CTV News | Ontario wants a cheaper nuke bid from AECL

Top Stories -   

Ontario wants a cheaper nuke bid from AECL

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV Toronto: Ontario puts nuke plans on hold

Font-size:      Share  Print  Comments(24)

The Canadian Press

Date: Mon. Jun. 29 2009 6:15 PM ET

TORONTO — Ontario is delaying plans to build two new nuclear reactors, saying Monday that Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.'s bid would cost billions more than the province is willing to pay as it hinted federal aid could help seal the deal.

AECL was the only one of three candidates to build the Darlington nuclear station reactors to properly address requirements around assuming responsibility for cost overruns, but that bid was still too expensive, said Energy Minister George Smitherman.

Ottawa, which earlier this year announced plans to put AECL's nuclear reactor business up for sale, may want to step in to allow AECL to make a more competitive bid, he added.

Once the government clarifies the future ownership of AECL, it must "sharpen their pencils substantially so that the people of the province of Ontario can renew their nuclear fleet with two new units from that company," Smitherman said.

"AECL is the government of Canada's company so, absolutely, the government of Canada is in the driver's seat with respect to giving AECL the opportunity to build new reactors in Ontario."

Smitherman wouldn't discuss the price tag attached to any of the offers or give a timeline for how long the postponement will last. He would only say the cost of the proposal was off "substantially, certainly by a measure of many billions."

The announcement comes as a surprise in a province that is spending $26 billion on a major expansion of nuclear power over the next two decades as it aims to generate 50 per cent of the province's electricity with that source.

Smitherman had said just last month that Ontario's plans to choose a company to refurbish its nuclear reactors wouldn't be affected by Ottawa's plans for a sale.

The future of AECL is widely considered to be tied to a successful Ontario bid.

The Organization of CANDU Industries, which represents the companies that would build parts for the new reactors, said Monday it was "extremely concerned" about how the move would impact the more than 30,000 workers in the industry.

"The member companies of OCI have invested heavily in this process and this delay will cause some of them considerable financial difficulty, possibly even bankruptcy," president Neil Alexander said in a statement.

Officials at AECL were not available for comment.

Smitherman insisted the announcement shouldn't be seen a shift away from nuclear, but stressed the province isn't going to build the new plants, expected to be up by 2018, "at any cost."

Steve Outhouse, a spokesman for federal Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt, said any discussions about costs rested with AECL, adding there was nothing that would push Ottawa to get involved at this stage.

Critics have said choosing AECL could mean higher costs, noting the price tag for building reactors has more than doubled in the last three years, and taxpayers risk being stuck with the bill.

NDP energy critic Peter Tabuns said Monday's move is an attempt to get a "massive bailout" from Ottawa for possible costs overruns by AECL, and that Smitherman "may be negotiating in public."

"They're going to try to stick us, through the federal budget, with the cost of overruns at this plant," Tabuns said.

The government's decision to put the plan on hold shows how much the costs for building nuclear plants have risen since an estimate of $6 billion in 2005, when Ontario committed to upgrade the plants, Greenpeace energy analyst Shawn Patrick Stensil said.

"This could be a set up for the Ontario government to back out -- with face -- of its 2005 nuclear commitment," Stensil said, noting recent estimates put the costs closer to $15 billion.

"It's also passing the buck if the federal government decides not to lower the price. The McGuinty government can blame the Harper government for killing AECL."

Areva Group of France and U.S.-based Westinghouse Electric Co., who were also in the running to build the reactors, didn't properly address the issue of cost overruns, Smitherman said.

Their bids could be considered in the future if the companies still want to part of process, but Smitherman said AECL is "very well-positioned to come back to us and initiate discussion."

Ontario currently has three operating nuclear plants: Pickering and Darlington east of Toronto, and Bruce on the shores of Lake Huron.

The change will have no impact on Ontario's plans to get rid of coal-fired plants by 2014, nor will it change the energy mix in the province or affect the reliability of electricity, Smitherman said.

