Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap
Mother Nature Doesn’t Give a Crap - She really doesn’t. She could care less about our timelines or our targets. She’ll happily continue throwing hurricanes, burning forests and melting her ice caps. Unless we do something. Join us as we tackle the climate crisis though interviews with leaders in the environmental movement and experts in the field. Each episode will explore the policies, technology and human factors that will help you understand this global crisis and what you can do to help solve it. Mother Nature Doesn’t Give a Crap, so we have to.
Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap
The Future of Nuclear Energy - Cleaner, Safer & Cheaper?
In this episode of "Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap," Geoff Sheffrin and Peter Reynolds discuss the benefits of nuclear energy in combating the climate crisis. They are joined by David Tindall, Director of New Build Engineering at Ontario Power Generation, who talks about his company's vision to help Ontario achieve net-zero carbon emissions and reduce nuclear waste through innovative technologies, including SMRs (Small Modular Reactors). Tindall shares his over 25 years of experience in the nuclear industry, emphasizing the importance of embracing all forms of clean energy, including nuclear, in the fight against climate change.
Subscribe on your favourite podcast app and don’t miss an episode!
Also available on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCkTMDHlF8N8lVIWzyPl4yhw?sub_confirmation=1
Follow on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100087081536326
Follow on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mothernature_podcast/
[Start of recorded material 00:00:00]
Peter Reynolds: Hi, I'm Peter Reynolds, and welcome to Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap with Geoff Sheffrin.
We've spoken a lot on this podcast about the benefits of nuclear energy to help combat the climate crisis, and the [00:00:30] innovative technologies that are being developed around the world to make it cleaner, safer and more affordable. On today's episode we're going to continue that conversation with David Tyndall, director of New Technologies at Ontario Power Generation, and talk about the innovations of OPG and their vision to help Ontario achieve net zero carbon emissions and reduce nuclear waste, and that we have no time to waste when it comes to solving the climate crisis, is professional engineer Geoff Sheffrin, Geoff, good to see you again.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:01:04] Peter, thanks for the invite and I'm delighted to have Dave on board today. Whilst this is a continuation, if you like, of more nuclear discussion, it is a very different segment. And I think it's important to link these two because what we need to do in green energy availability is incredibly broad ranging. And whilst we have hydro and we have wind and we have [00:01:30] solar, nuclear is the piece that often gets a bad rap and I'm trying hard to push the fact nuclear doesn't deserve a bad rap, and we need everything in this planet because the other utopian solutions like fusion, they're too far away. We'll be dead by then as a species.
So I'm very keen to have Dave here and love to get into that section of the broadcast.
Peter Reynolds: [00:01:52] Absolute. So why don't we just jump right in and introduce Dave Tyndall who's the director of Nuclear Technologies at Ontario Power Generation, and David has over 25 years' experience in the nuclear industry, leading research and developing efforts for new technologies that transform the way we generate clean energy. David, welcome to the podcast.
David Tyndall: [00:02:15] Yeah, thanks very much for having me, Peter and Geoff, it's great to be here. I'm looking forward to the talk today.
Peter Reynolds: [00:02:21] David maybe we could start, for those who maybe only think about energy during a blackout, maybe you could tell us a little bit [00:02:30] about Ontario Power Generation.
David Tyndall: [00:02:34] Sure. OPG is one of North America's largest clean power producers. We generate over 18,000 megawatts of clean power in the Province of Ontario, but also outside of Ontario. We have a number of Hydro assets that actually span across the US through one of our subsidiaries.
We have a broad portfolio that includes nuclear, it includes solar, it includes hydroelectric, and we do [00:03:00] have some gas plants as well and some other thermal stations that really serve to back up the grid when the renewables aren't generating. But our big focus really is our nuclear assets for the purposes of strong baseload generation.
Peter Reynolds: [00:03:19] Maybe you could talk – and I know Geoff is chomping at the bit to get into the weeds here, but maybe you could talk a little bit about the goal of net zero and how nuclear can help us achieve.
David Tyndall: [00:03:34] Sure. And so you know, OPG has a climate change strategy, and in that climate change strategy, which you can find on our website, it really speaks to needing a number of different sources of energy to really meet that net zero economy by 2050, and the net zero company by 2040. So we're looking at many, many different strategies to [00:04:00] address it, and whether that's expanding some of our hydro fleet. We're looking at innovating and changing the way we do business. We're electrifying – you know, our vision being electrifying, you know, life in one generation is a key message for us. And so we do that for the bus fleets and the transit fleets.
But it also comes down to nuclear being part of that solution. We have seen it, and whether you read the International Energy Agency or whether you read the [00:04:30] Ontario's ISO, the independent electrical system operator and their pathways to decarbonisation, the strong message is there is no path to net zero without nuclear. And so nuclear has to be part of the solution. And it's not just like one form of nuclear. So, you know, we can talk a little bit more about, hey, what do you mean there's not just one form of nuclear? Because really most of us have just grown up with this area where nuclear is just these big power stations. And now that's not the case. Or there [00:05:00] was research reactors on a very small scale at universities, or there was maybe some purpose built isotope reactors.
But really, you know, kind of we're all the different sizes of reactors and now we see nuclear playing a much bigger role than just power generation. If we think about the world as we knew it, nuclear reactors really just used to generate baseload power. That's what they do. And so with the advent of small modular reactors and micro reactors we see a lot more [00:05:30] role for nuclear to play in achieving a net zero economy.
