nuclear-news

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

Negotiations continue, as USA keen to market nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia

Bulletin of Atomic Scientists 12th Jan 2018, After a lengthy hiatus, negotiations will soon resume between the United
States and Saudi Arabia on an agreement for civil nuclear cooperation.
Concluding a bilateral civil nuclear agreement (often called a “123
agreement,” after the section of the Atomic Energy Act mandating such
agreements for nuclear cooperation with other countries) would enable US
companies to participate in the Saudi Kingdom’s ambitious plans to build a
fleet of nuclear power reactors to meet its growing electricity
requirements.
Previous negotiations stalemated over the treatment of
uranium enrichment, with the United States insisting that Saudi Arabia
accept a legally binding commitment not to engage in enrichment or
plutonium reprocessing and the Saudis refusing to foreclose what they
regard as their sovereign right to pursue nuclear technologies of their
choosing for peaceful purposes.
https://thebulletin.org/us-saudi-civil-nuclear-negotiations-finding-practical-compromise11426

January 15, 2018 Posted by | marketing, Saudi Arabia, USA | Leave a comment

China unlikely to go ahead with AREVA’s nuclear reprocessing plan, despite Macron’s support

Reuters 11th Jan 2018, So close yet so far: China deal elusive for France’s Areva. A deal long
sought by French company Areva to build a $12-billion nuclear waste
reprocessing plant in China looks increasingly unlikely to go ahead despite
a visit to Beijing by President Emmanuel Macron meant to drum up business.

During Macron’s state visit this week, Areva and China National Nuclear
Corp (CNNC) signed a new “protocol agreement” to build the plant but,
not for the first time, no definitive contract was signed.

Since talks began more than a decade ago – when uranium prices UXXc1 were near record
highs – a series of non-committal French-Chinese memorandums of
understanding have been signed for building a reprocessing plant in China
modeled on state-owned Areva’s plant in La Hague, northern France.

The reprocessing of nuclear fuel waste involves separating plutonium from the
spent uranium and reusing it in “Mixed Oxide” (MOX) fuel at nuclear
power stations.

But the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster and competition
from renewable energy are weighing on the nuclear sector, and uranium
prices are down 80 percent from a decade ago, making the expensive and
dangerous recycling process less attractive. Chinese nuclear scientist Li
Ning, dean of Xiamen University’s College of Energy and a member of State
Nuclear Power Technology Corporation’s (SNPTC) expert committee, sees
“a fairly low probability” that China will sign a formal contract for
the project.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-areva-china-nuclearpower-analysis/so-close-yet-so-far-china-deal-elusive-for-frances-areva-idUSKBN1F01RJ

January 13, 2018 Posted by | China, France, marketing, politics international, reprocessing | Leave a comment

Japanese and British taxpayers at risk as their governments commit to $20 billion loan for Wylfa nuclear project

Asahi Shimbin 11th Jan 2018, Japan and Britain have agreed to provide the lion’s share of financing for
a nuclear power plant project planned by Hitachi Ltd. on the island of
Anglesey off northwest Wales, sources said.
The two governments are set to extend a combined 2.2 trillion yen ($20 billion) in loans with the help of
financial institutions and acquire a stake in Horizon Nuclear Power Ltd., a
British company purchased by Hitachi to operate the plant. The total cost
of the project is estimated at 3 trillion yen.
It is extremely rare forgovernments to shoulder such a huge portion of the overall project cost. By
doing so, they must share the risk if the project suffers a financial loss,
but that tab could eventually be passed on to taxpayers.
http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201801110057.html

January 13, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, Japan, politics, UK | Leave a comment

The troubled and exorbitantly expensive history of the EPR nuclear reactor.

Romandie 9th Jan 2018, [Machine translation] The EPR, the flagship of the French nuclear industry
with many setbacks. Paris – The EPR, to be launched for the first time in China in about six months, is a third-generation nuclear reactor designed to offer improved power and safety, but whose yards have accumulated setbacks in France and elsewhere. Finland.

