• 3 minutes Shale Oil Fiasco
  • 7 minutes "Leaked" request by some Democrats that they were asking Nancy to coordinate censure instead of impeachment.
  • 12 minutes Trump's China Strategy: Death By a Thousand Paper Cuts
  • 16 minutes Global Debt Worries. How Will This End?
  • 5 hours americavchina.com
  • 1 hour Greta named Time Magazine "Person of the Year"
  • 3 hours DUMB IT DOWN-IMPEACHMENT
  • 8 hours Tories on course to win majority
  • 9 hours Winter Storms Hitting Continental US
  • 1 min Emissions Soar as Flaring Frenzy Breaks New Records
  • 58 mins Aramco Raises $25.6B in World's Biggest IPO
  • 12 hours 2nd Annual Great Oil Price Prediction Challenge of 2019
  • 1 day China Burns More Coal than the Rest of the World !
  • 8 hours WTO is effectively neutered. Trump *already* won the trade war against China and WTO is helpless to intervene
Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba is a writer and journalist based in Mexico City. She has extensive experience writing and editing environmental features, travel pieces, local news in the…

More Info

Premium Content

Canada’s Oil Hotspot Considers Going Nuclear

Canada’s oil sands produce some of the dirtiest oil on the planet. Their abnormally high carbon emissions have earned Albertan oil a soiled reputation not just among environmentalists, but among many politicians and their constituents as well. Now, Alberta is trying to win back some favor with a new, revolutionary plan to clean up their oil sands by turning to an unlikely adversary--the nuclear energy industry.

A United States Congressional Research Service report released back in 2012--when the potential approval of the Keystone XL pipeline crossing the U.S.-Canada border was an extremely contentious political hot topic (as it continues to be today)--estimated that the Canadian oil introduced to U.S. markets via the heavily debated pipeline “would be the equivalent of boosting U.S. global-warming emissions by between 0.06 percent and 0.3 percent per year” according to reporting by the Washington Post. “At the high end, that’s like putting 4 million extra passenger cars on the road.”

An op-ed in the New York Times summed up the issue of just how filthy the oil sands are with even more clarity and a healthy dose of vitriol: “Canada’s tar sands, deposits of sand saturated with bitumen, contain twice the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by global oil use in our entire history. If we were to fully exploit this new oil source, and continue to burn our conventional oil, gas and coal supplies, concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere eventually would reach levels higher than in the Pliocene era, more than 2.5 million years ago, when sea level was at least 50 feet higher than it is now. That level of heat-trapping gases would assure that the disintegration of the ice sheets would accelerate out of control. Sea levels would rise and destroy coastal cities. Global temperatures would become intolerable. Twenty to 50 percent of the planet’s species would be driven to extinction. Civilization would be at risk.” Related: Natural Gas Prices In The Permian Flip Negative Again

Now, just last month, reporting on new data has revealed that these descriptions of the dirtiness of Canadian oil sands crude are not hyperbolic but possibly even significantly understated. When measurements of Canada's oil sands CO2 emissions were “collected using internationally recommended methods,” scientists from Environment Canada “ found CO2 emission intensities up to 123 percent higher than current estimates”.

With this kind of public image, it’s easy to see why Alberta has gotten creative in its efforts to clean up its crude along with its reputation. This is where the Albertan government’s unlikely alliance with the nuclear energy sector comes into play. The strategy is to use small-scale modular nuclear reactors to power oil sands facilities with ultra low-emissions energy. In addition to electricity, the reactors would also produce steam and hot water, all of which are crucial components of crude oil production in the Albertan oil sands. Canada’s CBC describes the term "small modular reactor" as a “catch-all for units that produce less than 300 megawatts electric (MWe),” going on to specify that “some are small enough to fit in a school gym.” Related: U.S. Energy Storage Capacity Set To Double This Year

John Stewart of the Canadian Nuclear Association told CBC that "Alberta's always been a place where people are open to ideas," making the oil sands’ province the perfect region to try out the novel new idea before reproducing it on a larger scale. Even if the small modular nuclear reactors are a success, however, a lot stands in the way of them becoming the new oil sands industry standard, namely high construction and production costs and bureaucratic roadblocks.

That being said, the small modular nuclear reactors are much cheaper to build and get online than a standard nuclear plant and can the units can be standardized and mass-produced to then be assembled on-site. “Due to their size, they require less complex engineering for heat removal and smaller buffer zones than large reactors while having enhanced safety features” reports CBC.

If the Albertan oil sands nuclear experiment is successful, it could lead to great improvements to Canada’s overall emissions and could possibly even lead to other regions and nations following suit.

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage



Leave a comment
  • John Q on May 23 2019 said:
    Canada should invest in the Integral Molten Salt Reactor that Terrestrial Energy is building. It being an MSR eliminates the meltdown risk. It's also a strongly proliferation resistant design as it is a "once-through" burner reactor like most operating power reactors, with no breeding capability (the ability to breed fissile material on-site). I would class it as one of the safest designs of MSRs. They do build SMRs that take about 4 years to build on average. It does a good job giving you the benefits of MSRs (no meltdowns) with similarly high proliferation resistance standards as our existing pressurized water reactors. Those are strongly attractive features for any nuclear reactor design.
    It can also be used to burn thorium if U-233 is bred and used as fuel instead of the traditionally used U-235.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play