Tyler Hamilton
Toronto Star
June 1, 2007

The Ontario government, which wants to build at least 1,000 megawatts of new nuclear capacity in the province, has hired management consulting firm McKinsey & Co. to produce "independent" assessment of nuclear reactor technologies on the market.

The company’s report, due later this year, won’t recommend a specific technology but will be "important input" on any final decision, according to a statement from the Ministry of Energy.

The department also confirmed it will be allowing bids from foreign suppliers – meaning Candu technology from federally owned Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. could lose out to designs from General Electric, Westinghouse and a partnership backed by France’s state-controlled Areva.

The decision "will be based on the best technology offered at the best price that provides the greatest benefits and lowest risks over the lifetime of the new facilities."

Ontario Power Generation, to save time, previously wanted to construct an enhanced version of the older Candu 6 reactor at its Darlington site, rather than go with AECL’s next-generation Advanced Candu Reactor design, which only exists on paper.

"The first preference was to select a Candu 6E design because of an expectation of a two-year saving in the project duration," according to a Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission internal email dated last Dec. 19, obtained by Greenpeace Canada through an access to information request.

The email goes on to say that OPG is now "examining options for other technologies" because of the "likelihood" that the Candu 6 would have to go through design changes to comply with new regulations.

Sean-Patrick Stensil, a Greenpeace energy analyst, said the Candu 6 containment design does not meet international safety standards. "It’s beginning to show more and more that AECL’s options are severely limited."

Assistant deputy energy minister Rick Jennings said in an interview that a final decision on technology is likely to come "early next year." He said the McKinsey report will also assess how each reactor design will affect Ontario jobs and the larger economy.

"We’re looking at the impact on Ontario in the broadest sense."

Supporters of "Team Candu" predicted the review will confirm Canadian technology as the best option. The Organization of Candu Industries, a lobby representing 92 companies, claims that up to 22,000 person-years of employment will be at risk if Ontario went with a foreign supplier.

France’s Areva counters that 70 per cent of any reactor built in Ontario will come from local workers and engineers and technicians will gain skills that can be exported around the world.

Tom Adams, executive director of think tank Energy Probe, said he likes the idea of comparing reactor options but doesn’t believe a consultant is the right way to go.

"A consultant is going to tell you what you want to hear," said Adams. "We should have a public hearing."

Stensil warned that McKinsey is likely to base its assessment on "fantasy" information supplied by AECL and other suppliers.

That’s a concern for Jan Trzeciakowski, a veteran of nuclear engineering in Ontario. He said the government should be seeking objective opinion from other countries, rather than relying on the technology providers or OPG, which has always used Candu technology.

He noted that China has purchased Candu reactors in the past but more recently has selected Westinghouse and Areva designs.

"If Candu was so good, then why aren’t the Chinese buying more?"