Ontario to refurbish Pickering nuclear plant as demand for electricity grows

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.ย. 2024
  • The Ontario government has announced that it plans to refurbish the half-century-old Pickering nuclear generating station, keeping the plant operating for at least another 30 years.
    »»» Subscribe to CBC News to watch more videos: bit.ly/1RreYWS
    Connect with CBC News Online:
    For breaking news, video, audio and in-depth coverage: bit.ly/1Z0m6iX
    Follow CBC News on TikTok: bit.ly/3TnHioe
    Follow CBC News on Twitter: bit.ly/1sA5P9H
    Find CBC News on Facebook: bit.ly/1WjG36m
    Follow CBC News on Instagram: bit.ly/1Z0iE7O
    Subscribe to CBC News on Snapchat: bit.ly/3leaWsr
    Download the CBC News app for iOS: apple.co/25mpsUz
    Download the CBC News app for Android: bit.ly/1XxuozZ
    »»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
    For more than 80 years, CBC News has been the source Canadians turn to, to keep them informed about their communities, their country and their world. Through regional and national programming on multiple platforms, including CBC Television, CBC News Network, CBC Radio, CBCNews.ca, mobile and on-demand, CBC News and its internationally recognized team of award-winning journalists deliver the breaking stories, the issues, the analyses and the personalities that matter to Canadians.

ความคิดเห็น • 180

  • @Michael-pg7rv
    @Michael-pg7rv 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +71

    With all of the electric vehicles that will be on the road in the next 5-10 years we are going to need a huge source of clean and reliable energy.

    • @theeouttheres3083
      @theeouttheres3083 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      i think it's more we need electricity for the battery plants we bought for VW, etc. this isn't power for ontario... this is for the free electricity we'll provide to the plants. but totally worth it, for the economy!

    • @Mountain-Viking
      @Mountain-Viking 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Luckily, Ontario already has the best clean, reliable, most powerful energy source. Nuclear.

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Ontario would have plenty of clean and reliable energy right now except the Ford government didn’t build any new energy generation, green or otherwise, in five or six years.

    • @Kurtos25
      @Kurtos25 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Break throughs with fusion looks like the only thing promising until we discover something else

    • @c-v-n3322
      @c-v-n3322 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      but that's why they built all them wind and solar farms.
      We need more Nuclear Power Plants for our future.

  • @randomstranger9494
    @randomstranger9494 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +39

    As far as the general public is concerned, their knowledge of nuclear stopped at Chernobyl and Fukushima, there needs to be public education program to explain the advancements in the technology, especially where safety is concerned.

    • @SpectacularDisaster
      @SpectacularDisaster 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Especially with nuclear fusion

    • @killax7
      @killax7 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Too soon to talk about fusion. Let them finish building that test reactor overseas. (Too soon from an efficacy standpoint, there's no debate it will be safer if functional).

    • @SpectacularDisaster
      @SpectacularDisaster 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @killax7 Sooner than you may think. Some nuclear power experts beleive it can be ready for market withing 5 years. That said, Ontario is completely doing the right thing with this plant.

    • @SRN42069
      @SRN42069 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Nuclear power is extremely safe in today's world, also there's literally been knowledge sitting everywhere, there's nuclear info centres and the entire internet at your finger tips. None of the information is private it's public knowledge.

    • @kyletrusler4565
      @kyletrusler4565 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@SpectacularDisaster As they always say, its always 5 years away from market. In reality, itll be much longer before its even validated as a commercially viable, much less publicly accepted and then embraced by governments. Thats not going to happen quick anytime soon.

  • @christopherboisvert6902
    @christopherboisvert6902 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +99

    I support this move of the Ontarian Government. Green Peace must understand that Nuclear Power is the only energy that is RELIABLE and really LOW pollution when we compare other modes of production.

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      There are plenty of alternatives. The government even admits that its experts said they could build a reliable system with no pollution, but they just don’t want to because it might cost a little more and they are ideologically opposed to doing anything for the environment.