Launched in 1992, this technology, touted as the flagship of the French nuclear industry, was co-developed by the French company Areva and German Siemens, within their joint venture Areva NP, which Siemens has since withdrawn. EDF has just taken control of this activity as part of the reorganization of the French nuclear industry orchestrated by the State.

The first project was launched in Olkiluoto (Finland) in 2005, on behalf of the TVO electrician, with Areva and Siemens directly prime contractors. But the setbacks and budget slippages have accumulated. TVO lamented an umpteenth delay in the commissioning of the EPR in October, which is now scheduled for May 2019. It was initially scheduled for 2009.

There is a dispute between TVO and Areva and Siemens, with each party blaming the delays on the other.
claiming billions in compensation. The case is under arbitration.

The second EPR, which has been under construction since 2007 in Flamanville (western France) has also accumulated setbacks, mainly due to anomalies discovered on the composition of the steel cover and bottom of the tank. The Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) requires that the tank cover be replaced before the end of 2024. EDF, prime contractor, has postponed the commissioning of the reactor several times. The electrician plans to start the Flamanville EPR at the end of 2018, for commercial commissioning in
2019, when the initial schedule was for 2012.

Its cost has meanwhile more than tripled to 10.5 billion euros. Two other EPRs are under construction in Taishan (China), with a joint venture owned 51% by the Chinese state power company CGN, 30% by EDF and, since 2012, 19% by the electrical utility of
Guangdong province.
https://www.romandie.com/news/878943.rom

January 12, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, Finland, France | Leave a comment

France’s nuclear company AREVA to join China National Nuclear Corp in nuclear reprocessing

Areva to sign 10 bln euros China nuclear re-processing MoU -sourcehttps://www.reuters.com/article/china-france-areva/areva-to-sign-10-bln-euros-china-nuclear-re-processing-mou-source-idUSP6N1NF02R, Reuters Staff, 

PARIS, Jan 9 (Reuters) – French power group Areva is set to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) for a Chinese nuclear re-processing deal worth about 10 billion euros ($11.9 billion), a source with knowledge of the matter said.

The deal with the China National Nuclear Corp (CNNC) was expected to be signed on Tuesday, during a state visit to China by French President Emmanuel Macron.

$1 = 0.8375 euros Reporting by Benjamin Mallet; Writing by Sudip Kar-Gupta; Editing by Leigh Thomas and Jean-Michel Belot

January 11, 2018 Posted by | China, France, marketing | Leave a comment

France phasing out nuclear power at home: happy to export it abroad

China, France sign deal to enhance cooperation on nuclear energy Xinhua | 2018-01-10 07:17 GUANGZHOU — A Chinese nuclear power operator signed an agreement Tuesday with a French energy organization to deepen cooperation on nuclear power technology.

The deal, between China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) and the French Alternative Energy and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA), focuses on areas such as nuclear reactor technology, advanced fuels and materials, and nuclear fuel cycles.

Under the agreement, CGN and CEA will deepen cooperation in the upstream and downstream nuclear power industry chain, including reactor life management and the concept design of the fourth-generation nuclear energy technology.

He Yu, chairman of CGN, said the new agreement will enhance bilateral exchanges in nuclear power technology and open new space for Sino-French nuclear power cooperation.

Founded in 1994, CGN is the largest nuclear power operator in China, with 39,000 employees worldwide. It focuses on the development of clean energies such as nuclear power, nuclear fuel, wind power and solar power.

The CEA is a key organization in research, development and innovation in France. Its main areas include defense and security, nuclear and renewable energy, and physical and life sciences.

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201801/10/WS5a554d97a3102e5b17371b35.html

January 9, 2018 Posted by | China, France, marketing | Leave a comment

Japanese taxpayers now join in Britain’s scandalous subsidising of the nuclear industry

The profitability of nuclear plant construction has been worsening all over the world

Nevertheless, the government intends to extend all-out support for the project.

