Energy Drivers - Is nuclear energy the backbone of Canada’s clean energy future?

00:00:01 - 00:01:12

Lance Mortlock

Welcome to the next episode of the Energy Drivers Podcast. I’m Lance Mortlock, your host, for today’s discussion with James Scongack, Chief Operating Officer of Bruce Power. Throughout our series, we invite Canadian energy and industrial leaders to engage in discussions on key issues, share insights, and pose challenging questions. We’re pleased to welcome James, who brings deep experience in large-scale energy operations, infrastructure management and stakeholder engagement. As the Chief Operating Officer at Bruce Power, James plays a central role in overseeing one of the world’s largest nuclear generating stations, an asset that is foundational to Ontario’s electricity system and to Canada’s clean electricity supply. Today, we’ll discuss Bruce Powers role in the electricity system, key policy and planning developments affecting nuclear energy, and the opportunities, challenges ahead as Canada navigates the all-important energy transition. So, James, thank you for joining our podcast. It’s really good to have you here.

00:01:13 – 00:01:18

James Scongack

That’s great. And thanks for having me, Lance. I’m a big fan of the podcast and looking forward to our discussion today.

00:01:19 – 00:01:40

Lance Mortlock

Awesome. So, I thought I’d start us off with something easy. Some of our listeners may not be fully familiar with, Bruce Power. Could you share a bit about maybe yourself, your journey, but also Bruce Power’s mandate and how you think about the organization’s role in delivering reliable, affordable and clean electricity for Ontario?

00:01:41 - 00:03:18

James Scongack

Yeah, sure. Lance. So just a bit about Bruce Power. We actually just celebrated our 25th anniversary so, we are a public-private partnership. We lease the Bruce nuclear facility from the province of Ontario through 2064. Our owners consist of TC Energy, Omers pension plan and our two unions on site, along with 90% of our employees who are investors in the business.

And currently, we produce about a third of Ontario’s electricity from eight reactors. We’re also one of the world’s largest producers of made-in-Canada lifesaving medical isotopes. And right now, we have a multi-year, we call it our Refurbishment Life Extension program, but essentially what it is an ongoing program to life extend the assets that we have through 2064.

I actually grew up just north of the site in a small town called Port Elgin, my dad worked his career here as a firefighter. And I’m coming up on 23 years in Bruce power. And Lance, I always tell everybody that my first day of work at Bruce Power, our business plan ran the company to 2018 and shut down.

That was the business plan. And so here we are 25 years later with one of Canada’s largest electricity infrastructure projects, making power every day, making isotopes with a view to 2070. And so, me, along with all my colleagues and the hard workers here at Bruce Power, we’re really proud of how far we’ve come and the role that we play in not only Ontario but also in Canada.

00:03:19 - 00:03:35

Lance Mortlock

 I noticed that you are also the founding chair of the Nuclear Isotope Innovation Council of Ontario. Could you share a bit more about that organization’s purpose and how that connects to your role at Bruce Power?

00:03:36 - 00:05:02

James Scongack

Yeah, so, one of the things that we produce at our facility that I think is a real Canadian success story is lifesaving medical isotopes. If you think of nuclear medicine in Canada, if you think about modern health care, the type of energy that really powers modern health care and theranostics, diagnostics, therapeutics and cancer is medical isotopes.

And the vast majority of nuclear isotopes we use come from our nuclear fleet. And so, this is an area of responsibility I’ve had for a number of years, working with many dedicated people here. And back in 2018, we decided that a group of industry leaders, we came together. I brought people together to say we need to do something as a cross-functional sector in Canada, from production to distribution to research and development, to health care institutions, to ensure that we are putting in place the right building blocks for Canada to play a leadership role in isotope production, so that led to the creation of the Canadian Nuclear Isotope Council. It’s an organization now of about 130 organizations across Canada. The Ontario Council is a panel that I’m chairing for Minister Lecce with other a real amazing group of individuals that has given the province of Ontario advice and recommendations on what Ontario can do to double our isotope production by 2030.

