https://twitter.com/DavidRaymondAm1/with_replies
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-electricity-coal-climate-change-1.6111369
New Brunswick can't meet 2030 deadline for coal phaseout, minister says
Mike Holland says deadline doesn't give enough time to install alternatives, like small nuclear reactors
Mike Holland says the federal government's 2030 deadline for phasing out coal doesn't give the government enough time to put in place alternatives such as small nuclear reactors.
"Give me runway so we can put these things together," Holland said. "Give me some time and we'll put these renewables and non-emitters in place."
Even some of those options remain uncertain.
The province officially submitted draft regulations to Ottawa recently as the next step in negotiating a potential deal to continue burning coal at NB Power's Belledune generating station until 2040.
The proposal would see the province use Belledune only during winter months. The province says that would allow the plant to emit the same total, cumulative volume of greenhouse gases through 2040 as it would operating full-time until 2030.
The
Government of New Brunswick has asked that Ottawa allow NB Power to
keep burning coal at its Belledune generating station until 2040. (NB Power)
There just isn't enough time to come up with new sources of power by 2030, Holland said.
"The commitment is there to meet that ultimate goal, but the trajectory needs to come in line with initiatives that we've already completed or are in the middle of.
"We're confident we can meet the target but we need that runway. We need runway."
Without a so-called equivalency agreement, NB Power would have to build a new natural gas-fired generating station, a $1.5 billion expense that would have to be passed on to ratepayers.
While natural gas is cleaner than coal, it still emits greenhouse gases, meaning a new plant would be subject to carbon pricing and other climate policies.
Anticipating new federal generating standards
Environmental researcher Louise Comeau says she expects new federal standards soon on electricity generation that would aim to "drive fossil fuels out of the electricity system" by 2035.
The Belledune dilemma isn't new, but every day that goes by without a solution, or an agreement with Ottawa, is a day closer to the plant's shutdown.
And the timeline is even more pressing in light of new, even more aggressive greenhouse gas emissions goals from the federal government.
They would require New Brunswick to get emissions from electricity generation down to a cumulative 54.2 megatonnes between 2021 to 2040.
Previously, Ottawa's modelling would have allowed a maximum of 63 megatonnes during those two decades.
The old requirement worked out to 3.15 megatonnes per year. In 2019, the most recent year with records available, emissions from electricity generation in New Brunswick were 3.3 megatonnes, down from 3.7 in 2019.
Under the regulations proposed to Ottawa, the province would cap the emissions at an average of 2.9 megatonnes a year from now until 2025, and then at annual averages of 2.8, 2.4 and 2.3 megatonnes in each five-year period after that.
Another option for making up lost generation at Belledune is small modular nuclear reactors.
But NB Power doesn't expect them to be generating as much electricity as Belledune until the mid-2030s, says Brad Coady, the executive director of business development and strategic planning at the utility.
And it's not clear there'll be a viable business case for the reactors.
"History doesn't tell us that that's how it's going to go, necessarily," says Comeau, citing the huge debt NB Power accumulated from the Point Lepreau generating station.
"We need something that's affordable and reliable, and I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I'm not convinced that's going to be the saviour for them."
Louise
Comeau a climate-policy researcher at the University of New Brunswick,
says she expects federal regulations will drive fossil fuels out of the
electricity system by 2035. (CBC)
In fact, so far NB Power's projections don't rely on any electricity from SMRs.
It is expecting to get more of the output from the Bayside natural gas generation plant in Saint John, which it bought two years ago.
Bayside will reach the end of its natural design life in 2026 unless NB Power spends $144 million to extend it into 2038, according to the utility's most recent integrated resource plan.
That's also factored into the projections, as is the time the plant would be down for its upgrade.
Another potential substitute is hydroelectric power that New Brunswick will import from Hydro-Quebec under an agreement signed last year.
The utility says in its 2020 integrated resource plan that non-emitting solar and wind power present "an interesting challenge" because it relies on weather, making it "varied and largely unpredictable."
In 2017 the province's three largest wind farms operated at less than one-third capacity during more than half the year, the report says.
Because conventional generating stations can't be easily turned on and off based on whether it's sunny or windy, "this highlights the challenges of balancing intermittent resources such as wind or solar," it says.
Holland says reducing demand for electricity is another potential piece of the puzzle.
The province has already looked at and discarded two other ideas to convert Belledune.
One would have used a new hydrogen technology, but it was revealed to be flawed. A second would have seen the plant burn byproduct gas from an iron plant that would have been the biggest greenhouse gas emitter in the province.
Canada's latest emissions-reductions goal is 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.
New Brunswick emitted 12 megatonnes of greenhouse gases in 2019, which was 38 percent below 2005 levels, exceeding reductions called for in the Paris climate agreement.
But the province's official reduction target in its climate change law is to reach 10.7 megatonnes by 2030. That's 47 per cent below 2005 levels, which would surpass the new federal target.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://twitter.com/DavidRaymondAm1/with_replies
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/questions-small-nuclear-reactors-1.5828784
Questions abound about New Brunswick's embrace of small nuclear reactors
Critics question business case, but CEO says the market is 'screaming' for the units
· CBC News · Posted: Dec 07, 2020 6:00 AM AT
The Point Lepreau nuclear plant is NB Power's most important generating station, and earns an estimated $50,000 an hour for the utility when it's operating. (Submitted by NB Power)
When Mike Holland talks about small modular nuclear reactors, he sees dollar signs.
When the Green Party hears about them, they see danger signs.
The loquacious Progressive Conservative minister of energy development recently quoted NB Power's eye-popping estimates of the potential economic impact of the reactors: thousands of jobs and a $1 billion boost to the provincial economy.
"New Brunswick is positioned to not only participate in this opportunity, but to be a world leader in the SMR field," Holland said in the legislature last month.
Green MLAs David Coon and Kevin Arseneau responded cheekily by ticking off the Financial and Consumer Services Commission's checklist on how to spot a scam.
Is the sales pitch from a credible source? Is the windfall being promised by a reputable institution? Is the risk reasonable?
For small nuclear reactors, they said, the answer to all those questions is no.
"The last thing we need to do is pour more public money down the nuclear-power drain," Coon said, reminding MLAs of the Point Lepreau refurbishment project that went $1 billion over budget.
The Greens aside, New Brunswick politicians have embraced small modular reactors, which they say can both create jobs and help solve the climate crisis.
Smaller and cheaper, supporters say
They're "small" because, depending on the design, they would generate from three to 300 megawatts of electricity, less than, for example, Point Lepreau's 660 megawatts.
It's the modular design that is
supposed to make them more affordable. Rather than being built from
scratch on site, components are to be manufactured elsewhere, sometimes
in existing factories, then shipped and assembled..
Premier Blaine Higgs is a fervent supporter, but in the last provincial election the Liberals promised they’d do even more than Higgs to promote them. (CBC)
Premier Blaine Higgs is a fervent supporter, but in the last provincial election the Liberals promised they'd do even more than Higgs to promote them.
Under Brian Gallant, the Liberals handed $10 million to two Saint John companies working on SMRs, ARC Nuclear and Moltex Energy.
Greens point to previous fiascoes
The Greens and other opponents of nuclear power fear SMRS are the latest in a long line of silver-bullet fiascoes, from the $23 million spent on the Bricklin in 1975 to $63.4 million in loans and loan guarantees to the Atcon Group a decade ago.
"It seems that [ARC and Moltex] have been targeting New Brunswick for another big handout ... because it's going to take billions of dollars to build these things, if they ever get off the drawing board," said Susan O'Donnell, a University of New Brunswick researcher.
O'Donnell, who studies technology adoption in communities, is part of a small new group called the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development formed this year to oppose SMRs.
"What we really need here is a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of it," she said.
Government touts economic spinoffs
According to the Higgs government's throne speech last month, if New Brunswick companies can secure just one per cent of the Canadian market for small reactors, the province would see $190 million in revenue.
The figures come from a study conducted for NB Power by University of Moncton economist Pierre-Marcel Desjardins.
But a four-page public summary does not include any sales projections and NB Power did not provide them to CBC News.
Opponents of nuclear power fear SMRS are the latest in a long line of silver-bullet fiascoes, from the $23 million spent on the Bricklin in 1975 to $63.4 million in loans and loan guarantees to the Atcon Group a decade ago. (CBC)
"What we didn't see was a market analysis," O'Donnell said. "How viable is the market? … They're all based on a hypothetical market that probably doesn't exist."
O'Donnell said her group asked for the full report but was told it's confidential because it contains sensitive commercial information.
Holland said he's confident there will be buyers.
"It won't be hard to find communities that will be looking for a cost effective, affordable, safe alternative to generate their electricity and do it in a way that emits zero emissions," he said.
Market 'screaming' for small reactors, CEO says
SMRs come in different sizes and while some proponents talk about using "micro" reactors to provide electricity to remote northern First Nations communities, ARC and Moltex plan larger models to sell to power utilities looking to shift away from coal and gas.
"We have utilities and customers across Canada, across the United States, across Asia and Europe saying they desperately want a technology like this," said Moltex's Saint John-based CEO for North America Rory O'Sullivan.
"The market is screaming for this product," he said, adding "all of the utilities" in Canada are interested in Moltex's reactors
'It won't be hard to find communities that will be looking
for a cost effective, affordable, safe alternative to generate their
electricity and do it in a way that emits zero emissions,' said Mike
Holland, Minister of Energy Development. (Global News/Pool)
ARC's CEO Norm Sawyer is more specific, guessing 30 per cent of his SMR sales will be in Atlantic Canada, 30 per cent in Ontario and 40 per cent in Alberta and Saskatchewan — all provincial power grids.
O'Donnell said it's an important question because without a large number of guaranteed sales, the high cost of manufacturing SMRs would make the initiative a money-loser.
The cost of building the world's only functioning SMR, in Russia, was four times what was expected.
An Australian government agency said initial cost estimates for such major projects "are often initially too low" and can "overrun."
Up-front costs can be huge
University of British Columbia physicist M.V. Ramana, who has authored studies on the economics of nuclear power, said SMRs face the same financial reality as any large-scale manufacturing.
"You're going to spend a huge amount of money on the basic fixed costs" at the outset, he said, with costs per unit becoming more viable only after more units are built and sold.
He estimates a company would have to build and sell more than 700 SMRs to break even, and said there are not enough buyers for that to happen.
But Sawyer said those estimates don't take into account technological advances.
"A lot of what's being said ... is really based on old technology," he said, estimating ARC would be viable even if it sold an amount of reactors in the low double digits.
O'Sullivan agrees.
"In fact, just the first one alone looks like it will still be economical," he said. "In reality, you probably need a few … but you're talking about one or two, maximum three [to make a profit] because you don't need these big factories."
'Paper designs' prove nothing, says expert
Ramana doesn't buy it.
"These are all companies that have been started by somebody who's been in the nuclear industry for some years, has a bright idea, finds an angel investor who's given them a few million dollars," he said.
"They have a paper design, or a Power Point design. They have not built anything. They have not tested anything. To go from that point … to a design that can actually be constructed on the field is an enormous amount of work."
Both CEOs acknowledge the skepticism about SMRs.
'The market is screaming for this product,' said Moltex’s Saint John-based CEO for North America, Rory O’Sullivan. (Brian Chisholm, CBC)
"I understand New Brunswick has had its share of good investments and its share of what we consider questionable investments," said Sawyer, who grew up in Rexton.
But he said ARC's SMR is based on a long-proven technology and is far past the on-paper design stage "so you reduce the risk."
Moltex is now completing the first phase of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's review of its design, a major hurdle. ARC completed that phase last year.
But, Ramana said there are problems with both designs. Moltex's molten salt model has had "huge technical challenges" elsewhere while ARC's sodium-cooled system has encountered "operational difficulties."
Ottawa says nuclear is needed for climate goals
The most compelling argument for looking at SMRs may be Ottawa's climate change goals.
The national climate plan requires NB Power to phase out burning coal at its Belledune generating station by 2030. It's scrambling to find a replacement source of electricity.
The Trudeau government's throne speech in October promised to "support investments in renewable energy and next-generation clean energy and technology solutions."
And federal Natural Resources Minister Seamus O'Regan told CBC earlier this year that he's "very excited" about SMRs.
"We have not seen a model where we can get to net-zero emissions by 2050 without nuclear," he said.
O'Donnell said while nuclear power doesn't emit greenhouse gases, it's hardly a clean technology because of the spent nuclear fuel waste.
Government support is key
She also wonders why, if SMRs make so much sense, ARC and Moltex are relying so much on government money rather than private capital.
Holland said "the vast majority" of funding for the two companies "has to come from private sector investments, who will be very careful to make sure they get a return on that investment."
Sawyer said ARC has three dollars for every dollar it has received from the province, and General Electric has a minority ownership stake in its U.S.-based parent company.
O'Sullivan said Moltex has attracted $5 million from a European engineering firm and $6 million from "the first-ever nuclear crowdfunding campaign."
But he said for new technologies, including nuclear power, "you need government to show policy support.
"Nuclear technology has always been developed by governments around the world. This is a very new change to have an industry come in and lead this, so private investors can't take the risk to do that on their own," he said.
So far, Ottawa hasn't put up any funding for ARC or Moltex. During the provincial election campaign, Higgs implied federal money was imminent, but there's been no announcement in the almost three months since then.
Last month the federal government announced $20 million for Terrestrial Energy, an Ontario company working on SMRs.
"We know we have the best technology pitch," O'Sullivan said. "There's others that are slightly more advanced than us, but we have the best overall proposition and we think that's going to win out at the end of the day."
But O'Donnell said her group plans to continue asking questions about SMRs.
"I
think what we really need is to have an honest conversation about what
these are so that New Brunswickers can have all the facts on the table,"
she said.
About the Author
Methinks a lot of wild turkeys would strongly disagree N'esy Pas?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/barry-winters-kris-wells-lgbtq-edmonton-hate-charges-1.4201914
We don't need SMRs.
NB Power is going to generate electricity from seawater with some good folks from Florida.
Just ask em'
— Small Modular Reactors: No Solution
There are no costs for nuke waste as it is stored on site ( the NRC has it as .1 cents a kWh) or decomm (NRC has it at .2 cents) since the core will be replaced with an SMR at end of life.
Look forward though to your costing of the coal alternative's dead and air pollution.
Methinks the 40% of the folks who don't vote should agree that you should never vote for any political party N'esy Pas?
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 21:03:06 -0400
Subject: YO Mikey Holland your latest nonsense about SMRs to these
dudes sometime
To: ccnr@web.ca, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, mike.holland@gnb.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
CCNR is a not-for-profit organization, federally incorporated in 1978.
It is dedicated to education and research on all issues related to
nuclear energy, whether civilian or military -- including non-nuclear
alternatives -- especially those pertaining to Canada.
53 Dufferin Road, Hampstead QC
H3X 2X8 Canada
Telephone: (514) 489 5118
e-mail: ccnr@web.ca
https://www.moltexenergy.com/
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 16:46:13 -0400
Subject: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within CBC and Twitter
about your latest nonsense about SMRs Then review the attachments as
you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the Yuletide season
To: "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, "michelle.conroy"
<michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:39:30 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within
CBC and Twitter about your latest nonsense about SMR then review the
attachments as you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the
Yuletide season
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for taking the time to write to us.
Due to the high volume of emails that we receive daily, please note
that there may be a delay in our response. Thank you for your
understanding.
If you are looking for current information on Coronavirus, please
visit www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
(506) 453-2144.
Thank you.
Bonjour,
Nous vous remercions d’avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
Tenant compte du volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons
quotidiennement, il se peut qu’il y ait un délai dans notre réponse.
Nous vous remercions de votre compréhension.
Si vous recherchez des informations à jour sur le coronavirus,
veuillez visiter
www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
Merci.
Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
P.O Box/C. P. 6000
Fredericton, New-Brunswick/Nouveau-Brunswick
E3B 5H1
Canada
Tel./Tel. : (506) 453-2144
Email/Courriel:
premier@gnb.ca/
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <Megan.Mitton@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:39:27 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within
CBC and Twitter about your latest nonsense about SMR then review the
attachments as you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the
Yuletide season
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for your email. This response is to assure you that your
message has been received. I'm in Fredericton and sitting in the
Legislature during the week of December 7th. I welcome and appreciate
receiving comments and questions from constituents. Due a high volume
of email received and temporarily reduced capacity in my office, there
may be a delay before I'm able to respond. Thank you for your
patience.
If this is urgent, please feel free to call: (506) 457-6842
For media requests, please call : 506-429-2285
Thank you once again for contacting me.
-----
Merci pour votre courriel. Cette réponse a pour but de vous assurer
que votre message a bien été reçu. Je suis à Fredericton et je siège à
l'Assemblée législative pendant la semaine du 7 décembre. Je suis
heureuse de recevoir les commentaires et les questions de mes
concitoyens. En raison du volume élevé de courriels reçus et de la
capacité temporairement réduite de mon bureau, il se peut qu'il y ait
un délai avant que je puisse répondre. Je vous remercie de votre
patience.
Si c'est urgent, n'hésitez pas à nous appeler : (506) 457-6842
Pour les demandes des médias, veuillez appeler le : 506-429-2285
Je vous remercie encore une fois de m'avoir contacté.
Megan Mitton
Députée / Member of the Legislative Assembly of NB
Memramcook-Tantramar
Megan.Mitton@gnb.ca
Riding Office / Bureau de circonscription: (506) 378-1565
Office / Bureau - Fredericton: (506) 457-6842
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/chretien-nuclear-waste-project-1.5971996
Former prime minister Jean Chrétien part of secretive project to store nuclear waste in Labrador, emails show
Chrétien defends project, saying Canada, as supplier of uranium, has responsibility to dispose of it
· CBC News · Posted: Apr 01, 2021 4:00 AM ET
In an interview with Radio-Canada's Enquête, former prime minister Jean Chrétien defended the project to store nuclear waste in Labrador, saying Canada has been a top seller of uranium and has a responsibility to help dispose of it. (Jacques Taschereau/Radio-Canada)
As borders closed and lockdowns hit last spring, a group of entrepreneurs and lawyers had something else on their minds: setting up a facility in Labrador for international nuclear waste.
