Saudi-US talks on civilian nuclear program to begin within ‘weeks’ Riyadh’s energy minister insists kingdom seeks energy for peaceful purposes, but will not agree to American limitations on uranium enrichment
By TOI STAFF , 21 Dec 17, Saudi Arabia’s energy minister said the US and Riyadh will begin talks within weeks on cooperation over the kingdom’s emergent civilian nuclear program. Falih noted that Saudi Arabia has already “signed agreements with China, Russia, with France, so their technologies will be competing for the Saudi national nuclear project.”
US law forbids cooperation with nations that have not signed a so-called Section 123 Agreement, which limits nuclear work to peaceful uses only. Though Riyadh has said it does not seek a military program, it has said it seeks “self-sufficiency in producing nuclear fuel” and has in the past refused to sign an agreement that would limit its ability to enrich uranium…….https://www.timesofisrael.com/saudi-us-talks-on-civilian-nuclear-program-to-begin-within-weeks/
Ratepayers win victory in fight to recover money from failed SCE&G nuclear project BY SAMMY FRETWELL sfretwell@thestate.comDECEMBER 20, 2017 SCE&G customers who have paid nearly $2 billion for a failed nuclear construction project scored a victory Wednesday that could lead to a cut in power bills of up to 18 percent.
The S.C. Public Service Commission denied SCE&G’s request to throw out a legal case that seeks to eliminate charges customers now pay for the shuttered project. The commission also agreed not to dismiss a case that seeks potentially billions of dollars in customer refunds from SCE&G.
Wednesday’s decision was a rare win for ratepayers and a blow to SCE&G, which faces withering criticism for failing to complete the V.C. Summer nuclear project with its state-owned partner Santee Cooper.In deciding to keep the rate cases alive, the PSC now plans to hold a hearing next year to determine whether cutting the charges and making refunds are wise ideas. The hearing is among several ways ratepayers could be reimbursed. The Legislature also is considering bills to help reduce charges by SCE&G for the nuclear project…..
Whether the commission will eventually order rate cuts or refunds won’t be known until next year, but SCE&G’s critics were elated Wednesday that the PSC supported customers over the Cayce-headquartered power company.
They said the PSC has sided with SCE&G consistently in the past on the company’s plan to bill ratepayers for the V.C. Summer project. Customers have been hit with nine rate hikes to pay for the nuclear expansion effort under a 2007 law that made financing the project easier…….
Two legislative committees on Wednesday unanimously approved a controversial bill that could raise New Jerseyans’ utility bills $41 a year to subsidize the state’s largest energy company.
Public Service Electric & Gas officials say the $320 million subsidy would stave off the premature closure of nuclear plants in Salem County, which will be in the red within two years……..
Stefanie Brand, director of the state’s Division of Rate Counsel that represents utility consumers, said Wednesday that the utility company has not demonstrated are hurting financially “other than bald assertions and ultimatums issued by the company.”
“The Legislature has a duty to to its constituents to test those assertions and not simply succumb to the company’s threats,” she said, adding that the review of its financials described in the legislation falls short of what is required for a thorough analysis.
Renewable energy – the low cost, high-value option for the Philippines, Manila BulletinBy Eddie O’Connor, Chairman, Global Wind Energy Council and Mainstream Renewable Power “…..One of the perceptions about renewable energy and the transition to a low-carbon economy is that this technology will impose costs on the Philippines that it cannot afford, particularly in the generation of electricity where coal will have to be replaced by wind and solar power.In fact, renewable energy will save the Philippines money, make its economy more competitive, and boost living standards and consumer purchasing power. At the conference the chairman of the National Renewable Energy Board presented a study by the Philippine Electricity Market Corporation that showed that far from being a burden on the country, the existing renewable energy programme has reduced the overall cost of electricity.
This is because unlike coal or gas power, the variable cost of production for wind or solar energy is zero. This happens because the fuel – the wind and the sun – is free. This electricity is used first to satisfy customer demand, before the system operator brings on more expensive coal power. The overall effect is to depress the wholesale cost of electricity on the spot market.
By using this wind and solar power, the grid operator avoids the cost of operating the more expensive coal and oil plant. Over the three years of the PEMC study from 2014-2017 this avoided cost was 18.7billion pesos; a very significant sum………
n the Philippines all the customer sees on their bill is the cost of the tariff supporting new wind and solar power. What they don’t see is the overall savings accrued through this reduction in the price of electricity.
Knowing that, despite the cost of the tariff, the introduction of wind and solar power onto the system actually saves the customer money, the government in Ireland continues to support renewable energy, and we now have 22% of our electricity capacity from these two sources of generation.
The Philippines can follow this trajectory and aim to have 25% of its electricity capacity supplied by wind and solar energy in the coming decade. The savings that will accrue to the customer will be considerable. Funds that would otherwise be spent on coal or oil can be invested in other infrastructure. Consumers will have additional spending power. The economy will get an extra boost.
