I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
The Europeans were ramping defence spending already. After this? I think they will see this as a full mask off moment from the Trump Admin. They will understand they have no choice now.
- Reaction score
- 2,326
- Points
- 1,090
quadrapiper
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 636
- Points
- 1,040
New at-home spending suggests, if nothing else, that you might feel more confident sending kit to Ukraine.
Not to distract from the primary topic, but we're talking about the country's strategic interests so I thought I would chime in a bit on the electricity side of things (respectfully). There are several nuclear and hydro projects either almost done, being built, or newly agreed between parties and in the pre-development stage. The new Site C hydro facility in BC is now generating at about half its capacity and the province is looking to build renewables as supplement to its very hungry grid. It wasn't a picnic to get Site C done and it wasn't cheap but why would a long-lived (100 years plus) electricity generation asset (some drought risk notwithstanding) be cheap. NL finally finished its Muskrat Falls hydro project and the Labrador Island Link to send that hydropower to the island helping to retire an old thermal asset and enable some refurbishments and new builds elsewhere, and the feds have helped out with project re-financing because its a big project for NL to swallow on its own and there were some project management and cost issues. NL and QC recently settled their 1969 Churchill Falls contract dispute and it looks like they're settling in on getting new hydro facilities (thousands of megawatt range) built together on the same river system as Churchill Falls and Muskrat, plus upgrades to the original Churchill facility. Hydro-Quebec just announced they are going to build a training facility for all the labour they're going to need to build 5000km of transmission lines, hydro station upgrades, and more renewables to meet the province's anticipated demand as transport and space heating and industrial processes demand for electricity grows.
Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario utilities have agreed to work together on deploying SMRs (small modular nuclear reactors, in the 300 MW range each) in those provinces. The feds are funding predevelopment activities on SMRs for SaskPower and NBPower (some folks may not know, NBPower operates a nuclear facility at Point Lepreau), which includes pre-engineering, environmental work and consultations, etc. (there's lots of work to meet Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission permitting requirements for new sites, and it could go faster). I'm not sure they'll end up with SMRs or conventional Canadian CANDU reactors once the unit costs are laid bare but we'll see. Ontario is going all-in on nuclear with big-dollar refurbishments of its existing assets, SMRs, and may build a new conventional CANDU reactor facility that will, if completed, be one of the largest nuclear facilities on the planet. Canada is a top tier nuclear country and we control about 85 percent of the supply chains for our facilities. Most of the provinces, especially Alberta, have built a ton of renewables in the past 10 years, and with demand and extreme weather events knocking at the grid's reliability they're going to need more generation (gas+nuclear+renewables+batteries) and better transmission links with their neighbours (they've said as much).
Manitoba Hydro built its Keeyask hydro facility and it came online a few years back and they sell about 20-25 percent of their annual generation to the U.S., which when you think about it makes no sense when their neighbour to the west could use that power. The biggest risks with building new nuclear and big hydro generation facilities where the resource is located is cost containment, both for the generating asset and the transmission lines to your load centres in this era of supply chain competition and labour shortages, and the Constitutional requirement that Indigenous Peoples of this country are properly engaged early on and consulted on projects, and ideally given ownership in the game if we want things built. The provinces need to find a way to fund east-west projects that are in their benefit and by doing that reduce the costs on any one province in expanding or refurbishing its system. I think we can be really proud of what we've got and its a hell of a foundation to build a future economy on, especially if we can work together better and get past some self-imposed barriers to getting stuff planned, financed, and built.
Sorry for the chapters here but I think its something worth adding.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,494
- Points
- 1,210
SMR could also make resource exploration and electricity in the arctic cheaper
- Reaction score
- 24,658
- Points
- 1,360
SMEs are definitely a key part of increasing sustainable energy density in Canada, particularly in the North. On my last trip to Iqaluit my friend (he was the plant mgr) walked me through the NuPower’s plant and to imagine that its footprint of numerous EMD 20-710s, Wärtsillas and Cat burning through huge amounts of diesel, replaced with a single SMR (keep a few *diesels for backup, perhaps) would be positive both for the community and the environment.
Last edited:
I am still processing what happened yesterday. It seems to me we're genuinely watching the end of Pax Americana. And it's the Americans ending it. Which of America's allies will be the first to withdraw from the NPT? And how would/should Canada react? We've always opposes nuclear proliferation. But in this new world.....
The Russians had the notion of mounting a reactor in a ship's hull, independent of the propulsion unit to provide a portable power source. Not a bad idea for places like Churchill. Saves a bundle on foundation/ground preparation and avoids the issue of permafrost.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 35,836
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 9,357
- Points
- 1,160
Canadian SMRs on Korean designed barges with ABS (American Bureau of Shipping) approval. (we have barge builders in Canada). We are close.