Japanese gov’t to guarantee bank loans for Hitachi’s nuclear plant project in Britain https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20180103/p2a/00m/0na/004000c  (Mainichi Japan) The Japanese government is poised to guarantee the full amount of loans that three megabanks will extend for a nuclear plant construction project in Britain by Hitachi Ltd., sources familiar with the project said.

A group of banks, including the three megabanks and the government-affiliated Japa n Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), will extend approximately 1.5 trillion yen in loans to Hitachi’s atomic power station project.

Of the amount, the government will fully guarantee loans to be extended by the megabanks, while the governmental Development Bank of Japan (DBJ) will support the project by making capital investments. Chubu Electric Power Co. and other utilities are also considering investing in the project.

The state will thus join hands with the private sector in extending all-out support for the project to export a nuclear plant worth some 3 trillion yen.

However, concerns have been raised that if the project were to run into the red, taxpayers could be forced to shoulder the burden.

The project to be covered with loans and investments is an atomic power station that a Hitachi subsidiary in Britain is aiming to build in Anglesey, Britain. The firm hopes to start operations at the plant in the mid-2020s.

Hitachi Ltd. is poised to make a final decision on whether to invest in the project by the end of fiscal 2019. However, Hitachi is consulting with the Japanese and British governments and financial institutions over loans, their guarantees and investment on the grounds that the electronics giant alone cannot take risks.

Japanese financial institutions and the governmental Nippon Export and Investment Insurance (NEXI) offered in December last year to extend financial assistance for the project.

According to the sources, Hitachi estimates the total cost of the project at about 3 trillion yen. Hitachi aims to obtain about 1.5 trillion yen in loans to cover half of the amount while raising another 1.5 trillion yen through investments.

Each of the three megabanks — the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corp. and Mizuho Bank, Ltd. — intend to extend loans of more than 100 billion yen, totaling some 500 billion yen. NEXI will guarantee the loans. Hitachi intends to obtain the reminder of the loans from the JBIC and commercial financial institutions in Britain.

The DBJ has notified Hitachi of its intention to make capital investments in the atomic power station project, while Chubu Electric Power and Japan Atomic Power Co. are also considering investing in the venture.

Hitachi has also asked other utilities including Tokyo Electric Power Co. and trading houses to invest in the project in a bid to disperse risks involving the project.

The British government, which is speeding up the construction of nuclear plants, also intends to invest in the project, and Japanese and British Cabinet ministers in charge of energy policy exchanged a memorandum on cooperation in December last year.

The profitability of nuclear plant construction has been worsening all over the world due to an increase in the costs of ensuring safety since the outbreak of the Fukushima nuclear crisis in March 2011, contributing to the financial crisis of Toshiba Corp., another electronics giant.

Nevertheless, the government intends to extend all-out support for the project.

“It’s essential to win a contract on the British project in order to maintain Japan’s nuclear technology,” said a high-ranking official of the Economy, Trade and Industry.

January 7, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, Japan, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Another blow further delays China’s nuclear energy programme

CGN Power’s latest project delay deals another blow to China’s nuclear energy ambition http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/2126529/cgn-powers-latest-project-delay-deals-another-blow-chinas-nuclear, China’s largest nuclear reactor and builder delays commissioning of the first unit to later this year, Eric Ng, eric.mpng@scmp.com   – Tuesday, 02 January, 2018,  The latest commissioning delay at CGN Power’s nuclear project in Taishan, in Guangdong province – the third in two years – will lead to a further deferral of 5 billion yuan (US$770 million) in annual revenues and potentially more cost overruns, according to ratings agency Moody’s.

The delay is another setback for China’s ambitious development programme, which aims to raise its installed nuclear power capacity to 58 gigawatts by the end of 2020 from 34.73GW last year, and the world’s hopes for a successful launch of third-generation nuclear reactors.

They are touted by their designers to be safer and more efficient than second-generation ones, a key selling point after the global nuclear industry was dealt a blow by Japan’s Fukushima disaster in 2011.

“The delays reflect our concerns over the high execution risk for CGN in rolling out its aggressive expansion target and its adoption of a new generation of nuclear technology,” Ada Li, senior analyst at Moody’s, wrote in a note on Tuesday.