Peter Reynolds: [00:05:35] Can you explain baseload?
David Tyndall: [00:05:35] Sure. So baseload power is really kind of this flat line, if you think about it. So we all have businesses that we run, we all have houses that we run, and at any given point in the day there's really kind of a minimum amount of power that needs to be generated [00:06:00] to meet our demands. So whether that is our – you know, whether it's just our lights on in our houses, or things that are charging our businesses, that's where our, I'll call it the baseload is.
Now that goes up and down during the day. So when we think about where is our power going every day, depending on the time of year, we see either a summer peak, so when our AC comes on and baseload goes up in the summer [00:06:30] because everybody's cooling their houses. During the day we usually see a peak at the beginning of the day and at the end of the day as people are cooking and they're turning their lights on. They're getting up in the morning. They're getting – all their processes are starting at work. And so there is a different demand. But baseload is really that kind of – it never really goes below a certain number.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:06:50] And Dave correct me, but I think what's a delight about our nuclear here in Ontario is the baseload makes up a good 50 percent if not more from nuclear. And that is –
David Tyndall: [00:07:00] Absolutely.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:07:00] – a steady 24/7, 365 days a year. And that is a critical piece of our stable infrastructure. It's one of the reasons why our province, if it were a country, would be one of the top 10 greens in the world.
David Tyndall: [00:07:15] Correct. Yeah. Nuclear makes up – kind of about the 60 percent mark of our baseload combined with our large hydro, right? We've been blessed with both some plentiful hydro assets that allow us to generate, but then where we can't expand [00:07:30], I'll call it massively, in hydro – there's some opportunity for new hydro and we're going to go after that too, because it's an all tools in the toolbox approach to meet the whole demand – you need that nuclear piece. And that 60 percent nuclear that we've had for, you know, the last few decades has really served us well in having one of those cleanest grids in the world as it sits today.
Peter Reynolds: [00:07:53] So I guess it's that consistency, this idea of –
David Tyndall: [00:07:57] Correct.
Peter Reynolds: [00:07:57] – sort of the utopian idea of all our energy needs are solved by wind and solar. That's not something that could handle a baseline 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
David Tyndall: [00:08:11] No, no, and we love renewables, don't get me wrong. I'm not here to disparage them, because I believe they're great. They have a lot to bring. But when you look at kind of the hottest days of the year or the coldest days of the year, that's [00:08:30] often the days that correspond where there is no wind and there is no sun. And depending where you are in the world, you know, wind doesn't blow all the time and the sun doesn't shine all the time. So you think about Ontario and how far north we are, you know, we get limited hours of daylight in the summer time, so it's harder to generate, I'll call it, that baseload off of a solar type arrangement or wind type element without having these [00:09:00] massive forms of energy [00:09:00] storage.
And so energy storage is also part of this, but you have to look at the things like, can you get batteries big enough? Is there gigawatts of storage? Lots of ideas on the table about how that could potentially be looked at, but are they really technology ready that you have these really long duration storage piece. No, but everybody's pushing towards it. These are all solutions engineers are working on. How do you get it? But [00:09:30] it all is part of that kind of a bigger energy mix. And so you know, we love pump storage too. You look at Niagara Falls, we don't just generate power just because the water is falling. We also in the evening, you know, when power price is cheap, we fill a reservoir and then we use that to, I'll call it generate power when it comes out of that reservoir.
So there are energy storage solutions. But you can't meet it all with that. So that's why we need more capacity on the grid. Not just energy. It's not just that we need energy, it's what [00:10:00] we call capacity and there's that difference, and that capacity is really what we talked about in that reliable baseload piece in terms of it's there and it's available to be used at a switch. It's not dependant on the sun shining, the wind blowing or the river flowing, right? That's the part that nuclear brings to it.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:10:19] And I think the capacity piece also leads us into the ability to distribute the power. And I think when you look at the distribution infrastructure, Canada is this unique 95 percent of the [00:10:30] populace is along [00:10:30] this 200 kilometre-wide band, 8,000 kilometres long. But we have a whole bunch of stuff going up north, whether it's indigenous communities, other small communities, mining activities, all sorts of critical things. And putting a grid up there of large power requirement is a challenge. But I think that's the segue into us getting into the SMR discussion.
David Tyndall: [00:10:51] Sure, yeah, and agreed. And transmission is a big deal, and it's going to be – we need to expand the transmission system –
Peter Reynolds: [00:11:00] Like double it.
David Tyndall: [00:11:00] – I think that's well recognized – yeah, yeah, it's going to be big. So in order to really decarbonize we're going to need that. But to your point Geoff is that we are this geographically diverse and spread out type of country, and so not every solution's going to work. I can't put big plants and transmit it long distances because that's inefficient. We're making losses. We're just generating heat, what we try not to do. We try not to just generate heat, right? So [00:11:30] you know, we don't want to just put power lines up everywhere. Nobody likes those either. So we like what comes out of our wall socket, but we don't want everything everywhere.
So if we can figure out how to make these distributed resources, that becomes an important part of this. And that's where for lower population densities, small or micro reactors can absolutely make sense. And then there's these industrial users today that we have that, you know, lots of little co-generation plants, so [00:12:00] natural gas burning to generate heat and steam. Well, why do I need to do that by burning gas? There's many different types of reactors out there that could generate some of these high pressure, high temperature steam profiles that let us decarbonize those industries as well. So that's other areas that SMRs are coming to – we believe they have a roll in.