    • @stickynorth
      @stickynorth 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      It's not a matter of either/or it's both.

    • @jessefisher1809
      @jessefisher1809 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      @@my2iu There's not plenty of alternatives. Talking about non carbon/low carbon emitting dispatchable energy sources, its pretty much just Nuclear, Hydro and Geothermal. And all three can only be built in certain locations, limiting what you can build where even more. We really don't have the luxury to be throwing them out unnecessarily.

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@jessefisher1809 We have solar and wind with battery backup, plus Ontario has access to huge amounts of hydro in Manitoba and Quebec. Plus, Ontario can build a few gas plants too if it only needs to run them a few weeks per year. But the Ford government cancelled plans to buy Quebec hydro power, and they refused to build any green energy since it came into power, requiring the province to run its fleet of backup gas plants non-stop. In any case, I’m not against nuclear power. I’m fine with the new SMR reactor that they’re building at Bruce. I just don’t think you should run a nuclear plant beside the city of Toronto, which can’t be evacuated if there were ever to be an accident.

    • @corychallice7705
      @corychallice7705 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      ​@@my2iuCANDU reactor safety track record is stellar. Impressive design

  • @test40323
    @test40323 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +37

    My favourite nuclear energy is the CANDU reactors. A Canadian technology using plentiful uranium 238. I wish the Professor had explained it in more details.

    • @Dylan-hh7vo
      @Dylan-hh7vo 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Slight correction - CANDU uses natural uranium. This is a naturally occurring combination of U-235 and U-238 (roughly 0.7% U-235 and 99.3% U-238). Light water reactors use enriched uranium which has a higher U-235 content. We do not enrich uranium in Canada.

    • @test40323
      @test40323 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      @@Dylan-hh7vo , thanks for the correction. I didn't want to confuse people with the small amount of 235 but you are right about that and the use of deuterium (heavy water) to moderate the reaction.

    • @Dylan-hh7vo
      @Dylan-hh7vo 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@test40323 no problem. CANDU is exciting tech - I’m a big fan. My personal favourite aspects are the made in Canada aspect (96% made in Canada) and the ability for online refuelling which results in the amazing capacity factors you see in CANDU reactors.

    • @RC-nq7mg
      @RC-nq7mg 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      They are pretty cool reactors. Similar to a soviet RBMK only flipped on its side using deuterium (heavy water) as a moderator which makes the positive void coefficient of the reactor negligible. They also allow on line refueling just like the RBMK does. CANDU has a very safe and reliable record.

    • @event__horizon
      @event__horizon 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Over 60% of global uranium and over 80% of nuclear acceptable for power is produced by BRICKS nations that you told off nicely. Even if new Western sites are discovered it will take at least 10 years of setting up to bring the new deposits to market.
      Don't forget why gas prices jumped up either, sanctions and BRICKS doings.

  • @e30farmer85
    @e30farmer85 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I'll say easily it will be over 5 billion to refurbish one reactor. I'm for the refurbished over the wasted money we spent on solar and wind.
    It would be nice if we made another nuclear plant.
    Shocking nothing new tech wise came through the last 30 years.
    Rate payers be ready to have higher rates.

    • @Mountain-Viking
      @Mountain-Viking 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      There are 4 new reactors being constructed in Ontario, and Pickering refurbishment will keep those 8 running an other 50 60 years

    • @upnhere8513
      @upnhere8513 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It would nice if Canada were leaders in all energy: nuclear and renewables. Diversification will make us more resilient and best align us with future opportunities. Norway, for instance, invests in renewables from their gargantuan oil money fund. People are so divisive on these issues when the best solution is usually a marriage of solutions.

  • @Megabean
    @Megabean 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

    This is great news, we're not Germany.

