Nuclear power outperforms renewables every time

Wind and solar work in small niches, but nuclear remains the only reliable, cost-effective choice for large-scale electricity

Interview requests

Last week, Prime Minister Mark Carney unveiled a shortlist of major Canadian infrastructure projects. At the top: a small modular reactor (SMR) at Ontario’s Darlington nuclear site. Designed to power 300,000 homes, the project may make Canada the first G7 nation with operational SMRs—and it marks a quiet turning point in the clean energy debate.

It’s a timely reminder that while wind and solar dominate headlines, nuclear remains the only scalable low-emissions solution ready to anchor the grid.

As someone who spent decades working on 13 nuclear reactor projects across Canada and abroad—and 40 years living off-grid on a sailboat powered by solar panels and microturbines—I support renewables for small-scale use. But based on professional and personal experience, I can say confidently that nuclear is the better fit for our large-scale energy needs.

Many renewable advocates compare technologies using nameplate capacity—maximum output under ideal conditions. But what matters is how much electricity each generator actually delivers under real-world conditions, especially in places like Alberta.

A typical Canadian home consumes about 35 kilowatt hours of electricity annually. A 100-megawatt nuclear plant operating year-round produces 876 million kWh per year. In comparison, wind farms in Alberta operate at about 32 per cent efficiency, delivering only 280 million kWh per year. Solar farms fare worse, averaging just 17 per cent efficiency annually, with output dropping close to zero in the winter. A 100 MW solar farm produces around 149 million kWh per year. While performance may vary in other regions, the broader issues—intermittency and short lifespans—remain consistent.

Lifespan is a critical factor. A nuclear plant, with refurbishment, can last around 60 years. Wind turbines and solar panels typically last about 20 years and degrade by two to three per cent each year. Unlike nuclear, they can’t be economically refurbished. That means triple the renewable infrastructure is required over time to deliver the same output.

Measured over their full lifecycle, nuclear plants produce electricity more cost-effectively than many assume. High up-front costs and long construction periods can inflate financing charges, but modular construction of SMRs—factory-built in sections and assembled on site—will cut those interest costs significantly. Ontario’s older CANDU reactors already deliver electricity at 10.1 cents per kilowatt hour—less than natural gas (11.3), wind (15.4), or solar (50.2), and only slightly higher than hydro (6.1). These figures exclude subsidies.

Modern SMRs also address concerns around radioactive waste. Some designs use thorium, a safer alternative to uranium that doesn’t produce long-lived waste. Others recycle spent uranium fuel repeatedly until it’s depleted. Moltex Energy, based in New Brunswick, is developing technology to recycle spent CANDU fuel until it is fully depleted. In time, we may no longer need to store used fuel at all.

SMRs also offer safety and deployment advantages. Many rely on passive controls and require no on-site operators. They’re compact enough to be delivered by truck, avoiding years-long construction delays and enabling faster integration into the grid.

Wind and solar remain fundamentally intermittent. That’s because electricity grids require a constant, stable supply. If the wind dies down or clouds roll in, another source must take over immediately to prevent blackouts. This need for backup—usually with natural gas turbines—means double the infrastructure and double the cost.

The market is responding to the failure of renewables to deliver reliable power. Countries investing in nuclear are thriving. Others—like Germany—face deindustrialization, with energy prices up to four times higher than before. According to online news outlet Brussels Morning, more than 1,100 renewable projects have been rejected in Europe. Investor confidence in renewables is slipping.

All of this points to a simple truth.

Renewables have their place—but not as the backbone of our electricity grid. For reliable, industrial-scale power that keeps homes, hospitals and industries running, only nuclear can deliver.

Cosmos Voutsinos is a retired engineer who has published multiple scientific papers that have garnered a total of 96 citations. He earned his Bachelor of Applied Science (BASc) at the University of Waterloo and his Master of Engineering (M.Eng) degree from McMaster University.