00:05:03 - 00:05:14

Lance Mortlock

And the idea being is the world needs more of these isotopes. And so, there’s an opportunity for Bruce Power to kind of lean into that space and supply more. Is that the idea in terms of doubling production?

00:05:15 – 00:06:43

James Scongack

Yeah, that’s right. If you look at it really simply, there’s only two ways of producing isotopes. You can produce them in a reactor, research or power reactor, or cyclotron. And the global demand for medical isotopes is expected to double by 2030. So if you just think of the trends and countries moving more into the middle class, having access to the health care that we’re fairly used to here in Canada, the demand for these medical isotopes is going to continue to increase. In Canada, this is a story a lot of people don’t realize, Lance is, our power reactors also have the ability to not only generate electricity but have the unique ability to make isotopes. And so, Canada has been a leader in this space for generations. Doubling our production is really about ensuring that Canada continues to play a leadership role in this space.

So, you know, I always remind myself that if you look at the early days of nuclear medicine in the world, one of the major achievements in nuclear medicine was actually 75 years ago here in Canada, that was the first cobalt beam therapy. We actually made a stamp to celebrate it. There are literally 2 to 3 billion people in the world today that do not have access to that cancer treatment we did 75 years ago in Canada.

So, it’s just a reminder for us that we talk about energy growth in terms of electricity or other forms of energy. Isotopes follow that same pattern, Lance, and that’s why we need to make sure that isotope supply is there for patients and families.

00:06:44 – 00:07:23

Lance Mortlock

I kind of love that. And I also it kind of reminds me a lot about what we’re trying to do in terms of nation building, what we’re trying to do in terms of getting the economic engine of this country going.

Pivoting a little bit, let’s discuss the broader context in Ontario. Electricity demand growth is accelerating, driven by electrification, as you know, and to some extent, population growth and potential data centre deployment. How do you view the role of nuclear generation in maintaining system reliability and affordability over the next decades, two decades, call it?

00:07:24 - 00:08:42

James Scongack

Yeah, for sure. So, I mean, the first thing I always like to say is that I think what’s so critical when it comes to energy security, energy affordability, energy reliability is the importance of building a balanced supply mix. So you’ll never hear me demonize or idolize one form of energy. Well, I’ll probably idolize nuclear today, but in Ontario we have a balanced supply mix.

Nuclear produces about, depending on what is occurring in terms of refurbishments, about 50% to 60% of our power. And so we have a need in Ontario to firstly secure that for the long term, but also incrementally expand nuclear so we can continue to play that role. That will go alongside expanding hydroelectric. It will go along expansion and extension of renewables.

It will also go along with a continued important role for the gas fleet in Ontario. So, you know, I see Ontario, I’m a proud Ontarian, as an economy that we want to continue to grow, an economy that will need reliability and energy security. And really what the government in Ontario has laid out is an integrated plan that allows the roadmap for us to get there, and that’s going to rely on all sources of energy looking to play our role to secure what we have today and grow for tomorrow.

00:08:43 - 00:09:22

Lance Mortlock

And in that, I imagine as well, in terms of growing for tomorrow, a lot of the supply chain that exists around nuclear energy. I think one of the things that in my own research around the importance of nuclear energy, providing baseload capacity and all of that, given that the sun doesn’t always shine, the wind does not always blow, is that we’re actually quite self-reliant in Canada as well.

We’ve got our own uranium mines, we’ve got a pretty sophisticated supply chain. We design our own reactors, I believe. So it’s quite a self-contained system or ecosystem that we’ve got, which I think puts us in a great position, doesn’t it?

00:09:23 – 00:11:07

James Scongack

Yeah, it absolutely does. I mean, from as you noted, from your uranium mining in Saskatchewan, which gives us fuel security.