Plans they had for a meeting in April 2020 with partners in Japan were foiled by pandemic-related health restrictions.
The meeting was to bring together former U.S. government nuclear adviser Tim Frazier, Montreal business executive Albert Barbusci, as well as influential figures in Japan's nuclear and public relations industries.
Emails drafted in 2019 and 2020, obtained by Radio-Canada's Enquête investigative program, reveal they were going to discuss a secretive project to bury nuclear waste from foreign countries in Labrador.
Former prime minister Jean Chrétien was a player in the initiative. Another backer of the plan highlighted Chrétien's ties to the current Liberal government and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Chrétien has acted as counsel for the project's promoters, who are clients of his law firm, Dentons.
In a letter Chrétien wrote in summer 2019 to an executive at a major Japanese public relations agency, Hisafumi Koga, he argues in favour of storing other countries' nuclear waste in Canada and said he will help move the project forward.
WATCH | Canada has responsibility to clean up nuclear waste, Chrétien says:
![](https://thumbnails.cbc.ca/maven_legacy/thumbnails/82/47/CHRETIEN-FOR-ONLINE-1_7000kbps_1280x720_1880207939812.jpg?crop=1.777xh:h;*,*&downsize=510px:* 510w")
Former
prime minister Jean Chrétien says Canada has a responsibility to help
clean up nuclear waste because it made money selling uranium used to
produce nuclear energy. 'We have some responsibility, I believe, and if
we can help, we should,' he said in an interview with the Radio-Canada
investigative program Enquête. 2:25
"Canada has been the top supplier of nuclear fuel for many years, and I have always thought that it is only proper that Canada should ultimately become the steward and guarantor of the safe storage of spent nuclear fuel after its first duty cycle," Chrétien wrote.
"I will arrange and participate in discussions in Canada, its provinces, and potential partner countries to move the concept of a deep repository in Northeastern Canada forward."
Experts puzzled by secrecy
But some nuclear energy experts, who spoke to Enquête after reviewing the emails, question the safety of such a project and raise concerns around the lack of government involvement, and secrecy surrounding it.
"I must say I was really stunned that there is a small group of very high-profile representatives … that are coming together to form this conspiracy," said Mycle Schneider, an international consultant on nuclear energy based in Paris.
Schneider, whose expertise is sought after around the world, said this type of project should be led by governments, not industrialists.
"We are not talking about building a garage somewhere," he said.
Mycle
Schneider, a Paris-based nuclear energy consultant, says he was stunned
by the project's covert nature. (Mathieu Hagnery/CBC)
"We're talking about a highly complex project that no country in the world has so far successfully implemented and, you know, storing radioactive material."
Schneider also takes issue with the group's explicit wishes to keep their plans covert, considering "the dangers of the substances involved."
The group wants to bury the imported nuclear waste in what is known as a "deep geological repository" or DGR.
The site is similar to a mine hundreds of metres deep to permanently isolate highly radioactive waste, according to Ian Clark, a professor in the University of Ottawa's Department of Earth Sciences.
"A deep geological repository is really like a mine with a shaft or a hole down to a depth of maybe 500 meters, maybe 1,000 meters with galleries or drifts which give space to actually store nuclear waste," Clark explained.
Similar sites exist in Finland and Sweden, and scientists generally agree it is a safe way to dispose of used nuclear fuel.
Plans put on hold
The plan for the waste facility in Labrador was put on hold by the pandemic and it's unclear what will happen next. Barbusci, a promoter of the project, said there is nothing to talk about.
Reacting to Radio-Canada's reporting Thursday, Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey said Chrétien had mentioned the idea of storing nuclear waste in Labrador to him when he was running for leader of the provincial Liberals last year.
"It was very brief. It was a suggestion of economic opportunity through nuclear waste — in burying nuclear waste for the province. I said 'that's not on,'" Furey said.
Furey said to his knowledge, no one in his government's administration has had any formal discussions on nuclear waste storage and that his view on it was that there is "zero possibility" of it happening.
Canada's Nuclear Waste Management Organization has for years tried to build a DGR to bury waste from Canadian nuclear power plants, including in Ontario.
But the emails show this project is different, focusing instead on working with other nations to store their waste — starting with Japan — something that hasn't been done before, according to Schneider.
"And there are good reasons," he said. "This is extremely radioactive material. From a meter away, if spent fuel is not protected, it would deliver a lethal dose to a human being within a minute."
Chrétien said in his 2019 letter that "the dry granite rock of Labrador would be ideal" to build a DGR.
Clark, the University of Ottawa professor, agrees the region's geology makes it possible to find "good candidate sites if somebody wanted to embark on an economic venture to store nuclear waste from Japan."
The island of Japan, on the other hand, is more prone to earthquakes and fracturing, making it "not an ideal place to find a nuclear waste site."
Ontario
has been looking into creating nuclear waste storage sites, known as
'deep geological repositories' for years. (Sam Kingsley/Getty Images)
Clark said what Ontario has learned in its search for DGR sites, though, is that if you don't include local governments and populations early on in the process, "you're doomed for failure."
Months after Chrétien's letter to the Japanese PR executive, Hisafumi Koga's response in September 2019 illustrates the secretive nature of the discussions.
"As the success of the project hinges on the cooperation of all stakeholders, utmost care needs to be taken to keep the information from leaking," Hisafumi Koga wrote, accepting Chrétien's invitation for a meeting in Canada.
"I understand that I'm attending as a private person," Koga said.
Takuya Hattori, who held senior positions at Tepco, the company involved in the Fukushima nuclear accident, was also to be part of the trip, according to the emails.
Koga and Hattori did not respond to Radio-Canada's emails requesting comment.
Emails reveal project may be years in the making
When Radio-Canada reached out to Albert Barbusci, the Montreal entrepreneur promoting the project, and to Chrétien, both appeared to minimize its importance, as well as their involvement.
Barbusci cut short
Radio-Canada's questioning, saying Chrétien's involvement had been
limited to a 20-minute conversation and that the DGR discussions didn't
yet constitute a project. The correspondences obtained by Enquête paint a different picture.
Chrétien
says Labrador's dry granite rock and lack of seismic activity makes it a
safe place to store nuclear waste. (Radio-Canada)
A June 2020 email from Barbusci refers to a "smooth transition" after former Newfoundland and Labrador premier Dwight Ball's resignation, which took effect in August.
"As you may already know, Premier Ball has announced that he will be stepping down and a new leader will be named on August 3rd. That said, we plan to stay connected with Premier Ball so the transition is expected to be smooth," Barbusci wrote.
Four years ago, Ball's chief of staff, Greg Mercer, was found to have failed to report his previous lobbying activities on time. Some of his lobbying involved the company at the heart of the group's nuclear storage project, Terravault.
Frazier, the former U.S. nuclear adviser and another key player in the project, is one of Terravault's major shareholders. He refused to speak with Radio-Canada.
Mercer was found at the time to have been more than a year late declaring his lobbying activities with Terravault before working for Ball.
Ball also said Thursday Chrétien mentioned the idea of a DGR in Labrador to him.
"My response to him was swift to say, as the premier my government is not interested in entering into any discussions with your clients on this issue," reads Ball's statement.
Barbusci said he wasn't aware of the lobbying incident and that it precedes his involvement in the DGR project. He also said the location for the site wasn't yet decided.
Chrétien minimizes his role
As for the former prime minister, Chrétien said in February, when Radio-Canada first reached out about the group's plans, that it all seemed vague and distant.
"I was consulted but I don't know where they're at. I didn't even know there were Japanese people involved in that," Chrétien said.
This was before Radio-Canada called back last week, informing him it had the letter he wrote to Koga in 2019. He then agreed to do a sit-down interview with Enquête's Marie-Maude Denis at his home in Ottawa.
WATCH | Chrétien says he has no special access to PM Trudeau:
As borders closed and lockdowns hit last spring, a group of entrepreneurs and lawyers had something else on their minds: setting up a facility in Labrador for international nuclear waste.
Plans they had for a meeting in April 2020 with partners in Japan were foiled by pandemic-related health restrictions.
The meeting was to bring together former U.S. government nuclear adviser Tim Frazier, Montreal business executive Albert Barbusci, as well as influential figures in Japan's nuclear and public relations industries.
Emails drafted in 2019 and 2020, obtained by Radio-Canada's Enquête investigative program, reveal they were going to discuss a secretive project to bury nuclear waste from foreign countries in Labrador.
Former prime minister Jean Chrétien was a player in the initiative. Another backer of the plan highlighted Chrétien's ties to the current Liberal government and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Chrétien has acted as counsel for the project's promoters, who are clients of his law firm, Dentons.
In a letter Chrétien wrote in summer 2019 to an executive at a major Japanese public relations agency, Hisafumi Koga, he argues in favour of storing other countries' nuclear waste in Canada and said he will help move the project forward.
WATCH | Canada has responsibility to clean up nuclear waste, Chrétien says:
Former
prime minister Jean Chrétien says he is not interested in being a
lobbyist and does not have special access to Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau as some have alleged. 'I am a former leader of the party, but
Mr. Trudeau is the head of the government. I am not his trusted
adviser,' he told the Radio-Canada investigative program Enquête. 0:51
In the interview, Chrétien defended the project, repeating his belief that Canada has a responsibility to store used nuclear material. Chrétien maintains that he is simply acting out his duty as a lawyer and agreed to sign the 2019 letter when asked by colleagues at his firm.
"We made money selling uranium so we should help to solve the problem that the countries who bought our uranium are facing with that," he said, adding that he believes atomic energy is one of the solutions to combating climate change.
Chrétien maintains that he has no influence on Trudeau's decisions, despite an email to the group of stakeholders from a Dentons lawyer, Terry Didus, calling him a "trusted adviser."
"Good news: Liberals back!" said the email, sent soon after Trudeau's 2019 re-election.
"Better news: Jean [Chrétien] has now been 'appointed' by Justin Trudeau as his 'trusted advisor.' … In essence, Jean will be privy to all major policy decisions going forward."
In the Radio-Canada interview, Chrétien appeared frustrated by Didus's email and insisted he did not lobby for the project.
"I'm not his trusted advisor," he said, adding he'd only met Trudeau a few times. "I don't want to be a lobbyist. I told you that."
When Denis asked whether his influence could open doors for the project, Chrétien said, "No. I can open the door for you. It can get you out."
Translated by CBC Montreal's Verity Stevenson
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/nuclear-waste-reaction-1.5972883
'Zero possibility' of nuclear waste stored in Labrador, says Furey
Nunatsiavut government 'surprised' to learn about project through media
CBC News · Posted: Apr 01, 2021 4:48 PM NT
Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey says his government has not been involved in discussions on a project that would see nuclear waste stored in Labrador. (Radio-Canada)
There is no possibility of the government of Newfoundland and Labrador approving a secretive project that would see nuclear waste stored in Labrador, says Premier Andrew Furey, while the Nunatsiavut government said it is not aware of any proposed project.
"Zero possibility," Furey said Thursday, in reaction to the story from Radio-Canada's Enquête investigative program.
Emails drafted in 2019 and 2020, obtained by Radio-Canada's Enquête, reveal a group of business executives and former prime minister Jean Chrétien have been discussing a secretive project to bury nuclear waste from foreign countries in Labrador, with Chrétien saying that, as a supplier of uranium, Canada has a responsibility to safely dispose of it.
Furey said his government has never had any formal discussion about the proposal, which would see that waste stored in Labrador, nor has he seen any applications.
However, Furey said it was mentioned during a discussion with Chrétien in 2020, when Furey was running for leadership of the provincial Liberals. It was a 15-minute discussion, Furey said, in which Chrétien offered him advice on political life and public service, and mentioned the project.
That plan is not on for Newfoundland and Labrador.
- Premier Andrew Furey
"It was very brief. It was a suggestion of economic opportunity through nuclear waste — in burying nuclear waste for the province. I said 'that's not on,'" Furey said.
Emails in June 2020 discussed a "smooth transition" following the resignation of then premier Dwight Ball, outlining plans to keep in touch with Ball and stay connected.
Furey said to his knowledge, no one in his government's administration has had any formal discussions on nuclear waste storage.
"I don't have any knowledge about what happened before me, but I can tell you this, and tell the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, and frankly the people of the world: that plan is not on for Newfoundland and Labrador."
In a statement Thursday afternoon, Ball confirmed he had a "brief discussion" in which Chrétien asked for his opinion on the project.
"My response to him was swift to say, as the premier my government is not interested in entering into any discussions with your clients on this issue," reads Ball's statement. "I have had no further discussion on this matter."
Governments 'have a legal duty to consult'
News of the secretive plans also came as a surprise for the Nunatsiavut government.
"The Nunatsiavut government is not aware of any proposed plans to dispose nuclear waste in Labrador, and was surprised to learn of it through the media," reads a statement issued by Nunatsiavut on Thursday.
"The constitutionally protected Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement clearly defines Inuit rights and titles within Nunatsiavut. Under the agreement, the provincial and federal governments have a legal duty to consult with the Nunatsiavut government."
The statement added that Nunatsiavut is gathering more information and will be getting in touch with the provincial and federal governments before releasing anything further.
Torngat Mountains MHA Lela Evans said there have been previous discussions about nuclear storage in Labrador, but said the level of secrecy of this latest story isn't a total shock.
Four years ago, she noted, Ball's chief of staff, Greg Mercer, was found to have failed to report his previous lobbying activities on time. Some of his lobbying involved the company at the heart of the group's nuclear storage project, Terravault.
"There's so much secrecy. Back in 2017, people couldn't find much detail, it was all very secretive, hush hush, with ties to the provincial Liberal party," Evans said.
"Now it's being revealed again and it's all very secretive. There's no consultation with the people of Labrador and it reminds us of the old colonialism type of government."
Evans said projects in Labrador can't be approved without consultation with the people who live there.
"What we're asking for is a voice. The Labrador people need to be consulted, and this level of secrecy and having it revealed again is really insulting to the Labrador people," she said.
"I don't think there's any support in Labrador to actually be a waste disposal site for radioactive material."
Lela Evans, the Progressive Conservative MHA for Torngat Mountains, says the secrecy of the project is not a surprise. (CBC)
Lake Melville MHA Perry Trimper said this isn't the first time there's been interest expressed in storing nuclear waste in Labrador.
About eight years ago, he was approached by a company interested in a similar development.
"My position then, and still is now, is that if such a project were to ever proceed or advance in any way, it really would need the complete support of the Indigenous governments, and based on some of the locations they were looking at at that time, it was most relevant for the Nunatsiavut government," Trimper said, adding that he doesn't know if the same company that asked him about it years ago is the same group named in the story published Thursday.
"While there may be economic opportunities here, one really needs to think about ethically, and of course from an environmental perspective, if this is something you'd want to entertain."
Perry Trimper, Independent MHA for Lake Melville, says any project would need the support of Indigenous governments. (CBC)
In response to comments from Chrétien that Canada has a responsibility to store waste from the uranium it produces, Trimper argued that that onus should then be on whichever region produces the product to find a way to safely store or dispose of it.
"If a jurisdiction has had an opportunity to gain economically through the provision of uranium and/or nuclear energy, I feel that same jurisdiction … really should be responsible for handling the waste it produces at that location," he said.
"I think we really need to think going forward, because we certainly haven't in the past, about the consequences of industrial economic activity."
Regardless of possible economic benefits or fees that could be garnered from the project, it's not something that can move forward without support from the region's Indigenous peoples.
"That's the first step. You don't go any further until you have secured that," he said.
"They're looking for solid rock formations that you can go deep underground and take full advantage of the Canadian shield. Labrador has a variety of interesting geology to it so [that is] some of the attraction, but that said, I would suggest that the proponents not go too much further until they talk to the Nunatsiavut government and Innu Nation about what their plans are."
Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador
With files from Patrick Butler and Matt McCann
Fernand Robichaud
Jump to navigation Jump to search | This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) |
Fernand Robichaud | |
|---|---|
| Senator for New Brunswick | |
| In office September 22, 1997 – December 2, 2014 | |
| Appointed by | Jean Chrétien |
| Personal details | |
| Born | December 2, 1939 Shippagan, New Brunswick, Canada |
| Political party | Liberal (until 2014) Independent Liberal (2014-present) |
Fernand Robichaud, PC (born December 2, 1939) is a Canadian politician.
He was born in Shippagan, New Brunswick and received a teaching certificate from the Moncton Technical Institute. Before entering politics, Robichaud was a teacher and businessman. He served on the municipal council for Saint-Louis-de-Kent from 1971 to 1974.
Robichaud was first elected to the House of Commons of Canada in the 1984 election representing the riding of Westmorland—Kent, New Brunswick.
In the 1988 election, he was re-elected representing Beauséjour.
In 1990, he resigned his seat in order to allow newly elected Liberal leader Jean Chrétien to enter the House of Commons through a by-election.
Robichaud served as Special Assistant to the Leader of the Opposition until returning to the House in the 1993 election. With the election of Chrétien as Prime Minister, Robichaud became Secretary of State for Parliamentary Affairs. In 1994, he was appointed Secretary of State for Agriculture and Agri-Food, Fisheries, and Oceans.
Robichaud did not run in the 1997 election and was appointed on Chrétien's recommendation to the Senate of Canada on September 23, 1997.
From 2001 to 2004, he was deputy government leader in the Senate. He later served as vice-chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.
On January 29, 2014, Liberal Party leader Justin Trudeau announced all Liberal Senators, including Robichaud, were removed from the Liberal caucus, and would continue sitting as Independents.[1] The Senators referred to themselves as the Senate Liberal Caucus even though they were no longer members of the parliamentary Liberal caucus.[2]
He retired from the Senate on December 2, 2014 upon reaching the mandatory retirement age of 75.
