Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Goran Calic, Associate Profesor of Strategy and Entrepreneurship Leadership Chair, McMaster University

New partnerships are forming between tech companies and power operators — ones that could reshape decades of misconceptions about nuclear energy.

Last year, Meta (Facebook’s parent company) put out a call for nuclear proposals, Google agreed to buy new nuclear reactors from Kairos Power, Amazon partnered with Energy Northwest and Dominion Energy to develop nuclear energy and Microsoft committed to a 20-year deal to restart Unit 1 of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant.

At the centre of these partnerships is artificial intelligence’s voracious appetite for electricity. One Google search uses about as much electricity as turning on a household light for 17 seconds. Asking a Generative AI model like ChatGPT a single question is equivalent to leaving that light on for 20 minutes.

---

Read more:
AI is bad for the environment, and the problem is bigger than energy consumption

---

Having GenAI generate an image can draw about 6,250 times more electricity, roughly the energy of fully charging a smartphone, or enough to keep the same light bulb on for 87 consecutive days.

The hundreds of millions of people now using AI have effectively added the equivalent of millions of new homes to the power grid. And demand is only growing. The challenge for tech companies is that few sources of electricity are well-suited to AI.

The grid wasn’t ready for AI

AI requires vast amounts of computational power running around the clock, often housed in energy-intensive data centres.

Renewable energy sources such as solar and wind provide intermittent energy, meaning they don’t guarantee the constant power supply these data centres require. These centres must be online 24/7, even when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing.

Fossil fuels can run continuously, but they carry their own risks. They have significant environmental impacts. Fuel prices can be unpredictable, as exemplified by the gas price spikes due to the war in Ukraine, and the long-term availability of fossil fuels is uncertain.

Major tech companies like Google, Amazon and Microsoft say they are committed to eliminating CO2 emissions, making fossil fuels a poor long-term fit for them.

This has pushed nuclear energy back into the conversation. Nuclear energy is a good fit because it provides electricity around the clock, maximizing the use of expensive data centres. It’s also clean, allowing tech companies to meet their low CO2 commitments. Lastly, nuclear energy has very low fuel costs, which allows tech companies to plan their costs far into the future.

However, nuclear energy has its own set of problems that have historically been hard to solve — problems that tech companies may now be uniquely positioned to overcome.

Is nuclear energy making a comeback?

Nuclear power has long been considered too costly and too slow to build. The estimated cost of a 1.1 gigawatt nuclear power facility is about US$7.77 billion, but can run higher. The recently completed Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in the state of Georgia, for example, cost US$36.8 billion combined.

Historically, nuclear energy projects have been hard to justify because of their high upfront costs. Like solar and wind power, nuclear energy has relatively low operating costs once a plant is up and running. The key difference is scale: unlike solar panels, which can be installed on individual rooftops, the kind of nuclear reactors tech companies require can’t be built small.

Yet this cost is now more palatable when compared to the expense of AI data centres, which are both more costly and entirely useless without electricity. The first phase of OpenAI and SoftBank’s Stargate AI project will cost US$100 billion and could be entirely powered by a single nuclear plant.

Nuclear power plants also take a long time to build. A 1.1 gigawatt reactor takes, on average, 7.5 years in the U.S. and 6.3 years globally. Projects with such long timelines require confidence in long-term electricity demand, something traditional utilities struggle to predict.

To solve the problem of long-range forecasting, tech companies are incentivizing power providers by guaranteeing they’ll purchase electricity far into the future.

These companies are also literally and financially moving closer to nuclear power, either by acquiring nuclear energy companies or locating their data centres next to nuclear power plants.

Destigmatizing nuclear energy

One of the biggest challenges facing nuclear energy is the perception that it’s dangerous and dirty. Per gigawatt-hour of electricity, nuclear produces only six tonnes of CO2. In comparison, coal produces 970, natural gas 720 and hydropower 24. Nuclear even has lower emissions than wind and solar, which produce 11 and 53 tonnes of CO2, respectively.

Nuclear energy is also among the safest energy sources. Per gigawatt-hour, it causes 820 times fewer deaths than coal, 43 times fewer than hydropower and roughly the same as wind and solar.

Still, nuclear energy remains stigmatized, largely because of persistent misconceptions and outdated beliefs about nuclear waste and disasters. For instance, while many public concerns remain about nuclear waste, existing storage solutions have been used safely for decades and are supported by a strong track record and scientific consensus.

Similarly, while the Fukushima disaster in Japan displaced thousands of people and was extremely costly (total costs of the disaster are expected at about US$188 billion), not a single person died of radiation exposure after the accident, a United Nations Scientific Committee of 80 international experts found.

---

Read more:
With nuclear power on the rise, reducing conspiracies and increasing public education is key

---

For decades, there was little effort to correct public perceptions about nuclear fears because it wasn’t seen as necessary or profitable. Coal, gas and renewables were sufficient to meet the demand required of them. But that’s now changing.

With AI’s energy needs soaring, Big Tech has classified nuclear energy as green and the World Bank has agreed to lift its longstanding ban on financing nuclear projects.

Big Tech’s billion-dollar bet on nuclear

The world has long lived with two nuclear dilemmas. The first is that, despite being one the safest and cleanest form of energy, nuclear was perceived as one the most dangerous and dirtiest.

The second is that upgrading the power grid requires large-scale investments, yet money had been funnelled into small, distributed sources like solar and wind, or dirty ones like coal and natural gas.

Now tech companies are making hundred-billion-dollar strategic bets that they can solve both nuclear dilemmas. They are betting that nuclear can offer the kind of steady, clean power their AI ambitions require.

This could be an unexpected positive consequence of AI: the revitalization of one of the safest and cleanest energy sources available to humankind.