We have a supply chain and a network in Ontario and Canada that is, you know, that a lot of people really idolize around the world. You know, when we talk about, I think one of the things that’s great about us as Canadians, Lance, is I think humility is a real strength. And I think humility is important, but oftentimes we don’t talk about the strengths we have, and we can be both strong and humble at the same time. And our nuclear is exactly in that camp. If I think of what we do at Bruce Power, $0.95 of every dollar we spend stays in Canada. You know, when the pandemic hit, we were in the middle, which is starting our refurbishment program, and a lot of people, you’ll recall at the time quite concerned about supply chain disruptions. We were able to safely continue with that infrastructure project because we had everything we needed right from here in Canada to maintain that. So and I think that’s important in the world we’re in to where, you know, you can’t have economic security without energy security and strong supply chains are important. Well, one of the things that often people don’t talk about, Lance, that I think is important is our nuclear supply chain not only services our facilities in Ontario and New Brunswick, but there’s a lot of other, there’s over 400 nuclear reactors in the world. That nuclear supply chain in Canada exports capabilities, products and services to those reactors all around the world. So it’s not only about supporting our own needs here, which is great from a security point of view, but a lot of economies turn to Canada and Ontario for supporting their nuclear fleets.

00:11:08 – 00:11:50

Lance Mortlock

Energy transition is a central theme across the energy sector. And, I mean, I’ve spent a big part of the last several years on this podcast talking to different leaders in all aspects of the energy transition system, whether it’s mining companies, oil and gas companies, parent utility companies, and we’re seeing increased attention on nuclear energy in public policy, long-term planning discussions.

You know, for example, the inclusion of Darlington’s SMRs in the major projects list. Do you think that the narrative around nuclear energy is shifting? And how might that influence the future energy decisions that we make in Canada?

00:11:51 – 00:13:56

James Scongack

Yeah, I mean, certainly I do think the narrative is shifting. I think one of the areas that is contributed in Ontario and Canada to that narrative shifting is how we’ve carried out our Life Extension Program on time and on budget.

Traditionally, one of the concerns with any large infrastructure project is how do you secure cost and schedule predictability? And we’ve demonstrated here at Bruce Power the ability to deliver projects on time and on budget. So I think from an investment perspective, from a affordability ratepayer perspective, that is really important. But I also think nuclear checks the boxes and a lot of some of the significant challenges we have of our time.

You talked about climate change. If you look one of the most significant emissions-reduction initiatives in the world, the last 20 years was the phase-out of coal in the province of Ontario. In 2002, coal accounted for over a quarter of our power here in Ontario. It’s hard to believe. It was zero as of 2014. If you look at that from an energy perspective, Lance, nuclear was responsible by us bringing units back to service for 90% of that energy to phase coal out in Ontario. So it checks the climate change box. We have the cost predictability that we strive for every single day, energy security, domestic supply chains, growing the economy. So it checks those boxes. But what I also say is oftentimes when I get questions on acceptability, I think the trap that people fall into, and I’ve been guilty of it as well, is we’re very usually passionate about the energy sources in the sectors we work in, right?

You get somebody on hydro they love hydro or renewables or gas. And sometimes we make it sound like energy as a binary choice. And I think if we have an intelligent conversation about an appropriate mix, you would have seen the Prime Minister’s recent announcement on the National Electricity Strategy. It’s all about balance and mix. You know, the mix that may work for British Columbia and Québec may be different than Alberta.

00:13:57 - 00:14:33

Lance Mortlock

Our team recently published a study outlining a pathway for Canada to build more nuclear momentum. In our view, and actually, in my view as well, James, Canada needs more needs a clear policy direction regarding the nuclear strategy, financing, technology to provide a really clear business case and business case certainty. Do you agree with our position from an EY perspective, and what other areas do you think need to be addressed to support, you know, increased in in nuclear investment across the country?

00:14:34 – 00:16:21

James Scongack

 You know, I’m quite aligned with the many of the focus areas in there. The one area, Lance, that I would say that we don’t talk about enough with nuclear is the longevity of the asset.

So let me just give you an example. So we’re in the process right now returning one of our reactors to service following a refurbishment. That reactor when it returns to service will likely operate to the 2070s. It came into service in the mid 1970s. So we’re talking about assets here, much like a subway, much like a large hydroelectric facility that we’re really not only just one generation, like we’re almost talking, you know, a century of operation.