Electricity made from wind and solar does not require any fuel to be bought from abroad. The wind and sun belongs to the country. It will be there forever. It doesn’t matter what external price shocks impact on oil or coal, the wind will blow and the sun will shine and their unit cost will remain at zero.
By moving ahead of its regional ASEAN partners and setting ambitious targets for wind and solar power, the Philippines can also attract investment in the supply chain. Early movers into renewable energy like Brazil, Germany, China and Morocco have created new industries and thousands of new jobs. Why should the Philippines subsidise mining jobs in Australia and Indonesia when it could be building the plant that will supply its own clean energy sectors and those across the region?…..https://news.mb.com.ph/2017/12/21/renewable-energy-the-low-cost-high-value-option-for-the-philippines/
Japan’s Nuclear Exports: Risky Business A burgeoning nuclear export portfolio carries with it significant risks and responsibilities.The Diplomat By Tom Corben December 22, 2017 While Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s electoral victory in October has generated plenty of debate regarding prospective constitutional change, another highly controversial issue — nuclear power — has largely escaped attention despite being touted as a significant electoral issue. Although initially returning to power in 2012 at the height of post-Fukushima anti-nuclear sentiment, Abe has promoted nuclear energy as a pillar of his economic agenda at home and abroad. Indeed, despite the industry’s diminishing domestic prospects, his return to office signals the continuation of policies promoting Japanese nuclear technology abroad as a means of addressing the nation’s trade deficit, ironically a product of the suspension of most of Japan’s own reactors. While I have discussed the domestic security dimensions to Japan’s nuclear power program elsewhere, it is worth unpacking some of the political, financial, and strategic risks of a continuation of Tokyo’s nuclear export agenda.
Nuclear exports contribute significantly to the pursuit of Japan’s foreign economic and political goals in strengthening key bilateral relationships and opening up investment opportunities with emerging economies. Certain agreements, however, arguably risk implicating Tokyo in international proliferation controversies or potential future industrial-environmental disasters, while the long-term financial benefits of nuclear power investments are also uncertain. Furthermore, some analysts contend that Japanese society’s traditional “nuclear allergy,” including its nuclear non-proliferation principles, is facing steady erosion under sustained internal and external pressures. Tokyo has been criticized for backtracking on past professions of anti-nuclear principles, considering that this year’s version of its annual UN motion advocating for the elimination of nuclear weapons critically omitted any mention of a landmark treaty concerning the banning of such capabilities. As such, the signs indicate that Japan will persist with nuclear exports despite the myriad risks to its international reputation and global security generally……..
as a non-signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the ambiguous nature of assurances from the Indian government that Japanese technology will not be used to produce nuclear weapons is worrying, as is the lack of legal definition around the circumstances in which Japan may justifiably abandon the deal. The agreement has been criticized as a further deviation from Japan’s traditional nonproliferation principles, on top of the uncertain strategic dimensions to Japan’s own nuclear program and the aforementioned omission from it’s UN motion.
Prospective agreements with Saudi Arabia could potentially further undermine these principles. ……. A Japan-Saudi nuclear deal could be interpreted as a double standard given the international community’s efforts to constrain Iran’s own nuclear aspirations…….
The long-term economic benefits of nuclear exports are also uncertain……..the financial integrity of Japanese firms, such as Toshiba and its subsidiary Westinghouse, are already under scrutiny. Existing agreements may also be canceled: only last November Vietnam pulled out of a deal with a conglomerate of Japanese firms worth $11 billion due to safety fears and spiraling construction costs. More cancellations would see the vast sums of yen spent on project campaigns struck out as further financial losses. Without a strong domestic demand to fall back on, many companies may find that the balance between financial risks and rewards of overseas nuclear power projects will tip increasingly toward the former…….. https://thediplomat.com/2017/12/japans-nuclear-exports-risky-business/
Congress moves to aid Georgia’s troubled nuclear project, Politically Georgia, By Tamar Hallerman, WASHINGTON — Senators on Wednesday began laying the groundwork to aid the country’s only remaining new nuclear project under construction, the Augusta-area Plant Vogtle, less than a day before Georgia utility regulators are scheduled to rule on its fate.
The leaders of the tax-writing Finance Committee unveiled legislation that would guarantee the project roughly $800 million in federal tax credits, money Vogtle’s operators have long been counting on for their balance sheets.
The language, which Georgia’s congressional delegation has been lobbying hard for this year, would end the 2021 sunset date for the previously-promised nuclear production tax credits. Vogtle’s operators would receive the credits only after the new units go fully into operation.
The extension was needed since the project is not scheduled to be complete until 2022.
It is still unclear when both chambers of Congress will consider the legislation. Nuclear industry lobbyists have been pushing for lawmakers to consider the language as part of a must-pass government spending agreement later this week, but time on Capitol Hill is in short supply before the holiday break. U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson suggested Tuesday that Congress could wait until January and then make the credits retroactive…..http://politics.blog.myajc.com/2017/12/20/congress-moves-to-aid-georgias-troubled-nuclear-project/
Why Kenya’s push for nuclear power rests on false or fanciful premises, Mail and Guardian, Brendon J. CannonKenya wants to go nuclear. Since 2012, Nairobi has been talking the talk and walking the walk. It has engaged the International Atomic Energy Agency and signed multilateral letters of intent in pursuit of nuclear power.
To date, Kenya reportedly has memoranda of understanding with Russia, China, South Korea and Slovakia which involve the building of four nuclear power plants with a total output of 4 000 MW. France is apparently also eyeing the potentially lucrative deals which would nearly double Kenya’s current electricity capacity.
Kenya’s Nuclear Electricity Board secured the global atomic energy agency’s approval in 2016. It hopes to have the first plant online anywhere from 2022 to 2027, leading a new African push for nuclear power. The only country currently generating nuclear is South Africa……..
The cost of the Kenya plant is estimated at Sh500 billion. This is costly and, given the current energy consumption patterns in Kenya, would be a massive waste of money.
Kenya’s industrial and consumer demand, economic growth, relative poverty as well as the current grid and distribution network simply do not support this magnitude of power generation at such exorbitant costs.
Myths about Kenya’s power situation
According to the popular narrative, Kenya suffers from the twin evils of electricity that is overly expensive and in short supply. Yet there is strong evidence that Kenya’s power is relatively cheap and that successive governments have exaggerated both it’s economic growth trajectory and its need for a massive increase in power generation.
While economies are required to have surplus power capacity, excess capacity can lead to higher power bills as consumers are often charged for idle power plants.
Thus the government, while promising ever cheaper power to consumers may actually be undercutting this promise in its pursuit of nuclear power plants and other costly projects that fail to reflect both industrial and private consumer demand.
Note of caution
A recent study by a German engineering consultancy further confirmed how exaggerated government figures about demand have been. It noted that Kenya’s maximum power demand would
grow 72% to 2 259MW by 2020 from the current 1 620MW, when projects such as the standard gauge railway start operating fully.
Government estimates, on the other hand, project peak demand will jump threefold to 4 755 megawatts in the three-year period. This is twice as much as the consultant’s estimates.
On top of this, Kenya’s problem isn’t that it needs more energy. Rather it needs to address distribution issues.
Any project involving the generation of more power needs to pay equal attention to Kenya’s grid and distribution system which currently can’t handle additional power. This includes corresponding efforts at regular, systematic maintenance work. Without these, any extra power generated from renewable and other energy sources will remain costly and wasted.
Yet another note of caution is in order. Demand from Kenya’s domestic consumers remains low even though a total of 5.8 -million customers now have connections to power – a five-fold increase in the past seven years.
Why is this the case?
Neither a lack of connectivity nor an unreliable supply is to blame for the low consumption of electricity by the vast majority of Kenyan consumers. Nor is it because of reportedly relatively high electricity tariffs.
Rather, it is simply because the majority of Kenyans still have low income levels. Many Kenyans simply cannot afford the luxury of modern appliances for cooking, heating or refrigerating.
This simple fact has neither been figured into government prognostications nor donor-driven last-mile connectivity scenarios………
Adding extremely expensive nuclear power to Kenya’s energy mix along with power from other inadvisable projects such as the Lamu coal power plant is arguably inexcusable as well as profligate. Lamu is expected to produce 5 000MW of power within a period of three years.
As such, Kenya needs to work overtime to set a power generation agenda that identifies real versus perceived needs. The country’s electricity agenda must not be driven by estimated consumption figures that fail to correspond to the true energy needs. In the words of a former Kenyan energy official,
It does not take much effort to notice the gap between what is on paper and the economic reality.
US preparing ‘bloody nose’ attack on North Korea, New York Post, By Yaron Steinbuch, December 21, 2017 The US is preparing plans to deliver a “bloody nose” attack against North Korea to knock out its nuclear weapons program.
The White House has “dramatically” ramped up its military plans amid fears that diplomacy won’t thwart North Korean despot Kim Jong Un from making good on his threats, sources told the UK’s Telegraph.
One option is destroying a launch site before the rogue regime uses it for a new missile test, while another is targeting weapons stockpiles, according to the news outlet.
The Trump administration hopes that pre-emptive action would show the trigger-happy dictator that the United States is serious about stopping his bellicose pursuits and persuading him to negotiate.
The Telegraph cited three anonymous sources, one inside the administration and two former officials familiar with the White House thinking.
nuclear-news 