“The delays also imply the deferral of cash flows from the two nuclear units and potential additional capital expenditure, which would further pressure CGN’s financial metrics.”

She estimated the two reactors to initially make 5 billion yuan in annual revenues, amounting to 7 per cent of the firm’s 2016 revenues, adding its repeated delays are “credit negative”.

CGN said on Friday the first two generating reactors of the plant in Taishan – 136 kilometres west of Hong Kong – has been delayed to 2018 and 2019, from the second half of 2017 and the first half of 2018 respectively.

“As no nuclear power generating unit with the EPR [Evolutionary Power Reactor] technology has been put into commercial operation across the world … Taishan Nuclear has to conduct more experimental verifications in respect of design and equipment,” it added.

The firm in early 2015 cited a “comprehensive evaluation” of the construction plan and risks for its first delay. In the second delay early last year, it said it the needed to conduct “more experimental verifications in respect of its design and equipment”.

The project was originally expected to come on line in 2015.

Moody’s said the latest postponement will not affect its A3 issuer credit rating on CGN, which has already incorporated a six to 12-month delay.

Dennis Ip, head of Hong Kong and China utilities equities research at Daiwa Capital Markets, believes CGN will have difficulty meeting the revised target, saying in a note that he expects the first unit to start up in the first half of 2019.

Ip a year ago projected the Taishan plant’s investment cost to rise to between 22 and 23 yuan per watt from his previous forecast of 21 yuan. The company, meanwhile, had budgeted it at 14 yuan. Each unit has 1.75 billion watt of capacity.

January 3, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, China, politics | Leave a comment

Nuclear financial meltdown in Britain – Moorside in doubt

Blunders, catastrophic, delays, even bankruptcy… ANOTHER nuclear power plant is going into financial meltdown http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/article-5223475/ANOTHER-nuclear-power-plant-enerting-financial-meltdown.html  Neil Craven for The Mail on Sunday, 1 January 2018 The company behind one of Britain’s biggest nuclear power projects has plunged to a £266 million loss citing ‘uncertainties’ over its future and the viability of crucial technology.

Japanese firm Toshiba said the huge loss incurred by one of its UK subsidiaries was due to writing off hundreds of millions of pounds of investment in the proposed Moorside plant, in west Cumbria.

It is the latest sign of financial strain at the Tokyo-based firm amid wider concerns over the spiralling costs and catastrophic delays that have beset the UK’s nuclear industry.

Britons were last week supposed to be cooking their turkeys with power from EDF’s nuclear plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset, which is now not expected to be in use for another decade. ‘EDF will turn on its first nuclear plant in Britain before Christmas 2017,’ said Vincent de Rivaz in 2007, who stepped down as group chief executive in November. ‘It is the moment of the power crunch. Without it, the lights will go out.’

It was envisaged that new nuclear plants at Moorside, Hinkley Point and Wylfa in Anglesey would between them generate a fifth of the UK’s electricity.

This may still happen. But right now, nuclear firms are struggling with the expense, stringent regulatory hurdles and costly project delays – just as the cost of other forms of electricity fall. Toshiba won the contract to build the nuclear power plant at Moorside, on land next to the Sellafield nuclear fuel reprocessing site.

But it was forced in March to place its US nuclear division Westinghouse into bankruptcy protection. Last month, it said it would sell Westinghouse for £4 billion. Troubled Toshiba is now in talks to sell its interests in the Moorside project to Kepco, majority-owned by the South Korean government.

Toshiba has two UK subsidiaries: Advance Energy UK, which incurred the £266 million loss; and NuGeneration, which is directly responsible for running Moorside.

With a cloud of uncertainty over the project, the Japanese firm has admitted in reports issued by its UK subsidiaries: ‘The directors do not know whether a sale of the shares of [NuGeneration] will be completed nor how any successful bidder will frame the deal.’

Kepco said it hoped to complete a deal to take over the running of the project early next year.

