Does Nuclear Energy Have a Role in the Development of Canada&apos;s Oil Sands?

Subject Canadian government emissions, energy and environment policy. Significance In February, the government is expected to make approvals decisions for new oil sands projects. Five years after signing the Paris climate accords, Canadian politics are increasingly defined by climate change and the economic and political trade-offs inherent in reducing its associated risks. Impacts Renewed interest and investment in Canada’s nuclear energy industry is likely. Quebec hydroelectricity exports may help north-eastern US states reduce their emissions. The Teck Resources’ Frontier project will likely be approved, but low oil prices might mean it is not completed. If the Conservatives win the next federal election (due by October 2023, but likely earlier), looser emissions policy is likely. Provincial elections pre-2023 will likely see some non-Conservative governments returned, meaning tougher climate action.

Download Full-text

Climate and Energy Politics in Canada and Germany: Dealing with Fossil Fuel Legacies

Canadian Journal of European and Russian Studies ◽

10.22215/cjers.v14i2.2766 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 14 (2) ◽

pp. 29-55

Author(s):

Stephan Schott ◽

Miranda Alice Schreurs

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Strategic Alliances ◽

Oil Sands ◽

Nuclear Energy ◽

Large Scale ◽

Fossil Fuels ◽

Policy Instruments ◽

Energy Transition ◽

Hard Coal ◽

Phase Out

Canada and Germany are both pursuing major energy transitions and far-reaching climate programs but differ in terms of policies towards some energy sources and their preferred policy instruments. Both countries have committed to large scale emission reductions despite the challenge of regional divestment from fossil fuels: hard coal in North Rhine Westphalia and the Saarland; lignite in the Rhineland, on the German-Polish border in the Lusatsia (Lausitz) region, and in central Germany; coal in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia; and oil in Western Canada. We contrast the current Pan Canadian framework (PCF) on Clean Growth and Climate Change to the German Climate Law and the European Green Deal setting targets to become climate neutral by 2050. Germany has plans for a dual phase out of nuclear energy by 2022 and coal by 2038. In contrast, Canada differs by province in terms of policies on fossil fuels and nuclear energy. Both are leaders in renewable energies, but differ in the type of renewable energy which dominates. We further examine the international action components of the PCF and its implications for collaboration with Germany and the EU. We discuss potential partnerships and strategic alliances between Canada and Germany in the context of their mutual interest to enable an energy transition and to lead to the implementation of the Paris agreement for climate change action. We identify political challenges within each federation, and especially the approach to impacted coal regions in Germany and Poland as well as the Canadian oil sands. Barriers to progress for meeting identified targets and timelines are considered. We conclude with insights on the possibility and likelihood of linking policies and regulatory measures across the Atlantic, and the political threats of advancing towards decarbonization and an energy transition away from fossil fuels in each jurisdiction.

Download Full-text

Integration of Nuclear Energy Into Oil Sands Projects

Fourth International Topical Meeting on High Temperature Reactor Technology, Volume 2 ◽

10.1115/htr2008-58239 ◽

2008 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ashley Finan ◽

Andrew C. Kadak

Keyword(s):