Peter Reynolds: [00:12:22] Yeah, and I definitely want to get into SMRs, and we've talked about it in previous episodes, or small modular [00:12:30] reactors. In your title it says director of New Technologies, Ontario Power Generation. I'm wondering if this idea of new nuclear? What do we mean when we say new nuclear?
David Tyndall: [00:12:47] Well that's – it's kind of an interesting question, Peter in terms of new nuclear just means we don't have it today. So my spectrum goes across a number of different areas. So I'm looking at new nuclear power plants [00:13:00], so whether that is a micro reactor or a small modular reactor or large nuclear, or fusion, that's all going to fall under my portfolio around new nuclear power plants. So I'm using nuclear fuel to generate electricity or generate energy. So it could be that we've generated heat. So, that's what falls under my portfolio.
So when you start thinking about is nuclear fission new? Not really. But it may not be a CANDU technology [00:13:30] that we use in micro reactors that they don't make a micro reactor that's a CANDU. They make larger type reactors. So today we have to look at what are all the various technologies that are out there? And so that's what my team's been doing over the last few years is really looking at what's available around the world, what's available in North America, what can be ready to deploy on the timelines that we need them to be ready in. And [00:14:00] so that's how we've kind of got to where we are today and why we're undertaking the Darlington new nuclear project and deploying those reactors. Why we've got our Global First Power joint venture to look at micro reactor space.
And these are different forms of reactors. So they're all fission based reactors. Fusion's still a little while away, and Geoff kind of talked to. We're following it but it’s not ready today. The fission reactors, though, we're not [00:14:30] using, I'll call it a heavy water based reactor when we look at the new projects at this point. We're looking at, you know, the Darlington project's a boiling water reactor. Been around for decades. Like, some of the first reactors were boiling water reactors. The micro reactor we're looking at and our industrial partner reactor that we're dealing with, those are both high temperature gas reactors .gas reactors have been around for a long time. The UK had a fleet. Those were carbon dioxide as opposed to helium cooled. But the helium cool reactors, hey, they're [00:15:00] operating in Japan, they're operating in China, they had them in the US for years. So the reality is it's not really, I'll call it new tech, it's really, I'll call it old tech reimagined and deployed in a much smaller way. So that's how we see it today.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:15:20] [Unintelligible 00:15:20] I wonder if we could then sort of dig a little bit into – because Darlington, I gather, has been a very successful retrofit as a nuclear power station. On [00:15:30] time, on budget and just going through the end phases of completion. And it's also now the selected site for the SMR project that both the feds and the province have invested in. And it's one of the many that you're leading. So I'd love to hear a little bit more about that. Why Hitachi, because there are several different designs. It's just – it's a fascinating area and it's such a critical area for us to move forward on. So, what can you tell us about that part of the process [00:16:00], reference to the SMRs at Darlington?
David Tyndall: [00:16:02] Yeah, Geoff, it's been a few years in the making in terms of getting to where we got to today. So it's been an exciting time. When I joined the New Nuclear team back in 2020 we were actually looking at about 10 different technologies, and we went from 10 down to six, down to three, down to the one we picked. When we got down to three we actually made a pretty public announcement and the approach we took was actually we worked for a year with all three –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:16:30] I remember that.
David Tyndall: [00:16:30] – of those companies. And advancing the design and the project planning and really truly understanding what the right fit for us was in terms of, hey, when can we be on the grid? Hey, does it fit within the environmental assessment that we had already done at Darlington, you know, a decade ago that we maintained. Did it give us the right risk profile that we were, you know, I'll call it comfortable and confident in being able to deploy within the decade. That was really important to us because as is noted in the title of the podcast, you [00:17:00] can't wait. We have to take some action right? We have to get on with it.
And seeing those initial capacity shortfalls, when does that start happening? It's in late 2020s. Right? We start to see a capacity shortfall. Small one. Not a big one yet. That comes later. But the small capacity shortfalls start to come in the late '30, so hey, around 300 megawatts was actually a really good size for the Ontario grid and where we needed to do it. So that's how [00:17:30] we really got them. So it's about that confidence in being ready to deploy.
Now let's not pretend that there are no challenges. There's always challenges in any megaproject and I think really that's what we've shown we can do to your point about the refurbishment, that's given us the confidence. It's not an over-confidence. We know where the challenges are. Like –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:17:50] I can imagine.
David Tyndall: [00:17:50] – any project has challenges. Let's call a spade a spade. But the fact that we've been able to assemble a team with good partners, we understand that you have [00:18:00] to get your design done ahead of time. Like that's been one of the pitfalls right? When you look at these other nuclear builds in other jurisdictions that have gone way over school, way over budget, they started with very little design done. You know, they might have had a basic design done and got into construction, that's a danger zone.
So we have those lessons and that refurbishment experience, as you say, on time, on budget. Still proud to say that. We're marching ahead. We've got one unit done, the second unit's well [00:18:30] underway. And you know, starting to look at the subsequent units and make sure that they all stay on track. But we're well into this program, on time, on budget. And that's a huge suboxone.
And so we're using those lessons to learn lots of the same people, in order to make the SMR project a reality at Darlington. So it comes down to how do you work together as a team? How do you manage risk? And how do you solve them?
