nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Progress in getting compensation for sick Hanford nuclear workers and ex-workers

Hanford atomic workers get state legislative boost for workers’ comp  http://www.peoplesworld.org/article/hanford-atomic-workers-get-state-legislative-boost-for-workers-comp/   February 9, 2018 CST  BY MARK GRUENBERG  HANFORD, Wash.—This is a good-news story. It involves a persistent union legislative director, a favorable election outcome, and bipartisan and cross-chamber cooperation in the Washington State legislature.

And the beneficiaries are and will be hundreds, if not thousands, of workers exposed to some of the most dangerous materials known to humans.

The workers are present workers and retirees, at the Department of Energy’s nuclear complex in Hanford, Wash. And as a result of all those factors, they’ll be more eligible for workers’ comp.

The story starts in 1942-43, says Nick Bumpaous of Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 598, located near the complex. That’s when the U.S. War Department took over the Hanford area to build the factory complex to make nuclear warheads for U.S. bombs. Hanford, like the whole Manhattan Project for developing atomic weapons, was top secret.

The feds, to their credit, realized Hanford’s workers would be in constant daily contact with uranium, plutonium and other highly radioactive materials. Who knew what would happen to them in later years due to those exposures?

“In the 1940s, the War Department got into a contract with the state legislature to have workers use Washington’s industrial insurance for workers’ comp claims if they got ill from handling the radioactive material,” Bumpaous said in a phone interview. “The feds would reimburse the state for any claims.”

The catch was when sickened workers went to their doctors, the doctors “couldn’t tell what the illnesses were” – because Hanford was secret – “so they couldn’t give you medication,” much less OK workers’ comp claims.

Common diseases among the Hanford workers include various cancers, according to a fact sheet for a later federal workers comp program for federal nuclear workers nationwide. The Steelworkers, who now represent many of those nuke workers, lobbied for and won the federal program. It began in 2001, with a second part added in 2004. But it caps lifetime benefits at $250,000, plus medical expenses.

“But you still put the burden of proof” upon the worker to show his or her toil at Hanford and exposure to the fissile materials there caused those ills, not to mention exposure to other threats, Bumpaous says.

One example: Exposure to diethyl mercury, “a silent odorless, colorless, tasteless stuff that induces neurological diseases and dementia.” In addition, “you have a whole generation of people with reactive airway disease,” he adds.

The doctors couldn’t diagnose the reasons for Hanford ills. The workers became so ill they couldn’t work and had to leave their jobs, “so they’re not getting a paycheck and they had no health insurance.” They had to navigate the bureaucracy “and their claims were denied,” Bumpaous explains. Workers’ comp denials at Hanford were 52 percent above average.

“It’s hard enough to take care of yourself when you’re battling the Department of Energy,” which now runs Hanford “and the state Department of Labor and Industry,” which runs workers’ comp, Bumpaous says.

With the burden of proof on the workers, Bumpaous got into the picture. Two years ago, he read about legislation the Fire Fighters successfully pushed elsewhere, shifting the burden of proof for certain diseases – known to be caused by Fire Fighter exposure to asbestos and other dangers on the job – from the worker to the state.

In short, if a Fire Fighter goes to the doctor with asbestosis, the doctor must presume the worker caught it from on-the-job exposure and is eligible for workers’ comp. Bumpaous wanted to create the same scenario for the Hanford workers. Workers and retirees still must go to the doctors, though.

“These brave workers continue to be exposed to some of the most hazardous substances known to man, including many chemical and radiological hazards as yet unidentified, and the safety measures intended to protect them are inadequate,” wrote David Groves in The Stand, the Washington State Labor Council’s online newspaper, which first reported the legislation.

But the Hanford workers couldn’t get workers comp because they had to “connect specific exposures to their disease — a virtually impossible task given the” top secret “circumstances at Hanford.”

Bumpaous enlisted two lawmakers to push the measure shifting the burden of proof from the workers to the state: State Rep. Larry Haler, R-Richland, and State Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Kent, a longtime pro-worker advocate, who is now state Senate President Pro Tem and chair of the state Senate’s Labor Committee. Haler’s district includes Hanford.

And that’s where the political switch comes in. When Bumpaous, Haler and Keiser first tried to get their bill, HB1723, through, it passed the House, then died in the Senate, which the GOP controlled by one vote. Republican leaders wouldn’t even let it get out of committee.

