nuclear-news

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

China’s economic advantage in control of rare earths

Control of rare earths gives China a fresh economic advantage, Las Vegas Sun, By Llewellyn King, Aug. 10, 2017 “……China controls the world’s production and distribution of rare earths. It produces more than 92 percent of them and holds the world in its hand when it comes to the future of almost anything in high technology.

Rare earths are great multipliers and the heaviest are the most valuable. They make the things we take for granted, from the small motors in automobiles to the wind turbines that are revolutionizing the production of electricity. For example, rare earths increase a conventional magnet’s power by at least fivefold. Strategically, they are the new oil.

Rare earths are also at work in smartphones and computers. Fighter jets and smart weapons, like cruise missiles, rely on them. In national defense, there is no substitute and no other supply source available…….

If President Donald Trump — apparently encouraged by his trade adviser Peter Navarro, and his policy adviser Steve Bannon — is contemplating a trade war with China, rare earths are China’s most potent weapon.

A trade war moves the rare-earths threat from existential to immediate.

In a strange regulatory twist the United States — and most of the world — won’t be able to open rare-earths mines without legislation and an international treaty modification. Rare earths are often found in conjunction with thorium, a mildly radioactive metal and a large regulatory problem.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency have defined thorium as a nuclear “source material” that requires special disposition. Until these classifications, thorium was disposed of along with other mine tailings. Now it has to be separated and collected. ….

Meanwhile, future disruptions from China won’t necessarily be in the markets; they could be in the obscure but vital commodities known as rare earths: China’s not-quite-secret weapon. https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/aug/10/control-of-rare-earths-gives-china-a-fresh-economi/

August 12, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, China, politics international, RARE EARTHS | Leave a comment

China losing confidence in nuclear power

Nuclear Engineering International 10th Aug 2017, One of the conclusions of my most recent article on China was that many ofthe negative factors which have affected nuclear programmes elsewhere in
the world are now also crucial there.

The last year has confirmed that this was a reasonable judgement. Despite five new reactors starting up in 2016,
to bring the number in operation to 36, with combined generating capacity
of 32.6GWe, it is clear that the programme has continued to slow sharply.

The most obvious sign is the lack of approvals for new construction.
Although there are 21 units under construction, representing 23.1GWe, there
have now been no new approvals for 18 months. Other signs of trouble are
the uncertainties about the type of reactor to be utilised in the future,
the position of the power market in China, the structure of the industry
with its large state owned enterprises (SOEs), the degree of support from
top state planners and public opposition to nuclear plans.

There are a few possible explanations for the slowdown in approvals. Delays in imported
Generation III reactor designs (the Westinghouse AP1000 and Areva EPR) have
no doubt concerned regulators. Problems with the AP1000 projects at Sanmen
and Haiyang are more serious, as this reactor was destined for most of
China’s future reactor sites. Now hot testing is complete the first
Sanmen unit may go into operation before the end of 2017, but this will not
bring forward a flood of new approvals.

The Chinese have suffered a severe dent in their confidence about the AP1000, not helped by Westinghouse’s
bankruptcy. The authorities will want to see clear evidence of successful
operation before authorising more units. If they do, the first will be at
the existing two sites, but there are several others that have been ready
to go for several years now. http://www.neimagazine.com/opinion/opinionnuclear-in-china-why-the-slowdown-5896525/

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, China, politics | Leave a comment

Poor future for many decades for New Generation Nuclear Reactors

New Generation Nuclear Reactors Unlikely to Deliver on Design, EcoWatch, By Paul Brown, 9 Aug 17

New generation nuclear reactors, promised for the last 18 years by the U.S. Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) as a way to provide cheap and plentiful supplies of electricity, are unlikely to be fulfilled any time in the next 30 years.

That is the conclusion of university researchers who have used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain the program’s budget history to find out what designs the government has spent $2 billion of public money on supporting.

Researchers from the University of California San Diego and Carnegie Mellon University described the research program as “incoherent” and said the government was “unlikely” to deliver on its mission to develop and demonstrate an advanced nuclear reactor by mid-century.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, said much of the money that was supposed to be spent on civilian reactors was spent instead on supporting infrastructure, where the main focus was defense programs and not commercial opportunities……..

Overall, the technology’s prospects appear grim, with implications that go beyond energy.

“Without a sense of urgency among NE and its political leaders,” Abdulla warned, “the likelihood of advanced reactors playing a substantial role in the transition to a low-carbon U.S. energy portfolio is exceedingly low…..

These reported failings in the U.S. research program come at a difficult time for the industry when across the world the current “new” generation of large nuclear reactors is proving difficult to build on time and on budget, and some projects are being abandoned mid-way through construction…….

Most of the money now being spent on research into new generations of nuclear power stations is being provided by nuclear weapon states. Most countries that have never had nuclear weapons but have invested in nuclear power stations are now phasing them out and putting their development money into cheaper renewables. https://www.ecowatch.com/new-generation-nuclear-2471347067.html

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, technology, USA | Leave a comment

Workers’ health at risk at Idaho nuclear lab

Unheeded warnings, repeated mistakes put workers’ health at risk at Idaho nuclear lab, Idaho Statesman, BY PATRICK MALONE AND PETER CARY, The Center for Public Integrity AUGUST 10, 2017 

Ted Lewis knew the plutonium plates at the government lab where he worked could leak potentially lethal radioactive dust.

