News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 3K     9 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1.1K     3 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 2K     0 

Bruce Power: New Nuclear Generation Capacity

Refurbishing 1 and 4 should be doable if they are willing to spend the extra money, The reactors were re-tubed in the 80's so they are pretty much the same age as the b side reactors, so everything would need to re-done again. I suppose it depends how desperate they are for the extra 1000MW. I figure if they are spending the money now and its not too much more might as well get all of them done at the same time.
 
yoshirocks702 said:
Refurbishing 1 and 4 should be doable if they are willing to spend the extra money, The reactors were re-tubed in the 80's so they are pretty much the same age as the b side reactors, so everything would need to re-done again. I suppose it depends how desperate they are for the extra 1000MW. I figure if they are spending the money now and its not too much more might as well get all of them done at the same time.
Click to expand...

It might be worth it given we seem to be building a sort of body of expertise in reactor refurbs, with Bruce, Darlington and now Pickering.

AoD
 
nfitz said:
As far as I know, they are still in almost the same state as when they are shut-down, so there's no new barriers to being refurbished.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the Pickering reactors are smaller than the ones at Darlington or Bruce. The Pickering Block A reactor each had around 500Mw of power production. The ones in Darlington produce 878 Mw. That's why the refurbishment was initially cancelled. The Pickering reactors were to small to justify the cost. The block B should be refurbished to get additional capacity online ASAP. But in my opinion the block A can have a longer timeframe to demolish and rebuild larger reactors, maybe even have a new generation of CANDU developed as part of the project. Canada has had billions in economic development from those previous reactor designs.
yoshirocks702 said:
Refurbishing 1 and 4 should be doable if they are willing to spend the extra money, The reactors were re-tubed in the 80's so they are pretty much the same age as the b side reactors, so everything would need to re-done again. I suppose it depends how desperate they are for the extra 1000MW. I figure if they are spending the money now and its not too much more might as well get all of them done at the same time.
Click to expand...
 
dullturtle06 said:
Yes, but the Pickering reactors are smaller than the ones at Darlington or Bruce. The Pickering Block A reactor each had around 500Mw of power production.
Click to expand...
Pickering B are also 500-something - only slightly higher than Pickering A.

I'm not sure how size precludes two of the A reactors, but not the B reactors (or the other 2 A reactors).

Also, I thought the capacity at the two A reactors went up a bit during the refurb ... thought it's hard to say, the numbers I am seeing are all over the place.
 
...Should a separate thread be made for Pickering? Perhaps one for Darlington while we're at it?

Or just rename this thread to 'Nuclear Power infrastructure' or something instead?

The last few posts have nothing to do with the proposed new nuclear build at the Bruce site.
 
Haljackey said:
...Should a separate thread be made for Pickering? Perhaps one for Darlington while we're at it?

Or just rename this thread to 'Nuclear Power infrastructure' or something instead?

The last few posts have nothing to do with the proposed new nuclear build at the Bruce site.
Click to expand...
I’d support a nuclear power thread.
 
Not sure a new thread on Nuclear Power or Storage was started, so I will post here for now.

I ran across this article, I do not know much about the program, except in generalities, and cannot comment on the science and engineering involved, but this is of interest given the discussions ongoing in Ontario.

www.thecooldown.com

Finland is on the verge of an incredible human-made alteration deep beneath the Earth: 'They'll hold a total of 5,500 tonnes of waste'

Finland's Onkalo project represents a monumental leap toward curbing nuclear waste and safeguarding the environment.
www.thecooldown.com www.thecooldown.com
 
The Ford government made another power-related announcement a couple days ago. Ontario is planning the construction of three new power generation facilities. It is not determined what type of generation method they will use yet, but it is highly likely that they will be nuclear given that power demand is suspected to increase 75% by 2050 and require an additional 16,000 MW of generating capacity by that time. The new Bruce C plant will only provide 4,800 MW, so these three facilities are probably going to be quite significant. It will be very difficult to achieve this goal with any other type of power source. The sites in question are three OPG-owned properties that formerly hosted coal/oil-fired power plants, all of which have been decommissioned and/or demolished:
  • OPG Wesleyville in Port Hope (former oil-fired plant)
  • OPG Nanticoke in Haldimand County (former coal-fired plant)
  • OPG Lambton in St. Clair Township (former coal-fired plant)
The divestment of the Wesleyville site was initially planned, but was halted at the last minute in 2022, so it's likely this has been in the works for at least a couple of years now. Worth noting/repeating as well that a land assembly west of Stelco Erie Works in Nanticoke was initially planned to host the Bruce Erie nuclear power plant in the early 2000s, but was scrapped in 2008 or so when electricity projections were planned to plateau. Building it on the existing OPG site instead of a greenfield one is probably the better choice anyway.