Peter Reynolds: [00:18:56] I'm just wondering, David, for the laymen out there, when they talk about this refurbishment at Darlington, can we sort of – is there a way of describing it in simple terms? Of you know, what existed before, why a refurbishment was required and what we should see after?
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:19:15] Sure. So CANDU stations, so the pressurized heavy water reactor that we have, you know, has a core. And that core is made up at Darlington of 480 tubes, channels that go through, and [00:19:30] each one of those channels has a fuel bundle in it. And due to the fact that you have a – the nuclear fuel in there and the fission reaction going on, metal actually changes as it's irradiated. So it gets longer, it picks up hydrogen over time. And so we do detailed inspections and life management programs to monitor the health because those are really the, I'll call it the limiting components [00:20:00] for us to continue to operate.
And so there's always a midlife refurb in a CANDU plant. So what do you do in the midlife [unintelligible 00:20:07]? You're talking out all of the fuel, you're taking out all of those tubes and you're putting new tubes in and then you're putting fresh fuel in and restarting up. That's the big work. And so it's a lot of piping work and the pieces that really if you kind of make it akin to a car, I've kind of put a new engine in the car. I didn't – you know, the block is still the same. But I've done my pistons [00:20:30], I've put in some new heads. I've done that work. And then around the rest of the car I did a lot of other little tweaks because I had the opportunity in my schedule. So we're going to do turbine work, we're going to replace some valves. We'll do some other component replacements that we do as well as safety improvements. So safety's our overriding consideration in everything. And as we have the opportunity we always work to improve reliability and improve [00:21:00] safety.
And so those are all opportunities that we do during these refurbishment outages. And really that's the major parts of it, Peter.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:21:08] Great. And just a couple of observations there, I know up at Bruce they're also embarking on an extensive 10-year program. They're just underway on that for doing exactly the same program because that would extend those reactors up there. Bruce of the three that we have in Ontario is the biggest – matter of fact it's one of the biggest in the world. But it's the biggest and it's on [00:21:30] that program.
And I've heard some buzz that Pickering, instead of being shut down, is now actually going to be talked about to have that one put onto the program. Which I believe is critical for our future because we've got an 18 gigawatt baseload from our nuclears and we need to maintain that and then find ways of increasing it. And SMRs is a piece of it.
David Tyndall: [00:21:51] Yeah, for sure. And so we're excited that we were asked to, I'll call it, re-look at the feasibility of Pickering and doing that refurbishment. And [00:22:00] you know, that's work that's ongoing this year. So I can't speak, you know, to kind of all the details of it. But what I can tell you is we remain confident that there is a case to your point, Geoff, that we can make to life extend those reactors for sure. And you're right, Bruce is doing their program up there as well. And that's the nice part about the nuclear industry is we all work together.
There's a really interesting book that was many years ago in Britain that was called Hostages of Each Other, and what it comes down to and really the pretext of it is, we [00:22:30] have to work together because one bad nuclear power plant is every plant's problem. Not just that plant's problem. So –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:22:30] Don't we know about that?
David Tyndall: [00:22:30] – we as an industry – we have two major industry, whether it's the World Association of Nuclear Operators or the Institute of Nuclear Power Operators in the US, or the IAEA, we work together to make sure everybody's safe.
So you know, Bruce and OPG have worked together and collaborated on making sure we get the lessons [00:23:00] learned shared between our organizations to make sure that we are successful together. Because we want to see clean power in Ontario for sure.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:23:08] Yeah, absolutely.
Peter Reynolds: [00:23:09] So I was just going to ask about pushback and this idea of – as you're explaining it to me, I mean it completely makes sense. And this idea of having small modular reactors that could be in remote communities to give communities any independence. You know [00:23:30] it all sounds fantastic. And so I'm wondering what, if any pushback, the industry is experiencing, and what is your sort of reaction to that and how are you sort of managing that?
David Tyndall: [00:23:45] Yeah, hey there's always going to be pushback on anything. And really, this comes down to building relationships and talking and being a transparent organization. So there's a lot of stigma around nuclear, Peter, and what it [00:24:00] is and what it isn't. There's been big challenges around the world at times, right? Whether you want to go back to Chernobyl or you want to go back to Three Mile Island or Fukishima, or even the concerns and, I'll call it some of the challenges that are going on Ukraine right now and the flags that get raised there.
So there's lots of questions about safety, about security, about waste. What do with all of that and how do we manage it. And so our biggest thing is about getting [00:24:30] into where do we see potential opportunities for this? It's getting out and talking with the people, whether those are the indigenous communities, or it's the municipalities or the government shareholders or the industrial end users. You know, we see lots today where they're reaching out and going, "Hey, what is this nuclear thing? Like, we're kind of interested in it. We might be interested in doing it." But we hear parts of those same people – same parts of their communities are saying, "Hey, like, we're concerned about this. Can you help me understand?"
And so [00:25:00] you know part of – one of the reasons why I'm here is trying to help people understand what it is and what it isn't and be real about it. Right? So, you know, we spend a lot of time talking about fuel and what do we do with used fuel. And so in Canada, you know, there's the Nuclear Waste Management Organization that has the long-term accountability for the, I'll call it the disposal of used fuel. And so – but we have to work with them, right? We [00:25:30] can't just say, "Well it's your problem." No, we have to hold it until they're ready. So it comes down to, well how do you store it, and [cross talking 00:25:40]
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:25:40] It's everybody's problem but it's manageable.
