Maintaining the current production of nuclear energy would result in energy conservation because Canada would reduce its use of natural gas. Also, Canada would stop using the inefficient bitumen production method through underground steam wells. Such wells consume around a thousand cubic feet of gas for every barrel of oil which flows. On the contrary, nuclear energy would result in energy conservation because the nuclear produces energy without any emissions (Chu & Chang, 2012).

Canada would also save on costs. When the nuclear infrastructure gets constructed, it needs little maintenance compared to conventional fossil fuels. Canada would eliminate its gas boilers and instead focus on building nuclear furnaces. The projected savings through the use of nuclear fuel means that Canada would save a lot of money, and the cost of energy would be around a third of the present market price of fossil fuels (Swanson, Maury, & Quenneville, 2012).

Canada would increase its royalties to the extent which the production of oil from the oilsands decreases. The areas around the oilsands will fetch a lot of revenue from the sale and leasing of land by the Canadian government. At the present moment, the royalty rate of the Alberta oilsands is approximately 25 percent net. Therefore, Canada would create more opportunities for other industries such as the real estate industry by ceasing oil production in the oilsands (Naterer, Fowler, Cotton & Gabriel, 2008).

Another benefit of Canada’s use of nuclear energy is cleaner air than before. The use of nuclear power would stop the production of greenhouse gases that result from burning fossil fuels from the oilsands. The switch to nuclear energy will result in the creation of many jobs because of the construction of nuclear furnaces. Such plants would probably get situated in western Saskatchewan or eastern Alberta because of the high concentration of industrial activity there (Naterer et al., 2008).