Can Canada lead the way in Small Modular Reactor (SMR) deployment?

There are many different techniques and technologies used to generate electricity from nuclear energy. The focus on this article is on next-generation Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). SMRs promise advances in safety and affordability and are seen as important technological developments in energy markets. We will examine what is driving demand growth for electricity and whether Canada can take a leading role in the development of SMRs as a result.

What are SMRs?

SMRs are new. Put plainly, the “modular” in SMR means that they are constructed in standard units and then assembled on site. They promise the use of light water, safer production standards, smaller footprints and lower operating costs. They produce anywhere from tens to hundreds of megawatts. And their energy source is physically small, boasting about 16,000 times the energy density of coal. A single fuel rod (assembly) typically lasts 3-6 years.

Many countries and states have incentives in place to accelerate the deployment of SMRs. There are currently 80 designs globally (iaea.org). Russia deployed a floating SMR in 2019 and China followed in 2023. The map below shows the global activity in SMRs with several also under construction (the live map is at www.world-nuclear.org)

Approximately 14% of Canada’s electricity comes from nuclear reactors right now. If you are in the West, that might surprise you as it’s mostly generated in Ontario. Canada also developed its own and unique proprietary nuclear energy technology known as CANDU. 22 of the world’s 417 nuclear reactors use CANDU technology, which avoids the need to enrich Uranium.

Here is the percentage of electricity generation from nuclear energy by country. Canada, the US and the UK are about the same in terms of nuclear energy supply as a percentage of mix. Europe, led by France, is the largest adopter.

 

Does Canada have the demand growth to support SMR deployment?

Yes. Demand growth for electric power is being driven by data centers, EV adoption and general electrification. According to IESO (October 16, 2024) electricity demand in Ontario will grow by a staggering 75% to 2050. Canada-wide the forecast is for 47% growth (cer-rec.gc.ca) by 2050.

Is there enough Uranium?

Supply of Uranium for nuclear reactors is not an issue, even with potential SMR growth. The Uranium commodity market has seen reasonably steady and trending upward for a long time. To supply nuclear reactors, Uranium is procured through long-term contracts. The demand signals for nuclear reactors are foreseeable and further Uranium deposits can be developed. In addition, Canada has the highest quality Uranium deposits in the world by a significant factor. Supply is not a constraint.

Planning, Policy and Predictions

On March 5, 2025, Natural Resources Canada stated that nuclear energy plays a pivotal role in contributing non emitting electricity and that Canada would strategically invest in a nuclear future.

The Future Electricity Fund (FEF) funded $55MM to Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG’s) New Nuclear Project involving 3 SMRs that aim to power about 900,000 homes. OPG considers itself a first mover in the G7 for SMRs. That is a fair assessment. FEF also provided $80MM to SaskPower’s SMR pre-development work. Canada also has national roadmaps, funding for R&D and has worked out arrangements for treating and storing the waste.

Political will and coordination is high in Canada, with the notable exception of BC’s legislated anti nuclear position. Alberta and its deregulated market would allow behind the meter co-location and co-development to flourish. Ontario and parts of the Maritimes are ahead of the pack and have momentum. Other provinces are joining in planning and design for SMRs. And First Nations could be engaged in a meaningful way to co-own and provide viable solutions to communities.

Turning to the U.S. for a moment, executive orders by the current administration are helping to fast-track nuclear licensing. On the other hand, the queue for transmission interconnection in the US is now just shy of 5 years, one of the biggest delays facing large electricity projects, irrespective of technology. At the recent (23 July 2025) POWERUP data center conference in Dulles, most utilities estimate 8-9 years for new nuclear and SMR deployment.

Hydro’s limitations and CER forecasts.

With this federal funding, policy support, and momentum, why do the Canada Energy Regulator (CER at cer-reg.gc.ca) forecasts predict that nuclear will not grow in Canada?