And I think sometimes when we look at how do you price that in, that is very, very difficult to price in. Some of these other assets that are really important to the mix. You know, you’re right there, capital cost is lower, they can get onto the grid faster, and so I think it’s very important we’re looking at, you know, not sometimes these are apples to oranges, and how do you complement both? And so I think one of the areas we from a policy perspective we haven’t totally grabbed a hold of to really confront, and we’re working on it as Bruce Power is, how do you want to deal with those long assets? It’s more straightforward in what we’re doing now where you’re taking an assisting asset, improving it, enhancing it, innovating and bring it back to service.

But the various models that are going to be needed to, you know, finance a project that could be, you know, 10-plus years with a lifespan of 100 years, you know, how do we build the kind of the certainty that is needed around that? You know, nuclear doesn’t need a subsidy, but nuclear needs certainty.

00:16:22 – 00:16:40

Lance Mortlock

 Maybe shifting gears a little bit, I want to talk about technology. So, from a technology standpoint, stakeholders are increasingly focused on, call it, procurement options, What nuclear technologies do you believe are the most important in Canada’s energy transition future?

00:16:41 - 00:19:38

James Scongack

It’s certainly a question we get a lot. So maybe I’ll start with the regulatory process we’re underway right now. So right now, we’re for Bruce C, which will be looking to build up to almost five gigawatts of power on our site. We’re calling it we have Bruce Nuclear Generating Station A and B, so this is Bruce C. We’re undergoing an impact assessment process that is well underway.

And what we’ve done, Lance, is we’ve built what we call a technology-neutral process. So we’re able to work through the impact assessment process, receive the permit, but gives us time to select the right technology. Here would be my kind of key message on technology. This is as I mentioned earlier, this is a decision we’re making for 100 years.

And so we have launched a request for information process. We’re working in close collaboration with Ontario Power Generation, the Government of Ontario, because we want to make sure that we are driving to an outcome that is going to serve not only ourselves well, but be able to attract investors, but most importantly, protect ratepayers over the long run.

And so when people say, “What technology are you going to select in Ontario?” I always say that’s a very easy answer. We’re going to select a technology that is designed. We’re going to select the technology that can be licensed, that we can build a cost estimate on, that we can plan and prepare to execute. If we learned anything from the refurbs and doing them on time, on budget, it’s that having design complete, having regulatory approval delivers a lot of project certainty.

So, we’re running a competitive process because frankly, we want everybody to sharpen their pencils and give us the best product possible. And I see our job as a utility to almost be a little bit clinical about it. Give the government — in this case, Minister Lecce is leading the Ontario panel — give the government the clinical assessment of, you know, all the components that go into this.

There’ll clearly be a public policy overlay that the government is going to have to assign to that, but we think it’s very important to take the time and do that and sometimes these things can be an emotional discussion. You know, look, we’re the largest investor in CANDU technology in Canada as Bruce Power. So a lot of people say, you know, why aren’t you just building a CANDU?

I’m like, well, because we’re in a competitive process and that’s really important. What is also important to us is that we maintain the made-in-Canada component. There’s certain elements that are non-negotiable. You know, we talked about 95% of our spending Canada over the life of the unit. We talked about the security, that supply chain. We talked about what we need. Those are non-negotiable for us. And we think it’s important if you’re going to spend tens of billions of dollars to drive the expectations that are important to us because we only have one time to get this right.

00:19:39 – 00:19:58

Lance Mortlock

And so a couple of related questions to that. So, the CANDU technology and the current reactor design that you’re using, why not just use that because it works? Why not just replicate that? Why redesign the reactor when you’ve already got a very successful design that’s been in service for decades?

00:19:59 – 00:20:53

James Scongack

Well, and I think that would be certainly one of the options we would be considering here. So Atkins Realis, I don’t want to speak for them, but they’ve said this publicly, which is, you know, they are looking at effectively a replication of the Darlington four-pack.

That is what they call the Monarch D. that is what they have put forward. And again, we want to ensure that meets current regulatory standards in terms of it’s ready for constructability. What are the new construction techniques that could be applied to that?

