Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Energy

BC should revisit nuclear energy to address BC Hydro shortages

Published

7 months ago

5 minute read

From Resource Works

The short-term costs of nuclear SMRs are preferable to paying hundreds of millions to import foreign energy in the long-term.

British Columbia takes great pride in its tremendous hydroelectric resources, which result from the province’s many long, powerful rivers. For decades, BC has found it easy to rely on hydroelectricity as a clean, renewable source of power for homes, industry, and businesses.

However, the ongoing viability of hydropower in BC should be called into question due to worsening summer droughts and declining snowfalls, which have negatively impacted the annual supply of hydropower. BC has not seriously entertained the possibility of alternatives, even though other provinces have begun to embrace one particular source of energy that has been illegal here for over a decade: nuclear power.

By refusing to strike down the law passed in 2010 that prohibits the mining of uranium or the building of nuclear reactors, BC has made itself an outlier among its peers. Since last year, Ontario has announced plans to expand its existing nuclear capacity, which already provides the majority of the province’s electricity.

Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia have also begun to explore the possibility of expanding nuclear power to help power their growing provinces. BC has prohibited nuclear energy since passing the Clean Energy Act of 2010, which bans the building of reactors or mining uranium.

This prohibition is a barrier to diversifying BC’s energy supply, which has become more reliant on foreign energy. Due to energy shortages, BC Hydro had to import 15 to 20 percent of the energy required to meet the province’s needs.

Do not expect the situation to improve. Snowpacks are shrinking in the winter months, and summer droughts have become more frequent, which means BC’s dams will see a reduction in their power capacity. Power shortages may be on the horizon, leading to vastly more expensive purchases of foreign energy to meet BC’s growing electricity demand, driven by the construction of new homes and projects like LNG facilities on the coast.

Energy diversification is the solution, and nuclear power should be included, especially Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).

Low-carbon and reliable, SMRs can provide steady nuclear power in any season. They are flexible and much more cost-effective than traditional, large-scale nuclear reactors.

For a vast province like BC, filled with small communities separated by mountainous terrain, SMRs can be deployed with great ease to ensure energy stability in remote and Indigenous communities that still struggle with energy access. The Haida Nation, for example, is still reliant on diesel to supply its energy, which goes against the BC government’s clean energy goals and relies on fuel being shipped to the Haida Gwaii archipelago.

While SMRs are cheaper than massive nuclear reactors, they are still expensive and require strict safety regulations due to the ever-present risks associated with nuclear energy. However, is the cost of building nuclear facilities in the short term more expensive than importing energy for years to come?

In 2023, BC Hydro spent upwards of $300 million USD on imported energy, while the cost of the smallest SMR is $50 million, with the more expensive units costing up to $3 billion. Building SMRs now is the right decision from a cost-benefit perspective and in terms of BC’s clean energy goals because SMRs guarantee low-emitting energy, unlike imported energy.

The Clean Energy Act stands in the way of nuclear power’s emergence in BC. Amending it will be necessary for that to change.

BC is not going to need any less energy going forward.

It is high time to get over old fears and stereotypes of nuclear energy. Hydroelectricity need not be displaced as the cornerstone of BC’s energy supply, but it alone cannot face the challenges of the future.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Crime / 4 hours ago

Europol takes out one of the largest pedophile networks in the world with almost 2 million users

2025 Federal Election / 4 hours ago

Highly touted policies the Liberal government didn’t actually implement

Courageous Discourse / 4 hours ago

Europe Had 127,350 Cases of Measles in 2024

Canadian Energy Centre

Saskatchewan Indigenous leaders urging need for access to natural gas

Published on April 3, 2025

By

Piapot First Nation near Regina, Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy Piapot First Nation/Facebook

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Cody Ciona and Deborah Jaremko

“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”

Indigenous communities across Canada need access to natural gas to reduce energy poverty, says a new report by Energy for a Secure Future (ESF).

It’s a serious issue that needs to be addressed, say Indigenous community and business leaders in Saskatchewan.

“We’re here today to implore upon the federal government that we need the installation of natural gas and access to natural gas so that we can have safe and reliable service,” said Guy Lonechild, CEO of the Regina-based First Nations Power Authority, on a March 11 ESF webinar.

Last year, 20 Saskatchewan communities moved a resolution at the Assembly of First Nations’ annual general assembly calling on the federal government to “immediately enhance” First Nations financial supports for “more desirable energy security measures such as natural gas for home heating.”

“We’ve been calling it heat poverty because that’s what it really is…our families are finding that they have to either choose between buying groceries or heating their home,” Chief Christine Longjohn of Sturgeon Lake First Nation said in the ESF report.

“We should be able to live comfortably within our homes. We want to be just like every other homeowner that has that choice to be able to use natural gas.”

At least 333 First Nations communities across Canada are not connected to natural gas utilities, according to the Canada Energy Regulator (CER).

ESF says that while there are many federal programs that help cover the upfront costs of accessing electricity, primarily from renewable sources, there are no comparable ones to support natural gas access.

“Most Canadian and Indigenous communities support actions to address climate change. However, the policy priority of reducing fossil fuel use has had unintended consequences,” the ESF report said.

“Recent funding support has been directed not at improving reliability or affordability of the energy, but rather at sustainability.”

Natural gas costs less than half — or even a quarter — of electricity prices in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, according to CER data.

“Natural gas is something NRCan [Natural Resources Canada] will not fund. It’s not considered a renewable for them,” said Chief Mark Fox of the Piapot First Nation, located about 50 kilometres northeast of Regina.

“Come to my nation and see how my people are living, and the struggles that they have day to day out here because of the high cost of energy, of electric heat and propane.”

According to ESF, some Indigenous communities compare the challenge of natural gas access to the multiyear effort to raise awareness and, ultimately funding, to address poor water quality and access on reserve.

“Natural gas is the new water,” Lonechild said.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

MORE OF THE SAME: Mark Carney Admits He Will Not Repeal the Liberal’s Bill C-69 – The ‘No Pipelines’ Bill

Published on April 2, 2025

By

From EnergyNow.Ca

Mark Carney on Tuesday explicitly stated the Liberals will not repeal their controversial Bill C-69, legislation that prevents new pipelines being built.

Carney has been campaigning on boosting the economy and the “need to act forcefully” against President Donald Trump and his tariffs by harvesting Canada’s wealth of natural resources — until it all fell flat around him when he admitted he actually had no intention to build pipelines at all.

When a reporter asked Carney how he plans to maintain Bill C-69 while simultaneously building infrastructure in Canada, Carney replied, “we do not plan to repeal Bill C-69.”

“What we have said, formally at a First Ministers meeting, is that we will move for projects of national interest, to remove duplication in terms of environmental assessments and other approvals, and we will follow the principle of ‘one project, one approval,’ to move forward from that.”

“What’s essential is to work at this time of crisis, to come together as a nation, all levels of government, to focus on those projects that are going to make material differences to our country, to Canadian workers, to our future.”

“The federal government is looking to lead with that, by saying we will accept provincial environmental assessments, for example clean energy projects or conventional energy projects, there’s many others that could be there.”

“We will always ensure these projects move forward in partnership with First Nations.”

Tory leader Pierre Poilievre was quick to respond to Carney’s admission that he has no intention to build new pipelines. “This Liberal law blocked BILLIONS of dollars of investment in oil & gas projects, pipelines, LNG plants, mines, and so much more — all of which would create powerful paychecks for our people,” wrote Poilievre on X.

“A fourth Liberal term will block even more and keep us reliant on the US,” he wrote, urging people to vote Conservative.

Continue Reading

Trending

X