Port Hope's nuclear past shadows Ottawa's 10-reactor push as local opposition builds
Federal nuclear expansion plans face local resistance where radioactive legacy and new reactor promises collide, testing Ottawa's $500 million fuel security strategy.
The pushback against a proposed reactor in Port Hope comes with a history few other Canadian sites can match. The municipality has spent decades managing the radioactive legacy of radium and uranium processing that began in the 1930s, and residents are now asking why their community should again host the fuel cycle's front end.3
That matters for Ottawa's plan to build up to 10 large reactors by 2040. Federal energy strategy calls for a major expansion of domestic nuclear generation alongside CANDU reactor sales abroad and a push to grow uranium exports. The cost estimate sits above C$100 billion, more than US$70 billion at recent exchange rates, making it one of the largest infrastructure bets in Canadian history.5
The local question is not whether Canada needs more power. It is whether Port Hope's particular burden should carry the national program again. The town's low-level radioactive waste management facility has been the subject of cleanups and monitoring for years, and the community's skepticism has become a fixture in municipal politics.3
Federal officials argue the expansion is essential on affordability and security grounds. Without new generation, the country risks running short of power or relying more heavily on imports, said a federal representative involved in the push. Ontario's expansion plans could create roughly 150,000 jobs and contribute up to C$800 billion to the economy, the same argument goes.3
The security angle has sharpened recently. A Canadian-owned Westinghouse facility in the United States has been shipping in Russian enriched uranium, a dependence Ottawa has promised to break. The federal government has backed up to C$500 million in enriched nuclear fuel purchase contracts from allied countries as a "backstop" against supply disruptions.7
European data show the scale of that dependence. EU countries imported 583.4 tonnes of enriched uranium from Russia in 2025, worth 251.8 million euros, or about C$407 million, according to Bellona. Canada built its nuclear industry partly to avoid foreign fuel reliance; its new reactors will depend on a supply chain that still touches Moscow.7
Ontario has already moved early money. Last month the province announced a cost-sharing agreement worth up to C$300 million for early development work on a proposed new nuclear generating station at the Bruce Power site in Kincardine. That facility would be large-scale conventional capacity, not the small modular reactors that have drawn most of the attention.3
The SMR track is advancing separately. Canada is building what has been described as the West's first grid-scale SMR, with the sector hoping the technology can power data centers by the 2030s. Google has ordered seven SMRs, and Amazon and Microsoft are pursuing similar arrangements as artificial intelligence demand grows.4
But the SMR economics remain unproven. Proponents claim costs could fall by as much as 50% in coming years, but the technology has not yet scaled beyond pilot stages. France has committed US$1.1 billion to develop an SMR design, and the UK selected Rolls-Royce as preferred developer with over US$800 million in financing from its national wealth fund, yet no Western SMR fleet exists at commercial scale.4,2
The Port Hope dispute is a reminder that fuel cycle facilities face different political dynamics than reactors themselves. A materials-licensing rewrite proposed by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission would streamline pilot fuel lines and advanced-fuel storage approvals, but such changes do little to address community consent at specific sites.6
New Jersey this year became the sixth US state in a decade to repeal its nuclear moratorium, the second in 2026 alone. State-level reversal is one thing; local acceptance of new fuel cycle infrastructure is another, and Port Hope's experience suggests the two do not move together.1
Uranium markets are signalling that investors see momentum. The Uranium ETF closed at $46.07 on Thursday (2026-08-20), up 5.09%, while the coal ETF rose 2.90% to $26.65. But a policy-led rally in the fuel does not answer the question of where the fuel cycle gets built. [LIVE PRICES]
The watch item is whether Ontario's C$300 million Bruce Power commitment shifts federal timelines on fuel supply. Ottawa's C$500 million backstop for allied enriched uranium purchases expires at some point, and the contracts will reveal whether Canada can source enough non-Russian material at acceptable prices. If it cannot, the Port Hope debate becomes a supply-chain problem, not just a local one.7,3