He had seen it occur in the 1970s, when he was helping load some of those plates into a nuclear reactor at the lab near Idaho Falls. A steel jacket enclosing one of the plates somehow cracked, spilling plutonium oxide particles into the air. But Lewis and his colleagues were lucky — they were wearing respirators and given cleansing showers, so their lives weren’t endangered.

Three decades later, Lewis, an electrical engineer who had become chairman of the lab’s safety committee, had a bad feeling this could happen again, with a worse outcome. And he turned out to be right.

He tried to head it off. In 2009, Lewis wrote a pointed warning memo — he called it a white paper — and gave it to the official in charge of all nuclear operations at the Idaho National Laboratory, which is run by a consortium of private companies and universities under contract to the Energy Department.

The memo said the chance of encountering a plutonium plate that disintegrated, as Lewis had previously witnessed, was “greater than facility and senior management realizes,” according to a copy. Although Lewis said that a workplace manual published by the contractor — Battelle Energy Alliance LLC (BEA) — called the risk of an accidental spill of such radioactive dust “negligible,” he wanted his superiors to expect it and prepare for it.

 He said in a sworn court deposition in January 2016 that he shared his concerns with at least 19 others at the laboratory, which holds one of the world’s largest stockpiles of plutonium, the explosive at the heart of modern nuclear weapons. But they didn’t respond, he said, and some of the precautions he urged — checking the plates more carefully before they were unwrapped and repackaged for shipment and setting up a decontamination shower — were ignored.

Then, at 11:04 a.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2011, Lewis’ fears came to life in a cavernous room at the lab where workers were readying some plates the size of Hershey’s chocolate bars for shipment to other federal sites and to researchers. The workers had a lead shield between themselves and the plates, but the table where they sorted the plates wasn’t sealed, and none of them had respirators on.

When a nuclear material handler named Ralph Stanton noticed that one plate’s container had a label warning that the plate’s corner was “swollen,” he asked a shift supervisor for guidance. The supervisor phoned one of the lab officials whom Ted Lewis had briefed on his worries, but after finishing the call the official told the workers to continue, according to an internal Department of Energy report in January 2012.

Sure enough, as the plate’s wrapping was pulled away, black powder leaked out, and Stanton, along with 15 of his colleagues in the facility, inhaled the plutonium dust, according to the report. Three of them wound up suing BEA, saying that they had been sickened due to the company’s negligence. BEA publicly disputed that the workers were harmed, but it also reached private settlements with each of the litigants that included nondisclosure provisions.

The contamination incident was extensively covered by two newspapers published in Boise, including the Idaho Statesman. But the Center for Public Integrity’s investigation shows it was preceded by two other serious instances of radioactive contamination at the lab as well as by Lewis’ careful warnings, and that it was also followed by two additional, avoidable radioactive contaminations there……..

Idaho National Laboratory is not unique. The government has been similarly generous to many of the other private contractors that operate key nuclear weapons-related facilities. Part of the problem, according to auditors at the Government Accountability Office, which reports to Congress, is that the Energy Department has too little staff, and poorly-trained contract managers, making it more susceptible to fraud and waste than most agencies.

The contractors largely police themselves, according to the GAO and inspector general reports. Penalties do not cause enough pain to act as deterrents, safety experts say. And — as might be expected — the contractors typically prioritize the mission-related responsibilities that bear directly and most strongly on their profits, according to current and former workers and accident investigation reports.

Plenty of warning that workers were at risk

Lewis’ “white paper” was not the only sign that BEA’s effort to prevent radiation contamination of its Idaho workforce were lagging………

Numerous problems contribute to the mass inhalation incident

Then came the radiation contamination of 16 workers on Nov. 8, 2011, which occurred in a white, mound-shaped building that was once home to a now-dismantled nuclear reactor and still has a massive vault resembling a walk-in freezer. It’s there that the government stores several metric tons of surplus plutonium, which the Department of Homeland Security and the NNSA use to help develop and refine radiation detection devices deployed by Washington at ports and border crossings around the globe.

Multiple physical shortcomings and managerial lapses combined to endanger the workers that day, according to the Energy Department’s report: The building had old and failing equipment, and no showers. Records of the plutonium plates’ individual histories — including previous damage — had been lost, and Lewis’ warnings that some were liable to turning to powder were ignored. Managers “did not recognize the significance of this information,” the report said.

Worse, the nearest air monitor was 15 feet from where the plates were being unwrapped. A vent supposed to draw dangerous fumes from the work area was partially blocked. And some of those doing the work “had no training on the hazards associated with Pu [plutonium],” BEA’s report said.

According to the lawsuits filed against BEA, the company at the time felt compelled to complete the work speedily. In interviews with the Center, Stanton said he was told it was a “bonus job,” meaning that meeting deadlines would help the company and its managers earn their profits. “DOE gives these guys a bonus. When the milestone is in play, safety is completely gone,” he said. “We were playing Russian roulette.”