David Tyndall: [00:25:43] Correct. I mean we've been managing used fuel since day number 1, right? Since you know, when you look at whether it was Douglas Point, which was one of the first commercial reactors in Ontario that's now – you know, that [reside? 00:25:57] on the Bruce side. Or you look at Pickering that came on site in 1971 [00:26:00]. Virtually every single bundle that has ever been used at Pickering still resides on that site. We're talking very dense form of energy. We know how to store it, we know how to monitor it, we have cameras that report back all the way back to the IAEA in Geneva. And so it's monitored 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. We know the canisters, we know how to transport it. And we know how long it lasts.
So yeah, [00:26:30] it is conceptually, though, difficult for people to start trafficking, well, this is going to be, I'll call it highly radioactive or radioactive for, you know, 10,000 years. That's not an easy concept to think about and how do you know you're going to be doing something for 10,000 years? So it comes down to the way you assess it and the amount of research that we – you know, that we do and has been going on for decades.
And so that's how you can get the confidence [00:27:00] in that science-based approach to it. But again there's an emotional argument to it as well. And so you have to be respectful of that and thinking about how does it go forth to future generations? How do we ensure that we don't impact Mother Nature with what it is? You know, again it's an emotional argument. It is about prudent management and showing people what this looks like.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:27:26] Yeah but progressively, I mean we do have alternatives. I know [00:27:30] others' work in the background going on with other people down in the US on alternative fuel rod sources, etcetera. You know, and I don't want to get into a tangent about thorium, but there are alternatives, and some of those alternatives generate waste which is no longer able to be weaponized. So you know, there's some other elements there.
But I also think it's important when I look at nuclear waste, some of the small modular, and I'm not sure where [unintelligible 00:27:58] but some of the small modular [00:28:00] actually can use the spent fuel. So you know. There's a dozen designs out there –
David Tyndall: [00:28:06] You're right Geoff. You're right. There's lots of different ways to go about fuel. So like countries like France today, as an example of a country that already reprocesses fuel. So they take fuel out of a reactor, they reprocess it. There's their own challenges around that. But yeah, they reprocess and then they deploy it into new reactors or [00:28:30] into the same reactor after it's been reprocessed. So there are ways to go about this.
And that's what's important is there are solutions, there are viable pieces, and right now why don't I do that today? Well a lot of it has to do with economics. It's more expensive to do that. Right? So you know, the CANDU reactors that we've run for years, you know, it's a very closed fuel cycle for us, right? We can do it all in Canada. And yeah, for the newer reactors we're going to have to enrich [00:29:00] fuel, but the reality is, again, there's North American sources of enrichment, and we know how to do that, you can it without proliferation and all those wonderful things.
So it is possible and you're right, there are solutions for it. It's a matter of what makes sense, and it's a balance. So you know, yeah, we're excited by the work that, for example, Moltex is doing out in New Brunswick and ARC are doing out in New Brunswick that they look at ways to potentially leverage used fuel in their new reactors. All of this could be managed very, very well and safely. It's a matter of, when is it going to be ready?
And that's kind of a kick in the butt. And so if you looked at, hey, how can we get to these clean energy pieces? You know, we absolutely need to start moving, and so that's why we're looking at the X-300 and being able to move fast there for the SMR portfolio. And you know, hey, large nuclear is going to come back on the table, with the order of magnitude. But we can't [00:30:00] get to a large nuclear plant without having demonstrated that you can do things on time and on budget repeatedly. Right? Like that's been the big thing. Like, how do you go get financing on a project when you have the [Vogles? 00:30:13] and the Hinkleys and those things that have gone so far over cost and schedule, that's a big risk profile for people. So demonstrating these small plants is going to be really important for unlocking that right?
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:30:27] And the other thing I think some people like to ignore when they weren't to override and overlook nuclear is that they think wind and solar is the solution. Well not only is that not a 24/7 solution, but nobody really looks very critical – and I'm not trying to disparage that part of the industry, we absolutely need it to move forward, but when you look at the cradle to grave cost of doing solar, and you look at wind turbines, and we're only just, after 30 years, figuring out how to recycle the blades. All of those blades as they come – they go into a landfill. So you know, [00:31:00] the wind and solar is not benign without it's problems, and I think nuclear gets a disproportionate bad rap because people don't look at the other aspects that goes on in the rest of the green.
David Tyndall: [00:31:11] Yeah, I think it's an interesting, point, Geoff. And maybe I'll turn it back over to you, Peter, in a sec, but it's an interesting point because that's one thing nuclear's been forced to do for decades, ever since we were basically, you know, almost started, is we have to account for everything. You know, we have to have decommissioning plans done as part of our [00:31:30] initial licencing. So when you start to licence a new reactor I have to have already thought about, well how much waste am I going to generate at the end? So that includes the concrete, the metal. I could have a plan for it before I've been even allowed to build it.
And so we get – we get asked all of these questions, that we've been forced to account for our material, for good reason. And actually I think ESG governance over the time and looking forward is going to help us in that, and level that playing field, but it is [00:32:00] –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:32:00] I think it'll also help offset the balance between wind, solar and – I mean even hydroelectric, I mean hydroelectric once it's up and running is very, very benign from a carbon footprint viewpoint. Building it with the concrete and steel is one horror show from a carbon footprint viewpoint. But once it's up you've got – [unintelligible 00:32:16] look at Niagara. We've got a century's worth of this stuff running.
