nuclear-news

Nuclearization is underway. Or not.

None (small nuclear reactors) are close to any kind of production and serial release. Far from there……..No design has been certified in Europe and the United States, challengers left behind. Costs are exploding and there is no guarantee that the projects will be completed.

The new edition of the reference report on the state of civil nuclear power in the world has just been published. Exceptional independent work of public utility. Beyond the usual photographs, the opportunity will be given to extend the analysis: while some governments are frankly pushing for new construction of reactors, the relaunch of the nuclear program is questioned as to its reality; and the project to triple the production of electricity from nuclear origin is questioned about its feasibility.

Homo Nuclearus, 24 Jan 24 (not a very good translation from the French)

After the start of the literary season, it is the specialized edition of the year awaited by all individuals interested in nuclear power in the world: from governments to journalists, including operators and industrialists in the sector…

No exception to the rule, this volume of 549 pages remains produced by a group of independent consultants and analysts, not without surprise that such a priesthood is not supported financially and logistically by international institutions or agencies, in particular the IAEA as a major player and reference in the matter. So this detailed assessment of the situation and trends in the international nuclear industry would surprisingly not exist without Mycle Schneider and his team .

This eighteenth publication perseveres in its concern for a factual approach, nourished by details on the operation, construction and decommissioning of nuclear reactors throughout the world, i.e. more than 40 countries. Healthy reading of the past year 2022.

In any case, this is the media perception that emerges from the political will of a handful of countries

• According to the WNISR annual report, new construction remains driven by China but does not compensate for closures

• The share of nuclear power in the electricity generation mix is ​​at its lowest level for a long time

• Construction costs are such that private investments are desired

• The objective of tripling nuclear capacities by 2050 cannot claim to be realistic

• The International Energy Agency seems to be behind the pragmatism of the success of solar and photovoltaic production.

The trend was not upward. But nuclear production represents 9.2% of electricity production, its lowest level since the 1980s.

The most salient facts remain quite identical to the previous edition in terms of closures, units in operation, constructions scheduled and awaiting finalization, etc. In a few paragraphs.

First, in France, the increase in shutdowns has increased by almost 50%: 8,515 days in 2022, or an average of 152 days of shutdown per reactor. Chooz 1 and 2, Civaux 1 and 2 and Penly 1 were shut down for 16 to 22 months between August 2021 and July 2023, 11 other reactors were shut down for more than 200 days, 20 simultaneously for the equivalent of 273 days. Stress corrosion did not help , requiring checks and repairs of cracks attributed to this impactful and systemic phenomenon . The nuclear recovery plan in France may give the impression of a significant exception: it is true that six next EPR2s, or even eight additional apparently demanded by the Macron government, must enter service between 2035 and 2042. But at the same time time, closures will be experienced on the fleet, maintenance will take place to extend aging reactors: between 2010 and 2022, France lost 129 TWh of nuclear electricity production. A longer-term trend which should not be denied. The CEO of EDF does not refute any of this and concedes that between ‘2005 and 2015, nine years out of ten, 400 TWh of nuclear electricity were produced but that since 2015, this was no longer possible’. EDF still sets the objective of reaching 400 TWh again in 2030, not without difficulties according to managers.

At the same time, as a host country for new nuclear units, India continues to rely on the sector to develop their electricity production capacity (six reactors are under construction).

On the British side, things are no more optimistic than in France in the context of the construction of the EPRs. The situation stagnates as projects are delayed. EDF has just announced that the Hinkley Point C site is expected to experience between two and four years of delay (the electro-mechanical assembly is more complex than anticipated) and an almost doubling of the initial bill (7 to 9 billion additional costs incurred ). by EDF since the departure of the Chinese CGN ). The commissioning of the first EPR would be postponed by at least two years, or even four: start-up is now planned at best in 2029, or even 2031.

Apart from these few active nations, the entire nuclear sector relies on two major players. Overall, Russia continues to use nuclear energy as a geopolitical lever , particularly on the African continent, in total competition with China. As already mentioned in previous reports, this requires substantial financial contributions and sales of electricity production at negotiated rates, in Africa but also in Bangladesh, Egypt, Turkey… Like the installation of EDF in the Kingdom -United. In addition, Russia proposes to manage spent high-activity nuclear fuel and take responsibility for its recycling. So it’s like a complete package offered to neo-nuclear countries, a turnkey service.

This type of export with financing included remains the only real source of creation of nuclear units. And before France announced its new program, the nuclear sector remained dominated by China’s new projects on its own soil. Since the year 2000, 52 of the 116 reactors commissioned around the world have been Chinese. Of the 58 reactors currently under construction, 24 are located in China. The control is now increasing with technological domination. The panel is expanding since China recently put the Shidao Bay SMR into commercial operation (two reactors were commissioned in June 2022, after a ten-year project instead of five planned).

The prospects for a new commercial market are supported by the very numerous SMR projects of numerous private companies . But none are close to any kind of production and serial release. Far from there. Even more of a commissioning: 72 projects have been identified and few are at an advanced stage of development. Russia remains China’s most serious competitor in this area: it also operates two SMRs on board a barge and connected to the network since December 2019 (nine years later than planned). No design has been certified in Europe and the United States, challengers left behind. Costs are exploding and there is no guarantee that the projects will be completed.

This significant upward trend in construction and maintenance costs is countered in the United States by massive subsidies granted to new nuclear programs. In this liberal country, in the midst of the fight against climate change, these state and federal interventions are necessary because nuclear reactors are simply not (anymore?) competitive.

……………………… The detailed assessment of the current nuclear landscape is therefore awaited by all readers and specialists. But it is also the opinion given on the trajectory of the international nuclear industry which is scrutinized with interest: in view of the attempts to build which seem to abound, it is appropriate to gauge their relevance and effectiveness. So what really is this construction policy, its viability and its feasibility?

Do these cumulative announcements of nuclear construction materialize? Not according to Mycle Schneider:

Everyone feels like this is a booming industry and people feel like there are nuclear power plants popping up all over the world. But what we have seen is that some of the key indicators are showing a dramatic decline. In fact, the share of nuclear power in the global commercial electricity mix has fallen by almost half since the mid-1990s. And the drop in 2022 was 0.6 percentage points, which is the largest drop significant in a decade, since the post-Fukushima year of 2012. We have seen a 4% drop in nuclear electricity production in 2022, which means, if we take into account that the China increased by 3%, while the decline was 5% outside of China. So it’s very different from the perception you may have.

The nuclear will is first and foremost that of a will displayed before being reified. On this initially political momentum, France was able to count on an event of choice: not sufficiently satisfied with having convinced a group of European countries to defend civil nuclear power , France was able to count on the United States so that commits to tripling global nuclear energy capacity by 2050 . A surprise statement made at the United Nations climate summit of the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Official recognition of the ‘key role of nuclear energy in achieving carbon neutrality and net greenhouse gas emissions on a global scale’ which is good for France. But is this ambitious political objective tenable and realistic?

……………………………………………………………………………………… First, we must take into account that 270 reactors will close by 2050, that is to say as many reactors to replace. Where does this figure come from? From the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which plans to close 10 reactors (10 GW) per year from 2018 to 2050. For the sole purpose of replacing them, everyone will have to calculate: these are 10 reactors per year that ‘from 2024 it is necessary to build, operate, connect to the network… compared to a rate of five per year over the last two decades…

According to the WNISR report, to move beyond the status quo and triple global capacity, it would require an additional 2.5 new 700 MW reactors per month to reach more than 1,000 new reactors.

Nothing is less certain to achieve this objective displayed in the media. Nuclear power does not stand out to its advantage in this new report………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The thunderous announcement made by the twenty or so countries in favor of an increase in global nuclear capacities aims to convince international financial institutions to participate in the financing of nuclear programs, to favor the sector subscribed to heavy financial and economic constraints which are disadvantageous in the face of renewable energies. To cite only these last examples, remember that the American Westinghouse filed for bankruptcy in 2017, that EDF accumulates more than 65 billion euros in net debt (EPR of Flamanville, EPR of Great Britain, etc.), that the Korean national company KEPCO suffers a debt of 149 billion dollars…

A strategy for which France has the greatest hopes whatever happens: Macron has been leading intense nuclear diplomacy at the European level for two years. Question of survival of the nuclear sector. EDF’s debt and ultimately the State budget deficit being closely linked to the investment capacity to meet the large budgets of this program of 6 to 14 EPR2, we must know how to count on others.

In 2022, nearly 500 billion euros were invested in renewable energies worldwide, or around 14 times what was invested in nuclear power plants (investments in power plants are more the work of state or pseudo-structures). state than real private companies).

Dependent on public funding, due to its costs being much higher than wind and photovoltaic sectors, will nuclear energy be an energy of the future? According to the IEA, by 2026 , solar photovoltaics will exceed nuclear electricity production. Games are made ?  https://homonuclearus.fr/nuclearisation-en-cours-ou-pas/?utm_source=Homo+nuclearus&utm_campaign=4b01f7a1f3-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_02_12_08_27_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_338d2a581d-4b01f7a1f3-433658419

February 10, 2024 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international