  • @EpsilonMountainBiking
    @EpsilonMountainBiking 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    This is a day to be proud of for anyone who is a Canadian. CANDU reactors are Canadian made and still going. Also other countries still using CANDU to this day. Refurbishment is the best choice available to us. People need to have more pride in the decisions our country makes. Windmills produce energy but cannot be used when no wind is present, and also cannot be used when wind is too HIGH.. requires a sweet spot to function which is rarely rather than often. Solar is only sufficient as much as the sun is present, and you would require massive battery supplies to be able to back up the grid for when these sources are not present. Guys just do the research yourself please... what materials are batteries made from? Where are these materials found? What is USED to mine these materials? Battery creation and solar panels are not great for the environment. Nothing is perfect I will say that but it is reliable CLEAN power and I know for a fact that the people who work there are some of the smartest in the world. The authorized staff I have met them, they are some of the most intelligent people in Canada I have to imagine. They operate proudly and safely every day. Not to mention... I don't think a lot of people understand how much a megawatt actually is but for those who do not know... 1 mega watt is 1 million watts (1,000,000) each reactor producing currently 550 is to the grid - station supply x 4 reactors 2000 megawatts let's call it after station supply is used. That's 2 billion watts of power. 2,000,000,000 watts of power guys.... I can't imagine how many batteries you'd need for 3 days when the sun is not shining or the wind is not pushing the turbine blades.... but I am pretty sure it's a damn lot. I don't think wind or solar is bad I just think maybe we need a combination of different sources.
    Look what happened in Alberta recently during a winter storm.. they asked people to turn off power because their grid was tapped lol. They had to turn a coal/ natty gas plant back on to help out temporarily.
    Planets heating up argument? Okay yeah what do you think powers your air conditioner guys? Let's be realistic. Technology needs to advance in battery technology and it has, but I don't know if it's there yet. I know fusion power is on the horizon. Let's wait and see, but can we all calm down and have some trust in our government for the current decision on Pickering? This is a day to be proud not be angry. Our country doesn't make much stuff anymore.. we get the states to do most of it so to know that something Canadian made that brings 2 billion watts of power is getting a second life? This is a day to grab a God damn beer and say #$%@ yes go Canada time to celebrate. 🎉🎉🎉

    • @stephennorth9529
      @stephennorth9529 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I've heard a good argument for sodium-ion batteries for stationary purposes, being that capacity/mass ratio doesn't matter, and sodium is plentiful. Electrically, they're very similar to lithium, apparently. Now we just need to see if it will reach the market.

    • @EpsilonMountainBiking
      @EpsilonMountainBiking 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @stephennorth9529 yeah maybe one day. Batteries are making progress. I think the other problem is batteries being too hot reduces the life but increases capacity. Whereas cold increases life but reduces capacity. So you. Need an environment where equipment is basically constantly providing the most ideal environment for them. Don't get me wrong I think batteries have their place and they are useful, but on an industry scaled level to provide megawatt capacity seems unsettling lol. Batteries also can produce off gases which can be hazardous. Also batteries take up space and sodium ion batteries have less battery capacity per density in comparison to lithium ion lol 😆. You would need a bigger lithium ion battery to be comparable to a smaller lithium battery. Which means on an industrial scaled level for 6 billion watts continuously needing to last for 4 to 5 days supply... is insane. Not to mention batteries do not like to be dorment, drained completely to 0% or even maxed out to 100%. The more load you have on a battery the faster it drains as well. I just don't see it yet. Not saying I don't believe in the idea but not currently. Just not feasible. We are talking about like 10 million people that live in GTA that need continuous power. What provides continuous reliable power? 🤔.
      I seen some ultra violet light solar panels 2 yrs ago works in any weather. Put them on all high rises. Nearly continuous power during day time at least lol. Never heard of the project again.. not sure where it went but looked promising.

  • @cobytang
    @cobytang 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    Finally some actual work from the Ford government

    • @jpsion
      @jpsion 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Yeah. Seems like a paradox really, people don’t want wasteful projects but they’re not willing to invest in progressive projects

  • @alanjackson1015
    @alanjackson1015 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    Good to see. Hope Federal minister Giblets will not have any say

    • @Midaswhale531
      @Midaswhale531 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      He and his party are gone after the next election

  • @firefox39693
    @firefox39693 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    I'm the polar opposite of a Conservative. I hate the PCs with a passion, but I agree with this decision completely.