Saskatchewan Energy and Resources Minister Bill Boyd said Monday that Ontario's decision to delay its nuclear plans won't derail his province's atomic power review.

Boyd said cost is always an issue, but added that if Saskatchewan pursues nuclear power it would look for a partnership that would not use taxpayer money.

Comments are now closed for this story

Erik
said
0 0

If this project does move forward I hope the contract goes to AECL. Higher cost or not.

Canada has world leading nuclear technology, and it would be a shame to see our tax dollars being spent elsewhere.


Steve the Pundit
said
0 0

Hey Dalton! So what does that do to your promise to close all the coal fired plants? Another "unforeseen delay", perhaps?

Maybe now we can stop with this notion (based not in reality, but in political "optics") that we have other viable alternatives for generating "peak load" power. We don't. Period. Nuclear cannot be ramped up quickly, and solar / wind is unreliable (and cannot be stored with current battery technology). Even Niagara Falls is close to tapped out, hydro-wise.

The only reason the Ontario power grid hasn't collapsed due to the Liberal's incompetence on this file is that the recession (and the layoff of tens of thousands of workers) has reduced electricity requirements. Nothing says "good for the environment" like depriving workers of a paycheque!

So stop all this political "greenwashing" and do what should have been done when you were first elected: install scrubbers on the coal plants. It's proven, it works, it doesn't cost anywhere near as much as a nuke plant, and it can be done quickly. As a bonus, you'll reduce health care costs due to people breathing in unscrubbed emissions.

Come on McGuinty! For once let's see you do what's right, not what's politically expedient.


kate
said
0 0

Translation: We had to use your tax money to bail out the CAW private pensions and keep a dying industry alive. We also need more to pay the City of TO workers once Miller bails and capitulates and gives in to their outrageous demands. The rest of you can eat cake... of course you'll have to bake it over a bonfire but that's environmentally friendly compared to nuclear power!


Glenn in Winnipeg
said
0 0

The world has over a 400 year supply of cheap coal. Lets use it.

Keep electricity relatively cheap.


KJ in Kingston Ontario
said
0 0

So we've gone from those past dreams of energy too cheap to meter to the current reality of energy that's too expensive to even produce. Brace your budget for much higher energy costs in Ontario either way -- and lot's more of those largely ineffectual energy conservation campaigns to flick off the lights.


Scene
said
0 0

Although it will cost a lot of money to build these reactors, they are needed to support the massive hunger for electrical power for the next coming years. No matter what were going to have to build these, and it's gonna cost lots of $$$$$$!


Vern AAFU-Oshawa spokesman
said
0 0

Ottawa stepped in to bolster the sagging auto sector, why not kick in some cash to create more jobs with the new build of 2 reactors at Darlington. The government has gone down a slippery slope by loaning money to the auto sector, now, another project needs cash to create work. I don't think they should turn their backs, if the auto sector bounces back (as they say it will) after their huge investment, they are going to need power!!!


Gary Findlay
said
0 0

Did the companies not meet the requirements or did the environmentalists win the day with their lobbing or is AECL always the winner with the expetation that the federal government will be responsible for the ost over runs. My vote is that the federal government should not agree to any ost over runs and they are right in getting out of this business and letting the ptivate sector handle it. I think the fact that the two other major companies did not meet the requirements proves the point.


We're backing ourselves into a bad corner...
said
0 0

BUILD THEM NOW

It's not as if these reactors can be up and running in a short period. In a few more years we will be desperate for the power with our current plants needing large overhauls. The cost may be high, but the cost of buying power from american coal plants is higher...


Patriot
said
0 0

Nuclear Reactors are not Green Energy. They are a big waste of money. Not to mention the Nuclear waste and what to do with it. How about windmills, solar power, natural gas power plants. These are safe and last more than 50 years. And can't be used as targets for war.


THE Fatman
said
0 0

We'll all be sitting in the dark before these incompetents get anything done!