But earlier this year, Manka Dhingra, a Democratic pro-worker woman with strong union backing, won a special election for an open State Senate seat. Control switched, Keiser took over – and the legislation for the Hanford workers sailed through: 76-22 in the House and 35-14 in the Senate.

“It’s important we take care of workers who suffered due to being exposed to harmful chemicals and processes at Hanford,” Haler said. “Despite all the safety precautions, families and individuals have been devastated by illness and disease. They need help. This will help make that easier,” Haler said after HB1723 headed for Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee’s desk.

“Exposure to heavy metal and radiation has ruined people’s lives,” Keiser told the Senate before passage.

“I cannot think of a more suitable assertion for this Senate to make than putting our partisan differences aside to put people first. We are seeing people dying from dementia, cancer and lung disease who were systematically left out of workers compensation.”

“People went bankrupt paying for cancer treatments. This ordeal has been going on since the 1990s. We have seen a whole generation impacted by this tragedy. That is not right. Our Washington community cares about protecting all workers.”

Inslee is expected to sign the bill. But that’s not the end of the story for Bumpaous. “I want to see everyone get these benefits” nationwide if they worked in nuclear weapons and warhead production, he says. “That way we won’t have this type of stuff in the future.”

 

February 10, 2018 Posted by | employment, health, USA | Leave a comment

International Atomic Energy Agency trying hard to market nuclear power to Indonesia (never mind the earthquakes)

IAEA Director General Visits Indonesia: Highlights Close Cooperation in Using Nuclear Technology, Aabha Dixit, IAEA Office of Public Information and Communication 9 Feb 18 

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano praised the cooperation between Indonesia and the IAEA in bringing the benefits of nuclear technology to countries in Asia and Africa, during his visit to the country earlier this week. He pointed to areas such as enhancing food security, cattle cultivation, and plant breeding, where Indonesia has assisted trainees from Mozambique and Papua New Guinea.

During the visit, Director General Amano and Minister of Research, Technology and Higher Education Muhammad Nasir, further strengthened this cooperation, signing Practical Arrangements on enhancing technical cooperation among developing countries. The Practical Arrangements cover a three-year period (2018-2021).

“Indonesia is an advanced user of nuclear technology in many areas and shares its expertise with other countries,” he said………

Mr Amano was also briefed on the consideration being given to possible nuclear power development and areas in which IAEA support would be required.  He noted that having nuclear energy is a Member State’s internal decision and the IAEA stands ready to support efforts when a national decision is made. Elements, such as the IAEA Milestone Approach, which includes public communication, stakeholder involvement and setting up of a nuclear energy programme implementation organization, were covered.  https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/iaea-director-general-visits-indonesia-highlights-close-cooperation-in-using-nuclear-technology

February 10, 2018 Posted by | Indonesia, marketing | Leave a comment

Desperate to save its failing nuclear business, Toshiba looks to Ukraine

Toshiba seeks deal in Ukraine to revive nuclear power business, Asahi Shimbun, By TOSHIO KAWADA/ Staff Writer, February 8, 2018  Toshiba Corp. is planning another foray into an overseas nuclear-power industry, forced in part by the disastrous consequences of its previous failure abroad, sources said.

The Tokyo-based company has started negotiations with Energoatom, a Ukrainian state-run power company, to supply turbine generators for use in its nuclear power plants. The two companies concluded a memorandum in October 2017.

Toshiba in March 2017 said it was withdrawing from the business of designing and constructing entire nuclear power plants overseas following the collapse of its U.S. nuclear arm, Westinghouse Electric Co.

However, Toshiba judged that it would not suffer such a huge deficit again if it only supplies equipment to nuclear power plants abroad, the sources said.

“There will be little concern that we will suffer a huge loss (from an overseas deal),” a source related to Toshiba said.

Energoatom operates 15 nuclear reactors and is building two others in Ukraine. It plans to replace the generators of old reactors to increase output.

Toshiba wants to win a deal with Energoatom to export the replacement generators and provide maintenance services after they go into operation.

If Toshiba succeeds in the equipment supply business in Ukraine, it will consider looking at other markets abroad, the sources said.

Toshiba is desperate for a steady source of income…….