Michael Tadrous, an undergraduate student and research assistant at the DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University, co-authored this article.

Goran Calic does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. AI is consuming more power than the grid can handle — nuclear might be the answer – https://theconversation.com/ai-is-consuming-more-power-than-the-grid-can-handle-nuclear-might-be-the-answer-258677

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jack L. Rozdilsky, Associate Professor of Disaster and Emergency Management, York University, Canada

Residents of Los Angeles will need to get used to federally controlled National Guard troops operating on their streets. Due to a ruling from an appeals court on June 19, United States President Donald Trump now has broad authority to deploy military forces in American cities.

This is a troubling development. All presidents have held in their grasp extraordinary powers to deploy military troops domestically. But Trump stands apart with his apparent keen interest in manufacturing false emergencies to exploit extraordinary power.

An 1878 law called the Posse Comitatus Act restricts using the military for domestic law enforcement. The broader principle being challenged by Trump’s actions in L.A. is the norm of the military not being allowed to interfere in the affairs of civilian governance.

Injunctions and appeals

Five months into Trump’s presidency, L.A. has been targeted for aggressive immigration enforcement. In their pluralistic city where dozens of languages and nationalities peacefully co-exist, some Angelenos believe the city is experiencing an attack on its most essential social fabric.

On June 7, Trump acted under United States Code Title 10 provisions to take over command and control of California’s National Guard. Federalized military forces were deployed.

The objective was to counter what Trump argued was a form of rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States. In fact, these “rebellions” were largely peaceful protests in downtown L.A.

On June 9, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted an injunction restraining the president’s use of military force in L.A. The court order supported Gov. Gavin Newsom’s contention that Trump overstepped his authority.

On June 19, a decision from a panel of judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the injunction.

What this means at the moment is that Trump does not have to return control of the troops to Newsom. California has options to continue litigation by asking the Federal Appeals Court to rehear the matter, or perhaps directly asking the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.

Moving toward authoritarianism

Trump’s June 7 memorandum facilitating his move to overrule Newsom’s authority and seize control of 2,000 National Guard troops was based on the president defining his own so-called emergency.

He claimed incidents of violence and disorder following aggressive immigration enforcement amounted to a form of rebellion against the U.S.

As Trump flexes his emergency power might, his second term has been called the 911 presidency. He has used extraordinary emergency powers at a pace well beyond his predecessors, pressing the limits to address his administration’s supposed sense of serious perils overtaking the nation.

Issues arise when the level of actual danger locally is not at all representative of what the president suggests is a full-scale national emergency. For example, demonstrations over immigration raids occupied only a tiny parcel of real estate in L.A.’s huge metropolitan area. A Los Angeles-based rebellion against the U.S. was not occurring.

As dissent over aggressive immigration enforcement actions grew, localized clashes with law enforcement did occur. Mutual aid surged into Los Angeles, where neighbouring California law enforcement agencies acted to assist one another. The law enforcement challenges never rose to the level of the governor of California requesting additional federal support.

Shortly after the federal government took over the California National Guard, Newsom said the move was purposefully inflammatory.

In addition to declaring dubious emergencies to amass power, stoking violence is a characteristic of authoritarian rulers. Creating fear, division and feelings of insecurity can lead to community crises. Trump did not need to wait for a crisis; it seems he simply invented one.

No guardrails

The expression “out of kilter” comes to mind as Trump inches closer to invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807. If so, the situation will look quite similar in practice to what is happening now in Los Angeles.

Five years ago, Trump flirted with invoking the Insurrection Act during Black Lives Matter unrest in Washington, D.C., in and around Lafayette Park.

As recent L.A. protests intensified, Trump stated: “We’re going to have troops everywhere.”

Currently, there are few guardrails in place to prevent a rogue president from misusing the military in domestic civilian affairs. Trump has been coy about whether he would tap into the greater powers available to him under the Insurrection Act.

Real emergencies presenting existential threats to America do persist. Nuclear proliferation, climate change and pandemics need serious leaders. But politically exploiting last-resort emergency laws designed to provide options to deal with genuine existential threats — not to weaponize them against protesters demonstrating against public policy — is absurd.

Jack L. Rozdilsky receives support for research communication and public scholarship from York University. He also has received research support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

– ref. Appeals court ruling grants Donald Trump broad powers to deploy troops to American cities – https://theconversation.com/appeals-court-ruling-grants-donald-trump-broad-powers-to-deploy-troops-to-american-cities-258894

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Sara Bannerman, Professor and Canada Research Chair in Communication Policy and Governance, McMaster University

In Canada, federal political parties are not governed by basic standards of federal privacy law. If passed, Bill C-4, also known as the Making Life More Affordable for Canadians Act, would also make provincial and territorial privacy laws inapplicable to federal political parties, with no adequate federal law in place.

Federal legislation in the form of the Privacy Act and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act sets out privacy standards for government and business, based on the fair information principles that provide for the collection, use and disclosure of Canadians’ personal information.

At the moment, these laws don’t apply to political parties. Some provinces — especially British Columbia — have implemented laws that do. In May 2024, the B.C. Supreme Court upheld the provincial Information Commissioner’s ruling that B.C.’s privacy legislation applies to federal political parties. That decision is currently under appeal.

Bill C-4 would undermine those B.C. rights. It would make inapplicable to federal parties the standard privacy rights that apply in other business and government contexts— such as the right to consent to the collection, use and disclosure of personal information — and to access and correct personal information held by organizations.

Why should we be concerned about Bill C-4’s erasure of these privacy protections for Canadians? There are four reasons:

1. Threats to Canada’s sovereignty

In light of threats to Canadian sovereignty by United States President Donald Trump, the Canadian government and Canadian politicians must rethink their approach to digital sovereignty.

Until now, Canadian parties and governments have been content to use American platforms, data companies and datified campaign tactics. Bill C-4 would leave federal parties free to do more of the same. This is the opposite of what’s needed.

The politics that resulted in Trump being elected twice to the Oval Office was spurred in part by the datafied campaigning of Cambridge Analytica in 2016 and Elon Musk in 2024. These politics are driven by micro-targeted and arguably manipulative political campaigns.

Do Canadians want Canada to go in the same direction?

---

Read more:
How political party data collection may turn off voters

---

2. Threats to Canada’s future

Bill C-4 would undermine one of the mechanisms that makes Canada a society: collective political decisions.

Datified campaigning and the collection of personal information by political parties change the nature of democracy. Rather than appealing to political values or visions of what voters may want in the future or as a society — critically important at this historical and troubling moment in history — datified campaigning operates by experimenting on unwitting individual citizens who are alone on their phones and computers. It operates by testing their isolated opinions and unvarnished behaviours.

For example, a political campaign might do what’s known as A/B testing of ads, which explores whether ad A or ad B is more successful by issuing two different versions of an ad to determine which one gets more clicks, shares, petition signatures, donations or other measurable behaviour. With this knowledge, a campaign or party can manipulate the ads through multiple versions to get the desired behaviour and result. They also learn about ad audiences for future targeting.

---

Read more:
A/B testing: how offline businesses are learning from Google to improve profits

---

In other words, political parties engaging in this tactic aren’t engaging with Canadians — they’re experimenting on them to see what type of messages, or even what colour schemes or visuals, appeal most. This can be used to shape the campaign or just the determine the style of follow-up messaging to particular users.

University researchers, to name just one example, are bound by strict ethical protocols and approvals, including the principle that participants should consent to the collection of personal information, and to participation in experiments and studies. Political parties have no such standards, despite the high stakes — the very future of democracy and society.

Most citizens think of elections as being about deliberation and collectively deciding what kind of society they want to live in and what kind of future they want to have together as they decide how to cast their ballots.

But with datified campaigning, citizens may not be aware of the political significance of their online actions. Their data trail might cause them to be included, or excluded, from a party’s future campaigning and door-knocking, for example. The process isn’t deliberative, thoughtful or collective.

3. Secret personal data collection

Political parties collect highly personal data about Canadians without their knowledge or consent. Most Canadians are not aware of the extent of the collection by political parties and the range of data they collect, which can include political views, ethnicity, income, religion or online activities, social media IDs, observations of door-knockers and more.

If asked, most Canadians would not consent to the range of data collection by parties.

4. Data can be dangerous in the wrong hands

Some governments can and do use data to punish individuals politically and criminally, sometimes without the protection of the rule of law.

Breaches and misuses of data, cybersecurity experts say, are no longer a question of “if,” but “when.”

Worse, what would happen if the wall between political parties and politicians or government broke down and the personal information collected by parties became available to governments? What if the data were used for political purposes, such as for vetting people for political appointments or government benefits? What if it were used against civil servants?

What if it were to be used at the border, or passed to other governments? What if it were passed to and used by authoritarian governments to harass and punish citizens?

What if it was passed to tech companies and further to data brokers?

OpenMedia recently revealed that Canadians’ data is being passed to the many different data companies political parties use. That data is not necessarily housed in Canada or by Canadian companies.

If provincial law is undermined, there are few protections against any of these problems.

Strengthening democracy

Bill C-4 would erase the possibility of provincial and territorial privacy laws being applied to federal political parties, with virtually nothing remaining. Privacy protection promotes confidence and engagement with democratic processes — particularly online. Erasing privacy protections threatens this confidence and engagement.

The current approach of federal political parties in terms of datified campaigning and privacy law is entirely wrong for this political moment, dangerous to Canadians and dangerous to democracy. Reforms should instead ensure federal political parties must adhere to the same standards as businesses and all levels of government.

Data privacy is important everywhere, but particularly so for political parties, campaigns and democratic engagement. It is important at all times — particularly now.

Sara Bannerman receives funding from the Canada Research Chairs program, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, and McMaster University. She has previously received funding from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner’s Contributions Program and the Digital Ecosystem Research Challenge.

– ref. 4 reasons to be concerned about Bill C-4’s threats to Canadian privacy and sovereignty – https://theconversation.com/4-reasons-to-be-concerned-about-bill-c-4s-threats-to-canadian-privacy-and-sovereignty-259331

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Mohammadamin Ahmadfard, Postdoctoral Fellow, Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University

Artificial intelligence (AI) is quietly transforming how cities generate, store and distribute energy, acting as the invisible conductor that orchestrates cleaner, smarter and more resilient cities.

By integrating renewables — from solar panels and wind turbines to geothermal grids, hydrogen plants, electric vehicles and batteries — AI can enable cities to manage diverse energy sources as a single, intelligent system.

One striking example is the Oya Hybrid Power Station in South Africa. Here, AI-driven controls seamlessly co-ordinate solar, wind and battery storage to deliver reliable power to up to 320,000 households. Using AI makes this kind of integration not only possible, but dramatically more efficient.

Recent research shows AI can also optimize how batteries, solar and the grid interact in buildings. A 2023 study found that deep learning and real-time data helped a boarding school in Turin, Italy increase low-cost energy purchases and cut its electricity bill by more than half.

Cleaner, smarter energy grids

AI models are increasingly able to predict weather with greater precision. These predictions allow electric grid operators to plan hours ahead, storing excess energy in batteries or adjusting supply to meet demand before a storm or heatwave hits.

Using AI to respond strategically to weather is a game-changer. In Cambridge, England, a system called Aardvark uses satellite and sensor data to generate rapid, accurate forecasts of sun and wind patterns.

Unlike traditional supercomputer-driven weather models, Aardvark’s AI can deliver precise local forecasts in minutes on an ordinary computer. This makes advanced weather prediction more accessible and affordable for cities, utilities and even smaller organizations — potentially transforming how communities everywhere plan for and respond to changing weather.

AI for smarter district heating and cooling

In Munich, Germany, AI is improving geothermal district heating by using underground sensors to monitor temperature and moisture levels in the ground.

The collected data feeds into a digital simulation model that helps optimize network operations. In more advanced versions, during winter cold snaps, such systems can suggest lowering flow to underused spaces like half-empty offices and boosting heat where demand is higher, such as in crowded apartments.

This intelligent, self-optimizing approach extends the life of equipment and delivers more warmth with the same energy input.

This is a breakthrough with enormous potential for cities in cold climates with established geothermal networks, such as Winnipeg in Canada and Iceland’s Reykjavik.

Although these cities have not yet adopted AI-driven monitoring systems, they could benefit from AI’s real-time improvements in efficiency, comfort and energy savings during harsh winters — a principle that holds true wherever geothermal district heating and cooling exists.

Smart buildings

Inside the home, AI-managed smart climate systems can factor in how many people are in each room, which appliances are in use, how much natural sunlight each space receives and how much electricity or heat a home’s solar panels generate throughout the day.

Based on this, AI determines how to heat or cool rooms efficiently, and can transfer energy from one space to another, balancing comfort with minimal energy use.

Coastal cities and those in wind-heavy regions are using AI in other creative ways. In Orkney, Scotland, excess wind and tidal energy are converted into green hydrogen. Instead of letting that surplus power go to waste, an AI system called HyAI controls when to generate hydrogen based on wind forecasts, electricity prices and how full the hydrogen storage tanks are.

When winds are strong at night and electricity is cheap, the AI can divert surplus power to produce hydrogen and store it for later use. On calmer days, that stored hydrogen can power fuel cells or buses.

Energy storage

AI is transforming energy storage into a smart, revenue-generating force. In Finland, a startup called Capalo AI has developed Zeus VPP, an AI-powered virtual power plant that aggregates distributed batteries from homes, businesses and other sites.

Zeus VPP uses advanced forecasting and AI algorithms to decide when batteries should charge or discharge, factoring in energy prices, local consumption and weather forecasts. This enables battery owners to earn revenue by participating in electricity markets, while also supporting grid stability and making better use of renewable energy.

Utility companies are also using AI to monitor everything from high-voltage transmission lines to neighbourhood transformers, dramatically increasing reliability.

AI-powered dynamic line rating adjusts how much electricity a line can carry in real time, boosting capacity by 15 to 30 per cent when conditions allow. This helps utilities maximize the use of existing infrastructure instead of relying on costly upgrades.

At the local level, AI analyzes smart metre data to predict which transformers are overheating due to rising EV and heat pump use.

By forecasting these stress points, utilities can proactively upgrade equipment before failures happen — a shift from reactive to predictive maintenance that makes the grid stronger and cities more resilient.

AI-powered public transit and mobility

Transportation innovation is becoming part of the energy solution, with AI at the centre of this transformation. In New York City, energy company Con Edison has installed major battery storage systems to help manage peak electricity demand and reduce reliance on polluting peaker plants, which supply energy only during high-demand periods.

More broadly, Con Edison is deploying advanced AI-powered analytics software across its electric grid — optimizing voltage, enhancing reliability and enabling predictive maintenance. Together, these efforts show how combining energy storage and AI-driven analytics can make even the world’s busiest cities more resilient and efficient.

AI is also powering “vehicle-to-grid” innovations in California, where an AI-driven platform manages electric school buses that can supply stored energy back to the grid during periods of high demand.

By carefully managing when buses charge and discharge, these systems help keep the grid reliable and ensure vehicles are ready for their daily routes. As this technology expands, parked electric vehicles could serve as valuable backup resources for the electricity system.

AI for clean energy initiatives

AI is rapidly transforming cities by revolutionizing how energy is used and managed. Google, for example, has slashed cooling energy at its data centres by up to 40 per cent using AI that fine-tunes fans, pumps and windows more efficiently than any human operator.

Organizations like the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), in collaboration with NVIDIA, Microsoft and others, have launched the Open Power AI Consortium, which is creating open-source AI tools for utilities worldwide.

These tools will enable even the most resource-constrained cities to deploy advanced AI capabilities, without having to start from scratch, helping to level the playing field and accelerate the global energy transition.

The result is not just cleaner air and lower energy bills, but a path to fewer blackouts and more resilient homes.

Mohammadamin Ahmadfard receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Mitacs Inc. for his postdoctoral research at Toronto Metropolitan University.

– ref. AI applications are producing cleaner cities, smarter homes and more efficient transit – https://theconversation.com/ai-applications-are-producing-cleaner-cities-smarter-homes-and-more-efficient-transit-256291

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Shannon D. M. Moore, Assistant professor of social studies education, Department of Curriculum Teaching and Learning, Faculty of Education, University of Manitoba

The sexual assault trial of five former World Juniors hockey players has spotlighted issues around sexual assault and consent.

Sexual assault, intimate partner violence and other forms of gender-based violence aren’t inevitable. Kindergarten to Grade 12 public schools have an ethical obligation to enact sexuality education that is responsive to current contexts, respects human diversity, empowers young people and is rooted in human rights.

We argue for harnessing popular media to advance sexuality education. Children and youth learn about a great deal about gender, relationships, sexuality and consent from popular media.