David Tyndall: [00:32:23] Yeah, absolutely. So it's about that overall lifecycle and impact and that's what you have to look at really and that's what we're trying to do. But again, we believe it's an all tools in the toolbox. We're going to need more wind, we're going to need more solar, we're going to need more hydro. It's all there. But for the big reliable baseload, big capacity, we're going to need nuclear there as our tried and true and reliable.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:32:49] The only good news with Mother Nature getting mad at us, we're going to get more ferocious storms and therefore will have more wind. Never mind. Shut up Geoff. Let's just get on. Let's get [00:33:00] back to SMRs.
Peter Reynolds: [00:33:03] Yeah, this is very interesting, the stuff that I'm learning, because as you were saying, David, there's that emotional reaction when it comes to nuclear and I think you know, we talked about this in the previous episode of, you know, people getting little packages that live around nuclear plants –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:33:25] Little packets of iodine?
Peter Reynolds: [00:33:25] Yeah and you know, the sort of the reality of that. And so of course that's going to have an emotional reaction for people. But if you actually straight to look at it intellectually, and having these kind of conversations, you know, when you realize that solar and wind are fantastic sources of energy, but that the area that they take up in order to generate the same kind of power that nuclear would, these are things that never [00:34:00] even occurred to me, the kind of deforestation it would take. You know, what you would need to do to make these things work.
David Tyndall: [00:34:06] Just coverage of family land, Peter. You know, what we're able to do is seven acres with nuclear, maybe a little bit bigger than that now. Maybe 10 acres of nuclear, let's say, 1,600 acres of solar. And where are you going to build solar? Farm fields? So hey, we need food, we're growing in population. So, it's again, it's about what's the [00:34:30] right solution? So, you know, I think solar has a role to play for sure, but it is – that's the benefit of nuclear is that it's just such a dense form of energy.
I want to take you back to that point, though. You said, "Hey, there's an emotional piece" and if you start thinking about it, you know, I'll call it purely from a logic point of view, that's never going to happen though. And so one of the things that we believe is that you have to be open to having the emotional discussion. But we can't hide away in our power plants. We have to be open to having [00:35:00] – and having people challenge you and you learn something when that is – what is it that is actually driving the fear? Is it that they don't know? Is it that they can never accept it? And that's OK, there are always going to [be? 00:35:14] people who don't accept it. And that's fine.
But for the people who don't accept it because they don't know or they've been misinformed, that's the people that we want to talk to right? We want to talk to them about, "Here's what we are. Throw [00:35:30] your questions at us. I've got nothing to hide." Right? Like that's the big thing here, is I really have nothing to hide from anybody. I want to show you what I bring. I want to show you that – you know, are there things where this isn't, you know, I'll call it the silver bullet? Are there little things that you kind of [unintelligible 00:35:48] to and go, "Oh that's not as good as I would like it to be"? Sure. Absolutely. But I can tell you what those are and I'm willing to talk about it.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:35:57] Right, right. I think the other thing that's helpful is data – I regularly use [cross talking 00:36:02] data as a source and there's one chart in particular where they array safety and they array CO2 production from all of the fuels. Whether I'm going wind, solar, nuclear, hydro all the way up the scale through gas, through oil and coal. And when you start looking at those statistics on both the safety side and the carbon dioxide generation side, the fossil fuels are a horror show, unfortunately. And we've [00:36:30] got to find a way of transitioning our way out of that stuff in a constructive way.
There's an incredible amount of employment opportunity in green that, you know, we can migrate an incredible amount of the labour force that might have previously been deployed in fossils, into green fuel. Yeah, we've got to spend money training people and moving – it's just the nature of the climate crisis. It's not going to go away. You can put your head in the sand if you like, but it ain't going to stop.
Peter Reynolds: [00:37:00] I wanted to touch on, Geoff, that point you made about training, because I know we've talked about this in the past. The idea is it's one thing to put SMRs in remote communities. It's another thing to have people there who know how to service them, and I'm wondering if Ontario Power Generation has thought about that, about you know, having that capacity in those remote areas.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:37:27] Well I can chip in just before you start. One of the things I love about all of the technology that's developing, as much as that cyber hack I had two weeks ago pisses me off, you know, the great thing about it is we have incredible amount of remote monitoring capability from direct links through all sorts of video capability, drones, you know. David I hope that's opened the door for you to talk about how you can manage an SMR up north.
David Tyndall: [00:37:55] Yeah so there's lots to it. So people is definitely going to be one of the challenges, Peter. We see that already in terms of where those knowledge bases are. The nice part is, hey, Canada's been a nuclear nation for a very long time and we've done a good job at, I'll call it, building a workforce that supports our nuclear industry. And so we're engaging people on this project so we all learn and we bring the whole industry along. The industry shares with one another.
And so we do need more people though. If you look at the nuclear industry, we're all hiring everybody's hiring. And so we have a very rigorous [00:38:30] training programs internally. We've got great university nuclear programs. And so we're going to need more people. We're going to need more skilled trades. Construction workers, whether it's welders, pipe fitters, people that are doing iron work, modular buildings, that's all stuff we need. So like, it doesn't matter the trade. We're going to need skilled trades as well to enable these construction futures for all of these projects. So people is an issue. I don't want to say that it isn't. It is going to be [00:39:00] an issue. But are we already looking at the training? Yeah, absolutely. Are we already looking – if you look at the Canadian SMR roadmap had lots of interaction around education and resource demands, and there's industry working groups about bringing new people.
