http://ca.news.yahoo.com/north-mulls-micro-reactors-solution-rising-power-costs-20110415-060154-905.html

I've wondered for a while why micro reactors aren't the norm in the industry - you save so much in transmission losses when you put the reactor close to where the power will be consumed. But I guess that's the problem, the reactor would be very close to your population center. Apparently Toshiba offered Nanaimo a micro reactor that would be buried underground and maintenance free (or very low) Nanaimo said no, unfortunately.

   

Toshiba has offered many of these to different places, and so far no takers. Mostly along the North West coast, The Yukon, parts of Alaska, parts of Nunavut. I'd be all for them. They are maintained free, buried to prevent tampering, and cheap.

http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/nex ... 2.17b.html

http://www.cringely.com/2011/03/is-anyt ... nd-simple/

Sure beats this 'Heritage project' power lines they are trying to shaft us with in Alberta. Build many more small power plants that will last longer.
http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/10/0 ... ar-Reactor

   

Nuclear or geothermal it's gonna happen probably a bit of both.

   

The nuclear power for the north is actually going to be transported across the bering strait from russia. The bridge project is being tendered today.