What is the size of the unit in terms of reactor output, in terms of electricity? What does that capital cost look like. So that is certainly your bang on one option. But it’s very important for ratepayers and this type of investment we’re driving a competitive process. And I think ratepayers and government, I think they expect us to be responsible with this decision. And that’s what we’re trying to do.

00:20:54 – 00:21:47

Lance Mortlock

And my second related question, part of some work that I was involved in recently with a client, was looking at other jurisdictions around the world from a nuclear perspective. And so we spent some time studying France, and we were looking at projects that had overrun. We looked at the UK, and they’ve got some big projects underway. We also looked at South Korea. One of the things that struck me about South Korea is, a lot to be said around cost certainty when sticking with one designer. I don’t know if you’ve probably spent a lot more time than I have studying what they do in South Korea. Any kind of comments on whether it’s France, the UK, South Korea, other jurisdictions and what we can learn from what they do to make, you know, are already very good process, even better here in Canada?

00:21:48 - 00:24:30

James Scongack

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, what I would say is if you look at around the world, large capital spend for nuclear plants, the largest volume of capital spend that is coming in on time and on budget repeatedly is the combination of the Bruce Refurbs and the Darlington Refurbs, which combined are almost 30 plus billion likely in that time. So we clearly want to build off that. We look at what’s going on internationally. But what I would say is to me not to oversimplify, but I always look at four things when it comes to cost. Whether it’s a subway, whether it’s you name it, there’s four things that kind of always jump over for me. The first is design, is the design ready?

Is it ready to move to construction? We don’t want to be changing design and updating design while we’re in construction. You just think about that from a personal, if you’re building a house, you’re not moving beams and moving walls once you’ve started construction, right. So that design certainty, the construction packages aligned the regulatory approval of that before you start the work.

That is absolutely critical. That’s point number one. Point number two is the materials you need to do that work. You’ve procured them and you know they are going to be there when you need them. Long lead components, high volume materials, that is absolutely critical. The third component is you have the workforce that is necessary to do that. And the way you secure workforce is with a long term future, a long term view of that.

So, with a good design allows you to have materials ready, then allows the workers to be able to come to work and do what they do best, which is build things right. And then the fourth component, as you said, is the repeatability. Our refurbs on a repeatable cycle. We started with unit six, we’re going to unit three is coming back, we’re into 4 or 5 and then seven and eight and Darlington did the same. So with new build it’ll be exactly the same. We’re looking at four units at Bruce. They’re looking at up to eight units at WesleyVille. How do we go through a repeatability pattern? We get better every time we do it. And so we want to keep going, so but that’s just not true of nuclear projects. It’s true, if you and I were doing a house renovation. It’s true of a subway, a LRT, you name it, a hydro dam. And so to me, I’m a big believer if you want large infrastructure projects to go well, you invest in those things early, you get them locked in, and sometimes you have to go slow to go fast. If you take the time to do those things right up front, it allows when the workers get to the site to do what they do best, unencumbered with clear direction. So of course, Lance, I’m oversimplifying it, but I really believe those are the ingredients.

00:24:31 – 00:25:29

Lance Mortlock

Another thing, James, that I’ve been thinking about a lot, talking a lot on this podcast about, is regulations and how critical they are not only in the energy sector at large, but in the nuclear sector, to ensure the safety of reactors and plants.

However, some regulatory processes, I think, can slow development down and create uncertainty for investors. So, for instance, the Impact Assessment Act applies to new nuclear reactors with capacities over 200MW, and that can extend the regulatory reviews by up to 1,095 days. I see the same thing in the oil and gas sector. I see the same thing in the mining sector.

So, my question to you is, do you see opportunities for governments and regulators to streamline these processes while maintaining the rigorous safety standards that we have to apply?

00:25:30 – 00:28:41

James Scongack

Yeah, I absolutely do. And I think they are. I mean, there’s always a debate about we want things to always move quicker than they can, but I think they are.