Toshiba plans to earn steady profits from its nuclear business, believing competition with other companies will not be so fierce, the sources said.

But if this endeavor fails to pan out, Toshiba’s management situation could worsen. http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201802080050.html

February 9, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, Japan, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Russia postponing new nuclear reactors because of costs

Nucnet 5th Feb 2018,  Russia’s state nuclear energy corporation Rosatom is ready to postpone
the commissioning of two nuclear power units for two years in an effort to
slow down increases in energy prices, the state-owned Tass news agency
said.
In a report which Rosatom also published on its own website, Tass
said commissioning of Novovoronezh 2-2, planned for January 2019, would be
postponed by a year, and commissioning of Leningrad 2-2, planned for
February 2020, by two years.
Tass said the decision was taken because under
a government-regulated fixed power supply agreement with wholesale
consumers, any return on nuclear investment must be at least 10.5%, which
would mean electricity prices for the consumers would increase to meet the
target.
Fixed power supply agreements have been in place in Russia since
2008 to guarantee returns on investment in generating capacity. The final
wholesale prices are usually higher than the prevailing market price to
compensate costs incurred by the investor during construction. The
agreements include government-regulated price levels for various types of
consumer, dependent on their maximum consumption. Neither Tass nor Rosatom
gave details, although Tass said postponing commissioning of the units will
lead to a reduction in the rate of electricity price growth in 2019 from
12.9% to 11.1%.  https://www.nucnet.org/all-the-news/2018/02/05/russia-ready-to-postpone-commissioning-of-two-nuclear-plants-says-official-agency

February 9, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, politics, Russia | Leave a comment

Britain’s costly gamble with Hinkley point C nuclear project, as the renewables revolution gather speed

there will be no room in this new world of flexible, decentralised generation for large, rigid nuclear reactors. “There are going to be increasingly frequent periods when we have too much power,” says Mr Burke. “But if you are the energy minister, how do you explain to people why you are having to switch off cheap renewables in order to use the much more expensive nuclear power which you have committed to pay for over the next 35 years?”

FT 4th Feb 2018, The UK’s Hinkley Point C has become a critical test of developers’ ability to compete with cheap gas and renewables. Across an expanse of scarred earth the size of 250 football pitches beside the Bristol Channel in south-west England, 3,000 workers are building what will be, by some estimates, the most expensive structure on the planet.

At a cost of almost £20bn, the Hinkley Point C power station in Somerset is the first nuclear plant to be built in the UK since the 1990s. Clusters of cranes and cement silos loom over a warren of earthworks crawling with excavators and
100-tonne dumper trucks. At the centre of the site, foundations are taking shape for two 1.6 gigawatt reactors intended to meet 7 per cent of UK electricity demand, with a target for completion by the end of 2025.

Hinkley is crucial to UK energy security as the country faces the closure of old coal and nuclear plants accounting for about 40 per cent of the country’s reliable electricity generating capacity by 2030. But it also has wider significance as a test of the industry’s ability to compete in a rapidly changing energy landscape. Nuclear power has been under threat
since the meltdown at the Fukushima plant in Japan in 2011 revived safety fears.

But the biggest threat is now economic as the spiralling cost of building new reactors collides with a world of cheap and plentiful gas and renewable power. The UK is now one of the few western countries committed to renewing its ageing reactors. More than 70 per cent of the 448 reactors around the world are in the OECD club of wealthy nations, and more than half of them are at least 30 years old.

Many will reach the end of their operational lives in the next two decades, yet the prospects of replacing
them are uncertain, at best, in countries such as the US, Japan and France, while others including Germany, Switzerland and South Korea are planning to phase out nuclear power altogether. The days of networks dominated by a few large, centralised power stations are drawing to a close, according to many analysts. In their place will come more dispersed sources of renewable generation. Battery storage and digital “smart grid” technology will help smooth out supply and demand, and increase efficiency.

Tom Burke, chairman of E3G, an environmental think-tank, says there will be no room in this new world of flexible, decentralised generation for large, rigid nuclear reactors. “There are going to be increasingly frequent periods when we have too much power,” says Mr Burke. “But if you are the energy minister, how do you explain to people why you are having to switch off cheap renewables in order to use the much more expensive nuclear power which you have committed to pay for over the next 35 years?”

