In May, the provincial government responded to the NB Power Review report released in March. Of the Review report’s 50 recommendations, the government accepted 44 and identified six for further study.
Many of the recommendations are intended to improve NB Power’s operations and organizational culture, including governance, oversight, accountability, staffing levels and training. The government assigned most of these improvements to NB Power to implement, with some external assistance. We can only cross our fingers that the same utility that the Review criticized as lacking operational excellence – including basic project management skills – can somehow get it together to improve itself.
The Review report included a bizarre suggestion that buildings heated with baseboard electric heaters should switch to fossil gas furnaces. Thankfully, the government response did not pounce on this opportunity to promote fracking but instead responded by completing an “analysis of the role of natural gas for heating purposes” and developing recommendations “for government consideration.” Fingers crossed again that these will be quietly binned.
The Review report included considerable discussion of NB Power’s nuclear operations, much of it highly critical, yet recommended that the government consider developing a new large nuclear reactor. Remembering that more than half of NB Power’s $6 billion debt is due to Point Lepreau’s refurbishment and ongoing maintenance and outage expenses, this recommendation appears illogical.
At the media event in March to launch its report, the Review panel pointedly recommended against developing SMRs because they carry “a whole set of risks.”
Considering this clear advice to avoid SMRs, it is interesting that the government response to the new large reactor recommendation is “short-term action” to “evaluate opportunities for new nuclear (SMR and/or conventional).” CRED-NB was hoping that the Review panel’s criticism of SMRs as well as a new report highlighting the failure of Canada’s SMR strategy would mean the end of New Brunswick’s SMR ambitions, but it seems not.
Dr. Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility has used the term “hopium” to describe the irrational belief in the potential of nuclear energy. In a recent post, Dr. Edwards added: “HOPIUM also requires OPM = Other People’s Money.” Our hope is that the government’s evaluation of opportunities for new nuclear will be a learning opportunity about the reasons why nuclear power has no future.