Although there is strong theoretical rationale for using popular media to confront sexual assault, many teachers identify and experience barriers to putting this into practice in their classrooms.

Let’s (not) talk about sex?

Many factors shape the reality that comprehensive sex education remains wholly absent or inadequate in schools.

Talking about sex in society and in schools is often taboo. Discussions of healthy relationships and consent are often highly controlled, minimized or relegated to a sexual education curriculum that is not universally taught. This is due to parental opt-outs/ins in many provinces.

Some opponents of sexual education curriculum say parents should have full authority over the subject. Others exploit misunderstandings of age appropriateness and the presumed innocence of children and youth. Among the public at large, there is a lack of knowledge (or belief) about the high rates of sexual assault and other forms of gender-based violence experienced by youth within and beyond schools

Not surprisingly, neglecting comprehensive sexuality education has many adverse consequences. Students learn that eliminating sexual violence is not a societal priority. Those who have experienced assault and other forms of violence learn that they are not important, as their stories are often silenced, ignored or distrusted.

As a result, rape culture and gender-based violence remains unchallenged in schools, while it is normalized, legitimized and endorsed in popular media.

---

Read more:
‘Adolescence’ on Netflix: A painful wake-up call about unregulated internet use for teens

---

Meet your child’s other teacher

In the absence or confines of comprehensive sex education in schools, youth identify popular media as their main source of information about sex and relationships.

As professor of criminal justice, Nickie D. Phillips, writes, popular media is one of the “primary sites through which rape culture [is] understood, negotiated and contested.”

What youth watch, play, listen to or create on social media has a significant role in teaching dominant understandings that normalize sexual violence, misogyny and the patriarchy.

Critical media scholars Michael Hoechsmann and Stuart Poyntz emphasize that popular media “plays a central role in the socialization, acculturation and intellectual formation of young people. It is a … force to be reckoned with, and we ignore it at our peril.”

As teacher educators and educational researchers, the teachers we have worked with across grades and subject areas recognize how popular media is always and already present in classrooms, and many embrace the opportunities it affords for necessary conversations that are relevant to students.

Challenges with using popular media

The teacher participants in our study revealed that classroom culture wars have had a chilling impact on their practice, making them feel more wary about tackling particular topics.

We found that despite research-informed rationale for using popular media to ground sexuality education, teachers encounter several barriers and complications in doing so.

Teachers’ discomfort was exacerbated when school leaders did not support their efforts to advance these lessons, even though they were anchored to the provincial curriculum. Teacher participants also spoke of a lack of professional development or preparation to talk about healthy relationships and consent in teacher education contexts.

Finally, they also raised concerns about teaching with and through violent, sexually suggestive or explicit popular media in classrooms. This is the case even though young people are learning about sex through limitless access to digital pornography and R-rated popular media outside of classrooms.

Influencing healthy relationships

There is limited research about how popular media content could be used to teach about sexual violence prevention. Through our ongoing research, we have identified several starting points for using popular media content to ground conversations about healthy relationships, boundaries and consent.

1. Start with media constructions of gender: As popular media contributes to societal expectations of gender, students should begin by interrogating how masculinities and femininities are constructed and mobilized in popular media.

This can include examining how male, female and non-binary characters are constructed and presented to audiences, their position within the broader storyline and their level of dialogue and how varied intersections of identity impact these depictions.

Discussions of gender based violence must begin with intersectional discussions of gender, as these constructions contribute to the issue (for example, the hypersexualization and subordination of females, the exoticization and dehumanization of racialized women or the portrayal of males as powerful, aggressive and preoccupied with sex).

2. Begin with unfamiliar content: Students can initially become defensive when they are asked to critically engage with media content that deeply connect with their identity and give them a sense of joy.

While the goal is to move to the interrogation of students’ own media diets, it can positively generate student participation when educators begin analytical and critical discussions about media with unfamiliar, or at least not cherished, material (like popular songs, video or social media).

This means students learn how to analyze content before connecting this analysis with themes related to gender-based violence, like: how popular media normalizes sexual violence against women and promotes unhealthy representations of romance and relationships; how popular media contributes to victim blaming or siding with perpetrators and promotes “himpathy” for males who commit sexual assault.

3. Offer a feminist lens: As teacher educators, we recognize that there is no single method or approach that tends to every aspect of sexual assault and other forms of gender-based violence. Yet, we also know that educators seek resources to engage more meaningfully with students.

Cards to foster conversation

We constructed a deck of educational playing cards that educators can use to foster conversations about media portrayals of gender, healthy relationships and consent (or lack thereof).

These cards employ a feminist lens, based on Sarah Ahmed’s Living a Feminist Life. We advocate for teachers to have time in professional learning spaces to try out the cards with other educators before they facilitate complex conversations related to gender-based violence with students.

If as a society we want to see fewer instances of gender-based violence, teachers need provincial curriculum documents that align with the research on comprehensive sex education. They also need school leaders who will support their work and model consent in the broader school culture, and more professional development and preparation in teacher education.

Shannon D. M. Moore receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council

Jennifer Watt receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council .

– ref. If we don’t teach youth about sexual assault and consent, popular media will – https://theconversation.com/if-we-dont-teach-youth-about-sexual-assault-and-consent-popular-media-will-256741

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Leah Hamilton, Professor in the Faculty of Business & Communication Studies, Mount Royal University

Prime Minister Mark Carney recently raised the Pride flag on Parliament Hill and lamented the growing anti-2SLGBTQIA+ sentiment in Canada. He also committed $1.5 million to make Pride festivals across the country safer.

This political support stands in sharp contrast to the many businesses that have reduced or ended their support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community this Pride season.

Multinational corporations like Google, as well as Canadian-owned companies like Molson Coors, have divested from supporting festivals, while Target has scaled back its Pride merchandise due to threats against employees and large-scale conservative backlash.

The impact is already being felt. Pride Toronto is currently facing a $900,000 funding gap. Executive director Kojo Modeste recently told CBC News this corporate divestment appears to be linked to the larger backlash against diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.

Fear of punitive measures

In January, United States President Donald Trump issued an executive order to dismantle DEI initiatives in federal agencies and target private companies that support DEI measures. In the executive order, Trump’s administration called DEI measures and mandates “immoral discrimination programs.”

Spearheaded by journalist-cum-activist and Trump adviser Christopher Rufo, the attacks against so-called “woke” DEI programs are fuelled by the “culture wars” that pit equity and inclusion against merit and the free market.

---

Read more:
Here’s what ‘woke’ means and how to respond to it

---

Major private corporations, including IBM, quickly bent to the pressure of Trump’s anti-DEI orders by gutting their programs and shifting corporate donorship away from “woke” initiatives.

The pressure to comply with anti-DEI measures hasn’t ended with corporations. More recently, Trump has set his sights on the U.S. post-secondary system, freezing US$2.2 million in federal grants and US$60 million in contracts after Harvard University refused to comply with the administration’s demands related to its DEI programs.

In Canada, the rollback of DEI programs isn’t as loud, but it is happening. Michelle Grocholsky, the CEO of Empowered EDI in Toronto, told CBC News companies are reducing their budgets and cutting their staff. In the midst of job cuts in January 2025, the Alberta Investment Management Corporation removed their DEI staff.

Following in the footsteps of the U.S., Alberta’s United Conservative Party membership passed a resolution to eliminate DEI programs and training in the public service. The party has also indicated it will remove government funding from post-secondary institutions that continue to do DEI work.

Declining public support

In addition to the rollback of DEI programs, the ongoing corporate reductions in Pride support are taking place amid increasing anti-2SLGBTQIA+ sentiment.

A 2024 poll reported that, in Canada, support for 2SLGBTQIA+ visibility — like representation on screens and in sports — is lower than it was in 2021. Compared to previous years, Canadians also expressed less support for transgender rights, and this level of support was lower than the 26 other countries surveyed.

Not surprisingly, this declining public support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community coincides with rising hate crimes targeting 2SLGBTQIA+ communities. In 2023, Statistics Canada reported a 69 per cent increase in hate crimes targeting sexual orientation.

Public attitudes don’t change in a vacuum. They are deeply influenced by hate movements, political rhetoric and the spread of misinformation and disinformation weaponized by politicians and leaders to dehumanize the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, particularly transgender people.

This dehumanization incites fear, violence and support for anti-2SLGBTQIA+ hate. It has coincided with companies silently withdrawing their support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.

Where we live, in Alberta, the provincial government has passed the most draconian anti-trans laws Canada has ever seen. As we (Corinne L. Mason and Leah Hamilton) have previously written, Premier Danielle Smith’s government has unveiled a suite of policies targeting transgender, intersex and gender diverse children and youth in Alberta, and the 2SLGBTQIA+ community more broadly.

In this environment of reduced public and political support, it’s not surprising to see companies backing away from the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.

Getting back to Pride’s roots

The fact that companies have quickly backed away from their support of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community — by halting production of Pride merchandise or reducing sponsorship in Pride festivals — illustrates the conditionality of their support.

Rather than beg big business to come back to the table, some members of the community are using this moment to reflect on how corporate “Love is Love” campaigns haven’t actually led to increased quality of life or justice for our communities.

While it has received less media coverage than calls to remove police from Pride and the presence of Boycott, Divest and Sanction movement at Pride festivals, the corporatization of Pride has long been subject of debate in the 2SLGBTQIA+ community.

---

Read more:
Queers and trans say no to police presence at Pride parade

---

Those against “rainbow capitalism” — the shallow and inauthentic use of Pride imagery in advertising — argue for a return to community-based and radical protest rather than settling for flag-waving bankers throwing beads from atop expensive floats.

Pride Month is rooted in protest and resistance against police violence and systemic oppression. It was led by Black trans women and can be traced back to the Stonewall Riots. Today, Pride still isn’t simply a party and parade.

Authentic ‘rainbow dollars’

In this sociopolitical climate of legislated DEI rollbacks and declining public support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community, organizations that want to support the 2SLGBTQIA+ community should back up their messaging with meaningful actions and structural support.

Some organizations have shown a commitment to structural support for the 2SLGBTQIA+ community from its beginning, including the Northern Super League, the top-division professional women’s soccer league in Canada. The league openly and consistently amplifies and supports its 2SLGBTQIA+ players, coaches, staff and fans. Founded by Diana Matheson, an openly queer woman, the league is founded on inclusion as a core value.

When it comes to creating Pride merchandise, Social Made Local is a queer-owned Canadian apparel company in Saskatoon that focuses on gender-inclusive sizing, sustainability and community. They donate a portion of their sales to Canadian non-profits like Rainbow Railroad.

Companies that want to show their support can spend their rainbow dollars in good faith through actions that meaningfully support the 2SLGBTQIA+ community. This could include creating programs that support queer entrepreneurs, donating to legal funds that are fighting discriminatory legislation, and partnering with 2SLGBTQIA+ organizations to amplify their work.

Leah Hamilton receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Corinne L. Mason receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

Gini (Virginia) Weber does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Why corporations are backing away from supporting Pride this year – https://theconversation.com/why-corporations-are-backing-away-from-supporting-pride-this-year-258770

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Erenna Morrison, PhD Candidate, Curriculum and Pedagogy, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

Following the release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action in 2015, some Catholic school boards have made commitments to reconciliation in education. These boards include the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (DPCDSB).

However, the DPCDSB — located in the Greater Toronto area — has also introduced a flag policy that raises serious questions about a commitment to the wider progress being made in welcoming all students and promoting reconciliation.

On Jan. 28, 2025 — following advocacy in different parts of Ontario and the country against the presence of the Pride flag — the board’s trustees voted in nine to one to add more restrictions to its flag policies. These restrictions stipulated that only flags representing Canada, the provinces, territories and the school board can be be displayed inside schools or other DPCDSB facilities.

Acts of erasure

The developments in Peel Region follow earlier policy changes to restrict the presence of the Pride flag and other flags at schools.

Advocates from the board defending flag restrictions have said that in Catholic schools, the icon of the cross is the only symbol that should be promoted and that this represents inclusion and acceptance of all.

However, members of the 2SLGBTQI+ community and opponents of restrictive flag policies argue that the Pride flag is needed to signal a welcoming environment. They say its removal is an act of erasure and that it calls into question how the board affirms the rights, dignity and visibility of 2SLGBTQI+ people and how it fosters their safety. The board says, and believes, its practices and policies comply with the Ontario human rights code, adding that supports are available for students who identify as 2SLGBTQI.

The erasure of the Pride flag has the simultaneous effect of banning other important flags, such as Every Child Matters flags, Indigenous Nation flags and MMIWG2S flags (drawing attention to ending violence, disappearance and murder of First Nations women, girls and two-spirit people).

In our analysis, this restrictive flag policy expresses colonial violence. We rely on the work of Sandra Styres, researcher of Iethi’nihsténha Ohwentsia’kékha (Land), Resurgence, Reconciliation and the Politics of Education, who examines how colonial violence is expressed in academic settings through “micro-aggressions, purposeful ignorance, structural racism, lateral violence, isolation” and also in “representations and spaces.”

Crucial time for righting relationships

Our concern is informed by our combined research and personal engagement focused around reconciliatory education in elementary Catholic schools (Erenna) and Anishinaabe Catholic expressions of self-determination in the Church (Noah). Erenna is a settler and Noah is a member of Michipicoten First Nation.

We are married writing partners who travelled to Québec City in July 2022 to witness the long-awaited penitential pilgrimage of the late Pope Francis. We left with an awareness that this is a critical time for the righting of relationships that have been severely fractured by a Church complicit in genocide.

The DPCDSB flag policy speaks to an unwillingness of many to sever emotional attachments to the white imperialism that preserves a western way of thinking, doing and being, in the name of faith.

When a major Catholic entity like the DPCDSB introduces policies that may cause harm, concerned people, regardless of creed, must pay attention to such injustices.

Revised flag policy

Delegate Melanie Cormier, representing the DPCSB’s Indigenous Education Network, shared a statement relaying that the board’s restrictive flag policy fails to acknowledge the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation whose traditional and treaty territory where the board resides. She states: “Your flag policy is in violation of our jurisdiction. To say that any of our flags can not be flown in our own territories is unacceptable.”

Brea Corbet, the only trustee with voting power who did not vote to restrict the Pride flag, told an earlier bylaw policies meeting: “When we remove rainbow flags and heritage flags, we are not protecting our Catholic identity; we are revealing institutional fragility. The Pride flag does not threaten Catholic education, policies of exclusion do.”

Three student trustees also opposed the restrictive policy, but their votes unfortunately aren’t counted. We argue this too speaks to the suppression of student voice within the board.

This fragility disproportionately threatens the safety of Indigenous, 2SLGBTQI+ and marginalized students and staff as they are overlooked and dismissed by the flag policy.

---

Read more:
New Brunswick’s LGBTQ+ safe schools debate makes false opponents of parents and teachers

---

Nurturing all students

Kanienʼkehá:ka (Mohawk) education professor Frank Deer speaks of educational programming “that is congruent with the identity of the local community.” This programming, he writes, must go beyond curricula to address the school environment as well. Student safety, inclusion and identity affirmation must be prioritized in all aspects of school life.

Jennifer Brant, a Kanienʼkehà:ka interdisciplinary scholar, speaks in depth about how silence during times like these equates to complicity in accepting injustices that are taking place within “the communities in which we live, the broader society and global communities.”

Inaction in response to this policy is negligent.

Detrimental ramifications may also extend to reconciliation efforts in religious spaces more generally. This regressive policy poses lingering questions about the longevity of Catholic schools if they fail to protect and nurture all students.

Impacts on reconciliation

The primary target of the DPCDSB’s sweeping flag policy is the 2SLGBTQI+ community. In addition, the flag ban attacks Indigenous sovereignty and Anishinaabek nationhood, perpetuating attitudes tied to the Doctrine of Discovery still present in the Catholic ethos.

---

Read more:
The Vatican just renounced a 500-year-old doctrine that justified colonial land theft … Now what? — Podcast

---

Flying the flags of First Nations (at their request) is not only a matter of inclusion, it is a matter of respect — respect for the land, the people and the treaties that connect us.

In denying this step towards relationality, this governing body of a Catholic school board sets back the Church’s reconciliation efforts riding on the momentum of the papal visit.

---

Read more:
Pope Francis showed in deeds and words he wanted to face the truth in Canada

---

The board’s ignorance of how this policy risks damaging relationships with students, families and staff at the board, as well as the broader public, partly reflects an indifference that Pope Francis warned Catholics about during his visit:

“I trust and pray that Christians and civil society in this land may grow in the ability to accept and respect the identity and the experience of the Indigenous Peoples. It is my hope that concrete ways can be found to make those peoples better known and esteemed, so that all may learn to walk together.”

Walking together in solidarity

As we write this piece, we can see through the window a local Toronto Catholic Distric School Board elementary school, where an Every Child Matters flag is flown alongside a Pride and Canadian flag.

Catholic education, despite its sordid history and contested perspectives about interpreting and practising Church doctrine, can be a tool to drive reconciliation.

Catholics cannot let a narrow vision overshadow Pope Francis’s pilgrimage and the global Church movement he, the Church’s bishops and Catholic lay people have participated in — via a global synod — to respond to the call to walk together in solidarity with Indigenous, 2SLGBTQI+ and other marginalized people.

Counter-narratives of hope and possibility

We wish to continue to hear counter-narratives of hope and possibility for Catholic education. We wish to see active changes that move the DPCDSB, as scholar Sheila Cote-Meek of the Teme-Augama Anishinabai, writes, “to a drastically different way of being, doing and working.”

As other Catholic boards in Ontario initiate flag debates of their own, we are left with the lingering question. What is the future of Catholic education if it’s not intended to support the physical, emotional, mental and spiritual well-being of all those entrusted to its care?

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Catholic school board’s regressive flag policy sets back reconciliation in a post-Papal visit Canada – https://theconversation.com/catholic-school-boards-regressive-flag-policy-sets-back-reconciliation-in-a-post-papal-visit-canada-256765

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Rhea Desai, Post Doctoral Fellow, Department of Biology, McMaster University

With climate change-fuelled natural disasters becoming more frequent and devastating for communities around the world, the need for cleaner energy solutions is more urgent than ever.

When it comes to transitioning away from fossil fuels, much of the focus tends to be on solar, wind or hydroelectricity. However, small modular reactors (SMRs) are an emerging technology showing promise globally.

SMRs are a specific type of nuclear reactor that, as the name suggests, are small in energy output and modular in their manufacturing. Provinces like New Brunswick, Alberta and Saskatchewan have made progress on strategic plans to make SMRs part of their provincial climate action plans.

Unlike traditional nuclear reactors that generally produce more than 1,000 megawatts of electricity, SMRs are designed to produce as low as five megawatts. The modularity of such reactors allows for manufacturing off-site and installation at the desired location. This can decrease construction time, manufacturing costs and certain environmental costs associated with building on site.

This means SMRs are more feasible for many off-grid communities that lack reliable access to electricity, many of which are Indigenous. In 2023, the Canada Energy regulator said there were 178 remote Indigenous and northern communities not connected to the North American electricity grid and natural gas infrastructure.

In an effort to shift reliability from carbon-emitting resources to nuclear power, SMRs provide an exciting alternative, but implementation needs effective engagement with Indigenous communities to flourish.

Engaging Indigenous communities

Much of Canada’s electricity is already generated from low-carbon emission sources. However, there are still areas in northern Canada that are reliant on diesel, and therefore SMR plans are often aimed at providing electricity to these communities.

While on paper, this might sound like the perfect solution, there’s a lot to consider about SMR siting from an environmental perspective in these remote communities. These considerations include but are not limited to potential locations, source term, refuelling and waste management.

As research continues into the engineering and science behind SMR technology, meaningful community engagement with Indigenous communities is also required.

Thoughtfully considered and integrated consultations are necessary to ensure projects respect treaties, land rights and the surrounding environment. Consultation is needed to understand the needs and goals of the community for creating an energy transition plan.

In addition, incorporating traditional ecological knowledge in environmental risk assessments is vital. Ultimately, projects designed alongside Indigenous communities should strive for Indigenous sovereignty over growing infrastructure.

Why community engagement is important

Indigenous communities continue to face challenges as a result of colonization. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (TRC) seventh Call to Action highlights the need to eliminate educational and employment disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians.

A direct way to address in terms of Canada’s nuclear landscape is to train members of those communities in technical roles related to the planning, deployment and sustained use of a nuclear facility. Specifically, training today’s Indigenous youth so they can fulfil these roles in their future careers.

The TRC’s Call to Action 92 calls on Canada’s corporate sector to engage in meaningful consultation, respectful relationship-building and equitable access to training and education opportunities that will contribute to long-term benefits from any economic development projects.

Through understanding the need for this relationship-building, there is a lot that western practices can learn from adopting Indigenous ways of knowing. Indigenous people have a long history of sustainable practices in their culture and traditions, and although western science now consider sustainable practices, it is not deeply woven into community and industrial initiatives.

As nuclear projects advance in Canada, it’s vital to respect Indigenous knowledge through weaving with western science. Projects can adopt a Two-Eyed seeing approach. This refers to viewing a problem with one eye using an Indigenous knowledge perspective and the other with a western knowledge lens. There is much to learn from understanding the philosophy behind Indigenous ways of knowing that can be applied to protect the environment.

Indigenous knowledge varies across Canada and comes with different insights, but a commonality is the teaching that all living things are interconnected and must be respected and cared for. This perspective is necessary for the future of nuclear projects to ensure the environment is sustained to support the biodiversity of regions throughout Canada.

This informed approach of protecting the environment, together with an ecosystem approach that considers the uniqueness and interconectedness of each organism, will ultimately lead to improved nuclear policies and safety.

The actions that institutions and private industry take today to build strong relationships with Indigenous communities and work towards an increasingly sustainable future will support already resilient communities so they can see growth well beyond the deployment of SMRs. A path to a cleaner future is in reach, but only if we walk beside Indigenous leaders, knowledge holders, community members and, especially, youth.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Indigenous engagement is essential for small modular nuclear reactor projects – https://theconversation.com/indigenous-engagement-is-essential-for-small-modular-nuclear-reactor-projects-252134