Beauséjour riding (formerly known as Beauséjour—Petitcodiac) is a federal electoral district in southeastern New Brunswick, Canada, which has been represented in the House of Commons of Canada since 1988. It replaced Westmorland—Kent, which was represented from 1968 to 1988.
Beauséjour is largely Acadian and Francophone, with a significant Anglophone section in the southern section of the riding.
The riding consists of most of Westmorland County to the east and north of Moncton; and almost all of Kent County. Major towns in the riding include Shediac, Cap-Pelé, Sackville, Bouctouche and Richibucto. The neighbouring ridings are Miramichi—Grand Lake, Fundy Royal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, and Cumberland—Colchester in Nova Scotia; it is connected to the riding of Malpeque on Prince Edward Island by the Confederation Bridge.
Election results
Beauséjour
2019 general election
2015 general election
2011 general election
2008 general election
2006 general election
2004 general election
Beauséjour—Petitcodiac, 1997–2003
Change for Progressive Conservative candidate Angela Vautour are based on the party's results in 1997. She personally received 6.88% fewer votes based on her results as an NDP candidate. Change for the Canadian Alliance for 1997 are based on the results of its predecessor, the Reform Party.
Beauséjour, 1987–1997
All changes are from the 1990 by-election, with the exception of the Progressive Conservative Party, who did not field a candidate.
| 2019 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | Expenditures | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 24,948 | 46.47 | −22.54 | $83,393.36 | ||
|
|
Green | Laura Reinsborough | 14,305 | 26.65 | +22.16 | $74,321.26 | ||
|
|
Conservative | Vincent Cormier | 9,438 | 17.58 | +6.21 | $39,043.98 | ||
|
|
New Democratic | Jean-Marc Bélanger | 3,940 | 7.34 | −7.79 | none listed | ||
|
|
People's | Nancy Mercier | 1,054 | 1.96 | New | $6,338.64 | ||
| Total valid votes/Expense limit | 53,685 | 100.0 | $101,392.80 | |||||
| Total rejected ballots | 475 | 0.88 | +0.28 | |||||
| Turnout | 54,160 | 77.99 | −2.49 | |||||
| Eligible voters | 69,444 | |||||||
|
|
Liberal hold | Swing | −22.35 | |||||
| Source: Elections Canada[3][4] | ||||||||
| 2015 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | Expenditures | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 36,534 | 69.02 | +28.33 | $77,614.48 | ||
|
|
New Democratic | Hélène Boudreau | 8,009 | 15.13 | –8.30 | $24,161.02 | ||
|
|
Conservative | Ann Bastarache | 6,017 | 11.37 | –20.35 | – | ||
|
|
Green | Kevin King | 2,376 | 4.49 | +0.32 | $1,009.07 | ||
| Total valid votes/Expense limit | 52,936 | 99.40 | $200,494.19 | |||||
| Total rejected ballots | 320 | 0.60 | ||||||
| Turnout | 53,256 | 80.48 | ||||||
| Eligible voters | 66,170 | |||||||
|
|
Liberal notional hold | Swing | +18.31 | |||||
| Source: Elections Canada[5][6] | ||||||||
| 2011 federal election redistributed results[7] | ||||||||
| Party | Vote | % | ||||||
| Liberal | 18,507 | 40.69 | ||||||
| Conservative | 14,425 | 31.71 | ||||||
| New Democratic | 10,655 | 23.43 | ||||||
| Green | 1,896 | 4.17 | ||||||
| 2011 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | Expenditures | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 17,399 | 39.08 | -7.68 | $60,854.20 | ||
|
|
Conservative | Evelyn Chapman | 14,811 | 33.27 | +4.12 | $75,052.19 | ||
|
|
New Democratic | Susan Levi-Peters | 10,397 | 23.35 | +6.47 | $13,825.57 | ||
|
|
Green | Natalie Arsenault | 1,913 | 4.30 | -2.89 | $0.00 | ||
| Total valid votes/Expense limit | 44,520 | 100.0 | $84,184.30 | |||||
| Total rejected, unmarked and declined ballots | 534 | 1.19 | -0.16 | |||||
| Turnout | 45,054 | 71.21 | +1.96 | |||||
| Eligible voters | 63,267 | |||||||
|
|
Liberal hold | Swing | -5.90 | |||||
| Sources:[8][9] | ||||||||
| 2008 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | Expenditures | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 20,059 | 46.76 | -0.95 | $56,379.70 | ||
|
|
Conservative | Omer Léger | 12,506 | 29.15 | -3.03 | $54,871.67 | ||
|
|
New Democratic | Chris Durrant | 7,242 | 16.88 | +0.13 | $7,113.77 | ||
|
|
Green | Mike Milligan | 3,087 | 7.19 | +4.79 | $1,748.46 | ||
| Total valid votes/Expense limit | 42,894 | 100.0 | $81,263 | |||||
| Total rejected, unmarked and declined ballots | 586 | 1.35 | +0.15 | |||||
| Turnout | 43,480 | 69.25 | -5.97 | |||||
| Eligible voters | 62,790 | |||||||
|
|
Liberal hold | Swing | +1.04 | |||||
| 2006 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | Expenditures | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 22,012 | 47.55 | -5.73 | $58,009.11 | ||
|
|
Conservative | Omer Léger | 14,919 | 32.23 | +4.04 | $54,029.29 | ||
|
|
New Democratic | Neil Gardner | 7,717 | 16.67 | +1.96 | $10,068.80 | ||
|
|
Green | Anna Girouard | 1,290 | 2.79 | -1.03 | $1,869.49 | ||
|
|
Independent | Frank Comeau | 357 | 0.77 | – | $460.29 | ||
| Total valid votes/Expense limit | 46,295 | 100.0 | $75,255 | |||||
| Total rejected, unmarked and declined ballots | 561 | 1.20 | -0.50 | |||||
| Turnout | 46,856 | 75.22 | +8.62 | |||||
| Eligible voters | 62,291 | |||||||
|
|
Liberal hold | Swing | -4.88 | |||||
| 2004 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | Expenditures | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 21,934 | 53.28 | +0.59 | $51,654.26 | ||
|
|
Conservative | Angela Vautour | 11,604 | 28.19 | -11.64 | $51,129.02 | ||
|
|
New Democratic | Omer Bourque | 6,056 | 14.71 | +7.24 | $7,476.46 | ||
|
|
Green | Anna Girouard | 1,574 | 3.82 | – | $1,201.17 | ||
| Total valid votes/Expense limit | 41,168 | 100.0 | $73,195 | |||||
| Total rejected, unmarked and declined ballots | 712 | 1.70 | ||||||
| Turnout | 41,880 | 68.29 | -2.28 | |||||
| Eligible voters | 61,327 | |||||||
|
|
Liberal notional hold | Swing | +6.12 | |||||
| Changes from 2000 are based on redistributed results. Conservative Party change is based on the combination of Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative Party totals. | ||||||||
| 2000 federal election redistributed results | ||||||||
| Party | Vote | % | ||||||
| Liberal | 21,533 | 52.69 | ||||||
| Progressive Conservative | 12,663 | 30.98 | ||||||
| Alliance | 3,616 | 8.85 | ||||||
| New Democratic | 3,053 | 7.47 | ||||||
| Others | 5 | 0.01 | ||||||
| 2000 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | ||||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 21,465 | 47.10 | +12.27 | |||
|
|
Progressive Conservative | Angela Vautour | 14,631 | 32.11 | +16.11 | |||
|
|
Alliance | Tom Taylor | 6,256 | 13.73 | +3.55 | |||
|
|
New Democratic | Inka Milewski | 3,217 | 7.06 | -31.93 | |||
| Total valid votes | 45,569 | 100.00 | ||||||
| 1997 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | ||||
|
|
New Democratic | Angela Vautour | 18,504 | 38.99 | +33.25 | |||
|
|
Liberal | Dominic LeBlanc | 16,529 | 34.83 | -41.20 | |||
|
|
Progressive Conservative | Ian Hamilton | 7,592 | 16.00 | +0.78 | |||
|
|
Reform | Raymond Braun | 4,833 | 10.18 |
| |||
| Total valid votes | 47,458 | 100.00 | ||||||
| 1993 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | ||||
|
|
Liberal | Fernand Robichaud | 29,830 | 76.03 | +24.58 | |||
|
|
Progressive Conservative | Ian Hamilton | 5,970 | 15.22 | -12.02 | |||
|
|
New Democratic | David Bailie | 2,253 | 5.74 | -31.62 | |||
|
|
National | James Bannister | 738 | 1.88 |
| |||
|
|
Christian Heritage | Mae Boudreau-Pedersen | 445 | 1.13 | +0.28 | |||
| Total valid votes | 39,236 | 100.00 | ||||||
| Canadian federal by-election, 10 December 1990 | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ±% | ||||
| On the resignation of Fernand Robichaud, 24 September 1990 | ||||||||
|
|
Liberal | Jean Chrétien | 17,332 | 51.45 | -7.16 | |||
|
|
New Democratic | Guy Cormier | 12,587 | 37.36 | +27.12 | |||
|
|
Confederation of Regions | Margie Bowes-Legood | 2,789 | 8.28 | +4.37 | |||
|
|
Independent | Alonzo LeBlanc | 450 | 1.34 |
| |||
|
|
Christian Heritage | Mae Boudreau-Pedersen | 286 | 0.85 |
| |||
|
|
Rhinoceros | Bryan Gold | 246 | 0.73 |
| |||
| Total valid votes | 33,690 | 100.00 | ||||||
| 1988 Canadian federal election | ||||||||
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |||||
|
| Liberal | Fernand Robichaud | 22,650 | 58.61 | ||||
|
| Progressive Conservative | Omer Léger | 10,525 | 27.24 | ||||
|
| New Democratic | Lyman Dean | 3,958 | 10.24 | ||||
|
| Confederation of Regions | Russell Bowes | 1,511 | 3.91 | ||||
| Total valid votes | 38,644 | 100.00 | ||||||
Westmorla—Kent, 1966–1987
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Former U.S. regulator questions small nuclear reactor technology
Business case for small reactors 'doesn't fly,' says expert on nuclear waste
Allison Macfarlane, director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia, says she has a lot of unanswered questions about molten-salt technology. (University of British Columbia)
A former head of the United States' nuclear regulator is raising questions about the molten-salt technology that would be used in one model of proposed New Brunswick-made nuclear reactors.
The technology pitched by Saint John's Moltex Energy is key to its business case because, the company argues, it would reuse some of the nuclear waste from Point Lepreau and lower the long-term cost and radioactivity of storing the remainder.
But Allison Macfarlane, the former chairperson of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and a specialist in the storage of nuclear waste, said no one has yet proven that it's possible or viable to reprocess nuclear waste and lower the cost and risks of storage.
"Nobody knows what the numbers are, and anybody who gives you numbers is selling you a bridge to nowhere because they don't know," said Macfarlane, now the director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia.
"Nobody's really doing this right now. … Nobody has ever set up a molten salt reactor and used it to produce electricity."
Macfarlane said she couldn't comment specifically on Moltex, calling information about the company's technology "very vague."
But she said the general selling point for molten-salt technology is dubious.
"Nobody's been able to answer my questions yet on what all these wastes are and how much of them there are, and how heat-producing they are and what their compositions are," she said.
"My sense is that all of these reactor folks have not really paid a lot of attention to the back end of these fuel cycles," she said, referring to the long-term risks and costs of securely storing nuclear waste.
The Point Lepreau nuclear plant is NB Power's most important generating station, and earns an estimated $50,000 an hour for the utility when it's operating. (CBC)
Moltex is one of two Saint John-based companies pitching small nuclear reactors as the next step for nuclear power in the province and as a non-carbon-dioxide emitting alternative to fossil fuel electricity generation.
Moltex North America CEO Rory O'Sullivan said the company's technology will allow it to affordably extract the most radioactive parts of the existing nuclear waste from the Point Lepreau Generating Station.
The waste is now stored in pellet form in silos near the plant and is inspected regularly.
The process would remove less than one per cent of the material to fuel the Moltex reactor and O'Sullivan said that would make the remainder less radioactive for a much shorter amount of time.
Existing plans for nuclear waste in Canada are to store it in an eventual permanent repository deep underground, where it would be secure for the hundreds of thousands of years it remained radioactive.
Reduced storage time and expense
O'Sullivan said extracting and removing the most radioactive parts would reduce the needed storage time to only hundreds of years, and therefore lower the long-term expense.
"The vast majority will have decayed within a couple of hundred years back down to regular natural levels," he said in an interview.
Estimates for storing what's called intermediate radioactive material are from a hundred to a thousandfold cheaper, he said.
"It's very different in cost, complexity, depth underground. … That's obviously a very big, very appealing factor."
There is no permanent repository for storing spent nuclear fuel deep underground. The Nuclear Waste Management Organization, a national agency, is looking at two sites in Ontario but there's been no decision on a location.
Shorter-term radioactivity complicates storage
Macfarlane said a shorter-term radioactivity life for waste would actually complicate its storage underground because it might lead to a facility that has to be funded and secured rather than sealed up and abandoned.
"That means that you believe that the institutions that exist to keep monitoring that ... will exist for hundreds of years, and I think that is a ridiculous assumption," she said.
"I'm looking at the United States, I'm seeing institutions crumbling in a matter of a few years. I have no faith that institutions can last that long and that there will be streams of money to maintain the safety and security of these facilities. That's why you will need a deep geologic repository for this material."
My response is: prove it.
- Allison Macfarlane, nuclear waste expert
And she said that's assuming the technology will successfully extract all of the most radioactive material.
"They are assuming that they remove one hundred per cent of the difficult, radionuclides, the difficult isotopes, that complicate the waste," she said.
"My response is: prove it. Because if you leave five per cent, you have high-level waste that you're going to be dealing with. If you leave one per cent, you're going to have high-level waste that you're going to be dealing with. So sorry, that one doesn't fly with me."
Macfarlane, a geologist by training, raised doubts about molten-salt technology and waste issues in a 2018 paper she co-authored for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. In the U.S., she questioned plans for a long-term nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev.
'Baffled' by environmental backlash
A New Brunswick group opposed to small modular reactors, or SMRs, the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development, has been pointing to her research as another reason to doubt their viability.
O'Sullivan said he is "personally very baffled and frustrated" by opposition to SMRs by anti-nuclear activists.
He said such activists have long complained about nuclear waste as a key concern "and we think we've finally got a solution that's cost effective to deal with it, and we're still getting this backlash. … We're environmentalists and we have this backlash."
ARC Nuclear, the other Saint John-based company working on SMRs, also plans to use some existing nuclear waste in its reactor design.
The company said in a statement Thursday that its technology "has successfully been demonstrated, therefore proven, at the engineering scale," but no one was available for an interview.
Nuclear power essential to reduced emissions
NB Power has predicted the creation of thousands of job and a $1 billion boost to the provincial economy if SMRs are built here. The utility did not respond to a request for comment on Moltex's plan for Point Lepreau's nuclear waste.
The previous Liberal government handed Moltex and ARC a total of $10 million to support their research and development.
The federal government said nuclear power is essential to Canada reducing its emissions but has not provided funding to the two Saint John companies.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
https://sppga.ubc.ca/profile/allison-macfarlane/
Allison M. Macfarlane
Areas of Expertise
Education
Ph.D., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1992
Thesis title: The relationship among metamorphism, deformation and
plutonism in the Langtang region, central Nepal Himalaya. National
Science Foundation Fellowship, 1988-1991.
B.Sc., University of Rochester, Summa Cum Laude, 1986
Highest Distinction in Geology.
Thesis title: A strontium and neodymium isotopic study of the volcanic rocks of Bermuda.
About
Dr. Allison M. Macfarlane is currently Professor and Director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs within the Faculty of Arts at UBC. Dr. Macfarlane has held both academic and government positions in the field of energy and environmental policy, especially nuclear policy. Most recently, she directed the Institute for International Science and Technology Policy at the George Washington University. She recently held a fellowship at the Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC and was Fulbright Distinguished Chair in Applied Public Policy at Flinders University and Carnegie Mellon Adelaide in Australia.
The first geologist (and the third woman) to chair the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 2012-2014, Dr. Macfarlane holds a doctorate in earth science from MIT and a bachelor’s of science from the University of Rochester. She has held fellowships at Radcliffe College, MIT, Stanford, and Harvard Universities, and she has been on the faculty at Georgia Tech in Earth Science and International Affairs, at George Mason University in Environmental Science and Policy, and in the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University.
From 2010 to 2012, Dr. Macfarlane served on the White House Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, created by the Obama Administration to recommend a new national policy on high-level nuclear waste. She has also served on National Academy of Sciences panels on nuclear energy and nuclear weapons issues, and she chaired the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, the group that sets the Bulletin’s famous “doomsday clock.” In 2006, MIT Press published a book she co-edited, Uncertainty Underground: Yucca Mountain and the Nation’s High-Level Nuclear Waste. Dr. Macfarlane has published extensively in Science, Nature, Environmental Science and Technology, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, and other journals.
Research
Dr. Macfarlane’s research has focused on technical, social, and policy aspects of nuclear energy production and nuclear waste management and disposal as well as regulation, nuclear nonproliferation, and energy policy. As Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, she pushed for a more open dialogue with the public, for greater engagement with international nuclear regulators and, following the Fukushima accident, for stricter safety protocols at U.S. nuclear reactors. She also advocated for a more family-friendly workplace. She has spoken on a wide range of topics, from women and science to nuclear policy and regulatory politics
https://experts.news.ubc.ca/expert/allison-macfarlane/
Last updated: March 11, 2021 @9:31 am
Allison Macfarlane, PhD
nuclear energy, nuclear waste disposal, nuclear regulation, proliferation of nuclear weapons
Twitter/ allisonmacfar
https://nbmediacoop.org/2020/09/22/no-business-case-for-new-nuclear-reactors-in-new-brunswick/
No business case for new nuclear reactors in New Brunswick
Nuclear energy more expensive than renewable energy
The nuclear industry is pushing small reactors because large reactors are simply not economical. Constructing nuclear plants is just too expensive—as Ontario’s government found out after its call in 2008 for bids to build two more reactors at the Darlington site. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. reportedly bid $26 billion for two 1200-megawatt CANDU reactors and the province abandoned its nuclear plans.