Dave from Toronto
said
0 0

It's time for Tax Grants and Loan Progems to help the average single family household go as off grid as they can. Producing energy and feed it back to the grid when not needed, not taking as much from the grid when needed. If every freehold single family home and cottage did this, we would have surplus power!


Windmill farmer
said
0 0

In the meantime why not build some wind generators on the property.


Ross
said
0 0

Is this a ploy to get fed money?
The problem is we have to do something to get more electricity.
So far Dalton has done nothing and has no plans.
We need leadership on this and many other problems and the Libs are giving us nothing but consultants and waste on a gigantic scale.
Time for a change.


simon
said
0 0

I thought Harper said or implied he wanted the Federal Government out of the Isotope business.
That puts the AECL out of the equation, I would guess.


kkhon
said
0 0

Nuclear power is one of the cleanest greenest power supplies. Wind and solar power cost at least 3x more than nuclear and require as much clean water if not more than nuclear for cooling purposes. As others have said the reactor needs to be built yesterday!


Erik
said
0 0

@simon

This article is about nuclear power generation, not producing medical isotopes


Kkhon
said
0 0

Maybe if we increase the cost of electricity you wouldnt see people leaving there windows open and AC on full blast. Same in winter when people open the windows but leave the heat blaring. What about all the businesses that leave all lights on and AC/heat all night? Apparently electricity is too cheap for people to consider conserving still! The cost of the amount of windmills and land required to make the equivilant of a nuclear power plant are not even conceivable. People need ot be smart when it comes to using energy and stop blaming the governments for putting money into what works. And why can't OPG provide medical isotopes as well as electricity??


Dave in Whitby
said
0 0

The Darlington plant is in Bowmanville , Ontario and would have been good job's for Oshawa and Bowmanville resident's who are hurting with the GM plant closures
this year . Another Blow to the local Economy in Clarington & Durham Region.


Mike
said
0 0

The time is now, with electric vehicles plugging into the grid in the near years to come. As a Nuclear Engineer myself I do not see another sustainable source of clean electricity. Coal is not an option, were moving away from those sources which are to be phased out by 2014. A Nuclear build takes 8-14 years, we cannot delay anymore!


Alex (Toronto)
said
0 0

Wind power can produce more electricity than the province needs for a fraction of the real cost of nuclear power. The US and Europe are already taking advantage of wind as a real alternative.

There are no "scrubbers" that take carbon dioxide out of coal plant emissions. "Clean" cola technology is only pollution-free; it does nothing to reduce greenhouse gases. Ontario could plant enough trees to offset emissions from coal plants, but this would not be a cheap solution.

The government can step back from the business of generating power and just act as a regulator to ensure that the real costs of greenhouse gas emission, nuclear safety and nuclear incident remediation risk, and other costs are incorporated into the price of each solution. Let the market choose the most genuinely efficient solution. Just don't let power producers offload their environmental costs on the taxpayers, as has been done in the past. It may be cheaper for Ontario to import more power than to produce it locally.


Tono
said
0 0

Oh come on you guys! Let's be a little bit patriotic here. Canada builds the best nuclear reactors in the world.

By the way, whatever happened to Atomic Energy of Canada going public? I'm interested in a few shares!


Wind and Gas Critic
said
0 0

FYI...
In ontario atleast, we are paying windmills 19 cents per kwh, nuclear/hydro/coal get around 3.5 cents as i write this. How is this cheaper energy? Get informed tree-huggers.


Greg - Oshawa
said
0 0

Canadians need to keep our reactor technology and not sell out to other countries. It is too important for us to hold on this. I agree major changes are required with AECL's management but we should be able to handle this ourselves.


Share with your social Network:

 

Advertisement

Contest

User Tools

About the tools

Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.

Share it with your network of friends

Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.

Share this article with Facebook

Share this article with Digg

Share this article with Newsvine

Share this article with delicious

Share this article.
Send Email

Share this article with Twitter

Share this article with StumbleUpon

Share this article with Reddit

Share this article with Yahoo! Buzz