And then to Geoff's point, innovation is the next big thing.so what do we do? Like, how do you get these things, if you're going to operate plants in remote areas and you can't afford to have hundreds of people working at these sites? Or some of them are so small that you can really [00:39:30] only have a few people working at the site. So you have to adjust your design thinking. So you have to think about security. And security by design as opposed to, I'll call it an afterthought. So whether it's limiting access to buildings and how you do that and all that security stuff that I can't actually talk about in public. But there's lots of things that are there.
But remote monitoring, I mean we've got autonomous drones now at sites that can go out [00:40:00] and do inspections. I mean we've remotely operated hydro dams for decades. So remote operation of power plants is not a new concept by any stretch of the imagination. And I think people maybe don't appreciate that but we've got robots that we're looking at deploying at remote sites that can go do inspections for us. We get lots of data being fed back. So we know when to send workforce up to these remote sites. So remote monitoring, absolutely [00:40:30] you know, something we're doing and we will expand. And things we will do from centralized monitoring stations for fleets of reactors. That's all on the books.
I mean the concept of remote operation – I don't know when we're going to get to it. I think we can get to it, but I think, I'll call it one step at a time. Let's monitor it, have that central resource and then maybe we look at control in the future.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:40:53] Yeah, absolutely.
Peter Reynolds: [00:40:57] Any final questions or thoughts, Geoff?
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:40:59] Well I think we covered an awful lot of ground on the nuclear side, which is great. And whilst we isolated the SMRs to a degree and various pieces of that, I think what we've done is painted a reasonably broad picture about the nuclear piece. And I think if people go and dig into the data about, I think, the two big psychological barriers that I think are in the public eye – or should I say not in the public eye because of inadequate information. One of them is spent fuel and its disposal. And [00:41:30] the other, of course, is all the mythology that goes around nuclear safety driven by the events like Chernobyl, Fukishima, and Three Mile Island, and a few in Europe.
You know, these were unmitigated disasters. But when you look at the statistics they were isolated incidents driven by unusual circumstances. Fukishima was already over designed for a tsunami, the tsunami that Mother Nature threw at it was bigger than the over design. These things will [00:42:00] happen. And well, Chernobyl was a whole other matter. That was just a disaster from the outset. Three Mile Island became a whole non-issue. It was more media than real. It was real issue, but you know what I mean? It was more media hype than a problem.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:42:17] Yeah, I think that it's important to learn the lessons that came out of those, and that's something I've always felt good about working in the industry is that we learn a lot of lessons. And whether you want to – you know, there's again emotional arguments about [00:42:30] what you look at, and everybody says, "Hey, you know, the whole – right now with Fukishima in Japan releasing some of the water into the ocean," I think I've read some pretty interesting stuff around that. You'd have to drink 330,000 liters of it to get more radiation than a CT scan.
You know, but it's still, it's an emotional thing and people [don't want? 00:42:50] to drink radioactive water. And no, I don't want you to drink radioactive water. I'm not asking you to do that. But it's a matter of what is that [00:43:00]? Right? Like what are we actually talking about and understanding that fact.
But taking the lessons learned, you know, and making sure that we've looked at it and said, "OK, what is the worst thing that happens? How does that actually play out? How is decision making made?" because you know, you look at some of those events, it was the people, it wasn't the machine. Had the people done nothing the machine would have been in a better spot. So that's kind of an interesting [unintelligible 00:43:25] or decisions that were made, like, well some things can't happen. No, no [00:43:30] they could happen. You know, Mother Nature shocks us at times, right? And so decision making –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:43:35] That's right and we're learning that –
David Tyndall: [00:43:35] [Cross talking 00:43:35] –
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:43:36] – it's getting worse.
David Tyndall: [00:43:37] – [unintelligible 00:43:37] be there. Right. So today we're building – climate change adaptation is right – is a design requirement in our plans. So how do you deal with it? What happens if the world does get warmer? What happens if the storms become more intense? What happens if we get more snow? All of that is – have to be factored into the design and longer will be the life cycle. So [00:44:00] that's another thing, again, nuclear we think about these things. That's what we do, a and that's why – you know, there's a lot of people that work in nuclear because we do a lot of thinking and we look at what's the worst thing that can happen, and how do we address it, how do we mitigate it, how do we manage it?
And then we have to convince a regulator. Like, we don't just get to go and get a licence for the next 40 years. Every few years we're in front of a regulator saying, why are we still allowed to operate? What is this plant still [00:44:30] safe? What are we doing to take it to the next level? So that's a very, very public transparent process that anybody can participate in, right? It's not closed doors. It's not that we go in and have a side conversation and get a licence. No, it's public hearings that take multiple days and there are people that intervene, and it's an opportunity for everybody to have their say, right? That's the nice part about the nuclear industry.
Peter Reynolds: [00:44:58] David, what keeps you passionate about the industry? What keeps you going?
David Tyndall: [00:45:03] What keeps me going? I think a couple of things. One, what we can leave as a legacy. And I think that's – you know, when I look forward I want my kids to have a planet that's here and that's healthy. And so making sure that they have something that they can be proud of and that they know I contributed to helping. That's one of the things that keeps me [00:45:30] intrinsically motivated, is I weren't to leave a good legacy for future generations.