Natural Gas ◽

Greenhouse Gas ◽

Oil Sands ◽

Nuclear Energy ◽

Surface Mining ◽

Human Condition ◽

Labor Costs ◽

Mining Operations ◽

Natural Gas Prices ◽

Steam Production

Energy security and greenhouse gas reductions are thought to be two of the most urgent priorities for sustaining and improving the human condition in the future. Few places pit the two goals so directly in opposition to one another as the Alberta oil sands. Here, Canadian natural gas is burned in massive quantities to extract oil from one of North America’s largest native sources of carbon-intensive heavy oil. This conflict need not continue, however; non-emitting nuclear energy can replace natural gas as a fuel source in an economical and more environmentally sound way. This would allow for the continued extraction of transportation fuels without greenhouse gas emissions, while freeing up the natural gas supply for hydrogen feedstock and other valuable applications. Bitumen production in Alberta has expanded dramatically in the past five years as the price of oil has risen to record levels. This paper explores the feasibility and economics of using nuclear energy to power future oil sands production and upgrading activities, and puts forth several nuclear energy application scenarios for providing steam and electricity to in-situ and surface mining operations. This review includes the Enhanced CANDU 6, the Advanced CANDU Reactor (ACR) and the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR). Based on reasonable projections of available cost information, nuclear energy used for steam production is expected to be less expensive than steam produced by natural gas at current natural gas prices and under $7/MMBtu (CAD). For electricity production, nuclear becomes competitive with natural gas plants at natural gas prices of $10–13/MMBtu (CAD). Costs of constructing nuclear plants in Alberta are affected by higher local labor costs, which this paper took into account in making these estimates. Although more definitive analysis of construction costs and project economics will be required to confirm these findings, there appears to be sufficient merit in the potential economics to support further study. A single 500MWth PBMR reactor is able to supply high-pressure steam for a 40,000 to 60,000 bpd Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) plant, whereas the CANDU and ACR reactors are unable to produce sufficient steam pressures to be practical in that application. The CANDU, ACR and PBMR reactors have potential for supplying heat and electricity for surface mining operations. The primary environmental benefit of nuclear energy in this application is to reduce CO2 emissions by up to 3.1 million metric tons per year for each 100,000 barrel per day (bpd) bitumen production SAGD facility, or 2.0 million metric tons per year for the replacement of 700MWe of grid electricity with a nuclear power plant. Should carbon emissions be priced, the economic advantages of nuclear energy would be dramatically improved such that with a $50/ton CO2e at the releases expected for typical projects using natural gas, breakeven gas prices for nuclear drop to less than $3.50/MMBtu, well below the current natural gas price of $10/MMBtu for SADG steam production.

Download Full-text

Integration of Nuclear Energy Into Oil Sands Projects

Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power ◽

10.1115/1.3098421 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 132 (4) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Ashley E. Finan ◽

Andrew C. Kadak

Keyword(s):

Natural Gas ◽

Greenhouse Gas ◽

Oil Sands ◽

Nuclear Energy ◽

Surface Mining ◽

Human Condition ◽

Electricity Production ◽

Labor Costs ◽

Cost Information ◽

Mining Operations

Energy security and greenhouse gas reduction are thought to be two of the most urgent priorities for sustaining and improving the human condition in the near future. Few places pit the two goals so directly in opposition to one another as the Alberta oil sands. Here, Canadian natural gas is burned in massive quantities to extract oil from one of North America’s largest native sources of carbon-intensive heavy oil. However, this conflict need not continue. Nonemitting nuclear energy can replace natural gas as a fuel source in an economical and more environmentally sound way. This would allow for the continued extraction of transportation fuels without greenhouse gas emissions, while freeing up the natural gas supply for hydrogen feedstock and other valuable applications. Bitumen production in Alberta expanded dramatically in the past 5 years as the price of oil rose to record levels. This paper explores the feasibility and economics of using nuclear energy to power future oil sands production and upgrading activities, and puts forth several nuclear energy application scenarios for providing steam and electricity to in situ and surface mining operations. This review includes the Enhanced CANDU 6, the Advanced CANDU Reactor, and the pebble bed modular reactor. Based on reasonable projections of available cost information, steam produced using nuclear energy is expected to be less expensive than steam produced by natural gas at current natural gas prices and at prices above $6.50/MMBtu (CAD). For electricity production, nuclear energy becomes competitive with natural gas plants at gas prices of $10–13/MMBtu (CAD). Costs of constructing nuclear plants in Alberta are affected by higher local labor costs, which this paper took into account in making these estimates. Although a more definitive analysis of construction costs and project economics will be required to confirm these findings, there appears to be sufficient merit in the potential economics to support further study.

Download Full-text