In other news as well, the location for the NWMO Deep Geological Repository for nuclear waste storage has been chosen. Ignace and Wabigoon Lake FN will be hosting the facility, located near Dryden in Northern Ontario. They were chosen because the township and the FN were both willing hosts and had voted on the matter. The other competing finalist, South Bruce and Saugeen Ojibway Nation, was not chosen because while the municipality of South Bruce had voted to become a willing host, Saugeen Ojibway Nation had not yet committed to a timeline for scheduling a vote on the matter, and were not yet decided on being a willing host. Next stage is the Impact Assessment and regulatory process, which will likely take around a decade.

Some other Bruce Power-related news also came out earlier this month. Bruce Power and Ontario will be building a processing facility for medical isotopes. When Bruce Power started formally producing isotopes after they received their license in 2021 for their Isotope Production System (IPS), they were being sent abroad to Europe for processing for medical use. With this new facility, they will be able to be processed domestically instead, resulting in cost reductions. The facility will either be located on-Site or nearby. They currently produce Lutetium-177, which is used for prostate cancer treatment. They also have also been producing a non-IPS-based isotope Cobalt-60 for over 35 years, which is used for Gamma irradiation processes that sanitize medical equipment, in addition to being used for breast and brain cancer treatment.
 
Last edited:
ericmacm said:
The Ford government made another power-related announcement a couple days ago. Ontario is planning the construction of three new power generation facilities. It is not determined what type of generation method they will use yet, but it is highly likely that they will be nuclear given that power demand is suspected to increase 75% by 2050 and require an additional 16,000 MW of generating capacity by that time. The new Bruce C plant will only provide 4,800 MW, so these three facilities are probably going to be quite significant. It will be very difficult to achieve this goal with any other type of power source. The sites in question are three OPG-owned properties that formerly hosted coal/oil-fired power plants, all of which have been decommissioned and/or demolished:
  • OPG Wesleyville in Port Hope (former oil-fired plant)
  • OPG Nanticoke in Haldimand County (former coal-fired plant)
  • OPG Lambton in St. Clair Township (former coal-fired plant)
The divestment of the Wesleyville site was initially planned, but was halted at the last minute in 2022, so it's likely this has been in the works for at least a couple of years now. Worth noting/repeating as well that a land assembly west of Stelco Erie Works in Nanticoke was initially planned to host the Bruce Erie nuclear power plant in the early 2000s, but was scrapped in 2008 or so when electricity projections were planned to plateau. Building it on the existing OPG site instead of a greenfield one is probably the better choice anyway.

In other news as well, the location for the NWMO Deep Geological Repository for nuclear waste storage has been chosen. Ignace and Wabigoon Lake FN will be hosting the facility, located near Dryden in Northern Ontario. They were chosen because the township and the FN were both willing hosts and had voted on the matter. The other competing finalist, South Bruce and Saugeen Ojibway Nation, was not chosen because while the municipality of South Bruce had voted to become a willing host, Saugeen Ojibway Nation had not yet committed to a timeline for scheduling a vote on the matter, and were not yet decided on being a willing host. Next stage is the Impact Assessment and regulatory process, which will likely take around a decade.

Some other Bruce Power-related news also came out earlier this month. Bruce Power and Ontario will be building a processing facility for medical isotopes. When Bruce Power started formally producing isotopes after they received their license in 2021 for their Isotope Production System (IPS), they were being sent abroad to Europe for processing for medical use. With this new facility, they will be able to be processed domestically instead, resulting in cost reductions. The facility will either be located on-Site or nearby. They currently produce Lutetium-177, which is used for prostate cancer treatment. They also have also been producing a non-IPS-based isotope Cobalt-60 for over 35 years, which is used for Gamma irradiation processes that sanitize medical equipment, in addition to being used for breast and brain cancer treatment.
Click to expand...
Another advantage of these three sites is they have existing high-capacity grid connections already in place. If I'm not mistaken, Wesleyville never went online.

After the regulatory process, I read the actual construction of the waste storage facility will take another decade.
 
lenaitch said:
Another advantage of these three sites is they have existing high-capacity grid connections already in place. If I'm not mistaken, Wesleyville never went online.

After the regulatory process, I read the actual construction of the waste storage facility will take another decade.
Click to expand...
You're right, Wesleyville never went online due to the 1979 Energy Crisis.

A decade or more of construction for the DGR sounds about right. They are planning on going 650-800 metres below surface and will have to dig out all of their storage tunnels as well. Lots of material will need to be dug out and hauled away, and their isolation barriers will need to be installed too.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top