Hydro electric generation (and wind) remain a big part of its forecasts. But relying on hydro-generation is likely a mistake over the long-term. For the last 10 consecutive years, we have had 10 years of rising temperatures. In Feb 2024 worldwildlife.org released a study showing that 61% of the world’s hydro dams will be in drought areas by 2050. In 2023, the International Energy Agency (IEA) noted that BC hydro generation fell to its lowest level in more than a decade, importing 20% of its power from other jurisdictions. In 2024, BC spent $1.38 billion importing power from the US and Alberta, supplying 25% of the province with high carbon intensive electricity (energyfuturesinstitute.ca). The graph below shows what is happening with hydro generation from the Hoover Dam.

Hydro is becoming increasingly unreliable as a long-term baseload solution. We need to revisit hydro’s long-term contribution to Canada’s energy mix.

What about natural gas and renewables?

Gas is abundant but faces technology supply chain issues. Seven-year wait times are being experienced by utilities for gas turbines. Renewables like wind and solar cannot be used for stable baseload for the demand pull and supply quality needed for data centers. At least not without expensive battery solutions. Regardless of opinion, the solution is ultimately going to require a more complex mix. With significant constraints on gas turbines, issues with cost and reliability of renewables, a clean energy solution like nuclear fits into a commercial solution.

Will the Canadian Public accept nuclear?

Increasingly, yes. And many sources show increased public support for nuclear. But when it comes to where you put a reactor, small or not, it gets more complicated. And there is sensitivity to the nature of and the treatment of waste.

According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) there is growing support among consumers for nuclear power, especially as it is increasingly seen as a reliable, carbon-free energy source. The surge in energy demand from AI and data centers is pushing Big Tech and policymakers to consider nuclear energy as a stable baseload solution. The first-ever Nuclear Energy Summit in Brussels in 2024 helped reinforce global legitimacy and public visibility for nuclear energy.

Ideally, for placement of SMRs, you want to build closer to data centers and population centers to lower costs and minimize latency risks. One way to gain support for site selection is to use existing permitted sites more efficiently and add facilities to those. Also, utilizing federal sites such as defence facilities is another tactic being deployed in the U.S. by utility companies.

Why SMR versus large scale nuclear plants?

In this author’s view, modular is better. It is easier to predict, project manage and build in modules. That is true of many things – batteries, Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) and yes, nuclear. Bespoke means one of-a-kind risks and issues and invariably that leads to overruns.

Modular is also easier to dispatch. The growth in LNG is being led by small modular scale. The table below shows some of the features leading this segment growth and the outlook is the same for nuclear energy. Its easier and less risky. It also aligns more readily with industrial and technology customers that need dedicated power for instances such as data centers and mining operations. This type of distributed energy with co-located facilities is a great opportunity for Canada, particularly in deregulated markets.

Will Canada lead SMR development amongst the G7?

My own personal experience with LNG market development saw many projects go South to the US, despite large and engaged companies looking at Canada. I draw on this example only because it was a recent, large opportunity to capture market share and there are similarities with SMR market deployment. The US is now the largest exporter of LNG in the world, a position it attained in less than a decade.

Canada has the technical credibility, regulatory infrastructure, and political alignment needed to lead on SMRs. We have a nuclear legacy with CANDU, a proven safety record, and a growing need for non-emitting, stable power. But global competition is intensifying, where demand is rising faster and incentives are more aggressive.

If Canada is serious about leading the SMR space, we must shift our thinking and act decisively. We need to build on our head start and our existing strong nuclear footprint. With the right policies and stronger coordination between federal and provincial authorities Canada could accelerate SMR deployment. But even without legislative change, behind the meter tactics and distributed energy are viable SMR opportunities in Canada right now.

Leading in SMR deployment is not really a race amongst the G7. Canada has a lead it can build on and the US may well overtake it. The race is arguably in a different part of the world – the low cost-base and rapid deployment of clean energy technology in China is something to watch.