Jobs to make the Golden Horseshoe truly golden: an atomic win-win for Ontario

October 24, 2011
By

Ontario needs jobs, now. And not just any kind of jobs. We need high skilled, high paid jobs, which create a long-term, stable platform upon which thousands of Ontarians can stand. How can we create these kinds of jobs? By beginning the construction of new nuclear reactors at the Darlington generating station east of Oshawa.

Oshawa is at the eastern end of what is called the Golden Horseshoe—the vast megalopolis, centred on Toronto, which wraps around the western end of Lake Ontario. This area is the economic engine of the province; in fact, it is the most economically vital area in Canada.

Starting the Darlington construction project would generate over three thousand jobs. I base this on the fact that there are over 3,300 people working on refurbishing units 1 and 2 at the Bruce nuclear station in Tiverton. That work involves retubing two of the eight CANDU reactors at Bruce, and is much different from what will be done at Darlington.

See the video below for an idea of what retubing involves. It’s a corporate video, complete with the cheeseball music that comes with all corporate videos. But still it’s pretty impressive:

Nevertheless, both refurbishment and new construction are major infrastructure projects, involving highly skilled specialists working in close coordination. Hence both refurbishments and new construction are enormous job creation engines.

Some quick facts about the new Darlington project. It will be:

  1. The biggest capital infrastructure project in North America.
  2. The biggest job creation engine in North America.
  3. The biggest clean energy project in North America. If Ontario were to get 2,000 megawatts of electricity from natural gas-fired plants, those plants would dump nearly 9 million tons of pollution into the air every single year.

Three thousand high paid workers in the Greater Oshawa Area, where Darlington is located, would inject an enormous positive economic boost into the local economy. Nuclear plants tend to do this; this may be why they are so popular with local communities.

Starting Darlington is a political decision. It basically rests on the Ontario premier and energy minister, whose party, the Ontario Liberals, barely squeaked back into government in the October 6 election.

The Liberals had 72 seats going into the election; today they have 53. Their most heavy losses were in rural ridings where wind power, which became an election issue, is extremely unpopular. Three Liberal cabinet ministers in rural ridings lost their seats.

Moreover, the plan to replace coal-fired generating plants with natural gas-fired ones has also been set back. Local opposition in Oakville and Mississauga killed gas plants in those communities. Nobody knows where else the plants will go.

The premier and energy minister must be wondering if there is any community in Ontario that will willingly host a power plant.

They should look no further than the three communities that already host nuclear plants. Adding new nuclear capacity would be a win-win for the province:

  1. The government would see its energy plan actually moving forward.
  2. Thousands of people would become, or remain, employed in high skilled, high paid occupations; the economic spinoff benefits for the host community would be immense.
  3. The province would get a cheap, clean, long term stable electricity supply.
  4. The government could legitimately boast about its clean energy record.

Darlington B should begin now.

4 Responses to Jobs to make the Golden Horseshoe truly golden: an atomic win-win for Ontario

  1. Maury Markowitz
    October 25, 2011 at 11:22 pm

    “Some quick facts about the new Darlington project. It will be:”

    Ahh, the “facts”. Let’s see how this goes…

    “The biggest capital infrastructure project in North America”

    You say that like it’s a good thing! We’re in the “credit crunch”, where exactly is this supposed to come from? Why do you think they’re not pouring concrete now?

    But it’s wrong anyway. The State of Good Repair program in the US is budgeted at 85 billion. See for yourself:

    http://nascocorridor.com/pdf/Corridor%20Research%20-%20USA/CGLA%202010%20TOP%20100%20Infra%20Projects%2008%2004%2010.pdf

    “The biggest job creation engine in North America.”

    Not by a long shot. PV employment in the US alone is around 100,000 jobs, and plans on adding about 25,000 in the next year alone. More generally, renewables are the only area of sustained job growth. Again, read it for yourself:

    http://thesolarfoundation.org/research/national-solar-jobs-census-2011

    “The biggest clean energy project in North America”

    Sorry, the actual holder of this title is Brightsource 2.6 GW plant going into Mohave. And that’s not a “would be”, that’s a “actually is”. Here you go:

    http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/about_us

    We’ll see what comes up, but with ACR out of the running, I suspect we’re looking at a 2.2 to 2.8 GW proposal for Darlington. EBR I’d wager.

    • Steve Aplin
      October 26, 2011 at 1:09 am

      Maury, yes I think big capital projects are good. Number One, we’ll need the power. Number two, they put lots of people to work, in this case, high skilled high paid people.

      SGR might be $85 billion overall, but it’s not a single project. It’s many projects in many states.

      Brightsource’s 6 GW are CAPACITY. With a capacity factor of 20-77 percent (!) — see http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/pdfs/solar_overview.pdf — it’s better than solar PV, but compared with nuclear’s 80+, it’s inferior.

      What do you mean, EBR? Evolutionary BWR? Who knows. I’d say the EC6 has a good shot, but Areva/EDF now have a lot of experience with EPRs, Westinghouse with AP 1000s.

  2. October 26, 2011 at 2:20 am

    My understanding is that Brightsource is currently building one phase of one of those projects (Ivanpah)
    It isn’t 2.6 GW.
    I wish them well – I think it’s a far more promising technology than PV.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Item 1: if Ontario did not have its nuclear generating fleet, last hour’s CO2 emissions would have been AT LEAST:

5,587 metric tons, and the CIPK would have been 371.5 grams

Item 2: Since prorogation of the Ontario legislature on October 15, 2012, provincial gas-fired generating plants have dumped this much CO2 into our air:

14,391,418 metric tons. This is a running total. Every hour, the total increases by the amount of Gas CO2 given in Table 1.

VOTE in today’s poll

Should molybdenum-99, a vitally important medical isotope that is produced most efficiently in nuclear fission reactors, become more expensive?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...