I think you see governments aligned to that. Here’s what I think the challenge is that we have. And that is when the public hears that, sometimes it leaves the public with a view of, are you going to cut corners? We know Indigenous nations also play an absolutely critical role in these processes, and not only to engage in the process, you know, we want to earn the support of First Nations communities and actually have them as economic partners involved. And so sometimes the language we use can lead people to, you know, a conclusion that we’re not trying to drive. Really what we’re after is what are the non-value steps that don’t improve the environment, that don’t improve safety, that are just bureaucracy?

Eliminate those steps and get to the things that matter most. And so, you know, I’m really encouraged by the steps that are being taken. Unanimous consent is never going to be an outcome we’re going to land on any project. Right. There’s not going to be 100% of the population agrees on everything.

What I think is important is, you know, I always say, you know, I live in the community. So as a citizen of the community, I want to work for a company and support a project that protects the safety of the workers, protects the safety of the environment, operates a facility to the highest standards, has the support of the surrounding communities, has earned that support, and has worked to earn the support of First Nations communities, but not only earn the support of First Nations communities, but done so in a way that focuses on, I call it ”reconciliaction.”

How do we create economic opportunities for First Nations communities? I think we focus on those things, you know, we can make sure that we find that balance. But I’m very encouraged by the work that has been underway, I think we found the right balance at Bruce Power. But between how do we move this forward in an expeditious way, on the one hand, but on the other hand, that respects that those dynamics. And so I don’t think there’s ever going to be a perfect mix, Lance. I think it’s always going to be easy to say, one group may say this is going way too fast, no matter what you do. Another group may say it’s going to slow no matter what you do. We just got to be, you know, try to do the right thing.

But I’m really after and we’re after those steps that are not valid. Look, this is a 2,300 acre site that has been here for 50 years. Yeah. So we shouldn’t need to do a whole pile of new studies on this facility. And those are some of the practical things that matters. I think common sense would dictate that.

And so I’m very encouraged. I think we can do it as Canadians, but it’s going to take us all working together. And look, the government’s not going to make this happen on their own. We need to find creative solutions to achieve those objectives. And industry has as much of a role to play. I think you’ve got a Prime minister, I think you’ve got a Premier here in Ontario that are prepared to listen to those and find what the right thing to do is.

00:28:42 – 00:29:28

Lance Mortlock

 I want to shift gears with kind of my second to last question here around nuclear projects, which are often faced with extended development timelines compounded by cost overruns and delays. Globally, projects like Hinkley Point C in the UK, FlemanVille 3 in France, I think exemplify these cost and schedule challenges. How can stakeholders in Canada mitigate construction and project management risks to ensure that, you know, we don’t suffer from these same issues that we’ve seen in other parts of the world and that we deliver our projects more efficiently and with greater certainty. And you’ve touched on this a bit earlier, but maybe embellish that a little bit, James, if you don’t mind.

00:29:29 – 00:32:13

James Scongack

So, I mean, for me, first, I think we have the ingredients here in Ontario and what our focus here is at Bruce Power to, I always say there’s four important elements to a successful project, and they go in this order: safety, quality, schedule and then you get cost. If you focus on those four things, that’s a successful project. And we’ve put those ingredients in place here at Bruce Power and here in Ontario. I really think the factor that best determines a project’s success is that early investment, that early certainty. In Ontario, if you read the integrated energy plan, they use a term which I quite like, it’s called no-regret actions. What are the things that you will spend money on upfront to gain that certainty later and reduce that risk? And here’s what I often think, whether it’s nuclear or any other kind of large infrastructure project, what happens. People want to set a price to that project before they’ve completed all the design work. They want to start really, really quickly.

And so what we’ve really done in nuclear is developed, what are the stage gates in terms of how we’re going to say we’re ready? What does the class of estimate have to be what materials have we ordered? Are those on site? Do we have a regulatory approval? Is the work package ready? And we have to be disciplined that we’re not going to go to the next gate until that gate is met.

Success builds a lot of momentum in a project, but also a project that gets off to a bad start is very, very difficult to recover. And so I would say if you look at the success of large infrastructure projects broadly beyond nuclear and energy, it’s not great. But there are those common elements. And we’ve demonstrated at Bruce by being disciplined and focused on those items.