Since then, the business case for nuclear power has become much worse as the cost of renewables has fallen dramatically.
Nuclear energy more expensive than renewable energy
Last November, the Wall Street advisory firm Lazard reported that the average construction costs of solar photovoltaics and onshore wind turbines in the United States—one of the largest renewable energy markets in the world—are $1,000 and $1,300 per kilowatt of generation capacity respectively, down from $1,750 per kilowatt for either technology in 2013. During this period, the cost of building a new nuclear reactor rose from $6,792 to $9,550 per kilowatt.
Lazard also reports rapid decreases in the costs of batteries and other storage technologies, which would be needed to deal with the intermittent nature of wind and solar energy once these become a much larger component of our electricity supply.
Solar backed with battery storage has been breaking cost records. As costs of batteries decline further, it may even be possible to transition to obtain all electricity from renewable energy and phase out nuclear energy and fossil fuels altogether.
Can small nuclear reactors change this picture?
As their name suggests, SMRs produce small amounts of electricity compared to current reactors. But their price tag will not be small. The reason is simple: the cost of building and operating a reactor is not proportional to the power generated, because a reactor generating thrice as much electricity as a smaller plant does not need thrice as much concrete or three times as many operators.
Therefore, small reactors will be more expensive to build and operate per unit of power than large reactors, and their electricity will have to be priced higher. There is historical evidence for this: many small reactors built in the early decades of nuclear power shut down early because their electricity was too expensive for the market or consumers.
No market for small nuclear reactors
Nuclear proponents argue that they can compensate for the loss of economies of scale by factory manufacturing and through learning. Again, history indicates otherwise.
Both the United States and France, the countries with the highest numbers of nuclear plants, found that costs went up, not down, as they built more reactors and discovered newer safety risks. Even if we optimistically assume that there are cost reductions, small reactors have to be manufactured by the thousands just to become competitive with large nuclear plants, let alone other sources of power. Who is going to buy so many reactors?
SMR proponents claim that they can be deployed in Canada at small and remote communities and mines that are not connected to the electric grid. But the electricity demands of these mines and remote communities are too limited and the cost of electricity from SMRs will be too expensive for these to offer a viable energy alternative. Indeed, the hypothetical market offered by these would not even justify building a factory.
Lack of a market can prove critical. Take the case of Westinghouse, the company that has directly or indirectly designed the majority of the world’s nuclear reactors. After pursuing a small reactor design for over a decade, the company abandoned that effort in 2014. Its CEO explained: “The problem I have with SMRs is not the technology, it’s not the deployment—it’s that there’s no customers.”
Radioactive waste and other problems
There are other problems with SMRs. All nuclear reactors, whether large or small, produce multiple kinds of radioactive nuclear waste, an inevitable accompaniment to the fission process that produces the energy that these reactors convert into electricity. Different reactors vary in the amounts and kinds of radioactive wastes they produce.
The SMR designs being proposed for construction in New Brunswick, a molten salt reactor design and a fast neutron reactor design, will produce varieties of wastes that have technical characteristics that make them very difficult to manage.
If building nuclear reactors is unwise, pouring public money into these is worse because it will not result in any widespread economic benefit. Nuclear power in general is not a good job creator. According to one widely cited study, solar energy leads to six times as many jobs as nuclear power for each gigawatt-hour of electricity generated. Because solar power plants are far cheaper to build and maintain than nuclear reactors, the number of jobs created per dollar of investment will be even lower in nuclear power.
Small reactors also suffer from the usual problems associated with nuclear power: the risk of severe accidents, and the potential for nuclear weapons proliferation. Indeed, they might make some of them worse. The bottom line: investing in SMRs is not likely to be a successful business proposition, and is not the opportunity for New Brunswick or Canada that advocates claim.
M. V. Ramana is the Simons Chair in Disarmament, Global and Human Security and Director of the Liu Institute for Global Issues at the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Columbia and a Scholar at the Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies during 2020. He is the author of The Power of Promise: Examining Nuclear Energy in India, and a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials, the Canadian Pugwash Group, the Global Council of Abolition 2000 and the team that produces the annual World Nuclear Industry Status Report.
A version of this article was previously published in the Brunswick News dailies: Telegraph Journal, Fredericton Daily Gleaner and the Moncton Times & Transcript.
https://sppga.ubc.ca/profile/m-v-ramana/
M. V. Ramana
Areas of Expertise
Education
Ph.D., Boston University
M. V. Ramana is Professor and Simons Chair in Disarmament, Global and Human Security at the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs (SPPGA), University of British Columbia. He is also Director of the Liu Institute for Global Issues and the Acting Director (2020-2021) of the Centre for India and South Asia Research (CISAR) in the Institute of Asian Research. He is a Scholar at the Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies.
His research interests are in the broad areas of international security and energy supply, with a particular focus on topics related to nuclear energy and fissile materials that can be used to make nuclear weapons. He combines technical skills and interdisciplinary methods to address policy relevant questions related to security and energy issues.
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 21:03:06 -0400
Subject: YO Mikey Holland your latest nonsense about SMRs to these
dudes sometime
To: ccnr@web.ca, "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, mike.holland@gnb.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
CCNR is a not-for-profit organization, federally incorporated in 1978.
It is dedicated to education and research on all issues related to
nuclear energy, whether civilian or military -- including non-nuclear
alternatives -- especially those pertaining to Canada.
53 Dufferin Road, Hampstead QC
H3X 2X8 Canada
Telephone: (514) 489 5118
e-mail: ccnr@web.ca
https://www.moltexenergy.com/
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 16:46:13 -0400
Subject: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within CBC and Twitter
about your latest nonsense about SMRs Then review the attachments as
you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the Yuletide season
To: "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, "michelle.conroy"
<michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Higgs, Premier Blaine (PO/CPM)" <Blaine.Higgs@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:39:30 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within
CBC and Twitter about your latest nonsense about SMR then review the
attachments as you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the
Yuletide season
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for taking the time to write to us.
Due to the high volume of emails that we receive daily, please note
that there may be a delay in our response. Thank you for your
understanding.
If you are looking for current information on Coronavirus, please
visit www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
If this is a Media Request, please contact the Premier’s office at
(506) 453-2144.
Thank you.
Bonjour,
Nous vous remercions d’avoir pris le temps de nous écrire.
Tenant compte du volume élevé de courriels que nous recevons
quotidiennement, il se peut qu’il y ait un délai dans notre réponse.
Nous vous remercions de votre compréhension.
Si vous recherchez des informations à jour sur le coronavirus,
veuillez visiter
www.gnb.ca/coronavirus<http://
S’il s’agit d’une demande des médias, veuillez communiquer avec le
Cabinet du premier ministre au 506-453-2144.
Merci.
Office of the Premier/Cabinet du premier ministre
P.O Box/C. P. 6000
Fredericton, New-Brunswick/Nouveau-Brunswick
E3B 5H1
Canada
Tel./Tel. : (506) 453-2144
Email/Courriel:
premier@gnb.ca/
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Mitton, Megan (LEG)" <Megan.Mitton@gnb.ca>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:39:27 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within
CBC and Twitter about your latest nonsense about SMR then review the
attachments as you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the
Yuletide season
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for your email. This response is to assure you that your
message has been received. I'm in Fredericton and sitting in the
Legislature during the week of December 7th. I welcome and appreciate
receiving comments and questions from constituents. Due a high volume
of email received and temporarily reduced capacity in my office, there
may be a delay before I'm able to respond. Thank you for your
patience.
If this is urgent, please feel free to call: (506) 457-6842
For media requests, please call : 506-429-2285
Thank you once again for contacting me.
-----
Merci pour votre courriel. Cette réponse a pour but de vous assurer
que votre message a bien été reçu. Je suis à Fredericton et je siège à
l'Assemblée législative pendant la semaine du 7 décembre. Je suis
heureuse de recevoir les commentaires et les questions de mes
concitoyens. En raison du volume élevé de courriels reçus et de la
capacité temporairement réduite de mon bureau, il se peut qu'il y ait
un délai avant que je puisse répondre. Je vous remercie de votre
patience.
Si c'est urgent, n'hésitez pas à nous appeler : (506) 457-6842
Pour les demandes des médias, veuillez appeler le : 506-429-2285
Je vous remercie encore une fois de m'avoir contacté.
Megan Mitton
Députée / Member of the Legislative Assembly of NB
Memramcook-Tantramar
Megan.Mitton@gnb.ca
Riding Office / Bureau de circonscription: (506) 378-1565
Office / Bureau - Fredericton: (506) 457-6842
---------- Original message ----------
From: Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:37:54 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within
CBC and Twitter about your latest nonsense about SMR then review the
attachments as you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the
Yuletide season
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for contacting me. This automated response is to assure you
that your message has been received. I welcome comments and questions
from constituents.
Due to COVID-19, my constituency and hill offices are closed to
walk-ins and in-person appointments. We continue to provide services
to constituents via email and by phone.
I receive a much larger volume of correspondence (postal and email)
than the average MP. All emails are reviewed on a regular basis,
however due to the high volume of emails my office receives, I may not
be able to respond personally to each one.
My constituents in Saanich-Gulf Islands are my highest priority. If
you are a constituent, please email
elizabeth.may.c1a@parl.gc.ca<mailto:elizabeth.may.C1A@parl.
help me serve you better, please ensure that your email includes your
full name and street address with your postal code. You may also call
my constituency office at 250-657-2000.
If you are not a constituent, please contact your MP’s office for
assistance. You can enter your postal code
here<https://www.ourcommons.
represents you.
If you require details on the resources available to Canadians
regarding COVID-19, please visit my
website<http://elizabethmaymp.
You may also visit my colleague Paul Manly’s
website.<https://www.
Or, please read below for more information.
Thank you once again for contacting me.
Elizabeth May, O.C.
Member of Parliament
Saanich - Gulf Islands
Parliamentary Leader of the Green Party of Canada
----------------------------------------
Coronavirus General Information & Resources
· Government of Canada COVID-19
information<https://www.
– Updates, travel advisories, prevention and risk, Canada’s response
· B.C. Centre for Disease
Control<http://www.bccdc.ca/
– Information about the virus, community resources, self-isolation and
testing
· World Health
Organization<https://www.who.
– Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak
· City of
Victoria<https://www.victoria.
– COVID-19 information
· Municipality of
Saanich<https://www.saanich.
– COVID-19 information
· Town of
Sidney<http://www.sidney.ca/
– Information about novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)
· Capital Regional District
(CRD)<https://www.crd.bc.ca/
COVID-19 information
· Island Health<https://www.
– Coronavirus information (COVID-19)
· BC Covid-19 Self-assessment tool<https://bc.thrive.health/>
· B.C. COVID-19 Provincial Support and
Information<https://www2.gov.
o Please contact Adam Olsen’s
office<https://
regarding provincial measures
Hotlines
· Government of Canada COVID-19 Information – 1-833-784-4397
· B.C. Health Information – 8-1-1
· If you are in quarantine and are seeking to waive the one-week
EI sickness benefits waiting period – 1-833-381-2725 or via
teletypewriter (TTY) at 1-800-529-3742
· Emergency and travel assistance for Canadians abroad –
1-613-996-8855 or
sos@international.gc.ca<mailto:sos@international.gc.ca>
· Labour Program – 1-800-641-4049 (toll-free) or via
teletypewriter (TTY) at 1-800-926-9105
· Canada Emergency Response Benefit – 1-800-959-2041 or 1-800-959-2019
Government Response
· Canada’s COVID-19 Economic Response Plan: Support for
Canadians and Businesses<https://www.canada.
· Government press releases<https://pm.gc.ca/en>
Green Party of Canada Response
· Green Party of Canada press
releases<https://www.
Canada Emergency Response
Benefit<https://www.canada.ca/
· If you are not eligible for Employment Insurance
· Creation of the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) (up
to $10 billion)
o Originally this was going to be two separate benefits: The
Emergency Care Benefit and the Emergency Support Benefit — have been
combined for simplification purposes
· Benefit provides $2000 per month for the next 4 months to
workers who have lost all employment income because of COVID-19
· Online portal opened April 6, and people can receive money
within 10 days of applying by mail, or 3-5 days of applying via direct
deposit
· Who is a “worker” under CERB program? A worker is defined as a
person who is at least 15 years of age, is a resident in Canada and
who in 2019 (or in the 12 months before applying) had an income of at
least $5,000 from (a) employment (b) self-employment (c) certain EI
benefits
o CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION ON
ELIGIBILITY<https://www.
· Canadians will be able to apply for CERB through CRA
MyAccount<https://www.canada.
or My Service Canada
Account<https://www.canada.ca/
or by calling 1-800-959-2041 or 1-800-959-2019
Employment Insurance
· Employment Insurance (EI) sickness benefits can provide you
with up to 15 weeks of financial assistance if you cannot work for
medical reasons
· You could receive 55% of your earnings up to a maximum of $573 a week
· Some employers provide their own paid sick leave or short-term
disability plan. Before you apply for EI sickness benefits, check with
your employer to find out if they have a plan in place
· The one-week waiting period for EI sickness benefits will be
waived for new claimants who are quarantined so they can be paid for
the first week of their claim
· Priority EI application processing for EI sickness claims for
clients under quarantine
· People claiming EI sickness benefits due to quarantine will
not have to provide a medical certificate
· People who cannot complete their claim for EI sickness
benefits due to quarantine may apply later and have their EI claim
backdated to cover the period of delay
· If you are in quarantine and are seeking to waive the one-week
EI sickness benefits waiting period:
o Call this hotline: 1-833-381-2725 (toll-free)
o Or via teletypewriter (TTY): 1-800-529-3742
· EI Sickness
Benefits<https://www.canada.
— please visit to determine if you qualify/and to apply for EI
sickness benefits
· Specific COVID-19 information re:
EI<https://www.canada.ca/en/
International Travel Information
· Financial help for Canadians outside of Canada affected by
COVID-19<https://travel.gc.ca/
· Pandemic COVID-19 all countries: avoid non-essential travel
outside Canada<https://travel.gc.ca/
· Government of Canada Official Global Travel Advisory
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Travel
advice<https://travel.gc.ca/
Information for Businesses
· Letter from Elizabeth May: Resources for the Business
Community<http://
· Temporary Wage Subsidy – Helping Businesses Keep their
Workers<https://www.canada.ca/
o The government recently announced that the wage subsidy for
eligible businesses will be raised to up to 75%, to be backdated to
March 15
· Work-Sharing
Program<https://www.canada.ca/
– Temporary special measures for the downturn in business due to
COVID-19 and for the forestry and steel and aluminum sector
· Supporting Canadian Businesses Through the Canada
Account<https://www.canada.ca/
· Flexibility for Businesses Filing
Taxes<https://www.canada.ca/
· Business Credit Availability Program
(BCAP)<https://www.canada.ca/
– Ensuring Businesses Have Access to Credit Supporting Financial
Market Liquidity
· Canadian Federation of Independent
Business<https://www.cfib-
Coronavirus and small business: keeping you and your employees safe
· Business Development Bank of
Canada<https://www.bdc.ca/en/
· Small Business
BC:<https://smallbusinessbc.
COVID-19 Resources for Small Businesses
· BC Economic Development
Association:<https://bceda.ca/
· YYJ Locals for Locals:<https://www.
Group of community-minded tech and marketing professionals offering
pro-bono assistance to local small businesses, restaurants, and bars
in Victoria, B.C.
· Douglas
Magazine:<https://
A Victoria-based magazine with resources, advice, and information for
small- and medium-sized businesses
· Tiny Victoria Small Business Relief
Fund<https://docs.google.com/
Tech company Tiny is offering small, 0% non-recourse loans to
Victoria-based small businesses
Refugees, Temporary Foreign Workers, International Students, Permanent
Resident Applicants
· UNHCR Canada: Key Information for Asylum
Seekers<https://www.unhcr.ca/
· How COVID-19 is affecting business at Immigration, Refugees
and Citizenship Canada
(IRCC)<https://www.canada.ca/
Seniors and Pensioners
· If you are a senior or pensioner, the money you receive from
the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) or Old Age Security (OAS) does not count
as employment income, and you may be eligible for the Canada Emergency
Response Benefit (CERB)
· If you are struggling to apply for the Canada Emergency
Response Benefit (CERB) online, please call either 1-800-959-2041 or
1-800-959-2019
· The government reduced the required minimum withdrawals from
Registered Retirement Income Funds
(RRIFs)<https://www.canada.ca/
by 25 per cent for 2020
Students
· If you are a student who planned to have a full-time job over
the summer, and now cannot due to COVID-19, you are not eligible for
the CERB
· More information will be announced soon regarding what
government resources are available for students
· All student loan borrowers will automatically have their loan
repayments and interest suspended until September 30, 2020 – federally
and in B.C.
· Lighthouse Labs COVID-19 Scholarship
Fund:<https://www.
offering scholarships for full- and part-time courses to teach people
how to code
Farmers
· Farm Credit Canada lending capacity increases by $5B to
alleviate industry financial
pressure<https://www.fcc-fac.
---------- Original message ----------
From: Nathalie Sturgeon <sturgeon.nathalie@
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 12:37:55 -0800
Subject: Out of the office Re: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about
within CBC and Twitter about your latest nonsense about SMR then
review the attachments as you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu
over the Yuletide season
To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Thank you for your message.
I am currently out of the office and not responding to emails at this time.
All the best,
Nathalie
--
*Nathalie Sturgeon *
Reporter, Telegraph-Journal | Brunswick News Inc.
------------------------------
Mobile: 506-466-8150
sturgeon.nathalie@
https://tj.news
------------------------------
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 16:37:48 -0400
Subject: YO Mikey Holland Check my input about within CBC and Twitter
about your latest nonsense about SMR then review the attachments as
you scroll down to enjoy a little Dea Vu over the Yuletide season
To: dalmar@nbnet.nb.ca, wharrison <wharrison@nbpower.com>, "Holland,
Mike (LEG)" <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca>,
"Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)" <Kevin.A.Arseneau@gnb.ca>, "Mitton, Megan
(LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "elizabeth.may"
<elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca>, "jeff.carr" <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>, oldmaison
<oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, COCMoncton
<COCMoncton@gmail.com>, markandcaroline <markandcaroline@gmail.com>,
"terry.seguin" <terry.seguin@cbc.ca>, "Robert. Jones"
<Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, "David.Akin" <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>,
"steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, "Mark.Blakely"
<Mark.Blakely@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "martin.gaudet"
<martin.gaudet@fredericton.ca>, "charles.murray"
<charles.murray@gnb.ca>, jesse <jesse@viafoura.com>,
Chuck.Thompson@cbc.ca, jesse@jessebrown.ca, darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "blaine.higgs"
<blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>, Nathalie
Sturgeon <sturgeon.nathalie@
https://twitter.com/
David Raymond Amos
@DavidRaymondAm1
Replying to@DavidRayAmos @alllibertynews and 48 others
Methinks the Greens should not be surprised to see the nonsense begin
again right where the Gallant government left off immediately after
Higgy gets his majority N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.
#cdnpoli #nbpoli
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Questions abound about New Brunswick's embrace of small nuclear reactors
Critics question business case, but CEO says the market is 'screaming'
for the units
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Dec 07, 2020 6:00 AM AT
131 Comments
David Amos
Methinks folks should check the work of the Canadian Nuclear
Laboratories N'esy Pas?
David Amos
"The loquacious Progressive Conservative minister of energy development" ???
Methinks a lot of wild turkeys would strongly disagree N'esy Pas?
David Amos
Methinks Minister Mikey would have to admit that I crossed paths with
the same characters he has within the "Coalition for Responsible
Energy Development" since I first ran for public office in NB in 2004
N'esy Pas?
Ray Oliver
Reply to @David Amos: You run in some pretty prestigious circles..
David Amos
Reply to @Ray Oliver: Go Figure
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
David Amos
Methinks the Greens should not be surprised to see the nonsense begin
again right where the Gallant government left off immediately after
Higgy gets his majority N'esy Pas?
https://media.viafoura.net/
Barry Winters
Reply to @David Amos: Wee Davey Amos! Long time no see pal.
David Amos
Reply to @Barry Winters: Methinks the rumours of your demise have been
greatly exaggerated N'esy Pas?
David Amos
Reply to @Barry Winters: Methinks byway of your latest ID you Feds
must have figured out why I asked if you knew who Deputy Dog's lawyer
was N'esy Pas?
https://media.viafoura.net/
Barry Winters
Reply to @David Amos: Indeed shrugging off this mortal coil was nary
the preferred endeavour
https://media.viafoura.net/
Barry Winters
Reply to @David Amos: So how’s it going pal? Where’s that 11 million?
David Amos
Reply to @Barry Winters:
"I have found that I have a true passion for cybersecurity. Whether I
am cracking CTF challenges, pranking my friends, or learning to
develop interesting security tools, I find that I am constantly
working towards my goal of achieving a career helping to protect
people and companies from the dangers of the internet"
https://media.viafoura.net/
Barry Winters
Reply to @David Amos: Lots of great programmes on that one if you
catch my drift...
https://media.viafoura.net/
Barry Winters
Reply to @David Amos: Basically what you’re saying is it’s been
Frankie X all along?
David Amos
Reply to @Barry Winters: Methinks if they watched Deputy Dog's funeral
yesterday all your Fed friends would have to agree that Franny is far
more clever than you are N'esy Pas?
David Amos
Content disabled
Reply to @Barry Winters: Methinks folks who did not check my work in
Federal Court years ago should go figure how dumb you Feds truly are
today N'esy Pas?
Professor hopeful hate-crime charge will deter others, despite death of accused
'Of course, it’s tragic when anyone passes away and very said, I
think, in this case,' LGBTQ advocate says
CBC News · Posted: Jul 12, 2017 3:45 PM MT
"A rare hate-crimes court case in Edmonton is over but the
complainants may not have the kind of closure they were hoping for.
The man charged with wilful promotion of hatred for offensive language
he used on his blog, The Baconfat Papers, died of a stroke July 4, one
of the complainants confirmed Wednesday.
The Edmonton police hate crimes unit charged Barry Winters this spring
after receiving complaints about his blog from LGBTQ advocates"
Ben Haroldson
" Market 'screaming' for small reactors, CEO says " . I'd like a
further explanation on exactly what that means.. What market? The one
that sells the reactors?
Fred Brewer
Reply to @Ben Haroldson: And apparently they cannot show us this
screaming market because it is "commercially sensitive". I call BS on
that. They cannot show it because it does not exist.
Stephanie Haslam
Reply to @Fred Brewer: That has been the way of New Brunswick
governments . What is the Latin for secrecy, secrecy, and yet more
secrecy, because that should be the new motto. We are left to watch
the lobbyist registry, the public accounts and to make educated
guesses on what is being done. One case in point is the move to have a
Center of Excellence for Energy affiliated with the EECD, of all
departments. Was it discussed with the public? No. It was discovered
on the GNB website, in the employment section. My MLA, who is the
education minister, has still not answered an email questioning the
move. That makes it clear that there are some shenanigans going on,
because he is usually very prompt to respond.
David Amos
Reply to @Fred Brewer: Methinks its truly amazing how often that I
happen to agree with you but you will never know it N'esy Pas?
David Amos
Reply to @Stephanie Haslam: Veritas Vincit
Ben Haroldson
I thought power came from salt water. Stick to turkey hunting. How'd
those 2 portfolios ever get merged anyway?
David Amos
Reply to @Ben Haroldson: Methinks Higgy will never explain as to whom
he picks for ministers and why N'esy Pas?
---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 11:25:08 -0400
Subject: Fwd: Perhaps Mr Lyman and i should talk?
To: dalmar@nbnet.nb.ca, wharrison <wharrison@nbpower.com>, "Holland,
Mike (LEG)" <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, "David.Coon" <David.Coon@gnb.ca>,
"Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)" <Kevin.A.Arseneau@gnb.ca>, "Mitton, Megan
(LEG)" <megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "elizabeth.may"
<elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca>, "jeff.carr" <jeff.carr@gnb.ca>, oldmaison
<oldmaison@yahoo.com>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, COCMoncton
<COCMoncton@gmail.com>, markandcaroline <markandcaroline@gmail.com>
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 10:57:41 -0400
Subject: Perhaps Mr Lyman and i should talk?
To: ELyman@ucsusa.org
Cc: David Amos <david.raymond.amos@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 10:44:25 -0400
Subject: Fwd: YO Mikey Holland So Says the EUB So Say You All? RE
Matter 430 - NB Power 2019-2020 General Rate Application
To: enegin@ucsusa.org
Cc: "terry.seguin" <terry.seguin@cbc.ca>, "Robert. Jones"
<Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, "David.Akin" <David.Akin@globalnews.ca>,
"steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>
https://www.ucsusa.org/about/
Elliott Negin
Global Security, Nuclear Power
Director of News and Commentary
202-331-5439
enegin@ucsusa.org
https://www.nbpower.com/media/
https://www2.gnb.ca/content/
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Saint John environmentalist walks back opposition to nuclear power
As 2nd reactor is proposed for Point Lepreau, Gordon Dalzell says
nuclear power can fight climate change
https://www.cbc.ca/news/
Reactor developers propose a manufacturing hub — and a small nuclear plant
Moltex Energy and ARC Nuclear each claim thousands of new jobs
possible in New Brunswick
Connell Smith · CBC News · Posted: Mar 21, 2019 5:00 AM AT
30 Comments
David R. Amos
Methinks NB Power's mandate is to provide us with enough electricity
to meet our needs rather than venture into questionable business
schemes dreamt up by their overpaid Yankee vice president Brett
Plummer.
That said my hero Mr Tesla proved long ago that lots of power could be
sourced from fast moving water I have not seen a better plan since
particularly since we have lots of water. Why our government want to
spend big bucks to take down the Musquash Dam instead of putting it
back on line with modern generators etc is very strange in deed N'esy
Pas?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2019 10:16:51 -0400
Subject: YO Mikey Holland So Says the EUB So Say You All? RE Matter
430 - NB Power 2019-2020 General Rate Application
To: "blaine.higgs" <blaine.higgs@gnb.ca>, premier <premier@gnb.ca>,
"Holland, Mike (LEG)" <mike.holland@gnb.ca>, "David.Coon"
<David.Coon@gnb.ca>, "kris.austin" <kris.austin@gnb.ca>, "Robert.
Jones" <Robert.Jones@cbc.ca>, "robert.gauvin" <robert.gauvin@gnb.ca>,
"denis.landry2" <denis.landry2@gnb.ca>, "brian.gallant"
<brian.gallant@gnb.ca>, oldmaison <oldmaison@yahoo.com>,
"steve.murphy" <steve.murphy@ctv.ca>, "David.Akin"
<David.Akin@globalnews.ca>, "andrea.anderson-mason"
<andrea.anderson-mason@gnb.ca>, "hugh.flemming"
<hugh.flemming@gnb.ca>, "robert.mckee" <robert.mckee@gnb.ca>,
"Brenda.Lucki" <Brenda.Lucki@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>, "hon.ralph.goodale"
<hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca>, "Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc"
<Hon.Dominic.LeBlanc@canada.ca>, "Bill.Morneau"
<Bill.Morneau@canada.ca>, "Jody.Wilson-Raybould"
<Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.
<Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca>, Newsroom <Newsroom@globeandmail.com>,
newsn <news@kingscorecord.com>, news <news@dailygleaner.com>, news919
<news919@rogers.com>, news <news@hilltimes.com>, "maxime.bernier"
<maxime.bernier@parl.gc.ca>, "andrew.scheer"
<andrew.scheer@parl.gc.ca>, "Alaina.Lockhart"
<Alaina.Lockhart@parl.gc.ca>, "Karen.Ludwig"
<Karen.Ludwig@parl.gc.ca>, "martine.turcotte"
<martine.turcotte@bell.ca>, "Matt.DeCourcey"
<Matt.DeCourcey@parl.gc.ca>, andre <andre@jafaust.com>, jbosnitch
<jbosnitch@gmail.com>, "Arseneau, Kevin (LEG)"
<kevin.a.arseneau@gnb.ca>, "Mitton, Megan (LEG)"
<megan.mitton@gnb.ca>, "rick.desaulniers" <rick.desaulniers@gnb.ca>,
"michelle.conroy" <michelle.conroy@gnb.ca>
Cc: motomaniac333 <motomaniac333@gmail.com>, "Diane.Lebouthillier"
<Diane.Lebouthillier@cra-arc.
<Diane.Lebouthillier@parl.gc.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Mitchell, Kathleen" <Kathleen.Mitchell@nbeub.ca>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2019 16:15:36 +0000
Subject: Matter 430 - NB Power 2019-2020 General Rate Application /
Instance Nº 430 - Énergie NB Demande générale de tarifs pour 2019-2020
To: "David.Raymond.Amos333@gmail.
<David.Raymond.Amos333@gmail.
<david.sollows@gnb.ca>, "Paul.Volpe@enbridge.com"
<Paul.Volpe@enbridge.com>, "dave.lavigne@enbridge.com"
<dave.lavigne@enbridge.com>, "Gilles.volpe@enbridge.com"
<Gilles.volpe@enbridge.com>, "jeffery.callaghan@
<jeffery.callaghan@
<gerald@kissnb.com>, "cstewart@stewartmckelvey.com"
<cstewart@stewartmckelvey.com>, "hanrahan.dion@jdirving.com"
<hanrahan.dion@jdirving.com>, "lcozzarini@nbpower.com"
<lcozzarini@nbpower.com>, "jfurey@nbpower.com" <jfurey@nbpower.com>,
"SWaycott@nbpower.com" <SWaycott@nbpower.com>,
"NBPRegulatory@nbpower.com" <NBPRegulatory@nbpower.com>,
"wharrison@nbpower.com" <wharrison@nbpower.com>,
"bcrawford@nbpower.com" <bcrawford@nbpower.com>, "Lawton, John"
<John.Lawton@nbeub.ca>, "Desmond, Ellen" <ecdesmond@nbeub.ca>,
"Dickie, Michael" <Michael.Dickie@nbeub.ca>, "Young, Dave"
<Dave.Young@nbeub.ca>, "Mitchell, Kathleen"
<Kathleen.Mitchell@nbeub.ca>, NBEUB/CESPNB <General@nbeub.ca>,
"heather.black@gnb.ca" <heather.black@gnb.ca>, "rdk@indecon.com"
<rdk@indecon.com>, "rrichard@nb.aibn.com" <rrichard@nb.aibn.com>,
"jeff.garrett@sjenergy.com" <jeff.garrett@sjenergy.com>,
"dan.dionne@perth-andover.com" <dan.dionne@perth-andover.com>,
"pierreroy@edmundston.ca" <pierreroy@edmundston.ca>,
"ray.robinson@sjenergy.com" <ray.robinson@sjenergy.com>,
"sstoll@airdberlis.com" <sstoll@airdberlis.com>,
"pzarnett@bdrenergy.com" <pzarnett@bdrenergy.com>
Good afternoon,
Please find attached a Decision in connection with the above-noted matter.
Bonjour,
Veuillez trouver ci-joint une Décision de la Commission dans le cadre
de l'instance susmentionnée.
Kathleen Mitchell
Chief Clerk | Greffière en chef
Energy & Utilities Board | Commission de l'énergie et des services
publics du N.-B.
15 Market Square, Suite 1400
Saint John, NB E2L 4Y9
506-643-7324 (direct)
506-658-2504 (reception)
Confidentiality Notice
This private message (and any attachments) is for the exclusive use of
the individual for whom, or entity for which, it is intended. It may
contain information that is privileged, confidential or exempt from
disclosure by law. Its author does not waive the protection afforded
to it under applicable law. Disclosure to anyone other than the
intended recipient does not constitute waiver of privilege. Its
possession or usage, by any person other than the one for whom it is
intended, is not authorized by its author and is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately, at our expense, by telephone at (506) 658-2504. Also, if
you received this email in error, delete it and any attachments from
your computer system and records. Thank you.
Avis de confidentialité
Ce message privé (et toutes les pièces jointes) est à l'usage exclusif
de la personne pour laquelle ou entité pour laquelle, il est destiné.
Il peut contenir des informations qui sont personnelles,
confidentielles ou exemptées de la divulgation par la loi. Son auteur
ne renonce pas à la protection accordée en vertu de la loi applicable.
Sa divulgation à toute personne autre que son destinataire ne
constitue pas une renonciation de privilège. Sa possession ou
l'utilisation, par une personne autre que celle pour laquelle il est
destiné, n'est pas autorisée par son auteur et est strictement
interdite. Si vous recevez cette communication par erreur, veuillez
nous appeler dans les plus brefs délais, à frais virés, au (506)
658-2504. Aussi, si vous avez reçu ce courriel par erreur, veuillez
effacer ce courriel, ainsi que les pièces jointes, de votre système
informatique et de vos dossiers. Merci.
Moltex, NB Power and ARC Canada sign MOU to collaborate on nuclear development
Saint John, New Brunswick (Tuesday, November 17, 2020) – Moltex Energy today signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with NB Power and ARC Canada to work collaboratively to find synergies by establishing a small modular reactor vendor cluster in New Brunswick.
“This MOU formalizes and strengthens the existing relationship between us, NB Power and ARC Nuclear,” said Rory O’Sullivan, Chief Executive Officer, North America, Moltex Energy. “We look forward to continuing to seek opportunities to collaborate in the interest of advancing the nuclear industry in New Brunswick. We are committed to developing solutions to fight climate change, spur economic development, and improve the lives of New Brunswickers.”
According to the MOU, the parties will assess working together on communications initiatives; shared technology education and trades initiatives; supply chain development activities; and common research and development activities.
In July 2018, Moltex and ARC Canada were selected by NB Power and the Government of New Brunswick from among 90 applicants to develop their reactor technologies in New Brunswick, with the goal of commercial operation as early as 2030.
Moltex is developing a 300 MW reactor that is fueled by recycled nuclear waste, contributing to clean energy targets and reducing legacy waste. In tandem, it is developing energy storage technology so its reactor can be used as a 900 MW peaking plant, to complement intermittent renewable energy sources.
Media contact:
Erin Polka
Director of Communications
Moltex Energy
erinpolka@moltexenergy.com
About Moltex:
Moltex is a privately held company striving to solve the world’s most critical challenge: providing sufficient clean, reliable and affordable energy. In collaboration with innovators and energy experts, the company is developing a small modular reactor that will help keep fossil fuels in the ground. Moltex was selected by NB Power and the Government of New Brunswick to progress development of its reactor technology in New Brunswick, Canada, with the aim of deploying its first reactor at the Point Lepreau site as early as 2030.
Canadian National Energy Alliance named as Preferred Bidder to manage Canadian Nuclear Laboratories
(2015 June 26) Today, the Government of Canada announced Canadian National Energy Alliance as the preferred bidder to manage and operate Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), currently a subsidiary of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL).
Canadian National Energy Alliance represents a group of experienced nuclear engineering and management firms, including: CH2M Hill Canada, Fluor Government Group – Canada, EnergySolutions Canada Group, SNC-Lavalin, and Rolls-Royce Civil Nuclear Canada. The company was selected through a rigorous competitive procurement process and will lead the transformation of CNL into a three-mission national laboratory.
“This announcement represents good news for the future of the Canadian nuclear sector and for Canadian nuclear science and technology,” declared Dr. Robert Walker, CNL’s President and CEO. “Canadian National Energy Alliance has deep experience in successfully operating and growing national laboratories around the world through the Government-owned, Contractor-operated (GoCo) management model.”
The selection of Canadian National Energy Alliance as the preferred bidder marks a significant milestone in the process to procure the services of a private sector contractor to manage and operate the Nuclear Laboratories and deliver on its three core missions:
- Federal waste and decommissioning responsibilities;
- Nuclear science and technology expertise in support of federal government needs; and,
- Science and technology and related services to third-parties on commercial terms.
Canadian National Energy Alliance will bring private-sector rigour and efficiency to the management and operation of CNL. “Canadian National Energy Alliance has the technical capabilities and international experience to maximize the value of the laboratories,” adds Walker. “I am confident in the opportunity to leverage our unique facilities and world-class expertise to bring new success.”
The move to a GoCo model is part of Government’s commitment to establish a solid foundation for Canada’s nuclear sector to create and seize new opportunities. To this end, recent investments of more than $325 million have been made to revitalize research infrastructure and further investments will continue in the years ahead. Beyond CNL, new international agreements have opened the doors to trade opportunities in nuclear energy, most notably in China and India.
The Government and Canadian National Energy Alliance will finalize the contract for the management of CNL in preparation for share transfer in the early fall.
https://www.cnl.ca/en/home/news-and-publications/news-releases/2019-news-releases/20191118.aspx
CNL to fund collaborations with SMR vendors to accelerate clean energy deployment
Negotiations underway with Terrestrial, USNC, Kairos and Moltex
CHALK RIVER, ON, CANADA – November 15, 2019 – Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), Canada’s premier nuclear science and technology organization has announced that it has selected the first recipients of the Canadian Nuclear Research Initiative (CNRI). This initiative seeks to accelerate the deployment of small modular reactors (SMR) in Canada by enabling research and development and connecting global vendors of SMR technology with the facilities and expertise within Canada’s national nuclear laboratories. CNRI recipients will be able to optimize resources and share technical expertise to advance the commercialization and deployment of SMR technologies.
“Both our own market research and the findings of the Canadian SMR Roadmap made it clear that there is a desire within the nuclear industry for increased access to CNL’s expertise and facilities,” explained Mark Lesinski, President and CEO. “The CNRI program was launched as a way to enable that access.”
“CNL has made significant progress over the past three years to position Canada as the hub for small modular reactor research, we have built up considerable expertise and knowledge in key technical areas that are common across SMR technologies,” commented Dr. Kathryn McCarthy, Vice-President of Science and Technology at CNL.
“CNRI allows CNL to respond directly and efficiently to the needs of industry by co-funding important R&D that accelerates deployment in an increasingly competitive commercial marketplace,” added Dr. Corey McDaniel, Chief Commercial Officer.
CNL received a strong response to the announcement of the initial intake, receiving applications from key players in the SMR industry in Canada and abroad. Submissions were accepted based on a list of designated focus areas, including market analysis, fuel development, reactor physics modelling, transportation, and others. Applicants are required to match funds and in-kind contributions that will be made by CNL. The following projects have been selected for negotiations on the terms of cost sharing arrangements:
Applicant: MOLTEX CANADA
Reactor developer Moltex Canada, along with the University of New Brunswick, seek to build and optimize a test apparatus to explore the potential of converting used CANDU power reactor fuel into a fuel form capable of powering their Stable Salt Reactor design.
Applicant: KAIROS POWER
Kairos Power is proposing the development of a Tritium Management Strategy for its high-temperature fluoride salt-cooled reactor (KP-FHR) design. This CNRI project also includes early work to identify technologies to implement this strategy.
Applicant: ULTRA SAFE NUCLEAR CORPORATION (USNC)
Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation is proposing work that seeks to resolve a broad array of technical questions in support of its Micro Modular Reactor (MMR). These include fuel processing, reactor safety, and fuel and graphite irradiation, among others.
Applicant: TERRESTRIAL ENERGY Inc.
Terrestrial Energy Inc. will be evaluating the applicability of nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation technologies to the IMSR400 reactor and other SMR designs. This work will look at opportunities to utilize CNL’s existing facilities, most notably the ZED-2 reactor, as well as develop new experimental capabilities related to molten salt reactors.
These CNRI projects will be highlighted by Dr. McCarthy during CNL’s 7th SMR Vendor Roundtable on November 19, 2019 in Washington, D.C. CNL’s past roundtables have featured interactions between more than 30 SMR vendors and policy makers, regulators, national laboratories, customers and communities from around the world.
The next call for CNRI proposals is expected in early 2020. For submission details, or to learn more about CNRI, please visit www.cnl.ca/CNRI. For more information on CNL’s small modular reactor program, please visit www.CNL.ca/SMR.
About CNL
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories is a world leader in nuclear science and technology offering unique capabilities and solutions across a wide range of industries. Actively involved with industry-driven research and development in nuclear, transportation, clean technology, energy, defense, security and life sciences, we provide solutions to keep these sectors competitive internationally. With ongoing investments in new facilities and a focused mandate, CNL is well positioned for the future. A new performance standard reinforced with a strong safety culture underscores every activity.
To learn more visit www.cnl.ca
-30-
Contact:
Patrick Quinn
Director, Corporate Communications
CNL, 1-866-886-2325
CNL is Canada’s premier nuclear science and technology organization. CNL is a world leader in developing peaceful and innovative applications from nuclear technology through its expertise in physics, metallurgy, chemistry, biology and engineering.
Highly skilled employees enthusiastically deliver a range of nuclear services – ranging from research and development, design and engineering to specialized technology, waste management and decommissioning.
Today, CNL continues its commitment to ensure that Canadians and the world receive energy, health, and environmental benefits from nuclear science and technology with confidence that nuclear safety and security are assured.
PURPOSE
Advancing nuclear science and technology for a clean and secure world.
MISSION
- We will restore and protect Canada’s environment by reducing and effectively managing nuclear liabilities.
- We will provide the world with sustainable energy solutions including the extension of reactor operating lifetimes, hydrogen energy technologies, and fuel development for the reactor designs of tomorrow.
- Together, with partners, we will demonstrate the commercial viability of advanced reactor designs including Small Modular Reactor (SMR).
- We will work collaboratively with medical/educational institutions and pharmaceutical companies to pioneer new alpha therapies for cancer treatments that save countless lives.
- We will leverage all of our capabilities for commercial success in Canadian and international markets.
VIVID DESCRIPTION
We stand proud as a global leader advancing nuclear science and technology. The world comes to us to solve the toughest technological challenges. We have the most effective industrial partnerships of any national laboratory. Our campuses are home to a vibrant community of the world’s brightest innovators. Our people know they are making a difference in the lives of people around the world. Our customers in industry and the Canadian government value us.
CORE VALUES
- Safety
- Respect
- Teamwork
- Accountability
- Integrity
- Excellence
Executive
 | Joe McBreartyPresident and Chief Executive Officer Bio |
 | Dan WoodChief Operating Officer Bio |
 | Jeffrey GriffinVice-President, Science & Technology Bio |
 | Monica SteedmanVice-President, Finance and Business Management & Chief Financial Officer Bio |
 | Mike GullVice-President, Environmental Remediation Management Bio |
 | Phillip BoyleVice-President, Operations and Chief Nuclear Officer Bio |
 | Lou RiccoboniVice-President, Corporate Affairs Bio |
 | Brian SavageVice-President, Capital Bio |
 | Jeff WillmanVice-President, Health, Safety, Security, Environmental & Quality Bio |
 | Douglas McIntyreVice-President, Legal and Insurance BioAs Vice-President Legal & Insurance and Corporate Secretary for CNL, Doug McIntyre is responsible for the following functions within CNL: Legal, Insurance, Internal Audit, Intellectual Property, Corporate Secretariat, Ethics and Business Conduct and Export Import Compliance. Doug has over 12 years’ experience with CNL and AECL and has worked with the GoCo model from every possible perspective. Doug brings over 25 years of experience in private, public and crown corporation environments, providing strategic counsel to a variety of companies in the areas of nuclear, software, water purification, medical and other technologies. |
https://www.cnl.ca/en/home/facilities-and-expertise/smr/progressupdate.aspx
Technology developers advance in CNL’s process to site a small modular reactor
(February 15, 2019) Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), Canada’s premier nuclear science and technology organization, is pleased to provide an update regarding the organization’s invitation to site a small modular reactor (SMR) demonstration unit at one of their managed campuses.
Two respondents, Starcore Nuclear and Terrestrial Energy have successfully completed the pre-qualification stage of CNL’s invitation, and have been invited to enter the Due Diligence stage. In these stages, CNL will evaluate with increased rigour, the technical and business merits of the proposed designs, assess the financial viability of the projects, and review the necessary national security and integrity requirements.
StarCore Nuclear’s proposed SMR design is a 14 MWe high-temperature gas reactor. StarCore is proposing to build reactors at both the Whiteshell and Chalk River sites. Additional details can be found at www.starcorenuclear.ca.
Terrestrial Energy’s proposed SMR design is a 195 MWe integral molten salt reactor. Additional details can be found at www.terrestrialenergy.com
Global First Power (GFP) with its key partners Ontario Power Generation (OPG) and Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation (USNC) has progressed through the second stage of the invitation process, and has been invited to participate in preliminary, non-exclusive discussions regarding land arrangements, project risk management, and contractual terms (Stage 3). These negotiations are not an indication of project approval, and the proposal and proponent must satisfy further stringent evaluation.
GFP/OPG/USNC Team’s proposed SMR design is a 5 MWe high-temperature gas reactor. Additional details can be found at www.globalfirstpower.com
The
fourth and final stage, Project Execution, would include construction,
testing and commissioning, operation and ultimately decommissioning of
the SMR unit.
It
is important to note that all projects are subject to regulatory
processes and requirements. The licensing process is entirely
independent of CNL’s invitation and evaluation stages. Should a project
advance to a licence application, proponents will be required to
undertake meaningful project engagement with the public and Indigenous
communities. In the meantime, AECL and CNL continue to engage local and
Indigenous communities to seek their views and input.
Background:
In
its 2017 Long Term Strategy, CNL set the ambitious goal of siting an
SMR on a CNL-managed site by 2026. To achieve this, CNL launched a
Request for Expressions of Interest to gather input and feedback from
stakeholders across Canada and internationally. CNL received responses
from academia, energy utilities, potential end users, host communities,
and the nuclear supply chain. Included in those responses were 19
expressions of interest from technology developers interested in
building a prototype or demonstration reactor at a CNL site. Based in
part on that strong response, CNL moved forward with announcing a staged
invitation process for those vendors interested in siting their
demonstration unit.
The
invitation and evaluations are conducted entirely independently of the
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s licencing processes; all projects
are subject to regulatory requirements.
While
deployment of small modular reactors is still several years away, CNL is
building its expertise and capabilities to support the development of
these technologies, and has launched initiatives that would further
explore the full range of applications. The proposed flexibility of
operations for these new designs enables a wide range of end uses,
including pairing SMRs with intermittent renewable sources such as solar
or wind energy to ensure grid reliability. In addition to electricity
production, the energy from an SMR could be used for the production of
hydrogen, for local area heating, or in industrial processes which
require heat or steam.
For more information on CNL’s vision
to serve as a global hub for SMR development, including the siting of a
demonstration reactor on a CNL-managed site, visit www.cnl.ca.
For more information on small modular reactor technology, including potential applications, visit www.SMRRoadmap.ca
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/many-issues-modular-nuclear-1.5381804
'Many issues' with modular nuclear reactors says environmental lawyer
Three premiers have agreed to work together to develop the technology
· CBC News · Posted: Dec 03, 2019 6:00 AM AT
Theresa McClenaghan, executive director of the Canadian Environmental
Law Association, said she doesn't think modular nuclear reactors are "a
viable solution to climate change.” (CBC)
Modular nuclear reactors may not be a cure for the nation's carbon woes, an environmental lawyer said in reaction to an idea floated by three premiers.
Theresa McClenaghan, executive director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association, said the technology surrounding small reactors has numerous pitfalls, especially when compared with other renewable energy technology.
This comes after New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe and Ontario Premier Doug Ford agreed to work together to develop the technology.
Ultra Safe Nuclear Corp.'s Micro Modular Reactor Energy
System is designed to fit in a standard shipping container. The company
is partnering with Global First Power and Ontario Power Generation, who
are in talks with Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. and the CNSC about
preparing a site for a reactor at AECL's Chalk River Laboratories. (Ultra Safe Nuclear)
The premiers say the smaller reactors would help Canada reach its carbon reduction targets but McClenaghan, legal counsel for the environmental group, disagrees.
"I don't think it is the answer," said McClenaghan. "I don't think it's a viable solution to climate change."
McClenaghan said the technology behind modular reactors is still in the development stage and needs years of work before it can be used on a wide scale.
"There are many issues still with the technology," said McClenaghan. "And for climate change, the risks are so pervasive and the time scale is so short that we need to deploy the solutions we already know about like renewables and conservation."
Waste, security concerns: lawyer
While nuclear power is considered a low-carbon method of producing electricity, McClenaghan said the waste that it creates brings its own environmental concerns.
"You're still creating radioactive waste," said McClenaghan.
"We don't even have a solution to nuclear fuel waste yet in Canada and the existing plans are not taking into account these possibilities."
McClenanghan believes there are national security risks with the plan as well.
She said having more reactors, especially if they're in rural areas, means there's a greater chance that waste or fuel from the reactors could be stolen for nefarious purposes.
"You'd be scattering radioactive materials, potentially attractive to diversion, much further across the country," said the environmental lawyer.
With files from Harry Forestell and CBC News at 6
First, nuclear fuel used by conventional reactors, and there are various designs, does not have a lot of energy extracted and the resultant waste still has more than 92% radioactive energy remaining. That waste can be a serious radioactive hazard for tens or even hundreds of thousands of years.
SMNR's (small modular nuclear reactors) are designed to be able to use that nuclear waste as fuel. Energy will be extracted to a point where less than 8% radioactive energy remains. This new waste is not only a much smaller quantity but the amount of time it remains dangerous is considerably shorter; hundreds of years not many thousands.
I too believe this environmental lawyer is uneducated, lacks an open mind, and is more interested in her paycheck than getting at the truth. Just a quick reminder: Greta Thunberg has only one message and that is for everyone to pay attention to the science and the scientists: it is that simple. It is obvious to me, and to many others I am sure, that Theresa McClenaghan is not a scientist and knows not about that which she speaks. Theresa is an obstacle to what I believe is the only viable solution to saving our planet.
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/12/still-fighting-nb-power-and-aecl-enter.html
Thursday, 12 December 2019
Still fighting: NB Power and AECL enter mediation in long-running Lepreau dispute
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks Higgy and everybody else knows why I was not surprised to read this stuff or why accounting professor Matthew Wegener did not have the first clue as to why I called him just now N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/12/still-fighting-nb-power-and-aecl-enter.html
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nbpower-aecl-still-fighting-1.5393207
Still fighting: NB Power and AECL enter mediation in long-running Lepreau dispute
Utility's efforts to recover $1 billion in cost overruns on Point Lepreau refurbishment continue
· CBC News · Posted: Dec 12, 2019 6:00 AM AT
Former NB Power president David Hay promised in 2008 the refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station would be done 'on time and on budget,' but that didn't happen.
Like a disgruntled homeowner chasing a contractor years after a disappointing renovation, NB Power is still pursuing Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for compensation over its refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station nearly a decade ago.
But there are no signs any of the roughly $800 million New Brunswick claims it is still owed for the error-plagued job will be arriving anytime soon.
"NB Power is currently in the process of discussions with AECL, the objective of which is to reach a fair compromise of the remaining claims arising out of the refurbishment," the utility reported in a disclosure to the Energy and Utilities Board earlier this month.
"The process is being pursued with the assistance of a mediator."
The ambitious renovation had never been attempted on a Candu-6 reactor before, but AECL considered it feasible and developed plans to replace, upgrade or renovate key nuclear and non-nuclear components inside Lepreau to extend its life a further 25 to 30 years.
The work was expected to take 18 months and cost NB Power $1.4 billion but became mired in a number of problems and eventually took three years longer than expected. Those delays pushed costs $1 billion over budget.
Lepreau's poor performance
In addition, the plant has not performed as well as expected following the overhaul.
In its first seven operational years since coming back online in November 2012, the rebuilt reactor has run at an average of 82 per cent capacity, well below the 91 per cent level NB Power predicted for those early years during hearings in 2013 on that issue.
That's a production shortfall so far of about $250 million worth of electricity.
NB Power has also had to spend more than $500 million on capital improvements at Lepreau since the plant came back online, in part to try to improve its spotty post-refurbishment reliability.
The biggest mistake during the refurbishment occurred 10 years ago this month, when tubes were pulled from the station's calandria and the holes they rested in were scraped clean with wire brushes instead of being polished. Scratches left behind caused air leaks around new tubes. (Photo submitted)
There are signs those heavy investments are helping, but the question of who should be financially responsible for the delays and cost overruns of the original refurbishment are still not resolved and have dragged on longer than the refurbishment itself.
NB Power will not say how much compensation it is seeking from AECL but acknowledges in its new disclosure to the Energy and Utilities Board that the two sides are not close to an agreement.
Insurance money
NB Power has even suggested AECL may try and wring money out of the utility by laying claim to part of a settlement NB Power reached with Lepreau insurers in March 2018.
In its update to the EUB, the utility wrote: "There remain substantial areas of dispute between NB Power and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) related to the contract price for the retubing agreement, AECL's liability to NB Power for liquidated damages for failure to meet AECL's schedule guarantee, other damages which NB Power claims against AECL as a result of AECL's performance of the retubing and refurbishment work, and potential claims by AECL against NB Power relating to amounts recovered by NB Power as a result of the settlement."
NB Power has still not disclosed how much insurance companies paid it in 2018 under policies it held in relation to the refurbishment troubles.
But one estimate pieced together from public information by UNB accounting professor Matthew Wegener suggested it was close to $160 million.
UNB accounting professor Matthew Wegener estimated from public records NB Power received close to $160 million from insurance companies to settle refurbishment claims. That would leave $840 million in cost over runs to be recovered. (Graham Thompson/CBC)
That would leave $840 million in cost overruns to be collected for full compensation, which has been the official demand of three straight New Brunswick governments headed by premiers Shawn Graham, David Alward and Brian Gallant.
On Wednesday, the office of Natural Resources and Energy Minister Mike Holland did not immediately respond to a question about whether that remains the New Brunswick government's official position.
NB Power says, if it cannot reach an agreement with AECL on who owes what through mediation, it will move on to the next step.
"If this process is not successful, the alternative under the project agreements is to embark upon an arbitration process," it wrote.
About the Author
16 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.
David Raymond Amos
Surprise Surprise Surprise
Greg Miller
NB Power in the news again and as usual IT'S BAD NEWS!
David Raymond Amos
Fred Brewer
Big or small, nuclear is a terrible option. Always over budget and late. Radioactive waste storage has still not been resolved. Of all the options on the table, nuclear is the most expensive and the most dangerous.
"Big or small, nuclear is a terrible option...Radioactive waste storage has still not been resolved. Of all the options on the table, nuclear is the most expensive and the most dangerous."
Can you source that? The cash cowness of it all is obvious, but, what they're actually doing, on the ground, is anything but.
David Peters
Shouldn't the contractor be chasing the one they did work for? Why did NB Power pay the additional Billion?
Once again, ratepayers/consumers have no choice or protection in this equation.
David Raymond Amos
David Peters
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
The only counter to a monopoly is to outlaw it and then break it up.
David Raymond Amos
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-point-lepreau-insurance-settlement-cost-1.5089232
David Peters
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
Lot's of secrecy surrounding the $ involved in energy generation. But, aren't we talking about a public utility? Why the secrecy?
David Raymond Amos
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-rate-design-extreme-prices-eub-1.5365757
David Raymond Amos
Methimks Higgy and everybody else knows why I was not surprised to read this stuff or why accounting professor Matthew Wegener did not have the first clue as to why I called him just now N'esy Pas?
"On Wednesday, the office of Natural Resources and Energy Minister Mike Holland did not immediately respond to a question about whether that remains the New Brunswick government's official position."
David Raymond Amos
Higgy and Harper know this is not rocket science
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/weston-ottawa-basically-paying-snc-to-take-aecl-1.1078128
Weston: Ottawa basically paying SNC to take AECL
· CBC News · Posted: Jun 29, 2011 10:17 PM ETThe government-owned Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. has announced it has finally reached a tentative deal to sell its commercial reactor development and repair division to Quebec-based engineering giant SNC-Lavalin.
The Montreal-based company was the only suitor in the world left at the negotiating table, a fact that helps to explain why the government is effectively paying SNC-Lavalin to take over the Crown corporation.
Under the deal, SNC will pay a paltry $15 million for AECL's nuclear reactor division, plus some as yet undisclosed "royalties" on future reactor sales.
In return, the government will give SNC up to $75 million toward the development of the next generation of AECL's once internationally successful Candu reactors.
In other words, Canadian taxpayers are giving the Quebec company $60 million to take AECL off their hands.
If that were the whole deal, it would actually be a bargain for taxpayers.
AECL may be world-famous for its Candu reactors, but it hasn't sold one in 15 years, and now generates mainly massive amounts of red ink, the Crown corporation having cost Canadian taxpayers more than $820 million last year alone.
AECL's refurbishment of the Point Lepreau reactor in New Brunswick is so behind schedule and over-budget that the provincial government is demanding more than $2 billion in compensation.
In short, SNC-Lavalin is buying a money-losing, high-risk business with no sales of new reactors, and a scandalous record of fixing old ones.
In the words of Atomic Energy of Canada's president, Hugh MacDiarmid, earlier this year: "It is, in some cases, a bit of a leap of faith that somebody needs to take that we are going to be a company in the future that will enjoy growth, profitability and operational effectiveness."
Taxpayer stuck with liabilities
SNC-Lavalin isn't the only party taking a leap of faith in this deal.
Most of AECL's massive past liabilities and a lot of the financial risks going forward will remain exactly where they have always been — on taxpayers.
For instance, SNC-Lavalin will complete the current refurbishments of four reactor projects, but only "through subcontract service agreements with the government of Canada."
Translation: SNC-Lavalin will get paid for doing the work, but taxpayers will likely be on the hook for massive cost overruns and potential lawsuits that could run into the billions of dollars.
Similarly, the government's promised $75 million to complete development of a next-generation Candu reactor — called the Enhanced Candu 6 - may not be the last public cash into that project.
Under the deal with the feds, SNC is only undertaking to "work towards completing the Enhanced Candu reactor."
If that costs more than the $75 million the government is putting up, SNC could simply abandon the project — unless, of course, Ottawa ponies up some more cash.
Even if the new Candu finally comes to market, the Ontario government is already insisting that it won't be ordering any of the new multi-billion-dollar reactors unless the feds guarantee the deals against cost overruns.
Expect the same the world over — the nuclear reactor business runs on government guarantees.
Golden handshakes
SNC-Lavalin says it will be keeping about 1,200 of the roughly 2,000 employees currently working in AECL's reactor division.
Unless there is fine print in the deal we haven't seen, that means taxpayers will also be stuck with the onerous costs of giving golden handshakes to 800 scientists, engineers and other relatively high-priced AECL employees, not to mention the potentially staggering expense of transferring 1,200 public service pensions to SNC-Lavalin.
Perhaps the biggest ongoing cost to Canadians is what's being left out of the AECL deal - namely, the Chalk River research division that produces isotopes for medical scans and treatments.
The deal splits off Chalk River from the AECL reactor division that SNC-Lavalin is buying.
Over the past two years, the government has given AECL more than $170 million in special funding for the Chalk River research reactor and other facilities that produce nuclear isotopes for medical scans.
Meanwhile, AECL spent years and hundreds of millions of dollars at Chalk River building two new isotope reactors that don't work and likely never will.
Making matters worse, AECL's commercial partner in that snafu, MDS Nordion, is now suing the federal agency for $1.6 billion in damages.
Of course, if putting AECL under private-sector management successfully turns the nuclear reactor company into a commercial powerhouse, the federal government could ultimately reap a windfall in royalties from the sales of CANDU nukes the world over.
The fact the deal was announced by the government on the eve of summer doldrums suggests even the new owners of AECL aren't exactly overwhelmed with optimism.
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @Kathryn98967631 and 47 others
Methinks it interesting that Matthew Wegener a professor of accounting at UNB came up with the same figure I did last year but in a much different fashion N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/04/top-secret-point-lepreau-insurance.html
#nbpoli #cdnpoli
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-point-lepreau-insurance-settlement-cost-1.5089232
Top-secret Point Lepreau insurance settlement details leaking
NB Power deal over nuclear plant refurbishment may be worth $159M, according to inadvertently released figures
What is supposed to be a top-secret settlement between NB Power and insurers over problems encountered during the troubled Point Lepreau nuclear plant refurbishment appears to be worth just under $160 million, according to various financial details inadvertently released by the utility.
NB Power is not confirming the amount, claiming it is still a company secret.
But there are signs the Lepreau settlement, reached last year, is worth slightly less than half the $320.1 million the utility said it was owed when it filed a lawsuit against insurers in 2012 for non-payment of its claim over damages and delays.
"We cannot provide a specific number," said Marc Belliveau, a spokesperson for NB Power, in an email to CBC News about the settlement amount.
"We continue to believe that keeping this information confidential is in the best interest of customers as we continue to work through the remaining litigation."
But Matthew Wegener, a professor of accounting at the University of New Brunswick's Saint John campus, says NB Power has not been as disciplined redacting information about the settlement from its budget documents this year as it was last year and doubts AECL will have a hard time piecing together precise settlement details if it chooses.
Wegener's own estimate from a review of public information is that the settlement is worth around $159 million, although he says that could be refined with deeper analysis of available information.
"It's not overly difficult, just time-consuming," said Wegener.
"It depends on how much certainty you want. Just to get that estimate, really it only took me a couple of hours."
The scratches caused problems as the reactor was being reassembled and eventually took about a year to be resolved.
NB Power made a damage claim with insurers for $65.1 million over the scratches and a further $255 million claim for the delays caused by repairing them.
The redactions [this year] within their budgets are not really sufficient to be concealing anything.
- Matthew Wegener, UNBSJ accounting professorThe legal fight dragged on for six years but last April the utility announced it had settled the claims. However, the utility would not say what it received, insisting the information was too sensitive to be released publicly.
"Immediate public disclosure of the terms of settlement would be directly and substantially detrimental to NB Power's opportunity to reach a favourable resolution of remaining claims between NB Power and AECL," NB Power lawyer John Furey told the EUB at a hearing hearing in Saint John.
Furey said if Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. found out what NB Power won from insurers it could affect how much the utility can ultimately wring from the company — or worse — might encourage AECL to make a claim against NB Power for part of the insurance money for itself.
Several hearings dealing with the settlement were held behind closed doors, with those in attendance subject to confidentiality agreements. Transcripts of those hearings remain secret.
NB Power's income, balance sheet and cash flow statements were also rewritten to account for the financial impact of the settlement, but 30 of 66 financial entries were blacked out in the public version to prevent anyone from piecing amounts together.
However, this year many of those blacked out values have been disclosed in the utility's latest application for a rate increase and Wegener says it is much easier to track how settlement money hit NB Power's accounts.
"The original redactions were pretty effective," said Wegener
"The redactions [this year] within their budgets are not really sufficient to be concealing anything."
No lawsuits filed yet
Public intervener Heather Black has seen the settlement, but will not speak about it because of the non-disclosure agreement she signed last year. She also would not comment on whether NB Power has failed to protect the secrecy of settlement details in this year's budget submission.
"I am still bound by the confidentiality undertaking and can't give you any insight without potentially violating it," she said in an email to CBC News.
From publicly available accounts Wegener looked at, he says the information appears to show the insurance settlement involved a $48.5 million payment for direct damage to the plant caused by the scratches and a $102 million payment for startup delays caused by them.
In addition, he says based on those numbers there would have been another $9 million in settlement funds shared between legal fees and a payment to P.E.I.'s power company Maritime Electric, which owns just over four per cent of Lepreau's output and expenses.
Wegener says his $159 million estimate of the insurance settlement could be off slightly, but the fact it can be made at all shows how much information that was secret last year has leaked into public view this year.
Belliveau acknowledges some previously secret information about the settlement has become public in NB Power's financial reporting, but says that was inevitable and expected.
NB Power continues to "engage in negotiations" with AECL for compensation for cost overruns on the Lepreau refurbishment even though the job finished more than six years ago. The utility says it has not filed any lawsuits over the issue yet and any amount it is seeking to recover is "privileged and protected from disclosure."
Commenting is now closed for this story.
David R. Amos
Surprise Surprise Surprise
David R. Amos
Reply to @David R. Amos: Methinks Mr Jones understands why NB Power and the EUB keep barring me from intervening and why I will never understand why he conceals the facts of the matter. However anyone can check the public records of the EUB to read what Mr Jones will not report about N'esy Pas?
David R. Amos
Ferdinand Boudreau
Why always secret stuff-- Its our money?
Getting tired wool pulled over our eyes
David R. Amos
Reply to @Ferdinand Boudreau: "Getting tired wool pulled over our eyes"
Methinks you should ask yourself who is doing it N'esy Pas?
Rawlu McIsaac
Nuclear is nothing but a Never Ending Money Pit, from the day it is Built to the day it is Buried somewhere nobody wants it...
David R. Amos
Gaëtan Thomas on why building Point Lepreau was “visionary” by New Brunswick
Posted on November 7, 2017 | Natural Resources Magazine
"The plant came online in 1983. There were some delays and cost overruns, and this was not long after the nuclear reactor accident at Three Mile Island in the U.S. There was also a fairly large earthquake in the early 1980s in the Miramichi. A lot of effort was required to explain the advantage of the CANDU 600 nuclear reactor design Point Lepreau used. We placed a high value on having a good relationship with local communities and the First Nations and it’s still going on today.
If you could go back in time and know what we would be facing today for carbon reduction targets, people would say we were not only visionary but predicting the future. This was done without having the benefit of looking at carbon the way it’s looked at today. I think there are very few people who have opposed Point Lepreau in New Brunswick, and it has generated a lot of pride. I’m told the latest survey shows over 80 per cent of our residents support nuclear power.
I think that’s because we were able to provide benefits. When you have a plant that produces no carbon emissions and we are the fourth-best jurisdiction in regards to power rates in the country, the proof is in the pudding. Our customers are enjoying very competitive rates. They would not be able to do that without Point Lepreau."
David R. Amos
Reply to @Rawlu McIsaac: Go Figure some more
2018-05-14
Fredericton, N.B. – The World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) announced the appointment of Gaëtan Thomas as the new Chairman of the WANO-Atlanta Centre Regional Governing Board.
"I am pleased to announce the appointment of Gaëtan Thomas and welcome him to the Atlanta Centre Regional Governing Board and the wider WANO family. Gaëtan brings a wealth of experience and insight to the position, which will be very valuable to the global community of nuclear operators.” said Jacques Regaldo, chairman of WANO.
WANO, which has over 130 members across the globe, is the organization that unites every company and country in the world that operates commercial nuclear power plants. Its goal is to achieve the highest possible standards of nuclear safety and excellence in operational performance. WANO is headquartered in London and, in addition to the Atlanta Centre, which has 38 members, WANO also has regional centres in Moscow, Paris and Tokyo.
David R. Amos
Reply to @David R. Amos: Gaëtan Thomas on why building Point Lepreau was “visionary” by New Brunswick
Posted on November 7, 2017 | Natural Resources Magazine
"The plant came online in 1983. There were some delays and cost overruns, and this was not long after the nuclear reactor accident at Three Mile Island in the U.S. There was also a fairly large earthquake in the early 1980s in the Miramichi. A lot of effort was required to explain the advantage of the CANDU 600 nuclear reactor design Point Lepreau used. We placed a high value on having a good relationship with local communities and the First Nations and it’s still going on today.
If you could go back in time and know what we would be facing today for carbon reduction targets, people would say we were not only visionary but predicting the future. This was done without having the benefit of looking at carbon the way it’s looked at today. I think there are very few people who have opposed Point Lepreau in New Brunswick, and it has generated a lot of pride. I’m told the latest survey shows over 80 per cent of our residents support nuclear power.
I think that’s because we were able to provide benefits. When you have a plant that produces no carbon emissions and we are the fourth-best jurisdiction in regards to power rates in the country, the proof is in the pudding. Our customers are enjoying very competitive rates. They would not be able to do that without Point Lepreau."
Fred Brewer
Point Lepreau is the albatross around NB Power's neck. Mactaquac will be the next.
David R. Amos
Marc Martin
What a mess....The English population of NB should have let he government sell this corporation, scandal after scandal...
Rawlu McIsaac
Why get rid of the baby with the bathwater?
The only problem with NBPower is government. It was in the black until Godfather Frank put his greedy fingers in it.
BTW ya think the bureaucrat would dream up his own expressions but I guess plagiarism is considered a form of flattery by the mindless N'esy Pas?
Proof please. I don't think you can prove that NB Power amassed 5 billion in debt just since the days of King Frankie. It all started with Point Lepreau long before Frank's time
Bruce Ellingwood
Methinks many should agree that he is even worse than your latest assessment of his character N'esy Pas?
Lou Bell
160 million ! Yee Haw ! Bonus time again !!!
David R. Amos
Lou Bell
160 million . CEO will be looking for a buyout of BIGLY proportions I suspect.
David R. Amos
Andrew St.John
the construction Director was involved in pushing this work forward without taking time for complete test analysis. Not exactly AECL. They are just an easy target from Ontario.
David R. Amos
David R. Amos
Methinks everybody knows the real story here is the things that Robert Jones and his buddy Marc Belliveau won't tell N'esy Pas?
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2020/02/nb-power-spending-on-private-sector.html
Monday, 10 February 2020
NB Power spending on private sector projects questioned
David Raymond Amos @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @alllibertynews and 49 others
Methinks the little Buggie named Lou who often lands on my shoulder and chirps in my ear is having a bad day just like her heroes Higgy and Holland no doubt are N'esy Pas?
https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2020/02/nb-power-spending-on-private-sector.html
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-private-sector-spending-questioned-1.5457730
NB Power spending on private sector projects questioned
Utility is spending $1.3 million this year helping Maritime Iron study its Belledune project
· CBC News · Posted: Feb 10, 2020 7:30 AM AT
The proposed iron-ore processing plant in Belledune would use the existing NB Power conveyor system to move materials from port to the facility and send exhaust gases into the generating station's boilers. (Elena Mantagaris/Maritime Iron)
NB Power is spending $1.3 million this year helping the cash challenged backers of a proposed iron ore processing facility in Belledune investigate its feasibility. The expense has triggered a debate whether the utility is properly following directives from the Higgs government to focus on its own debt problem.
Last November, NB Power received a "mandate letter" from Mike Holland, provincial natural resources and energy minister, laying out how the Higgs government expects the utility to conduct itself, emphasizing debt reduction "first and foremost."
In his letter, Holland said he wanted NB Power to pay off about $500 million of its $4.8 billion debt by 2027 to increase equity in the company to "at least" 20 per cent of its total worth.
Mike Holland, the natural resources and energy minister, sent a mandate letter to NB Power in November telling it to focus on its debt and help the province build a low carbon economy. (Radio-Canada)
"This target should come first and foremost in utility planning and may require eliminating investments in other endeavours such as research and business development opportunities until the equity target is met," wrote Holland.
Last month Premier Blaine Higgs reinforced that directive during his televised state of the province address.
"I have asked NB Power to immediately develop a plan to reduce their unacceptable debt level without impacting rates," said Higgs.
