Canada s Progress in Meeting the Paris Agreement on Climate Change: One Year Later

Transcription

1 Canada s Progress in Meeting the Paris Agreement on Climate Change: One Year Later John Saroudis May 24 th, 2018 Nuclear 2018 Conference ICN Pitesti

2 Summary Update on Canadian Emissions Picture Renewables (hydro; wind; solar) Role for nuclear Conclusions

3

4

5

6 Canadian Emissions Picture 722 Mt in 2015 (0.7% reduction from 2014) Tar sands: 70 Mt of CO2 growing to 100 Mt as new projects come on line over next decade or so (gov t decision) New pipeline projects will add 20 Mt (Romania: 110 Mt; Germany: 970 Mt)

7 Canada s Commitment in Paris Agreements Reduce net CO2 emissions by 30% by 2030 and by 80% by 2050 compared to 2005 baseline; In absolute terms this implies coming down from about 742 Mt (2030 projection) to 523 Mt in 13 years or so; And down to about 200 Mt in 33 years;

8 Climate Action Tracker

9

10 Is hydro the answer?

11 Problems with massive hydro development Major capital investment required per project; Cost of electricity will not be cheap for many of the more technically challenging projects; Environmental impact could be unacceptable; Interconnections across Canada are weak; Long distance transmission lines needed making environmental issues greater Some examples.

12 Muskrat Falls Hydro Project Newfoundland and Labrador: 824 MW; 4.9 TWh/yr (one C6: 5 TWh/yr) Capital Cost: C$7.4B (2012) C$10.1B (2017) Cost of electricity: C$174 / MWh

13

14

15

16 Keeayask Project Northern Manitoba on Nelson River: 695 MW (4.4 TWh/yr) Capital Cost: C$6.5B (2014) C$8.7B (2017) -estimated increase to ~C$10.5B Schedule delays: from 2019 to 2021 Major rate increase by Manitoba Hydro to cover costs

17 Once built, the Keeyask generating station in northern Manitoba will generate another 695 megawatts from the Nelson River, which already produces almost 4,000 megawatts. (Keeyask Hydropower Limited Partnership.) Once built, the Keeyask generating station in northern Manitoba will generate another 695 megawatts from the Nelson River, which already produces almost 4,000 megawatts. (Keeyask Hydropower Limited Partnership.)

18 Site C Project on Peace River: BC Hydro 1,100 MW (5.1 TWh/yr) Original estimate: C$8.3B now C$10.7B Cost of power: ~C$125/MWh Completion in 2024 Impact on rates: About 1-2% per year Big impact on utility debt

19 Site C plan B.C. Hydro Site C plan B.C. Hydro

20 La Romaine 2 dam site

21 Wind Generation in Canada

22 Solar Generation in Canada

23

24

25 Role of nuclear in Canada Refurbish existing large NPPs to maintain significant nuclear generation into second half of 21 st century; Develop and prove capability and economics of SMRs for large scale deployment

26 Life Extension of operating reactors Bruce NPP: 2 x 780 MWe- Units 3 & 4 Units 5-8: 4 x 817 MWe C$13 Billion project; long term PPA: C$65.73/MWh Darlington: 4 x 878 MWe C$12.8 Billion project; est.c$75/mwh Units will be able to operate up until 2055 (Darlington) and 2064 (Bruce)

27 Bruce A Nuclear Generating Station Bruce B Nuclear Generating Station

28

29 Canadian SMR Projects Update: Possible application in tar sands extraction, ammonia production, desalination, remote mining sites petrochemical etc. (650 C) 300 Mwe plant size $40-$50/MWh generating costs Natural Resources Canada working with Bruce Power and others to develop a roadmap to deploy SMRs # SMRs might well be the only way to keep tar sands projects in operation for the long term

30 Chalk River Laboratories plans Demonstrate SMR commercial viability by 2026; Hub for SMRs multiple vendor supported prototypes (Terrestrial Energy; Moltex Energy (Stable Salt Reactor); LeadCold (Swedish Advanced Lead Reactor SEALER); Expand hydrogen research program (hydrogenfueled bulk transport)

31 CRL Request for Expression of Interest on SMRs

32 19 expressions of interest to site prototype at CRL

33

34

35 Conclusions: Canada has committed to very challenging targets for CO2 emissions reductions to 2030 and 2050; Challenge cannot be met only by reducing CO2 emissions in electricity generation; Need massive electrification of transport and industry (+ 100,000 MWe; $1,000 Billion); Massive large-scale hydro development does not seem economically viable Nuclear can be a key component of the solution: (Gen III+ and SMRs) but economics is vital factor So far progress is still slow.

36 Canada Top 100 Projects for 2017 Rank Project Value 1 Bruce Power Refurbishment $13,000,000,000 2 Darlington Nuclear Refurbishment $12,800,000,000 3 Muskrat Falls Project $9,100,000,000 4 Eglinton Crosstown LRT $9,100,000,000 5 Site C Clean Energy Project $8,775,000,000 6 Romaine Complex $6,500,000,000 7 Keeyask Hydroelectric Project $6,496,000,000 8 Réseau électrique métropolitain $5,900,000,000

37 Thank you! You can find me at:

38 Credits Special thanks to all the people who made and released these awesome resources for free: Presentation template by SlidesCarnival Photographs by Startupstockphotos