Strong domestic supply chain an advantage as Canada moves ahead with new nuclear

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute

By Sasha Istvan

Canada has two major advantages. We produce uranium and we have an established supply chain.

The pledge from 22 countries, including Canada, to collectively triple nuclear capacity by 2050 drew cheers and raised eyebrows at the United Nations Climate Change Conference last fall in Dubai. Climate commitments are no stranger to bold claims. So, the question remains, can it be done?

In Canada, we are well on our way with successful and ongoing refurbishments of Ontario’s existing nuclear fleet and planning for the development of small modular reactors, or SMRs, in Ontario, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and most recently Alberta.

The infrastructure required to generate nuclear energy is significant. You not only need engineers and technicians working at a plant, but the supply chain to support it.

Over five decades worth of nuclear generation has allowed Canada to build a world class supply chain. Thus far it has focused on servicing CANDU reactors, but now we have the potential to expand into SMRs.

I first became interested in the CANDU reactor after working as a manufacturing engineer for one of the major fuel and tooling suppliers of Ontario Power Generation and Bruce Power. I witnessed firsthand the sophistication and quality of the nuclear supply chain in Ontario, being particularly impressed by the technical expertise and skilled workers in the industry.

The CANDU reactor is the unsung hero of the Canadian energy industry: one of the world’s safest nuclear reactors, exported around the world, and producing around 60 per cent of Ontario’s electricity, as well as 40 per cent of New Brunswick’s.

Having visited machine shops across Ontario, it’s evident that Canadians should take pride that the expertise and technology required for the safe generation of nuclear energy is available here in Canada.

As Canada looks to grow its nuclear output to achieve net-zero goals, its well-established engineering and manufacturing capabilities can make it a leader in the global expansion of nuclear energy as other nations work to make their COP28 declaration a reality.

Canada has two major advantages. The first is that it is a globally significant producer of uranium. We already export uranium from our incredible reserves in northern Saskatchewan and fabricate unenriched uranium fuel for CANDU. Canadian uranium will be an important ingredient in the success and sustainability of a nuclear renaissance, especially for our allies.

The second is that we have an established and active supply chain. While new nuclear builds have slowed dramatically in the western world — a result of the fallout from Chernobyl and Fukushima, as well as competition from cheap natural gas — Bruce Power and OPG are in the midst of major refurbishments to extend their operations until 2064 and 2055, respectively.

Bruce Power has successfully completed the first unit refurbishment on schedule and within budget, with ongoing work on the second unit. OPG has accomplished refurbishments for two out of its four units at Darlington, with the latest unit completed ahead of schedule and under budget. These multibillion-dollar refurbishments have actually grown our nuclear supply chain and demonstrate that it’s firing on all cylinders.

SMRs are the next phase of nuclear technology. Their size and design make them well suited for high production and modular construction. Investing in the supply chain for SMRs now positions Canada for significant economic gains.

OPG plans to build four GE-Hitachi BWRX-300 reactors, with the first slated for service as early as 2028. This first-of-a-kind investment will help identify and overcome design challenges and develop its own supply chain. That will benefit not only their project but those that follow suit.

SaskPower is planning to proceed with the same SMR design, as well as the first pilot globally of the Westinghouse eVinci microreactor; New Brunswick is moving ahead with the ARC-100, both for its existing nuclear site at Point Lepreau as well as in the Port of Belledune; and OPG and Capital Power recently announced a partnership to explore a nuclear reactor in Alberta, including the potential for the BWRX-300.

While the bulk of the nuclear supply chain is currently located in Ontario, other provinces have already been investing in the development of local capacity.

All this activity sets Canada up to leverage first-mover advantage and become a significant global provider of BWRX-300 components. Canada will not only see the economic benefits during initial construction but also through sustained demand for replacement parts in the future.