Progress at Hinkley, therefore, is being watched as closely in Beijing as in Paris and London. A repeat of the delays at Olkiluoto and Flamanville could sign the death warrant for western reactor developers, while dealing a setback for
China’s international expansion. Mr Rossi is aware of the high stakes: “We need to make sure that Britain will be happy about the choice it made.”  https://www.ft.com/content/8307c266-066b-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5

February 5, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment

American companies’plans to market nuclear technology to India have come to nothing

The Hindu 3rd Feb 2018, Watching the Republic Day parade, where 10 ASEAN leaders were chief guests,
it was easy to miss the fact that the dates of their visit also marked the
anniversary of another big visit three years ago: the visit by then U.S.
President Barack Obama, when he announced a “breakthrough” in the
India-U.S. civil nuclear deal, to finally pave the way for a commercial
contract.

“The deal is done,” Sujatha Singh, who was Foreign Secretary
at the time, said as the government issued papers and held briefings
describing the nature of the agreement between India and the U.S. on
supplier liability and tracking requirements, which would enable American
companies to build nuclear power reactors in India.

Today, nearly a decade since the memoranda of understanding were inked, and three years after the
last wrinkles were ironed out, there is no sign yet of any concrete
contract between an American company and the Indian authorities to build a
reactor.

In 2009, both GE-Hitachi and Toshiba-Westinghouse had begun talks
on techno-commercial agreements for six reactors each in India. These
commercial contracts were to be the start of the ‘payoff’ for the U.S.
that had considerably shifted its stand on non-proliferation to give India
the waivers needed, and they were to herald India’s arrival on the global
nuclear power stage in return.

Instead, GE-Hitachi’s plans were shelved after it rejected the Obama-Modi agreement in January 2015, saying GE would
not accept the compromise formula on supplier liability. (While others have
indicated they would accept the liability offer, none of them has put that
on paper.) Toshiba-Westinghouse then carried the baton to actualise the
India-U.S. civil nuclear deal, but ran into a different storm as both
Toshiba and Westinghouse had major financial troubles last year. After a
near-bankruptcy, Toshiba jettisoned Westinghouse for just $4.6 billion to a
Canadian consortium, a deal that is now expected to be cleared by the end
of 2018.
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/forging-a-new-nuclear-deal/article22637628.ece

February 5, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, India, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

Trump administration wants $716 billion for defense for fiscal 2019

Why the military wants $716 billion from Congress,The Hill , BY REBECCA KHEEL – 02/04/18  The Trump administration is poised to ask Congress for $716 billion for defense for fiscal 2019, a major hike that budget analysts say aligns with administration’s stated goals of bulking up the military and preparing it to potentially fight near-peer rivals after years of focusing on terrorism.

“A total of $716 billion means that they are putting themselves on the trajectory for a big buildup in military power,” said Todd Harrison, a defense budget expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “The caveat, though, is to really carry out the plans that they talked about in the past, you wouldn’t just need 7 percent growth in [fiscal] ’19; you would need similar levels of growth in the years following.”

President Trump came into office pledging to rebuild what he described as a “depleted” military. …..

“I’m not subtle,” Mattis told House and Senate Republicans on Thursday at their annual retreat at The Greenbrier resort in West Virginia.

“I need to make the military more lethal. Some people think I’m supposed to be an equal-opportunity employer,” Mattis added, according to several sources in the closed-door meeting.

Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon on Friday that he is “very happy” with the $716 billion request for next year.

“The money is going from readiness to modernization to nuclear deterrent,” he said. “You look at the strategy, and you see where it’s going.” ……..http://thehill.com/policy/defense/372110-why-the-military-wants-716-billion-from-congress

February 5, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Costs of France’s Flamville nuclear power project have exploded, and delays ballooned

Le Parisien 3rd Feb 2018, [Machine Translation] EPR Flamanville: four questions on an industrial
disaster. Seven years late and a quote that has tripled in ten years: the
site of the EPR Flamanville Friday received the visit of Sébastien
Lecornu, Secretary of State Nicolas Hulot.

Started in April 2007, the EPR was to cost € 3.3 billion and enter service in 2012. Except that the site
has accumulated the setbacks, the highlight of which was in April 2015,
after the discovery by the ASN of a anomaly in the steel of the lid and
bottom of the reactor vessel. In June 2017, EDF obtained authorization from
the ASN to operate the tank, but confidence in EPR technology has been
eroded. The bill exploded: around € 11 billion.
http://www.leparisien.fr/economie/epr-de-flamanville-quatre-questions-sur-une-catastrophe-industrielle-03-02-2018-7538637.php

February 5, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, France, technology | Leave a comment

Divestment from nuclear weapons funds – one strong move to reduce danger of nuclear war

Global Voices: Citizens can help reduce risk of nuclear conflict http://www.timescolonist.com/life/global-voices-citizens-can-help-reduce-risk-of-nuclear-conflict-1.23163769, Marc and Craig Kielburger / .FEBRUARY 4, 2018 

Marzhan Nurzhan has a mission. The 25-year-old from Kazakhstan is rallying global youth to tackle one of the biggest threats to her generation. But time may be running out.

On Jan. 25, partly in response to North Korea’s recent weapons tests, international scientists moved the hands of the “Doomsday Clock” — a symbolic gauge that measures the risk of nuclear war — to 11:58. It’s the closest to midnight we’ve been since 1953.

Midnight represents Armageddon.

Nurzhan has been an international advocate for nuclear disarmament ever since she learned of the impact nuclear weapons had on her country. Two million Kazakhstanis still suffer cancer and birth defects, the fallout from decades of Soviet weapons tests.

While many international organizations are active on nuclear disarmament, advocates such as Nurzhan face a major challenge getting ordinary people engaged, especially youth.

During the Cold War, public demonstrations against nuclear arms were common. Today, not so much. Increased threats haven’t increased public interest, says Nurzhan.

Rob van Riet, peace and disarmament co-ordinator for the World Future Council, says: “[Nuclear disarmament] feels too large for a lot of people and they feel powerless.”

Issues such as climate change are daunting, but tangible. Ordinary citizens can contact politicians, demanding policies that reduce emissions.

More importantly, people have at least some control over their household energy use. But making superpowers give up their huge arsenals, let alone influencing a rogue state such as North Korea, seems unattainable.

Still, Nurzhan and Van Riet insist ordinary people can help reduce the global risk of nuclear conflict.

A powerful tool is divestment. The U.S., Russia and China want to upgrade their aging nuclear arsenals, and develop new types of smaller weapons that could be used on the battlefield. The companies that build parts for those bombs are supported by investors such as pension funds, and even our personal RRSP funds.

We can pressure investors to drop these companies from their portfolios, pushing them to get out of the bomb business.

Canada is uniquely positioned to be a leader in nuclear disarmament. As climate change makes Arctic waters more accessible to submarines, Russia and the US increasingly see the north as a key part of their nuclear strategy, according to van Riet.

As a respected Arctic nation, Canada could lead the campaign to make the region a nuclear-free zone.

Likewise, with public pressure, Canada could play a diplomatic leadership role and insist that all nuclear states follow the example of China and India and declare a “no first use” policy.

This would reduce the risk of conventional conflicts escalating into nuclear war.

But if Canada is to be that leader, we have to make it a priority for our government. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been conducting town halls across the country — a great opportunity to raise the issue, notes Douglas Roach, a former Canadian senator and Ambassador for Nuclear Disarmament.

“If he’s not hearing from people, he’s going to think people don’t care.”

The Cold War might be a distant memory, but its terrifying ghost still haunts us.

It’s time for us to engage again on nuclear disarmament.

The clock is ticking.

Craig and Marc Kielburger are the co-founders of the WE movement, which includes WE Charity ME to WE Social Enterprise and WE Day. For more dispatches from WE, check out WE Stories.

February 5, 2018 Posted by | 2 WORLD, business and costs, weapons and war | Leave a comment

The woes of Australian uranium company Paladin – 98% of shares transferred to creditors

Paladin to return to ASX, most shares in hands of creditors http://www.miningweekly.com/article/paladin-to-return-to-asx-most-shares-in-hands-of-creditors-2018-02-02/rep_id:3650 2ND FEBRUARY 2018 BY: MARIAAN WEBB CREAMER MEDIA SENIOR RESEARCHER AND DEPUTY EDITOR ONLINE JOHANNESBURG (miningweekly.com) – Uranium miner Paladin Energy will apply for its securities to be reinstated to official quotation on the ASX, the Australia-based company said on Friday, announcing the completion of its restructuring and the appointment of two new directors.

With the deed of company arrangement (DOCA) effected, deed administrators have retired and the day-to-day management and control of Paladin has reverted to the company’s directors. The two new board appointments are iCobalt MD David Riekie and former interim CEO and MD of Atlas Iron Daniel Harris.

The DOCA was put forward to the administrators of Paladinby a group of the company’s unsecured bondholders, known as the Ad Hoc Committee. The DOCA’s key terms included the debt-for-equity swap, the raising of $115-million pursuant to the issue of a high-yield secured note and the reinstatement of Paladin to trade on the ASX.

In terms of the DOCA, 98% of Paladin’s shares have been transferred to creditors and other investors and only 2% are retained by shareholders. If a shareholder held 10 000 Paladin shares before the restructuring, they will now hold 200 shares.

Creditors all agreed to a restructuring proposal in December, although major creditor Electricité de France (EDF) previously said that it may seek to have the DOCA terminated.

Paladin appointed administrators in July last year after the company was unable to agree a delay to the repayment of $277-million it owed EDF.

On Wednesday, Paladin published its quarterly activities reports for the June, September and December quarters, as well as its June 2017 annual report.

The most recent quarter’s results show that the Langer Heinrich mine, in Namibia, produced 873 107 lb of uranium oxide (U3O8), up 4% on the prior quarter. Sales were at 1.24-million U3O8 at an average selling price of $22.39/lb.

The Kayelekera mine, in Malawi, remains under care and maintenance.

February 5, 2018 Posted by | AUSTRALIA, business and costs, Uranium | Leave a comment

The continuing collapse of the nuclear industry in USA

More Premature Nuclear Unit Retirements Loom, Power Magazine, 02/01/2018 | Sonal Patel  Two more U.S. nuclear power plants are facing early retirement, joining a string of generators whose fate was determined by market conditions, political pressure, or financial stresses assailing the sector. Several others may be poised to join them.

The 647-MW Duane Arnold nuclear plant in Palo, Iowa, will likely close in 2025 after a current contract with the facility’s primary customer expires, said NextEra Energy Resources’ chief financial officer, John Ketchum, in a fourth-quarter earnings call on January 26.

“Without a contract extension, we will likely close the facility at the end of 2025 despite being licensed to operate until 2034,” Ketchum said. “As a result, during the fourth quarter, Duane Arnold’s book value and asset retirement obligation were reviewed, and an after-tax impairment of $258 million was recorded that reflects our belief it is unlikely the project will operate after 2025.” Ketchum added, however, that NextEra will continue to pursue a contract extension.

On the same day, the Toledo Blade reported that FirstEnergy Corp.’s Davis-Besse nuclear plant in Oak Harbor, Ohio, is headed for premature closure, citing James Pearson, the company’s chief financial officer. Pearson told the newspaper that no date has been set for the closure of Davis-Besse. He also reportedly said that the outlook for the company’s Perry plant in Ohio and twin-reactor Beaver Valley nuclear plant in Pennsylvania is “bleak.”   FirstEnergy is intent on exiting its competitive business, but though the company may want to sell the plants, they are “probably impossible to sell in today’s market,” he reportedly said.

A Critical Condition  The plants join a series of generators recently stricken by financial pressure primarily by competition from cheap natural gas, expanding renewable capacity, and lethargic power demand growth.

Throughout the short history of the U.S. nuclear power sector, 31 reactors licensed to operate have been permanently shut down—11 between 1960 and 1980; four in the 1980s; and nine in the 1990s. The recent streak began in 2010—12 years after the nation’s last reactor, Millstone 1 in Waterford, Connecticut, had been shut down in 1998—as Exelon announced it would shutter its Oyster Creek plant in New Jersey by 2019 owing to economic conditions and changing environmental regulations. In February 2013, Duke Energy (then Progress Energy) retired its Crystal River reactor in Florida, unable to repair damage to the containment structure. A string of casualties then ensued, as Kewaunee in Wisconsin was closed in May 2013; two units at San Onofre in California were formally shuttered in June 2013; Vermont Yankee in Vermont was shut down in December 2014; and Fort Calhoun in Nebraska closed its doors in October 2016. Other units slated for near-term shutdown include Pilgrim in Massachusetts and Palisades in Michigan. (For more, see, “THE BIG PICTURE: Nuclear Retirements.”)

Early retirement has also been proposed for Clinton and Quad Cities in Illinois and for Nine Mile Point, Fitzpatrick, and Ginna in New York—but their fate appears dependent on the outcome of legal challenges to “bailout” programs to keep those plants operating for economic reasons. The states’ measures are being legally challenged by several independent power producers—including Dynegy, Eastern Generation, NRG Energy, and Calpine Corp.—and, prominently, competitive power producer trade group the Electric Power Supply Association. The consortium has long argued that the state rules interfere with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) jurisdiction over wholesale electric rates and unlawfully interfere with interstate commerce………..

Earlier in January, California regulators approved Pacific Gas & Electric’s application to retire the Diablo Canyon plant by 2025, following a protracted battle over the generating station that pitted local economic interests against environmentalists and other opponents of nuclear power. In New York, political pressure combined with economic misgivings, also prompted plans to shut down Indian Point by 2021.

A Swath of Other Reactors May Be Troubled  According to a September 2017 report from the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), several more nuclear plants are likely to retire early, stymied by an “ongoing industry wide, systemic economic and financial challenge to operating nuclear plants particularly in the deregulated markets.”

A revenue gap analysis conducted by the national laboratory for 79 of 99 operational reactors that are in a region where public wholesale electricity market prices are available suggests that 63 units would have lost money in 2016. Of those 63, 36 are merchant generators, 19 are regulated, and eight are public power generators.

INL suggests that among plants at high risk of early retirement are Davis-Besse, Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania, and Xcel Energy’s Prairie Island in Minnesota.

A number of studies separately suggest similar findings. ……..http://www.powermag.com/more-premature-nuclear-unit-retirements-loom/

February 3, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear firm Westinghouse owes them $111 billion, claim creditors

Creditors claim Westinghouse owes them $111 billion. Westinghouse says it’s closer to $9 billion.  http://www.post-gazette.com/powersource/companies/2018/01/30/Creditors-claim-Westinghouse-owes-them-111-billion-Westinghouse-says-it-s-closer-to-9-billion/stories/201801300149   ANYA LITVAK    alitvak@post-gazette.com  Westinghouse Electric Co. has released the details of how its $4.6 billion sale to Brookfield Business Partners will trickle down to the thousands of companies and individuals that say they are owed money by the nuclear firm.

In line with what the company previous disclosed in bankruptcy court earlier this month, it seems that the largest chunk of the money will go to a group of hedge funds led by Boston-based Baupost Group.

According to a document filed on Monday, the Cranberry-based firm disclosed that nearly 2,400 claims totaling $111 billion have been filed against the company.

But it believes less than $9 billion will be allowed by the court. Of that, vendors, suppliers, employees and contractors who filed $6 billion in claims will likely get between $775 million and $1.16 billion, the company estimated.

The plan, which has the approval of Westinghouse, Toshiba, the unsecured creditors committee, and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., must now be voted on by the unsecured creditors by March 15.

Anya Litvak: alitvak@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1455.

February 3, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Following multibillion-dollar nuclear fiasco, Santee Cooper to drop ‘ridiculous’ perk for executives

Santee Cooper to drop ‘ridiculous’ perk for executives after nuclear fiasco http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article197923979.html  , BY AVERY G. WILKSawilks@thestate.com,  February 01, 201

Santee Cooper is dropping two retirement plans that the state-owned utility has offered for years to its executives, part of an effort to cut costs following a multibillion-dollar nuclear fiasco and appease state lawmakers, livid the perks existed in the first place.

“Clearly, it’s a way to make sure we demonstrate we’re hearing what the folks in the Legislature are saying,” interim Santee Cooper Chief Executive Jim Brogdon told The State newspaper Thursday.

Later this month, the utility’s board is expected to vote to get rid of the two extra retirement plans, which offered some Santee Cooper executives benefits in addition to the normal retirement plan that is open to all state employees, Brogdon said.

 Thirty-three Santee Cooper managers currently are enrolled in an extra pension-style plan. Nine employees are enrolled in an additional 401(k)-type plan.

Those plans pay benefits in addition to the normal state retirement plan’s payments.

Longtime Santee Cooper Chief Executive Lonnie Carter decided which employees were allowed to enroll in the two extra plans, which the utility said it offered to retain top executives.

Carter participated in the state retirement plan and the two extra plans, which he was added to by Santee Cooper’s board. After stepping down amid controversy last August, he receives a retirement package worth at least $800,000 per year.

Carter’s retirement came a month after Santee Cooper abandoned its decadelong joint effort with Cayce-based SCE&G to build two nuclear reactors in Fairfield County.

The failed project saddled Santee Cooper with $4 billion in debt, cost S.C. power customers at least $2 billion in higher bills and brought fresh scrutiny to the way the state-owned power company rewards its executives.

“The fact that they had three separate retirement plans for their executives, and the fact that the CEO chose the members of those plans, to me, was ridiculous,” said Senate Minority Leader Nikki Setzler, the Lexington Democrat who co-chaired the Senate committee that investigated the nuclear fiasco. “That is an abuse of the system.”

During a Senate hearing Thursday, Setzler told Brogdon he was pleased with the proposal to ditch the special retirement plans.

Santee Cooper’s board vote later this month would close the extra retirement plans to future executives but leave them in place for current employees and 32 retirees who already are enrolled.

Avery G. Wilks: 803-771-8362, @averygwilks

February 3, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Oyster Creek nuclear power station to close ahead of schedule

Nuclear plant to close ahead of schedule, Washington Examiner,  by John Siciliano |     One of the oldest nuclear power plants in the country will be shutting down more than a year ahead of schedule.

Exelon, the largest nuclear utility in the country, said Friday that it would shut down the Oyster Creek power station in New Jersey in October, more than a year ahead of schedule.

The power plant decided to close early, even though it is licensed by the federal government to provide electricity through 2029. The early closure stems from costly regulations in New Jersey requiring it to install new cooling towers.

Exelon entered into an agreement with the state’s environmental regulators in 2010 to phase out the plant’s operations, after it decided that it could not justify the cost of meeting the new water cooling rules. It instead agreed to a planned phaseout in which it would close the plant in December 2019.

But on Friday, things changed, and now the company wants to close the plant more than a year earlier than under the agreement with the state. It explained that the shutdown decision was made to help employees in finding new employment, while dealing with higher maintenance cost and lower prices for electricity……….

Environmentalists and other staunch opponents of nuclear power plants welcomed the decision, pointing out that the Oyster Creek plant is the same design as the one that experienced multiple reactor core meltdowns and explosions during the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.

The Oyster Creek plant is the “first and the oldest Fukushima-design nuclear reactor in the world,” a General Electric model called the Mark I, said the anti-nuclear energy group Beyond Nuclear in reacting to Exelon’s new closure timeline.

“It’s clear that Oyster Creek and the entire, aging U.S. nuclear reactor fleet is hemorrhaging financially,” said Paul Gunter, the head of the group’s reactor oversight program. “The fact that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear industry continue to prioritize financial margins over public safety margins is a growing concern, especially at the remaining 29 Fukushima style reactors still operating in the U.S.”  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nuclear-plant-to-close-ahead-of-schedule/article/2647965

 

February 3, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

China reorganising its nuclear companies in order to export nuclear technology

China goes nuclear with latest state-brokered power deal, Josephine Mason, David Stanway
BEIJING (Reuters) 2 Feb 18, – China National Nuclear Corp (CNNC), China’s No. 2 nuclear power producer, will take over the country’s top nuclear power plant builder to create a company worth almost $100 billion, the latest state-orchestrated marriage in the nation’s vast power sector. 

Approval for the tie-up between CNNC and China Nuclear Engineering & Construction (CNEC) was announced by the State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC) on Wednesday in a one-line statement posted on its website…….

Beijing wants to overhaul its nuclear sector in order to create globally competitive firms and reduce overcapacity across its broader power market. The nuclear industry is struggling with project delays and a slowdown in approvals for new domestic projects.

By creating a unified home-brand series of reactors, and combining firms, China will be better positioned to bid for and finance overseas projects, experts say.

Both companies have built nuclear plants overseas, including in Pakistan, and developing Chinese nuclear technology abroad is a key goal of China’s Belt and Road initiative…… https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-power-nuclear/china-goes-nuclear-with-latest-state-brokered-power-deal-idUSKBN1FK0S4

February 3, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, China, marketing | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »