Hydro built our past. What’s the future of energy?

Manitoba has long told itself a comforting story about abundant clean electricity. For generations, hydroelectric power flowing through northern rivers has powered homes, farms and industry while giving the province one of the cleanest electricity systems in North America.

It remains a remarkable achievement. But climate change, rising electricity demand and growing affordability pressures are quietly rewriting that story.

Across Canada, provinces are beginning to rethink their electricity futures. Ontario is moving ahead with construction of what is expected to be the first grid-scale small modular reactor in the G7. Saskatchewan is preparing for potential deployment in the early 2030s. Meanwhile, proposals like StarCore’s concept near Pinawa are beginning to push the nuclear conversation into our public debate.

Manitoba itself has not made nuclear part of its near-term energy plan. Manitoba Hydro’s 2025 Integrated Resource Plan suggests the province could require new electricity supply by around 2030 as demand grows and existing capacity tightens.

That does not mean nuclear is the answer.

But it does raise an important question worth asking now rather than later: If other provinces are already building or studying new forms of firm power, should Manitoba at least decide how it would evaluate one?

Energy debates are often framed as engineering problems or economic calculations. But energy systems are also public health systems.

They determine whether homes stay warm during prairie winters and cool during increasingly frequent summer heat waves. They determine whether hospitals and community infrastructure remain reliable during climate extremes. And they determine whether families can afford to heat their homes without sacrificing other essentials.

Energy poverty is not only about blackouts or disconnections. It is also about whether a senior, a renter or a young family can keep a home safely warm in winter, cool in summer and still afford groceries.

Reliable and affordable energy is not just an economic issue. It is a health issue.

Manitoba’s hydroelectric system remains one of the cleanest electricity networks in North America. But a system built around water must now confront a future shaped by climate volatility.

Recent drought years have reduced hydroelectric generation and at times forced Hydro to rely more on electricity imports while reducing exports. At the same time, electrification of transportation, heating and industry is expected to increase electricity demand across the country.

Clean electricity alone is no longer enough.

How resilient is Manitoba’s hydro system under prolonged drought, and what fills the gaps if water levels fall short?

These questions matter particularly in a province whose economy and rural communities remain deeply tied to agriculture.

Energy planning is often discussed as if it affects only cities and industrial facilities. But Manitoba is also a farming province, and modern agriculture depends heavily on reliable energy systems.

Energy powers grain drying during wet harvests and irrigation during drought. It produces fertilizer, fuels farm machinery and keeps food moving through processing plants and cold storage from farm to table.

A province built on agriculture should never treat energy planning as separate from food systems.

If energy systems become unstable, food systems become vulnerable.

That is why Manitoba should resist turning the nuclear conversation into a familiar ideological battle of “pro” versus “anti.”

Small modular reactors are now moving from theory to reality in parts of Canada. Ontario is building one. Saskatchewan is studying them seriously. Manitoba is not currently pursuing them. And that may ultimately be the right decision.

But before we accept or reject any technology, we should ask a more basic question:

What transparent criteria should Manitoba use to evaluate future sources of firm electricity?

Those criteria should go well beyond engineering diagrams and vendor promises. They should include cost and timing, fuel supply chains, long-term waste management, Indigenous consent and community participation, and opportunity costs — because every dollar invested in one technology is a dollar not invested in others such as efficiency, storage or transmission upgrades.

And they should ask a broader question: What energy mix best protects Manitobans from energy poverty while strengthening resilience for farms, communities and future generations?

Manitoba does not need to rush into nuclear power. But neither should it avoid the conversation altogether.

Instead, the province should develop a clear and public framework for evaluating future power options — SMRs included — through the lenses of health, affordability, climate resilience, Indigenous rights, water systems and food security.

Hydro built Manitoba’s past.

But the next chapter of our energy story may require new thinking and honest planning.

Marwa Suraj is a Manitoba-based health leader whose work centres equity and social accountability.