Uncertainties are understood to include the use of Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactor. Approval for use at Moorside was first sought from UK regulators in 2011. It was granted approval by the Office for Nuclear Regulation in March – just days after Westinghouse entered bankruptcy protection.

Should Kepco decide to ditch the design and use its own, the project would likely be delayed for years until a new design is approved. Some estimates say that could put any launch back from 2025 to the late 2020s at the very earliest. ‘The whole thing is a mess,’ said Martin Forwood of campaign group Core, which opposes the Moorside development.

‘Kepco would almost certainly push to use its own reactors so the big question is whether they would have to start afresh on consultation.

‘A lot of people around Moorside believe it will never take off.’

Forwood said the costs of other forms of renewable energy are falling and energy storage systems are being developed. ‘The longer these plans get delayed the less nuclear is needed,’ he added.

And, according to Forwood, the firms involved in the projects at Moorside and Wylfa ‘are not going to get anywhere near what the Government signed up for at Hinkley’.

The House of Commons Public Accounts Select Committee last month said there had been ‘grave strategic errors’ awarding French government-backed EDF the Hinkley Point contract.

It said ‘the economics of nuclear power in the UK have deteriorated’ and a ‘blinkered determination’ to agree the 35-year Hinkley deal, ‘regardless of changing circumstances’ had lumbered consumers with £30 billion payments over market rates for electricity.

January 1, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, politics international, UK | Leave a comment

South Carolina’s Base Load Review Act, even Florida’s, – a licence for the nuclear industry to rip off the people

 Lessons from Florida’s nuclear failure, https://www.aikenstandard.com/guest-editorial-lessons-from-florida-s-nuclear-failure/article_d9f06eea-ec33-11e7-9362-eb50c4bd1cba.html 31 Dec 17, It’s a story all too familiar to millions of South Carolina electric ratepayers.Some $381 million in lost construction costs; $1.3 billion to shut down an existing nuclear power plant; $871 million for a nuclear project that never even broke ground. Those and other disasters will cost Florida ratepayers about $6 billion over the next few decades.

Here in South Carolina, Santee Cooper and SCE&G customers could be stuck paying as much as $9 billion over the next six decades for two new nuclear reactors that will never generate electricity unless lawmakers and regulators effectively intervene on their behalf.

 All this is thanks to a 2007 bill that, like a comparable one in Florida, allowed utilities to charge customers up front for large capital projects and then recoup costs later, even if projects were never completed.

In South Carolina, that law led to one massive failure. In Florida it contributed to a handful.

The lesson from Florida is that South Carolinians remain vulnerable until the Base Load Review Act is either repealed or significantly modified. Until then, utilities in the state could theoretically use it to advance other major projects while leaving customers on the hook for the cost.

That shouldn’t be allowed to happen.

Interestingly, Florida never actually repealed its law. Instead, lawmakers added two key words in 2013 that set a much higher bar for getting new projects off the ground – “reasonable” and “feasible.” No nuclear projects have been proposed since then.

It’s almost inconceivable that a law should have to state that building a new nuclear reactor on the backs of millions of ratepayers should be “reasonable” and “feasible.” Any business would be incredibly foolish to pursue such a massive investment that didn’t meet such a minimal standard.

But the BLRA and its Florida equivalent allow, and in fact encourage, utilities to go big by removing any economic risk associated with inherently risky investments.

That was deeply misguided in 2007. It seems unfathomably wrongheaded now in the wake of so many high-profile failures across the Southeast.

In South Carolina, utilities must prove that their nuclear costs were “prudently incurred” before passing them on to customers under the BLRA. SCE&G and Santee Cooper did not likely meet even that low bar.

 The two nuclear reactors that were abandoned in July have been plagued by delays and cost overruns almost since construction began in 2009. At least one professional report by engineering firm Bechtel in 2015 found serious flaws in design and management and raised questions about the project’s feasibility.

But work proceeded, customers continued to pay higher rates, and utility executives kept telling lawmakers and regulators that construction on the reactors was proceeding appropriately. That’s certainly not “prudent.”

