerals, mining, liquefied natural gas facilities, the oil sands and population growth in general.
“The provinces shouldn’t be fighting amongst each other, and the proponents either,” he said. “We should all be banding together to make sure that we have enough power supply in Western Canada to facilitate our lights being on at our homes and our fridges being cold, as well as industry growth and economy growth, so that we can stay competitive.”
B.C. proposes industrial electricity rules putting resource development before AI, data centres
Edmonton-based independent power producer Capital Power CPX-T (which owns a fleet of natural-gas plants across North America) announced a partnership with Ontario Power Generation nearly two years ago to explore developing small modular reactors, or SMRs, at 11 candidate sites within a 150-kilometre radius of Edmonton. Their joint reports, released earlier this year, contained only generic information, and Capital Power has barely discussed nuclear in its recent communications with investors; the company declined an interview request from The Globe and Mail to discuss its plans.
Founded in 2022, Calgary-based startup Nucleon Energy previously said it’s predeveloping two projects in Alberta (one in Bonnyville, another in the Peace River region) but has yet to apply for permits. Its CEO, Dustin Wilkes, said Nucleon is open to using a wide variety of reactors, but the company announced this year it’s exploring potential deployment of the ARC-100, a conceptual SMR from a small New Brunswick developer.
A history of window-shopping
Saskatchewan’s fascination with nuclear power is motivated in part by concerns about its uranium mining and milling sector, for which it is known internationally. The problem is that its nuclear value chain essentially stops there: It doesn’t process its own uranium for use in reactor fuel, let alone consume that fuel to generate power.
Anxieties mounted in the late 2000s when Saskatchewan lost its status as the world’s largest uranium producer. An industry-dominated group called the Uranium Development Partnership recommended the province build 3,000 megawatts of nuclear generation capacity.
Alberta, though, had its own plans. Industry accounts for roughly three-quarters of the province’s energy use. Many industrial processes need not only electricity but also steam; nuclear plants can produce both. Energy Alberta rose during this era: Established in 2005, it drew up initial plans for a Peace River plant before being purchased by Bruce Power, a dominant player in Ontario’s nuclear industry, in 2007.
Yet both governments’ ardour quickly cooled. Saskatchewan’s premier at the time, Brad Wall, acknowledged nuclear’s high costs and public opposition. In 2009, his government kiboshed Bruce Power’s proposal to build a large nuclear power plant in Saskatchewan.
That same year, Ed Stelmach, then Alberta’s premier, described nuclear power as a “viable option” but vowed no public money would be spent on it.
Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall in Saskatoon in February of 2008. His government kiboshed a Bruce Power proposal to build a large nuclear power plant in the province.GEOFF HOWE/The Canadian Press
Jason Wang, an analyst with the Pembina Institute, an energy think tank, said the lack of nuclear proposals since then is revealing.
“Any time between then and now, private entities could have said, ‘We’d like to build a project and work with the government on developing all the regulations necessary to execute that,’” he said.
“But we haven’t seen it.”
The cost conundrum
The nuclear industry’s cost disadvantage has grown since then. The only reactor constructions in North America during that period went dramatically over budget and blew past deadlines. Wind and solar generation, meanwhile, declined dramatically in price.
SMRs were intended to bridge that gap, but the promised savings haven’t materialized. Ontario Power Generation expects to pay $20.9-billion for a 1,200-megawatt station consisting of four BWRX-300s, far above optimistic estimates by SMR vendors.
The price for a 1,000-megawatt Monark, the reactor proposed for construction in Peace River, has not been disclosed. But its developer, AtkinsRéalis Group Inc. ATRL-T, has estimated a single unit might cost between $10-billion and $15-billion.
Nuclear cost estimates are famously unreliable. Mr. Wang said the Pembina Institute analyzed recent nuclear projects globally over a six-year period, and found that the average cost overrun was 125 per cent.
All considered, it’s worth asking whether Alberta and Saskatchewan can really afford nuclear plants. The Alberta government’s total operating expenses were $62-billion for the 2024-25 fiscal year – that’s for health, education, child care, social services, the legislative assembly and everything else.
As for Saskatchewan, its total revenues amounted to about $21-billion, and expenditures were slightly greater.
Mr. Harrison said Saskatchewan will only build reactors that have already been constructed elsewhere, which he expects will drive down costs and minimize risks. He expects federal financing, and pointed to Britain’s Sizewell C, priced at £38-billion or roughly $70-billion, as one nuclear project that has attracted private financing.
Proponents argue that nuclear’s large upfront costs must be weighed against alternatives over plant lifetimes. Alberta Premier Danielle Smith appears to accept that logic, asserting in late August that nuclear is “low-cost in the long run.”
Construction underway of the first new reactor at Ontario's Darlington Nuclear Generating Station. Ontario Power Generation expects to pay $20.9-billion for a 1,200-megawatt station.Supplied/Ontario Power Generation
Water, waste and waiting
In another stark contrast with alternatives, nuclear plants can easily take a decade or two to plan and construct – a drawback for jurisdictions with immediate wants and needs.
Ms. Smith is eager to attract data centres to Alberta, and casts reactors as a natural fit. Yet, Mycle Schneider Consulting’s latest report on the nuclear industry, published in September, pointed to such projects’ penchant for lengthy construction schedules and frequent delays.
“Building new nuclear plants for data centers appears incoherent,” the report concluded.
“Time horizons do not match: while data centers need power in the short term, nuclear power plants need many years to develop, plan, and build; competing solar power plants can be set up within months.”
Alberta and Saskatchewan present additional challenges for building nuclear plants. The simplest and cheapest way to cool a nuclear station is by drawing water directly from an ocean, large lake or river. Partly for this reason, Ontario’s were built on the shores of the Great Lakes, Quebec’s on the St. Lawrence River, and New Brunswick’s alongside the Bay of Fundy.
Opinion: Canada’s electricity crisis: Why national interest demands a national grid
Water is generally scarcer across swaths of Western Canada, particularly Southern Alberta. Alternative cooling methods exist, including cooling towers and evaporation ponds, and nuclear plants have been built in arid regions. But alternatives can add to cost and also consume large quantities of electricity, further eroding a plant’s economic attractiveness.
Radioactive spent fuel requires permanent disposal, and this is again tricky and expensive. Canada’s nuclear industry proposes building an underground facility known as a deep geological repository in Northern Ontario, at an estimated cost of $26-billion. It’s unclear whether plants in Western Canada would ship their spent fuel there, or the provinces would need to build their own.
For Mr. Harrison, failure is not an option; Saskatchewan has no fallback plan for achieving its long-term electricity and decarbonization targets.
“We’re committed to having nuclear being the evolution to where we go,” he said. “We’re going to work through this.”