May 2024
Can floating nuclear power plants help solve Northern Canada’s energy woes?
Diesel is the only way to keep the lights on in many remote Arctic towns. A new project wants to offer a greener option – but first it has to assuage safety and cost concerns and compete with renewables
www.theglobeandmail.com
October 2023
.jpg)
ABS approves Korean SMR power barge design
A design for a floating offshore nuclear power barge from HD Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering and Kepco Engineering & Construction has received approval in principle from the American Bureau of Shipping.;
www.world-nuclear-news.org
October 2023
Floating Offshore Nuclear Power Barge Design Receives ABS Approval
South Korea’s HD Korea Shipbuilding & Offshore Engineering (KSOE) and KEPCO Engineering and Construction Company have become the latest partnership to...
maritime-executive.com
- Reaction score
- 9,357
- Points
- 1,160
Change of subject and back to matters military in light of the Trump of Doom.
www.telegraph.co.uk
5000 is a little bit light. But....
The EU has continued to stumble over sovereignty issues when it came to defence. They have tried rapid reaction forces in the past but it always comes back to the Crimean problem (ca 1857). The French and British were in joint command but had spent so long fighting each other they sometimes forget they were there to take on the Russians on behalf of the Turks. Sometimes they seemed to act as two armies with two separate war goals.
So...
Something like an EU Foreign Legion made up of willing nationals but who is to control it and how much power should it have.
The Household Brigade and County Regiments.
The Brits were adamant that they didn't want a standing army in the hands of the government that could suppress the locals. The monarchy wanted some sort of fighting tail. The solution was a limited force under the personal command of the monarch, the Household forces, and local forces made up of Baronial fighting tails, county regiments, militias and volunteers. A later addition was the Royal Marines under command of the Navy and thus never available for domestic deployment.
So...
Could Europe create a modest supra-national force, directly responsive to the EU or a suitable committee of nations, that it could deploy effectively but was never big enough to suppress any individual nation? Something in the 20-30,000 range?
Is that something that Canada could contribute to while still maintaining its own active force in the 20-30,000 range for Home Defence?
How Donald Trump has brought a European army one step closer
Leaders fear the US will pull its troops out of Europe and hope a joint force could deter an aggressive Russia
www.telegraph.co.uk
5000 is a little bit light. But....
The EU has continued to stumble over sovereignty issues when it came to defence. They have tried rapid reaction forces in the past but it always comes back to the Crimean problem (ca 1857). The French and British were in joint command but had spent so long fighting each other they sometimes forget they were there to take on the Russians on behalf of the Turks. Sometimes they seemed to act as two armies with two separate war goals.
So...
Something like an EU Foreign Legion made up of willing nationals but who is to control it and how much power should it have.
The Household Brigade and County Regiments.
The Brits were adamant that they didn't want a standing army in the hands of the government that could suppress the locals. The monarchy wanted some sort of fighting tail. The solution was a limited force under the personal command of the monarch, the Household forces, and local forces made up of Baronial fighting tails, county regiments, militias and volunteers. A later addition was the Royal Marines under command of the Navy and thus never available for domestic deployment.
So...
Could Europe create a modest supra-national force, directly responsive to the EU or a suitable committee of nations, that it could deploy effectively but was never big enough to suppress any individual nation? Something in the 20-30,000 range?
Is that something that Canada could contribute to while still maintaining its own active force in the 20-30,000 range for Home Defence?
- Reaction score
- 2,326
- Points
- 1,090
true but does the Italian military not feel up to taking out a few donkeys? Is that why they are donating so little
- Reaction score
- 23,755
- Points
- 1,260
Keep in mind those are only OS announcements.
Several countries have donated items that they have intentionally not announced, as well as a lot of third party transfers don’t get applied to the country to actually donated them.
For instance I believe most of Italy’s retired Leo 1’s went to get refurbed to go to Ukraine.
- Reaction score
- 24,658
- Points
- 1,360
Meh…I’d go with R.O.K. K2s or Leo3, H725M Caracal and pass on the skinny, non-missionised US 47Fs.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 35,836
- Points
- 1,160
Because we have such a great track record for on boarding 2nd hand kit from other countries, right?
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,736
- Points
- 1,260
While your boss is threatening annexation? Do we really want equipment for which Trump already has the cyber kill codes?
the problem with that is Trump will say he subsidized the purchase and we owe him all our resources in trade.
Those two ABCT standing down, are they being reorganized or completely stood down?
In all seriousness if the equipment is up for sale it might not be a bad deal if the price is right and the equipment is in good shape. We can somehow staff it all. Would be a good way to equip our Latvia Brigade.
- Reaction score
- 9,357
- Points
- 1,160
Similar threads
- Article