Lawmakers must now make it a priority when they return to session in January to help SCE&G and Santee Cooper customers recover as much money as possible and avoid paying higher electric bills for decades for a failure that was entirely out of their hands.

They must also undo the law that made that failure possible in the first place. Otherwise – as in Florida – South Carolina’s first nuclear disaster might not be its last.

January 1, 2018 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Russia’s nuclear corporation Rosatom extending its grip on Uzbekistan

Russia And Uzbekistan Sign Nuclear Energy Deal, By RFE/RL staff – Dec 30, 2017, Russia’s Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation and Uzbekistan have signed a nuclear-cooperation agreement that Rosatom says will pave the way for bilateral cooperation “in many aspects of civil nuclear energy.”Rosatom said the agreement was signed on December 29 by its Director-General Aleksei Likhachyov and Uzbek Deputy Prime Minister Nodir Otajonov.

“The collaboration could include creation and development of infrastructure in Uzbekistan, training, construction of nuclear power plants and research reactors, as well as operational and maintenance support during their life cycle,” the Rosatom statement said.

“It could also cover exploration and mining of uranium, handling of uranium waste, and the production of radioisotopes for use in medicine, agriculture, and academic research,” the state-owned firm said.

Likhachyov said Rosatom was ready to build a two-unit nuclear power plant in Uzbekistan and has offered to start training Uzbek nuclear experts-to-be at Moscow’s expense beginning in September 2018.

In early November, during a visit to Tashkent by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, a memorandum on cooperation between Rosatom and Uzbekistan’s Academy of Science was signed, along with an agreement on production and provision of nuclear fuel by Uzbekistan for Rosatom.

January 1, 2018 Posted by | marketing, politics international, Russia | 1 Comment

Financial needs of nuclear industry override Japanese fears of another Fukushima

Fears of another Fukushima as Tepco plans to restart world’s biggest nuclear plant, Consent given to turn reactors at the massive Kashiwazaki-kariwa plant back on, but Japanese worry over active fault lines and mismanagement, Guardian Justin McCurry , 28 Dec 17, If a single structure can define a community, for the 90,000 residents of Kashiwazaki town and the neighbouring village of Kariwa, it is the sprawling nuclear power plant that has dominated the coastal landscape for more than 40 years.

When all seven of its reactors are in operation, Kashiwazaki-kariwa generates 8.2m kilowatts of electricity – enough to power 16m households. Occupying 4.2 sq km of land along the Japan Sea coast, it is the biggest nuclear power plant in the world.

But today, the reactors at Kashiwazaki-kariwa are idle. The plant in Niigata prefecture, about 140 miles (225km) north-west of the capital, is the nuclear industry’s highest-profile casualty of the nationwide atomic shutdown that followed the March 2011 triple meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi.

The company at the centre of the disaster has encountered anger over its failure to prevent the catastrophe, its treatment of tens of thousands of evacuated residents and its haphazard attempts to clean up its atomic mess.

Now, the same utility, Tokyo Electric Power [Tepco], is attempting to banish its Fukushima demons with a push to restart two reactors at Kashiwazaki-kariwa, one of its three nuclear plants. Only then, it says, can it generate the profits it needs to fund the decommissioning of Fukushima Daiichi and win back the public trust it lost in the wake of the meltdown.

 This week, Japan’s nuclear regulation authority gave its formal approval for Tepco to restart the Kashiwazaki-kariwa’s No. 6 and 7 reactors – the same type of boiling-water reactors that suffered meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi.

After a month of public hearings, the nuclear regulation authority concluded that Tepco was fit to run a nuclear power plant and said the two reactors met the stricter safety standards introduced after the 2011 disaster.

Just before that decision, Tepco gave the Guardian an exclusive tour of what it claims will be the safest nuclear plant in the world…….

‘This is no place for a nuclear power plant’

The public, however, is far from convinced. Last year, the people of Niigata prefecture registered their opposition to the utility’s plans by electing Ryuichi Yoneyama, an anti-nuclear candidate, as governor. Exit polls showed that 73% of voters opposed restarting the plant, with just 27% in favour.