  • @tonedcorster7631
    @tonedcorster7631 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    I just got into the boiler makers union. This announcement means i definitely have more work coming. Finally the government doing something good

    • @preisschild4622
      @preisschild4622 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Huge respect, you are building something that will provide clean energy for decades.

    • @tonedcorster7631
      @tonedcorster7631 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@preisschild4622 I hope so I just got in lol

  • @ijji4615
    @ijji4615 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    I think this decision is right, at least for now. (although old, but its working and survives the prupose it was built).

  • @LFTRnow
    @LFTRnow 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    A well worthwhile investment. Why not build new? Simple - it takes longer, requires new land, new setup (switchyard, etc) takes 4x longer and costs nearly 10x as much. Refurbishment has been proven to work well as can be seen from Darlington. Why continue? Demand, particularly with electric transport will only go up and is required when the sun isn't shining and wind isn't blowing (and batteries cost more money for those things). Also, some may not know, but Ontario's power generation no longer uses coal. It stopped over 10 years ago, becoming completely coal-free. How? Nuclear - CANDUs in particular.

    • @event__horizon
      @event__horizon 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You recited everything you heard perfectly!

  • @stickynorth
    @stickynorth 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    All carbon-free sources of power are wanted and needed ASAP including nuclear which is the safest, cleanest and overall cheapest form of baseload power that exists. What I want now is a huge number of announcements for NEW REACTORS in Canada including the CANDU MONARK 1000, Moltex, eVinci, Westinghouse 1200 and GE Hitachi BRWX 300's... Amongst others!

    • @jeanbolduc5818
      @jeanbolduc5818 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Not the cleanest .... what do you do with nuclear waste?

  • @Bank-E
    @Bank-E 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    About damn time !

  • @YbotPoweredGaming
    @YbotPoweredGaming 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Good, Canadian Nuclear Plants have proven to be very safe. We are going to need a lot more power generation with every new vehicle being electric in 2035.
    Also shutting down the plant is not free either. Decommissioning the Pickering plant would take years and cost tens of millions of dollars.

    • @SRN42069
      @SRN42069 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      CANDU reactor's are among the safest in the entire world.

  • @oceancape
    @oceancape 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    I support expanding Nuclear Power in Canada. Nuclear Power is the only sensible answer to Canada's growing Electrical energy needs.
    Need to reduce the excessive regulatory burden to be appropriate for modern safe modular nuclear energy technology.

    • @jeanbolduc5818
      @jeanbolduc5818 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You mean for Ontario ... not Canada .... speak for your unsustainable province .Toronto is ranked 3 rd worst city for traffic and pollution in the world

  • @CaptArgo24
    @CaptArgo24 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    What can possibly go wrong...
    Actually not a bad idea (if you do it right)

    • @donnicholson3170
      @donnicholson3170 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Nothings gone wrong in the last 40 years. So likely nothing will.

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The only thing that went wrong was the repeated fires at the Pickering plant, and the time that all of Ontario’s nuclear reactors had to be shut down for many years due to safety violations.

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Let’s not also forget the regular releases of radiation into Ottawa by the Chalk River nuclear facility too.

    • @donnicholson3170
      @donnicholson3170 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@my2iu had to reach all the way back to 1952 for that one eh?

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@donnicholson3170 The Ford government has been careful to scrub the Internet of all traces of references to Ontario’s nuclear safety issues. But it was in 1997.

  • @SuperCasique
    @SuperCasique 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Great news for the trades workers and for all Ontario!!!

  • @stephennorth9529
    @stephennorth9529 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I'm all for refurbishing! So much money saved not rebuilding all of the infrastructure that's in working order! It comes at a steep price tag, even as an annuity, but you get a lot of CO2-free electricity out of it, and I'd much rather see precautions followed and preventative measures taken rather than the cleanup and apologies we tend to see from other industries. Proud to see these plants still running strong after 40 years while keeping the locals employed.

  • @user-rj8nm9gy6w
    @user-rj8nm9gy6w 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    They should just relocate it to walmarts.

  • @mrwang420
    @mrwang420 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    There are only 9 coal power plants left in Canada.

  • @terryh5763
    @terryh5763 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    CBC should be ashamed for shutting comments off on almost EVERY youtube video they have... The boss there should be fired and NO BONUSES should be given. Disgusting. Canadians pay for the damn thing and we should have a say in how they spend OUR money... I have canceled my online subscription and I have left their web site because they shut off comments all the time. Shameful.

    • @dfwerwolf
      @dfwerwolf 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      CBC boss is government. You are assuming this is an act of single person's whim but this is systematic and deliberate. They have rules and instructions on which videos comment section is to be opened and which should be closed. Which comments to remove. All designed to steer and control the narrative and public discussion (does public discussion even exist nowadays?)

  • @wesritter
    @wesritter 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Funny they don't mention how much money SCL will make off this pork barrel project...

  • @Progressive_Canadian
    @Progressive_Canadian 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Nuclear energy and power plants, when implemented with stringent safety measures, are a remarkably safe and environmentally conscious means of generating electricity. The fear surrounding nuclear power often stems from historical incidents, but advancements in technology and stringent regulations have significantly enhanced safety standards. Unlike coal and other carbon-producing power generation methods, nuclear power plants produce electricity without emitting greenhouse gases or contributing to air pollution. The carbon footprint of nuclear energy is substantially lower, making it a crucial player in mitigating climate change. Moreover, modern nuclear reactors are designed with multiple layers of safety features, including fail-safes and emergency shutdown systems. The probability of a catastrophic incident is exceedingly low when compared to the potential long-term damage caused by carbon emissions from traditional fossil fuels. It's essential to dispel misconceptions and recognize that nuclear energy, when responsibly managed, can be a key player in the transition to a cleaner, more sustainable energy future. Embracing nuclear power is not only a pragmatic choice for meeting growing energy demands but also a crucial step toward combating climate change and safeguarding the environment for future generations.

  • @libshastra
    @libshastra 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Hopefully Ontario govt also invests in new designs and help companies win contracts to build powerplants abroad. Spread and share the costs and reduce the impacts of climate change.

    • @my2iu
      @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Ontario is already investing in a new SMR reactor at the Bruce plant, so it’s not clear why they need to refurbish Pickering.

    • @kyletrusler4565
      @kyletrusler4565 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@my2iu To expand energy generation. They're (IESO) is anticipating a doubling of energy demand in the next 30 years of 42K MW, so this is just a small part of that.

    • @iamhamzaamin
      @iamhamzaamin 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@my2iuSMRs are at Darlington. Bruce is looking at larger commercial reactors in the ballpark of 1200-1400 MWe

    • @Massacrer007
      @Massacrer007 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@my2iuBWRX-300 generates up to 300MW of power, and deployment takes time. Pickering B units generate 500MW of power.

  • @GreenWays2000
    @GreenWays2000 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Nuclear is unfortunately the cheapest form of "green" energy. Generates way more power on less land at a lower cost. Would be nice if there were more appealing incentives for home owners to add solar and wind on their property.

    • @preisschild4622
      @preisschild4622 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Why "unfortunately"? It employs a lot of people, is safer then even Hydro, reliable and clean.

  • @continentalmasters5432
    @continentalmasters5432 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I wish this will reduce our electricity bills but that won’t ever happen

  • @Headinavise
    @Headinavise 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Remember when Alberta turned down the Peace River nuclear plant proposal. It would have been built by now. I wonder what kind of support ATCO had ?

  • @dstylez1171
    @dstylez1171 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Yay about time!!

  • @inmybox2023
    @inmybox2023 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Actually a good idea, until the bureaucracy and shady deals get done with it, then it will be WAY overpriced and probably delays

  • @brianjonker510
    @brianjonker510 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Congratulations!! to Ontario from Syracuse NY.

  • @JessT-vg7ib
    @JessT-vg7ib 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    more wonderful news

  • @jeanbolduc5818
    @jeanbolduc5818 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    What do you do with nuclear waste? Not the best for the environment .... you do like Japan , Poor the radioactive in the lake Ontario

  • @bcreason
    @bcreason 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Greenpeace isn’t being practical. They would have to build 400 wind turbines to replace this plant. Wind turbines don’t supply reliable base load power. So they would have to build more than 400 and have battery storage to level it out.
    If we want to have electric cars and trucks, we’re going to need Pickering to power them.
    Let the government refurbish Pickering and use private investment to build turbines and solar. This way we have both.
    Plus to shutdown a nuclear reactor is horrendously expensive. Might as well spend a little more and refurbish.

  • @Anonymous11175
    @Anonymous11175 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I thought they were decommissioning the Pickering plant.
    Hence, they hired somany my Electical and Instrumentation friends.

  • @richardsimms251
    @richardsimms251 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    The best alternative for electric power for many countries seems to be nuclear power.
    RS. Canada

  • @BearbearbearbearbearbearRarrrr
    @BearbearbearbearbearbearRarrrr 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Doh.

  • @michaelolive8152
    @michaelolive8152 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    How does a "green" organization not support Nuclear????

    • @SpectacularDisaster
      @SpectacularDisaster 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      They do, wholeheartedly. Especially with nuclear fusion.

    • @andrewm8703
      @andrewm8703 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Uranium mining is not a nice process. Its very dirty. Plus the waste (we don't recycle nuclear waste like France or Japan) lasts for a LONG LONG time.
      But, in comparison to natural gas or coal, it is far better. It is reliable power that is safe. CANDU reactors have never failed - ever.
      Its a side benefit that Uranium mining only really exists in 3 countries. Canada, Russia and Kazakhstan. We employ our own citizens and businesses in all the steps of generating our own electricity.

  • @jamiezhou5049
    @jamiezhou5049 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Feel good for nuclear station rebuild. But can it been done wihin 2 times of budget? I doubt.

  • @thisspacenotforrent
    @thisspacenotforrent 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I suppose this will be the video shown in future history classes in relation to when something goes wrong at this plant...the plant spoken about decades ago where Homer Simpson would feel most comfortable working...this place gave iodine tablets to residents of Pickering and Ajax 25 years ago when they leaked water into the area...so many problems in the past...on the middle of two fault lines, under one of the flight paths from the proposed Pickering Airport (yes I know building a high speed rail line to Munro would be 10% of the price but we are talking about the government here...), what could go wrong, SMH...

  • @JohnDelong-qm9iv
    @JohnDelong-qm9iv 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    shouldnt we consult with greta thunberg she may not approve

  • @jpsion
    @jpsion 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    duh. refurbishing is the right thing to do. solar/wind is too volatile to make them reliable. or do both refurb and buffer with solar/wind

    • @user72974
      @user72974 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      As far as I can tell with my admittedly amateur research, doing both is the way to go.
      It's slow to build and refurbish nuclear, so we need to keep building more solar and wind right now so that we don't fall bebind. But, we also don't want to let this plant go to waste because nuclear is such good baseline power. When the refurbishment is finished, the plant can be combined with the wind and solar that we build right now.
      Long term, if we don't want to use nuclear anymore, we can use renewables like wind and solar as baseload by combining them with energy storage tech like batteries and pumped hydro.
      We can also combine renewables with grid connections to other places like Quebec that already have pumped hydro. For example, Quebec can import from us when the wind is blowing and store it in the pumped hydro, and we can import them them (drawing from the pumped hydro) when the wind isn't blowing.
      At the end of the day, even if this refurbishment is expensive, at least the power produces will be clean. It's not oil and it's not natural gas. That's a good thing.

    • @Bank-E
      @Bank-E 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Too volatile ? 😅 and drilling for oil or mining for coal isnt way worse ? 😂

    • @maryjeanjones7569
      @maryjeanjones7569 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@@Bank-E Didn't you know that Ontario is home to 20 Nuclear power plants. Nuclear has been sustaining Ontario electricity for decades.

    • @user72974
      @user72974 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​​@@Bank-E @jpsion is referring to the volatility of using renewables like wind and solar without energy storage, making the power output volatile. We need to fight climate change, but we also have certain short term realities that we need to deal with. For example, nobody wants their hospital to lose power when people are on life support. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that we need our grid to be reliable.

    • @JR-qk8kl
      @JR-qk8kl 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Think they meant not reliable.

  • @SimRacingVeteran
    @SimRacingVeteran 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Gonna need more powa to charge up those EVs government is going to mandate.

  • @pwartv3528
    @pwartv3528 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    and then need to build about 10 more plants

  • @donnarocha4043
    @donnarocha4043 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you Mr. Ford.

  • @mingzhu8093
    @mingzhu8093 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    What is the percentage of electricity Canadian use is produced by Canada?

  • @James-hm9on
    @James-hm9on 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Good to see this being done .

  • @MrBezyBez
    @MrBezyBez 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Hell yeah! Good high-paying jobs coming to Pickering soon. Great to see Canada invest in high-tech infrastructure.

    • @user72974
      @user72974 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Nuclear is low tech. It's decades old tech that's dangerous (with safety reports coming out that the mainstream media doesn't publish), it's expensive (2x that of firmed renewables), slower to build (10x longer than a solar farm or wind farm), and we still don't have a plan for storing the nuclear waste long term.
      We need to ditch nuclear in Ontario. Clinging to it is almost as egregious as clinging to fossil fuels.

  • @Steph_7d7
    @Steph_7d7 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Instead of going small modular reactors lets refurbish a worn out pos. Bad idea

    • @alanjackson1015
      @alanjackson1015 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      SMR's aren't ready to be deployed yet, so great idea

    • @Massacrer007
      @Massacrer007 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The worn out one you are thinking of is Pickering A. They are refurbishing the Pickering B units.

    • @johncrompton2285
      @johncrompton2285 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      No you get a new reactor at a fraction of the price

  • @JJs_playground
    @JJs_playground 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Good move, we need more nuclear power.

  • @scottmccambley764
    @scottmccambley764 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Why aren't we building new SMRs instead? Cheaper and less transmission lines needed

    • @alanjackson1015
      @alanjackson1015 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      They aren't fully ready for full scale deployment. They are still somewhat experimental. Earliest online for SMR I have seen is 2030 :(

    • @Massacrer007
      @Massacrer007 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Not to mention each of them only generate 300MW of power.

    • @alanjackson1015
      @alanjackson1015 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Massacrer007 That small output is one of their advantages actually. You set them up like a typical gas plant where you have multiple turbines in series, and you turn them on and off as the power demand fluctuates. Or if you have a very large point source of power use (say the Oil Sands plants) you set one up locally as needed

    • @Massacrer007
      @Massacrer007 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@alanjackson1015 I am aware of that and I agree that this is the actual intended usage of SMRs. However, the government and OPG have decided to do this (which I do not agree with as a private individual), and this is what we will have to go with.

    • @preisschild4622
      @preisschild4622 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The transmission lines are already there and SMRs arent necessarily cheaper per energy produced, but even if they werent, transmission costs would be the same, because with 3 SMRs youd end up sending the same amount of energy as with 1 large reactor.
      Heck, even CANDUs were initially small-ish, but they were made bigger because it results in cheaper electricity.

  • @davidgraham5040
    @davidgraham5040 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    To sustain a plan of all electric new vehicles by 2030 you’ll need like 80 of these plants to be built lol

    • @stickynorth
      @stickynorth 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Not even close. But having said that Canada had already pledged to triple its nuclear generation... SMH...

    • @stickynorth
      @stickynorth 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      WHAT A MAROON!

  • @oldtechie6834
    @oldtechie6834 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Is election coming soon?

  • @thebenefactor6744
    @thebenefactor6744 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Build other smaller thorium 4 salt reactors too.

    • @Massacrer007
      @Massacrer007 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It's more to do with politics than actual scientific reasoning.

  • @tania9062
    @tania9062 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is good news

  • @orioninvesting4299
    @orioninvesting4299 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    It's cheaper if you just build a new plant instead of refurbishing the old ones.

    • @dead8720
      @dead8720 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      🤣🤣

  • @gaetanomagnifico1836
    @gaetanomagnifico1836 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Billions to refurbish you say usually means cosmetic like some painting, repairing maybe some cleanup.
    I'm hoping they meant retrofitting the plant big difference.
    I know its just words but I lost faith in government to do the right thing.

    • @cabey2082
      @cabey2082 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      As stated in the video, the refurbishment makes the reactor almost like new. They replace most of the components within it. They've done this to three reactors at Bruce Power, two at Darlington and working on two more.

    • @Massacrer007
      @Massacrer007 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      When they meant refurbishment, this usually means that they are doing replacement of components or repair/upgrade-in-place of the critical components.

  • @winman1234
    @winman1234 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Good

  • @nibblesd.biscuits4270
    @nibblesd.biscuits4270 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    When you interview people I would expect you to disclose their affiliations to industry and at the very least ask them how their opinions are affected by their financial positions. Like do they own stock in these industries. Anyone who thinks pushing for a prolonged nuclear program must also carry a bunch of nuclear stock in their portfolios. Thus having an opinion that skews towards a positive outlook on this issue would benefit their own financial future. Anyone who you portray as an expert should have to disclose their portfolio details to ensure they aren’t speaking out of personal interest rather than for the interest of Canada as a whole. I would suspect that the professor holds nuclear stock since he’s an obvious supporter of it, so how can we trust his opinion on the subject. Please take effort to ensure you are providing unbiased guests on these very important topics.

  • @dahemac
    @dahemac 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    ❤❤❤❤❤

  • @user-nm4sb7ju6z
    @user-nm4sb7ju6z 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Okay thanks al international and community my family all brothers and sisters my family all amid and all international and community my family all USA the government my family all American and all history my family all freedom and Democratic policies my family all palatine the government my family all west bank and Gaza all the government my family all freedom and Democratic policies my family all amid and all from Gaza and jeursalem and all al Aqsa and all company and all airlines and all also export and import my family all freedom and Democratic policies my family all peace OK thanks

  • @user72974
    @user72974 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Why do this instead of importing Quebec's extra hydroelectricity at 1/4 the cost?

  • @UncompressedWAVmusic
    @UncompressedWAVmusic 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I'm glad that Professor's name was Tokohero and not Professor Fukushima, which is the most radioactive place on Earth.

  • @dfwerwolf
    @dfwerwolf 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    "REFERBISH - renovate and redecorate (something, especially a building)". Looking forward to redecoration of this nuclear station. Totally nothing worrying or cryptic about the language of choice.

  •  7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    The words Re Furbish and Nuclear power should never be in the same conversation 😢

    • @carlyar5281
      @carlyar5281 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Why?

  • @debbiebarrett9664
    @debbiebarrett9664 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great news! But wasn't this part of Pierre Poillivere's plan??!! 😂😂😂🍎🍎🍎

  • @lifewuzonceezr
    @lifewuzonceezr 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I feel scared

  • @my2iu
    @my2iu 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Pickering is the least safe of Ontario’s reactors, and it’s right beside the country’s largest city. It’s not possible to evacuate the millions of Toronto’s residents if a meltdown were to occur. Ontario has always been lax about nuclear safety. They don’t give proactively give out iodine pills to all of Toronto’s residents or give out information about evacuation pathways to all Scarborough residents. Ontario can keep using nuclear, but Pickering should close.

    • @Steve-mz7np
      @Steve-mz7np 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      For the cost of the clean up they will keep refurbishing long after we are dead and gone, just like General Electric in Peterborough.

  • @smrtdis
    @smrtdis 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    What an amazing word salad by the prof