And what’s important for us as we get into new build is we apply that same discipline. We take it step by step. We’re bold in the end point, but methodical on the step-by-step approach. And honestly, Lance, I think it can work. I don’t want to comment and criticize other projects because we’ve had projects in our early first 10 years of Bruce Power that didn’t go well, and we learned from that.

And we also have to be humble that you’re only as strong as your last day of performance or your last day of project execution. And so just because the last refurbs have gone really well, we’re not complacent. So, you know, I’m a big believer that we will be given the investor support, the political support, the public support to continue with nuclear if we can deliver predictability.

00:32:14 - 00:32:32

Lance Mortlock

That makes sense. Yeah. I appreciate your insights on that. Maybe before we wrap up, is there any anything else that I should have asked you? Any final thoughts or insights that you want to share with our listeners about the future of nuclear energy or Bruce Power’s role in Canada’s energy system?

00:32:33 – 00:33:29

James Scongack

You know, that’s a good question. it’s maybe a philosophical point, but if I think of me sitting here at Bruce Power today, there’s 10,000 workers working on this site, produce a third of Ontario’s power, generate lifesaving medical isotopes, one of the largest private sector infrastructure projects in Canada. We are doing what we are doing today on the Bruce site because of decisions that were made in the 1970s and 1980s to build these facilities.

A lot of the conversation you and I are having right now, that was a conversation they were having in the lead-up to that. You know, I feel very blessed to have the work for the company and live in the community. I do, and I think we have the standard of living we have in Canada doesn’t mean we don’t have a way to go, because of decisions that were made a long time ago, and so we have to live up to the moment. The decisions we are making today, it’s going to be, Lance, about somebody else talking about this 30 years from now.

00:33:30 – 00:34:30

Lance Mortlock

Those are great concluding comments James and certainly resonates with me. And I would wrap up by just saying a big thank you to you.

Appreciate you coming on the show and appreciate the work that you’re doing. I mean it is no small feat to be supplying 30% of Ontario’s energy needs, at the same time going through major refurbishment, at the same time, you know, providing lifesaving medical isotopes. That is a massive undertaking, and I think we need in this country more leaders like you that are, you know, stepping up and leaning in to, you know, drive as you talk about this next wave of energy and infrastructure that we need in the future.

So, thank you for everything you do, James, and thank you for coming on the show. It’s been really interesting listening to you.

00:34:31 – 00:34:52

James Scongack

It’s great to be on. And what I would say is we are in the people business here at Bruce Power, and I have the honour of getting to speak about this stuff, Lance. But there’s 10,000 people that are making this happen every day.

And so, you know, it’s a thank you to them and thank you to you and EY for your leadership, I know you’re a partner many of us count on. And I look forward to the continued dialogue and work together.

00:34:53 – 00:36:35

Lance Mortlock

Awesome. So for our listeners, we encourage you to reflect on today’s discussion with James and share your insights with us.

You can reach out to EY via the attached contact details or join the conversation on social media. Finishing yet another great episode. I’d like to share a few final messages on my conversation with James.

Number one, I think nuclear energy is positioned as a reliable system foundation. Bruce Power illustrates how nuclear energy plays a foundational role in delivering reliable, affordable and emissions-conscious electricity at scale. Number two, energy transition requires balance. Canada’s energy transition conversation is increasingly recognizing the need to balance decarbonization goals with system reliability, affordability and long-term planning discipline. Nuclear reactors can help us achieve our net-zero ambitions without compromising growth opportunities. And finally, number three, I think nuclear energy needs stable and long-term policy. Sustaining and expanding nuclear energy requires clear, stable policy frameworks that support investment and infrastructure designed to operate for decades, which James talked about. Investors need revenue certainty, bipartisan support and I think Canada has a strong policy and regulatory backbone. But obviously, and we’ve talked about it, more refinement is needed in this space as we go forward. So once again, thank you to our listeners for joining our podcast, and we’ll see you on the next episode.