Yoneyama has said that he won’t make a decision on the restarts, scheduled for spring 2019, until a newly formed committee has completed its report into the causes and consequences of the Fukushima disaster – a process that could take at least three years.

For many residents, the plant’s location renders expensive safety improvements irrelevant. “Geologically speaking, this is no place for a nuclear power plant,” says Kazuyuki Takemoto, a retired local councillor and a lifelong anti-nuclear activist.

Takemoto cites instability caused by the presence of underground oil and gas deposits in the area, and evidence that the ground on which Tepco’s seawall stands is prone to liquefaction in the event of a major earthquake.

Local critics have pointed to the chaos that could result from attempting to evacuate the 420,000 people who live within a 30km radius of Kashiwazaki-kariwa. “That’s more people than lived near Fukushima, plus we get very heavy snowfall here, which would make evacuating everyone impossible,” Takemoto adds. “The situation would be far worse than it was in Fukushima.”

Adding to their concerns are the presence of seismic faults in and around the site, which sustained minor damage during a magnitude-6.6 offshore earthquake in 2007. Two active faults – defined by nuclear regulators as one that has moved any time within the last 400,000 years – run beneath reactor No. 1.

But for Tepco, a return to nuclear power generation is a matter of financial necessity, with the utility standing to gain up to ¥200 billion in annual profits by restarting the two reactors at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa…….. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/28/fears-of-another-fukushima-as-tepco-plans-to-restart-worlds-biggest-nuclear-plant

December 29, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, Japan, politics | Leave a comment

What now for South Carolina, having wasted $9 Billion on Nuclear Reactors that will never work

South Carolina Spent $9 Billion on Nuclear Reactors That Will Never Run. Now What? The legislature must decide whether residents will keep being charged, possibly for decades, for the failed project. Governing. BY ALAN GREENBLATT | JANUARY 2018 It has to be one of the greatest wastes of money in any state’s history. Last summer, two utility companies halted construction on nuclear reactors in South Carolina. They had already sunk more than $9 billion into the project, which will never be completed or generate a kilowatt of power. The state is now trying to figure out who’s to blame, and who will pay.

The story started a dozen years ago. Back in 2006, South Carolina, along with several other states, passed legislation to try to jumpstart the moribund nuclear construction industry………

Customers have already been billed some $2 billion for the reactors. Under current regulations, the utilities continue to collect $37 million per month. That means the average ratepayer is paying an additional $250 per year, or 18 percent of the bill. This could go on for 60 years. “You will literally have your children and grandchildren pay for this mistake,” says Bursey.

Some legislators have argued that consumers shouldn’t be on the hook for the billions already charged. But it may not be legally possible to recover the money. It may not even be feasible. The utilities don’t have the cash to give back, even if they wanted to. “That would be the fair thing, but it’s not realistic,” Massey says.

Instead, the fight in the legislature this year will be about whether to curtail additional payments going forward. Needless to say, the utilities are opposed to that idea. They insist they must collect the money, or they won’t be able to continue operating or have access to capital. They aren’t sympathetic actors, but Santee Cooper is state-owned so legislators will have to take its concerns seriously…..http://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-south-carolina-nuclear-reactors.html

December 29, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

France’s President Emmanuel Macron to save France’s nuclear export industry?

Final negotiations for Areva reprocessing plant in China, Les Echos, Frédéric Schaeffer, Correspondant à Pékin, 26 Dec 17, Areva’s president was in Beijing on Thursday. Paris hopes to sign an agreement during Emmanuel Macron’s visit to China in early January. The contract would be around ten billion euros for Areva……

“There have been  comprehensive  discussions with many Chinese officials  in France and French in Planned over 10 years.  This project could be agreed upon  during the visit of Emmanuel Macron early January in the Middle Kingdom. “We are accelerating the final negotiations in view of the President’s  visit” ….”the visit of Emmanuel Macron will mark a key stage” – French nuclear officials