Nuclear energy has already made a significant contribution to the Canadian economy. In 2019, a study commissioned by the Canadian Nuclear Association and the Organization of Canadian Nuclear Industries showed that the nuclear industry accounted for $17 billion of Canada’s annual GDP annually and has created over 76,000 jobs.

Notably, 89 per cent of these positions were classified as high-skilled, and over 40 per cent of the workforce was under 40. This study, conducted before the announcement of SMR plans, was followed by a more recent report from the Conference Board of Canada on the economic impact of OPG’s SMR initiatives. The study found that the construction of just four SMRs at OPG could boost the Canadian GDP by $15.3 billion (2019 dollars) over 65 years and sustain approximately 2,000 jobs annually during that period.

Public perception of nuclear is improving. In 2023, the percentage of Canadians wanting to see further development of nuclear power generation in Canada grew to 57 per cent compared with 51 per cent in 2021.

As well, the Business Council of Canada has voiced its support for nuclear expansion, emphasizing Canada’s strategic advantages: political and public backing across the spectrum, coupled with a rich history of nuclear expertise.

Nuclear energy is dispatchable, sustainable and a proven technology. As nations move to achieve their climate goals, it has one other major benefit: a supply chain that is wholly western and in Canada’s case almost totally domestic.

While the critical minerals and manufactured goods required for batteries, wind and solar energy rely heavily on China and other politically unstable or authoritarian countries, nuclear provides energy independence. Canada is well positioned to help our allies improve their energy security with our strong, competitive nuclear supply chain.

Sasha Istvan is an engineer based in Calgary, with experience in both the nuclear supply chain and the oil and gas sector.

Related Topics:#MacdonaldLaurierInstitute #NucleanEnergy #SashaIstvan #SmallModularReactors

Up Next

The Cost to Western Canada if Steven Guilbeault Copies Biden’s Assault on LNG

Don't Miss

Opportunity knocks for Canada to become key LNG supplier as U.S. pauses projects

Todayville

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

Follow Author

Surgery Denied. Death Approved.

Economy / 3 hours ago

Affordable housing out of reach everywhere in Canada

Business / 3 hours ago

Canada invests $34 million in Chinese drones now considered to be ‘high security risks’

Dan McTeague

Will this deal actually build a pipeline in Canada?

Published on December 7, 2025

Dan McTeague

By Dan McTeague

Will Carney’s new pipeline deal actually help get a pipeline built in Canada? As we said before, the devil is in the details.

While the establishment and mainstream media cheer on the new pipeline agreement, there are specific details you need to be aware of.

Dan McTeague explains in his latest video.

Energy

Canada following Europe’s stumble by ignoring energy reality

Published on December 7, 2025

Todayville

Family in Spain eating by candlelight during a blackout, April 2025

From Resource Works

By Stewart Muir

Canada’s own 2024 grid scare proves we’re on the same path unless we change course.

Europe’s green-energy unraveling is no longer a distant cautionary tale. It’s a mirror — and Canada is already seeing the first cracks.

A new Wall Street Journal investigation lays out the European story in stark detail: a continent that slashed emissions faster than anyone else, only to discover that doing so by tearing down firm power before its replacement existed comes with brutal consequences — collapsing industry, sky-high electricity prices, political fragmentation, and a public increasingly unwilling to subsidize wishful thinking.

The tragedy isn’t that Europe tried to decarbonize quickly.

The tragedy is how they did it: by insisting on an “or” transition — renewables or fossil fuels — instead of what every energy-literate nation outside Europe pursued: renewables and fossil fuels, working together while the system evolves.

And here’s the uncomfortable truth:

Canada has already had its first European-style crisis. It happened in January 2024.

Canada’s early warning: the January 2024 electricity crunch

Most people have already forgotten it, because our political class desperately wanted you to. But in January 2024, Western Canada came within a whisker of a full-blown energy security breakdown. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and B.C. were stretched to their limit. The grid was under cascading stress. Contingency plans were activated. Alberta came terrifyingly close to rolling blackouts.