Recent spending questioned
EUB vice chair Francois Beaulieu said his reading of a mandate letter to NB Power from the province was that it should stop spending money on research and business development projects like the Maritime Iron project. (Graham Thompson/CBC)
At NB Power's ongoing rate hearing in Saint John, Holland's letter and the premier's comments have led the Energy and Utilities Board to question the appropriateness of some recent spending, including $1.3 million used by the utility this year to study elements of the Belledune project being proposed by Maritime Iron.
The $1.3 million is quadruple what was budgeted and approved by the EUB last spring and comes even though the project is the responsibility of a private company and not yet financed or approved. NB Power is also proposing to spend an additional $300,000 studying the project further next year.
"If I read the letter from the Minister isn't it quite clear that what he is saying or what the mandate that he is suggesting is that until you reach your equity target, that this Board may consider eliminating investments in research and business development, which may include SMRs (small modular nuclear reactors), and Maritime Iron Works," said Beaulieu.
Wiggle room in letter
NB Power senior vice president Keith Cronkhite told the EUB the utility believes the Higgs government wants it to support projects like the iron ore processing plant proposed for Belledune despite its letter urging a focus on debt reduction. (Robert Jones/CBC)
"As New Brunswick Power, we are an important component in the business structures and the business opportunities that could occur within the province. We need to support those to ensure that they have a reasonable opportunity of success. That has many spinoffs to the province beyond just electricity sales."
Maritime Iron's proposed plant would process iron ore into pig iron, and pipe a byproduct gas to the adjacent NB Power generating station to generate electricity. That gas would allow the utility to replace some of the station's coal consumption and NB Power has been paying for studies into what modifications would be required in plant boilers to accommodate that change.
EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond questioned why those studies are NB Power's responsibility, given the project is being initiated by Maritime Iron.
"Has NB Power ever considered asking Maritime Iron to pay for the costs NB Power is incurring," asked Desmond.
Utility picks up costs for now
In January's state of the province address premier Blaine Higgs said his government had instructed NB Power to 'immediately' come up with a plan to deal with its 'unacceptable debt.' (Stephen MacGillivray/Canadian Press)
Cronkhite said Maritime Iron would pay if the project proceeds and renovations to NB Power's generating station are required, but until then the utility is picking up costs.
"We see that as a NB Power expense at this particular point in time," said Cronkhite.
"Isn't it still a risk that this project may not unfold as anticipated or hoped and that these costs that are currently being incurred would not have future benefit for ratepayers," pressed Desmond.
Maritime Iron submitted environmental impact documents in June for what is supposed to be a $1.5-billion project, but there have been ongoing questions about where that money will come from.
Brian Gallant's former Liberal government had to forward Maritime Iron about $625,000 in grants to help finance "pre-feasibility" studies of its idea and the company has acknowledged in media reports it is looking for $30 million in federal grant money to make the project work.
EUB lawyer Ellen Desmond asked NB Power executives why the utility, and not Maritime Iron, is paying for studies into what an iron ore processing facility will need. (Roger Cosman/CBC)
Although NB Power has been spending significant amounts on it for several months, in late November, Higgs told the legislature the province was still unsure how realistic the proposal is.
"How real is this project? Does it have traction?"
An additional hurdle is the Maritime Iron project, if approved, will emit substantial amounts of greenhouse gas and Holland's letter to NB Power directs the utility to "help support the province in achieving a low-carbon economy" and "work with the province to reduce greenhouse gas emissions".
The rate hearing continues Monday.
87 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.
David Amos
Methinks the little Buggie named Lou who often lands on my shoulder and chirps in my ear is having a bad day just like her heroes Higgy and Holland no doubt are N'esy Pas?
David Amos
Methinks its worthy of repeating that folks who truly care should attend the EUB hearings or at least download the transcripts and read them rather than rely on the opinions of Mr Jones as to what is important N'esy Pas?
David Amos
Chump Change Methinks everybody knows NB Power is NOT audited N'esy Pas?
Mike Connors
Blaine Higgs promised if the Conservatives were elected this foolish spending would end but here we are every second day getting an increase in our power bills, while the drunken sailors at NB Power spend our hard earned money on pipe dreams. This electorate is not going to be a happy camper if the EUB allows a hydro hike while this foolish spending continues.
David Amos
Wayne Mac Arthur
As with the liquor palaces and cannabis castles,the heads of these corporations have little regard for the public or their elected reps.
David Amos
Graeme Scott
If Maritime Iron can't even afford 1.3 million for these feasibility studies where are they going to get the 1.5 BILLION needed to build the project? More "pie in the sky" economic development for poor old NB? Maybe part 2 of this saga will be asking the government to pay for it.....or bail it out when things go south.
David Amos
I trust that Mr Jones must be clever enough to know this minor spit and chew in the EUB right now is just a smoke and mirror sideshow to make the dude yapping about his Maritime Iron scheme run off and hide under his rock in Ontario in order to provide some relief for Higgy and Vickers much to the chagrin of the NDP, Greens and the PANB while Independent Interverners such as Roger and Me get to laugh at the nonsense N'esy Pas?
Terry Tibbs
Reply to @Graeme Scott:
I don't know about you, but one of the last places I would go for a feasibility/engineering study would be NB Power.
You gotta question the reality of anything when someone pulls a figure of $1.3 million out of their backside. How many new staff were hired, or was the study given to current employees to look over, to break up the monotony of doing not very much of anything?
Don't you worry we will be building flux capacitors in NB yet.
Fred Brewer
Reply to @Graeme Scott: Exactly! When I read the words "cash-strapped" I was mortified and visions of another Joi magic beans scenario came to mind. If they need help with a simple study, they will need help getting the environmental permits, they will need help getting the plant built and they will want a break in payroll and property taxes. In return we will get all the pollution and when its bankrupt we are on the hook for everything including cleanup costs. Forget it. Walk away. No. Run away screaming.
Ned MacAllister
That David Amos likes to comment on every post on here. He must be the smartest person in the world or the dumbest with the largest ego. I am figuring he is not the smartest. People must know him as he could not get himself elected to the public trough.
However sometime when you are bored you should at least read Statement 83 of my Statement of Claim against the Queen. (Federal Court File No. T-1557-15) Trust that the "Powers that Be" beginning with MacKay and his boss Harper have already argued it without much success. The fact that the Crown pulled Rule 55 on me should make any ethical soul in New Brunswick and everywhere else laugh at their incompetence and desperation N'esy Pas?
Rule 55 In special circumstances, in a proceeding, the Court may vary a rule or dispense with compliance with a rule. SOR/2004-283, s. 11
Michel Forgeron
Reply to @Ned MacAllister: I’ve looked at a couple of his debates before elections, in my mind he makes a lot of sense. He is very knowledgeable regarding government, the law, social and other issues. I asked him a question about him not having a N.B. Medicare Card, he referred me to a long court document which I don’t intend to read (that may be the reaction of most people here). He does this frequently. His ideas are good IMO, but he should directly gibe his opinions here rather than referring/ linking to other sites. But I’m not sure he is concerned if there is agreement or not. Is he a touch narcissistic? Maybe, I don’t know.
Marc Martin
Reply to @David Amos: Who cares.
David Amos
David Amos
Reply to @BruceJack Speculator: YO Oh Ye without the sand to have a real name Please do tell if I am as crazy as you allude tothen how do you and the RCMP explain my having so many wiretap tapes of the mob and yet I am still alive and not hiding from anyone like you certainly are?
Ben Haroldson
Reply to @Ned MacAllister: He knows more about scum politics than most nber's
James Johnstone
This comment is directed to Michael Holland. Those that know him and those that he represents in Alma can see that he is honest and is working tireless for his constituents. He sent a letter to the board of NB Power and they seem to have a problem understanding what he is saying and putting their own spin on the meaning. Perhaps it is time to meet with the board and give them a clear and concise explanation that if they do not do as they are instructed they are to pack their bags immediately and move on without severance pay or pension. I would expect that will get their attention. Time for some tough love for those making decisions in this near bankrupt province.
David Amos
Marc Martin
Reply to @David Amos: You seem to have a drinking coffee issue.
Ben Haroldson
Reply to @James Johnstone: He just wants turkeys to be legal game in NB. Hopefully he is looking around the table.
Robert L. Brown
NB Power is way to top heavy and its managers are incompetent they need a total overhaul and so does the Higgs Government for allowing them to keep wasting our taxpayers money
David Amos
Brian Robertson
NB Powers dabbling with public money, in the private market outside of it's mandate needs to be reigned in.
Who do their managers think they are? Politicians?
David Amos
Some say pedantic.
Some say petty.
Harold Wood
No more foot dragging. Time for Higgs & company to pull the plug on NB Power including Thomas and the Executive and get somebody hired who has the taxpayers interests as their prime priority. I sometimes wonder if EUB needs some investigation also as to their duty to NB taxpayers. You know those overtaxed people paying their wages who are not any political party.
David Amos
Emilien Forest
If I were to use Keith Cronkhite's logic, every month I receive a document from NB Power indicating the amount of electricity I used. There is no indication that I am responsible and should have to pay that amount. So why should I pay it?
David Amos
Marc Bourque
" helping the cash challenged backers "
I stopped reading right there.....back out NOW!! Cant they see the writing on the wall??
David Amos
Richard Dunn
It is time for not only the CEO Thomas, but it appears most of the Board, and Senior Management, to find employment elsewhere.
This group continues to show poor judgement, with our money, day after day.
David Amos
Kyle Woodman
I see the brain trust is at it again.
The second version is a more human, old-fashioned, classically New Brunswick tale.
Norm Betts, a member of NB Power's board of directors, "knew somebody that knew somebody that knew somebody, apparently," according to board chair Ed Barrett, and suggested Thomas "take a look" at Joi.
Betts, a business professor and former provincial finance minister, confirmed in an interview he'd been on the board of a retail technology company with a Toronto businessman who was also "the person responsible for Joi in Canada."
He would not say if that was Chaikin, the company's Canadian sales representative.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/untold-story-joi-scientific-nb-power-1.5359262
Edward Andrews
I think it is time to seriously limit the decision making authority of the board and executives at NB Power. They have one directive - provide for the energy needs of their owners, the taxpayers of NB. They are not a business with the goal of growth or to wee our money into the wind on speculative investments. They only need to look to product clean and economical power. If they can't keep this in focus then its time for the current board and executives to leave and not with fat bonuses for under performing and failing. Yes failing is what it is called when you are in debt up to your eyeballs and floundering around trying to distract your share holders with ideas of EV super charging stations and other projects that are not in your lanes of what you are directed to do.
David Amos
Paul Bourgoin
Again New Brunswick is ready to invest money in NB-Power as if it would pay NB to do so. Instead they should invest in a snow flake fabrication plant rather than NB Power. It would be less costly for the New Brunswick residents living in the poorest Province in Canada. Production should be only during the month of July. Such a project in the poorest province in Canada WOW!
Who is going to capitalize on this sinking Boat?
David Amos
Ben Haroldson
Any extra money in any crown corporation should go back to the general funds, for education, health and roads. And nepotism needs to be made illegal again.
David Amos
Greg Miller
Come on Higgs pull the plug on this ridiculous crown corporation it's autonomy is just a license to spend taxpayer's money WITHOUT REPRESENTATION. No accountability whatsoever!
Ben Haroldson
Reply to @Greg Miller: It's almost like they want it to happen, like when NBtel sold out to bell, a lot of mangers waited like vultures and pounced on a lot of the assets, creating the new Contract companies that have proven to be way more expensive than when the work was performed in house.
Justin Time
Unbelievable! Shut this spending down immediately. This project is not going to happen so NB Power just wasted another 1.3 million dollars on a study that should be the responsibility of Maritime Iron. Just like the money wasted on the "LAB" in Florida. If the government wasn't so involved in many of these schemes they would have ordered an audit long ago. Unfortunately an audit might uncover some very embarrassing info about a lot of dealings in this corporation so it probably will never happen.
David Amos
Ben Haroldson
When will it end.
Roland Stewart
Fred Brewer
Reply to @Ben Haroldson: We could have ended it 10 years ago.
John Valcourt
NBPower has no right whatsoever to spend our money on projects outside on generating power and it appears they should only be able to do it then when it isn't snake oil like they have been know to waste our money on. They keep saying they need rate increases well now we can see why and it not only needs to stop but the entire upper management team needs to go. They have no right to do this and then seek rate increases and this smart meter project that is only going to cost us more money.
Ben Haroldson
Mr Jones no doubt hopes you enjoy a little Deja Vu
Cheap coal stoking NB Power's bottom line — for now
Utility reports it is on track to beat its profit target for the first time in five years
Robert Jones · CBC News · Posted: Nov 27, 2019 7:00 AM AT
Belledune's giant coal and petroleum coke boilers are saving up to $59,000 a day on fuel costs this year over last year, according to information NB Power filed with the Energy and Utilities Board last month. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
Cheap prices for coal are helping to generate unexpected profits at NB Power — despite carbon pricing — even though the utility's dependence on the fuel still promises significant financial problems in the years ahead.
In separate submissions in the last two months — one to the New Brunswick Energy and Utilities Board and one to the New Brunswick department of finance — NB Power has given notice this year's profits are running between $12 million and $24.6 million higher than originally budgeted.
"If those numbers hold, it will be the first time the utility has exceeded its annual earnings target in five years."
"NB Power will not reveal specific prices it pays for coal and it is difficult to estimate. It hedges coal purchases with fixed price contracts and other financial instruments to protect itself from unexpected price increases, which also slow the receipt of benefits from price drops.
Coal is NB Power's single largest expense for fuel. It buys its entire supply for the Belledune generating station from Colombia, which has seen prices tumble in the last year. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)
Nevertheless, the utility had budgeted at the start of the year to spend $126.1 million on coal, petroleum coke and other fuels, mostly for Belledune, but has since cut that estimate by $16.3 million.
The saving is equivalent to much of the improvement showing in the utility's bottom line.
Coal is NB Power's largest fuel cost, and earlier this year in its annual report, it noted price fluctuations have a significant effect on its bottom line.
"A $5 (per tonne) change in coal and petcoke prices will result in net earnings variability of approximately $2 to $7 million," it wrote.
NB Power has missed its profit targets in each of the last four years by a combined $252 million. This year it has informed both the Energy and Utilities Board and the Department of Finance that profits are running ahead of its budget projection. (Radio-Canada)
As of Tuesday, according to the website Trading Economics, coal was trading at $72.22 US per tonne, $26.57 below prices one year earlier and $42 less than peak prices in October 2018.
Guzman says he sees no sign in Colombia of prices moving higher in the short term."
Stephen Clarke
The Higgs government needs to clean house at NB Power. All the top management should be tossed out with no severance or bonuses. These people do not have the best interests of our citizens in mind,they keep blowing through money like it isn't theirs,and it isn't,it is our money
Miles Haukeness
It makes absolutely no sense for Alta, Sask and NB having to shut down its coal power production when BC is allowed to export far more coal to China. Canada's consumers have to pay extra for their utilities so China can build more coal powered plants. Ridiculous.
NB Power to dodge major carbon taxes after Ottawa proposes looser rules on coal plants
Greenhouse gas bill for Belledune station could fall to less than $1 per tonne after policy change
Robert Jones · CBC News · Posted: Oct 30, 2018 5:00 AM AT
A policy reversal by the federal government on emissions standards on coal-fired power plants could benefit New Brunswick consumers by eliminating the need for power rate increases to pay for carbon taxes. (CBC)
In a climate-policy retreat over the treatment of coal, federal Liberals are proposing to loosen emission standards for power plants that burn the fuel, effectively lowering carbon taxes on each tonne of greenhouse gas released from coal-burning stations, like NB Power's Belledune, next year to less than $1.
That could mean significant benefits for New Brunswick consumers, eliminating the need for power rate increases to pay for carbon taxes.
But it also undermines federal claims made as recently as last week that major greenhouse gas polluters, like Belledune, would pay the most under Canada's new carbon pricing scheme
Federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna's office explained a federal commitment to ban coal generating stations in 2030 makes heavy carbon taxes on coal unnecessary given the costs it would impose on electricity customers.
"A price on pollution is one way to reduce pollution from the electricity sector — but it's not the only way," wrote Caroline Theriault, McKenna's press secretary, in an email to CBC News.
"One of the most important measures to reduce pollution from electricity is our commitment to phase out traditional coal power by 2030, all while ensuring a just transition for coal workers and communities through the Just Transition Taskforce."
The proposed exemption for coal is so large it will eliminate most of the carbon taxes New Brunswick's biggest greenhouse gas emitter, NB Power, was warned it would be facing just six months ago.
It would also allow it to continue releasing most of the greenhouse gases it currently produces at its coal-fired generating station in Belledune for free.
I was under the impression that carbon tax holidays given to coal powered generating plants depended on one thing, and one thing only, they were to be using Canadian coal.
If this is true it leaves Belledune out in the dark as far as a carbon tax holiday.
Unless a special exception was made for Belledune I didn't hear about?
Because ALL the other Canadian coal burning plants use Canadian coal.
Funny thing no one is able to tell me: Why are we not burning NB coal at Belledune?
It's not like we couldn't use the jobs?
Terry Tibbs
Reply to @David Amos:
Seriously, I don't know why we are buying coal from South America when we have plenty in province................. unless, of course, the Irvings are involved?
David Amos
Content diaabled
Reply to @Terry Tibbs: Remember NB Coal? Now check NB Power's books to review how much we are still paying for.that nonsense.
Fred Brewer
Reply to @Terry Tibbs: NB coal was the terrible quality.
As any/all carbon tax collected in NB stays in NB, and can easily be rebated to the citizens of NB, this is no more than a manufactured "need". Who honestly cares if coal is burnt to make electricity in NB? I certainly do not give a shit, but one thing I know for sure: giving our NB government an opportunity to fix a problem that does not exist will likely end in a costly nothing if Mr Higgs has anything to do with it.
ReplyDelete