…. The stakes are crucial for New Areva, the agency resulting from the restructuring of the French nuclear industry and now refocused on the fuel cycle. This could be the key – with  a contract of ten billion euros. …. CNNC originally chose the coastal city of Lianyungang to locate the plant. But that announcement had sparked violent protests last year, forcing a halt to preliminary work. Since then, CNNC and the government have examined several coastal sites but have been careful not to make their choice known.https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/energie-environnement/0301060536871-ultimes-negociations-pour-lusine-de-retraitement-dareva-en-chine-2141002.php

December 27, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, China, France, politics | 2 Comments

Shaky economics, as Georgia Public Service Commission decides to save the nuclear industry

Regulators Rescue Troubled Vogtle Nuclear Plant https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Regulators-Rescue-Troubled-Vogtle-Nuclear-Plant.htmlBy Leonard Hyman & William Tilles – Dec 23, 2017 There’s a scene in that classic black and white boxing movie, Requiem for a Heavyweight. A hulking, groggy Anthony Quinn tries to stay on his feet, while a lithe, young Mohammed Ali pounds him senseless. We saw the financial/regulatory equivalent today in Georgia.

Executives from Atlanta-based Southern Company defended their long delayed and way over-budget nuclear construction project, the Vogtle plant, before the Georgia Public Service Commission. But this time, Anthony Quinn won. The Georgia PSC commissioners gave Southern the ok to keep building.

The PSC had a choice: recommend cancellation of the huge project or let it proceed. But cancellation would require still another unpleasant discussion and decision: who foots the bill for the incomplete plant? Not the sort of decisions politicians like to make on their watch.

So the PSC ruled that power-generating alternatives to nuclear, such as combined cycle combustion turbines, would cost more than completing the plant (a conclusion that requires judgment about gas prices). And it made some modifications that will supposedly cut $700 million off what the plant will cost Southern’s consumers (that’s $18 million per year over the projected life of the plant, so no big deal.)

Economists warn decision makers to ignore sunk costs. But those sunk costs apparently did weigh on regulators. Explaining to the governor and to voters that the billions of dollars of plant investment made on their watch is now worthless… well, that’s a decision few regulators would choose to make.

The public reasoning behind today’s Georgia PSC decision involved assumptions about future energy costs, the company’s need for a diverse energy mix, and the desirability of adding low carbon emitting generating resources.

For all the attention this decision received, probably didn’t play a significant role. Nobody we’ve ever met could accurately forecast trends in energy consumption, power technology and costs at the same time over any reasonable planning horizon. To accurately forecast these over the 40-60 year projected life of the Vogtle plant turns an impossible task ridiculous. That is the key to the problem regulators faced today, and the reason why a decision to build a large nuclear plant is so risky.

Two Greentech Media journalists saw today’s PSC decision as an “infusion of hope for large-scale nuclear… and the last chance to prove the viability of the industry” in the U.S. The verdict of the financial community was far more muted. The common shares of Southern Company fell 1 percent.

How will an over-budget, late and marginally economic nuclear power generating facility encourage others to dive into the nuclear new-build game?

Georgia regulators cited other reasons to approve this project, including the need to reduce carbon omissions and to maintain America’s nuclear power generating capability. But the big question is why should the electricity consumers of Georgia, alone, bear the burden of meeting relatively high-cost national energy goals?

Given the size and risks inherent in building new nuclear projects, especially with relatively new designs, shouldn’t the risk be spread throughout the nation? There’s something bizarre about the electricity consumers of Georgia and South Carolina (where an identical project was recently canceled) incurring possibly $25-$50 billion of financial risk for the sake of the nation’s nuclear power generating capability.

Given the size and risks inherent in new nuclear projects, shouldn’t the risk be spread throughout the nation, if—as the regulators imply—the entire nation actually benefits? The electricity consumers in Georgia and South Carolina shouldn’t incur significant financial risk for the sake of the nation’s nuclear capability—especially when no other domestic utility management appears ready to follow suit.

As a supposedly patriotic gesture, we can certainly applaud the sentiment. But the economics remain shaky.

December 27, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, politics, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »