Collaborative Proposal Creation
Create, improve and sponsor proposals in a respectful, fully bilingual environment. Grow proposals in the "Hothouse", for promotion to the "Workshop", to become official GPC policy.
Preamble
Nuclear power is one of the lowest-carbon sources of electricity, as recognized by IPCC and United Nations ECE. A majority of Canadians support using nuclear energy to generate electricity.
Proposal text
Green Party of Canada WILL CEASE BLANKET-OPPOSITION TO NUCLEAR POWER AS A SOURCE OF LOW-CARBON ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION.
Type of Proposal
Public policy that the party would represent.
Objective / Benefit
This resolution is intended to withdraw existing GPC policies which oppose Canada's use of nuclear technologies for non-military purposes. GPC policies which impede nuclear by calling for "renewable" energy shall be updated to replace "renewable" with "clean".
If your proposal replaces an existing policy or policies, which one does it replace?
1996 Foreign Aid - repeal
G06-p11 Enhanced Nuclear Policy - repeal
1998 - Peace and Security - repeal
G08-p012 Nuclear Power - repeal
G10-p31 Carbon Free National Feed-in Tariff - Amend: remove "non-nuclear,"
G08-136 Energy Transition Plan - Amend: change "renewable energy" to "clean energy"
G08-p137 Support of Distributed Electrical Power Grid Research - Amend: change "renewable energy" to "clean energy"
List any supporting evidence for your proposal
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe issued a report comparing not just lifecycle carbon emissions for various electricity sources, but overall impact on the environment and human health. Nuclear power was the single lowest CO2eq /kWh electricity source studied. The single lowest impact on ecosystems. And among the very lowest impact on human health. (CO2: Page 8. Ecosystems: Page 57. Human health: Page 58.) https://unece.org/sed/documents/2021/10/reports/life-cycle-assessment-electricity-generation-options
Our World In Data summarizes a modern assessment of various electricity system's safety and cleanliness. While not as in-depth or recent as UN ECE's study, Our World In Data clearly positioned nuclear in 2020 as one of humanity's safest and cleanest energy sources. https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
Despite his continued opposition to nuclear power, Dr. Gordon Edwards acknowledges "Low-carbon emitting technologies include solar, wind, hydro and nuclear" in a 2021 briefing paper. https://www.ourcommons.ca/content/Committee/441/ENVI/WebDoc/WD11891319/11891319/RamanaMV-1-e.pdf
In GPC's "Roundtable on Canada's Nuclear Policy" Dr. Gordon Edward observes that splitting atoms for energy does not release carbon. (Excerpt with my commentary:) https://youtu.be/HKIcnbMMdO0?t=24 (Original video:) https://www.facebook.com/GreenPartyofCanada/videos/934857067289154/
The nuclear supply chain for CANDU refurbishments is 98% Canadian. https://www.opg.com/documents/2021-ontario-nuclear-collaboration-report/
This can be contrasted with other low (but not as low as nuclear) carbon energy sources where components are not domestically produced, such as wind turbines: https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/79fdad93-9025-49ad-ba16-c26d718cc070
Nuclear's domestic, Canadian, supply chain still achieves a cost /kWh only beaten by hydropower. https://www.oeb.ca/sites/default/files/rpp-price-report-20211022.pdf
On April 23, 2023, Dr. Chris Keefer debated Dr. Gordon Edwards on the subject of nuclear power in Canada. This was the "Roundtable on Canada's Nuclear Policy" that GPC members might have experienced, if a single pro-nuclear voice had been allowed to participate. https://youtu.be/LvMC8TK025w
Angus Reid Institute finds increasing support from Canadians for nuclear power. In June 2021, 51% of Canadians said they would like to see further development of nuclear power generation. Now 57% say the same. https://angusreid.org/canada-energy-nuclear-power-oil-and-gas-wind-solar/
This 57% of Canadians supporting nuclear matches a similar trend in the United States, where also now 57% support nuclear power. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/18/growing-share-of-americans-favor-more-nuclear-power/
Germany serves as a cautionary tale that renewables have not replaced their nuclear fleet. This video details use on online grid monitoring tools to evaluate Elizabeth May's statement (made during COP28) that shutting down nuclear power has "freed up" the grid to accept renewable energy, while not also noting that German grid remains high-carbon, and Germany immediately transitioned (upon the closure of their last nuclear power plants) from being net-exporter of electricity to net-importer of electricity. https://youtu.be/8rcMwmGuGSo
Does this proposal affect any particular group and what efforts have been made to consult with the group or groups?