The people that I get to work with keep me motivated. Whether that's the people in the community – and that could be the people that are challenging, me, they keep me thinking, right? Or the people that I work with and challenge to think differently or the people that I get to challenge to work differently. Hey, like, nuclear was a very stagnant kind of organization for a number of years and thinking [00:46:00] about ways to challenge our mindset and bring lessons from other industries, like, we're talking robotics and AI and all those fun things that everybody thinks [unintelligible 00:46:08] forefront, those weren't associated with nuclear 10 years ago. But bringing that in and showing people how we could do it, that's what keeps me going.
Between the people I get to work with and leaving a legacy, that's what makes me tick.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:46:22] Dare I ask the counter question? What keeps you awake at night, Dave?
David Tyndall: [00:46:30] I'll call it the sheer ability to move as fast as we need to move.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:46:36] I can imagine.
David Tyndall: [00:46:36] You know, I think we all see climate change and that's why it excites me to be part of the company I'm with that we want to move fast. It's that ability to move fast. Making sure the technologies are ready, making sure that we have the necessary amounts of financing and resources. And that we have the human resources to be able to get out there and do what needs to be done [00:47:00]. And so I think we're seeing that big mindset shift.
But that's the big thing that keeps me up and going, hey there's a lot of – it feels like there's a lot of weight on the shoulders sometimes. We've got to go do this and we've got to do it now. And so it's just – it's figuring out the strategies to make sure all that – we're able to do it.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:47:17] It falls into place.
David Tyndall: [00:47:19] Yeah.
Peter Reynolds: [00:47:19] Your passion has really come through during this podcast, David. Thank you so much for sharing your insights.
David Tyndall: [00:47:27] No problem at all.
Peter Reynolds: [00:47:30] I'd love to end the podcast as we do, often, talking about new technology. And I wanted to just throw out this thing that's been popping up in the news.
So Australian scientists have discovered an enzyme that converts air into energy. This is absolutely blowing me away. This is science fiction stuff. The finding that was published March 8th in the journal Nature reveals that this enzyme uses low amounts of hydrogen in the atmosphere to create an electric current. And this finding opens [00:48:00] the way to create devices that literally make energy from the air.
David, what goes through your mind when you hear about this?
David Tyndall: [00:48:11] I just love the sheer ingenuity of people. But also it just makes me, like, how many things about Mother Nature do we not actually truly understand? Like, you kind of think of it and you're like, wow that's amazing right? And so these creatures have powered themselves for years – or the enzymes have powered themselves for [00:48:30] years and OK, how – that's pretty cool. So how do we leverage this? That's my question. And how big can it be. I think I've seen the article pop up and kind of red it and you know, there's lots of questions, there's lots of work to be done. But the fact that people are looking at it and looking at it in different ways. That's awesome.
And I think you know, one day do we have these, like, sensors or maybe my watch is powered by this. I don't think it replaces power generation. I just don't – [00:49:00] but hey, if it gets there, that's awesome. But I just – from everything I've read so far, it's kind of like, hey, we might get to powering a watch sometime, but we'll figure it out. So it's exciting that people go and look for these things. Right? So it's good.
Peter Reynolds: [00:49:13] Your job is safe for the time being, I think, David.
David Tyndall: [00:49:15] I think so.
Peter Reynolds: [00:49:17] But Geoff, your thoughts.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:49:22] Well I just – thank you Dave. I just love having had this conversation. I think it's terrifically useful. There's just so much going on out there. My next podcast I want to rant and rave a bit about so many positives, and this little hydrogen sucking enzyme to me is just one of those many things. And we have so many of these types of things developing which unfortunately are 20 or 30 or 40 years of development away before they are big scale and can replace what we're doing now. Meanwhile. The stuff we're doing now is just critically essential to move us forward.
You know, that's one of the reasons I'm on the [unintelligible 00:49:56] it's one of the reasons I'm up on my rooftop, as you kindly [00:50:00] put it, Peter, trying to yell and scream at people about the fact that 2030 is too freaking late. We've just got to get on with this stuff and I'm just delighted that we have the opportunity to do this.
Peter Reynolds: [00:50:13] Well that, I think is a great way to end the podcast, and on behalf of myself and Geoff, David, I want to thank you again for spending time with us today, sharing your insights on the future of nuclear power, and the leadership role that Ontario Power Generation is taking when it's coming to develop and implementing [00:50:30] this technology.
And as always we want to thank our audience. Whether you're watching this on YouTube or you're listening on your favourite podcast app, you're what makes this all possible. And we absolutely would love to get your comments, your questions – we're actually going to be starting a segment on the podcast where we answer questions. So whether you're seeing this on YouTube or on a podcast app or a clip on Facebook or Instagram, leave a comment, ask a question [00:51:00]. We'd absolutely love to hear from you.
So thanks again to David-
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:51:04] Can I also just say, Peter –
Peter Reynolds: [00:51:05] Oh, sorry, go ahead Geoff.
Geoff Sheffrin: [00:51:07] Can I just say my usual closing? You know, Peter – I always have to push Peter – my usual closing is movers make things happen. Everyone else is a spectator. So go out and be a mover. Thank you Peter, thank you David.
Peter Reynolds: [00:51:25] And thank you for listening to another episode of Mother Nature Doesn't Give a Crap. My name is Peter Reynolds and we'll see you next time.