It wasn’t caused by climate change. It wasn’t caused by a mysterious cyberattack.

It was caused by the same structural brittleness now crippling Europe:

Insufficient firm power, after years of political messaging that we could “electrify everything” without adding real generating capacity.
Overreliance on intermittent sources not backed by storage or gas.
A planning system that punted risk into the future, betting the grid could be stretched indefinitely.

The January 2024 event was not a blip. It was a preview.

Our European moment in miniature.

But instead of treating it as the national wake-up call it should have been, B.C. did something telling — and deeply damaging.

The B.C. government’s response: attack the messenger

Just a couple of years ago, an economist publicly warned about the economic price of emerging system vulnerabilities due to a groaning stack of “clean economy” policies.

The B.C. government didn’t respond with data, evidence, or even curiosity. Instead, a cabinet minister used the safety of legislative privilege — that gold-plated shield against accountability — to launch nasty personal attacks on the economist who raised the concerns, which themselves had originated in the government’s own analysis.

No engagement.

No counter-analysis.

No willingness to consider the system risks.

Just slurs — the very definition of anti-intellectual governance.

It was a moment that told the whole story:

Too many policymakers in this province believe that energy systems obey politics, not physics.

Physics always gets the last word.

Europe shows us what political denial turns into

The WSJ reporting couldn’t be clearer about the consequences of that denial:

Germany: highest domestic electricity prices in the developed world.
U.K.: highest industrial electricity rates among major economies.
Industrial flight: chemical plants closing, data centres frozen, major players hinting at exiting Europe entirely.
Grid instability: wind farms paid tens of millions not to generate because the grid can’t handle it.
Public revolt: rising support for parties rejecting the entire green-transition agenda.
Policy whiplash: governments rushing to build gas plants they swore they’d never need.

Europe is now an object lesson in how good intentions, executed poorly, can produce the exact opposite of what was promised: higher prices, higher volatility, declining competitiveness, and a public ready to abandon climate policy altogether.

This is precisely what January 2024 warned us about — but on a continental scale.

The system cost we keep pretending doesn’t exist

Every serious energy expert knows the truth Europe is now living: intermittent renewables require massive amounts of redundant capacity, storage, and backup generation. That’s why the U.K. now needs 120 gigawatts of capacity to serve a demand previously met with 60–70 gigawatts, even though electricity use hasn’t meaningfully grown.

This is the math policymakers prefer not to show the public.

And it’s why B.C.’s refusal to have an honest conversation about firm power is so dangerous.

If we electrify everything without ensuring affordable and abundant natural gas generation, we’re not building a green future.

We’re building Europe, 10 years early.

The lesson for Canada — especially for B.C.

Here is what Europe and January 2024 together say, in one clear voice:

1. There is no energy transition without firm power.

Renewables are part of the system, but they don’t run the system. Natural gas does. Hydro does. Nuclear does. Pretending otherwise is how you end up with rolling blackouts.

2. Political denial makes crises worse.

When ministers attack economists instead of answering them, it signals that ideology is running the show. Europe learned the cost of that. We will too, unless we change course.

Europe lost the room. Once people see their bills double while factories close, the climate agenda becomes politically radioactive.

4. B.C. has an advantage Europe would kill for.

Europe dreams of having an abundant, local, low-carbon firm-power fuel like northeastern B.C.’s natural gas. We treat it like a political liability. That’s not strategy. It’s negligence.

5. The transition will fail if we don’t treat electricity like the national security asset it is.

Without energy, there is no industry.

Without industry, there is no prosperity.

Without prosperity, there is no climate policy that survives the next election cycle.

What we need now

Canada must embrace an “and” strategy:

Renewables and natural gas. Electrification and realism. Climate ambition and economic competitiveness.

January 2024 showed us the future in a flash. Europe shows us the end state if we keep ignoring the warning.

We can still choose something better. But only if we stop pretending that energy systems bend to political narratives — and start treating them with the seriousness they demand.

Resource Works News