N/A
Jurisdiction: Is this proposal under federal jurisdiction?
Yes
Please indicate the language the proposal is being submitted in.
English
This proposal is being evaluated
Posted on the Continuous Motion Development Vote tab for member review prior to the all-member vote.
Amendments (3)
-
Created at
05/07/2024 -
- 6
-
Created at
27/02/2024 -
- 0
-
Created at
05/07/2024 -
- 0
We're building a new kind of politics. One that is open, participatory, and people-powered
If you believe in what we're doing, please consider making a small donation to help us build it
Related images
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
1/3 Thank you Derek! Regarding Suzuki Foundation's "Shifting Power" 2022 report (cited repeatedly here in comments as proof that nuclear is not needed for a carbon-free grid)...
https://davidsuzuki.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Shifting-Power-Zero-Emissions-Across-Canada-By-2035-Report.pdf
This will focus on CP2022-ZP's 2050 build and examples, because only 2050, not 2035, has sets of example data in report.
Canada will consume 980 TWh yearly by 2050. Agreed.
Ontario will deploy 21x as many wind turbines as we had in 2021, by 2050... but NOT develop any additional hydropower capacity? (And also retire all nuclear!)
I do recognize it would be nice to NOT need to develop any additional hydro capacity... the impact landing most significantly on Indigenous Canadians... BUT this is ensuring maximum complexity! Hydro is the cheapest, and the most flexible source of electricity. It is no surprise that the anti-nuclear Suzuki Foundation wants a nuclear-free future... but we're NOT going to expand hydropower AT ALL? We're going to expand expensive intermittent wind... but NOT hydro?
Their sample 1 week period shows a wind capacity factor of ~33%. According to OEB, Ontario's average wind capacity factor is ~30%.This is fine, from an "average" perspective. The "representative hourly supply" is truly representative of a typical summer and a typical winter week in Ontario in 2050. Hour-by-hour the wind goes up-and-down, and we count on lots-of-storage (20 GW) to match the intermittent wind supply with demand.
But, what about atypical weeks? Bad weeks? Not rare-bad, just not-average bad?
https://intermittent.energy/d/QCEg6rl7z/generation?orgId=1&var-region=canada&var-area_type=region&var-area=90&var-production_type=20&var-group_by=area&var-group_by=production_type&var-demand=0&var-min_interval=7d&var-gapfill_function=interpolate&from=now-5y&to=now
That's Ontario's wind generation over the past 5 years. Each point on that graph represents an entire week.
Those "dips" are not hour-long blips (like in SP2022-ZP 2050 example week). Find 2 of THESE dips next to each other, and you've got at-least a 14 day dry-spell.
We see 14 days of (on average) 460 MW. That's with 2022's wind hardware, so in 2050 we can assume CP2022-ZP's build-out of 21x as many wind turbines...
460 MW * 21 = 9.6 GW would be generated by wind, in Ontario, in 2050, according to the CP2022-ZP plan. (Out of an installed capacity of 78 GW wind.)
Look at that January sample (which is only 1 week long), and imagine trying to make it through 14 days with 9.6 GW of wind, as opposed to their optimistic wind sample.
20 GW of storage is depleted in the first 2 days.
Now, please consider that in recent years, during the winter, Quebec does NOT export electricity to Ontario. Quebec IMPORTS electricity FROM Ontario.
Loading comments ...