Braase, a health physicist technician responsible for checking jobsite radiation and worker exposures, said in his own legal complaint that the work was accelerated so it could be completed before he went on a medical leave, allowing less time than usual for a careful review. BEA’s report on the accident, issued Sept. 17, 2012, said one of the factors contributing to the accident was that the company’s “focus is on getting the work done (the end justifies the means).”…

Health physicists consulted by the Center noted that the unusual circumstances complicate estimates of the potential consequences. If you inhale plutonium particles, they sit in the lung or get into the bloodstream and continue to radiate for a lifetime or until they are all are excreted. As a result, labs generally predict exposures and assign limits for this type of exposure over a 50-year period. Annual radiation limits for workers, in contrast, are pegged to short-term exposures from sources outside the body — like from an X-ray or series of X-rays……..

For this incident, and for the earlier radiation exposures that year of the three workers in the hot fuel facility, the DOE’s enforcement officer initially proposed fining BEA $615,000. But Boulden reduced the fine to $412,500 for what he said were “corrective actions taken.”

Separately, BEA’s profit was cut by $500,000 on Jan. 31, 2012, in a letter from Richard B. Provencher, the DOE’s fee awarding official, to Grossenbacher that noted “unacceptable events continue to occur” at the lab. But on Nov. 22, 2013, Provencher, who determines BEA’s annual profit, gave back the entire $500,000 that had been withheld, with the stipulation that BEA spend $100,000 of it on efforts to improve operations and safety.

In total, in 2011, BEA earned $17.1 million in profits, the year of the accident, or 92 percent of what was available. In 2012, it earned $16.2 million, but the next year it got the $500,000 back.

New contamination incidents

The plutonium contamination of 16 BEA workers was followed by two other significant radiation exposures, with the first occurring in August 2014, when workers in the Fuel Manufacturing Facility, a low structure next to the building where the plutonium exposures occurred, were fabricating radioactive americium in a glove box.

Outside the body, small bits of americium pose almost no threat to human health. But in higher internal doses, its radiation breaks down cells, alters genes and attacks bones and organs, increasing its victims’ chances of contracting life-threatening maladies, according tothe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention…….

At the end of 2014, BEA was awarded $18.1 million in pure profit, after $350,000 was deducted for the two safety incidents. That meant the company got 97 percent of the maximum profit allowed under its contract. It also got its contract extended to 2019 without competition. A joint news release from BEA and the Energy Department announcing the extension credited the decision to the company’s “consistently strong annual performance and success in managing INL.”

This article is from the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative media organization in Washington, D.C. Read more of the Nuclear Negligence series at this link.  http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/state/idaho/article166418912.html

August 11, 2017 Posted by | employment, incidents, USA | Leave a comment

South Korea: nuclear phaseout much cheaper than nuclear maintenance

Nuclear power more expensive than gov’t claims, as spent fuel storage exceeds $57 billion. http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/805177.html  

By Kim Sung-hwan, staff reporter New report finds that nuclear power phaseout could save nearly $17 billion in maintenance costs

The cost of managing the “spent nuclear fuel” irradiated in nuclear plants has steadily increased and now exceeds 64 trillion won (US$57.2 billion), a new report confirms. If the government implements its policy of a nuclear phaseout, it could reduce this maintenance cost by as much as 19 trillion won (US$16.9 billion), according to the report.

A report on the current maintenance cost for spent nuclear fuel that Minjoo Party lawmaker Lee Hun, a member of the National Assembly’s Industry, Trade, Resources and SME Committee, received from the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy on July 25 states that as of 2016 the cost needed to maintain the spent nuclear fuel for 36 nuclear reactors (including one that is permanently shuttered, 24 that are operational, five that are under construction and six whose construction is planned) is 64.13 trillion won. “The Radioactive Waste Maintenance Cost Calculation Committee, which determines the cost of spent nuclear fuel, calculated that the project cost as of 2016 was 64.13 trillion won, but the government has been publishing the project cost calculated in 2015 [of 53.28 trillion won],” Lee said.

“Since we were unable to submit a motion for approval of the project cost to the cost management review board at the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, we included the previous year’s project cost in the basic plan for managing high-level radioactive waste, which was released in July of that year,” the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy said in regard to why it had published an outdated project cost. The project cost for maintaining spent nuclear fuel has been steadily increasing as more nuclear reactors have been built, rising from 22.62 trillion won (with 28 reactors) between 2004 and 2012 to 53.28 trillion won (with 34 reactors) from 2013 to 2015.

The project cost has been increasing because of the need to keep building interim storage facilities inside the nuclear reactors to store spent nuclear fuel and the need to set aside a reserve fund for permanently disposing this waste (and no decision has been reached about where or how this waste will be disposed). “The project cost has increased because the cost of regional support, including storage fees, and the contingency preparation cost, including the cost of insurance, had not been explicitly included. We need to calculate the figures more specifically by launching another public debate about spent nuclear fuel,” the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy said.

But implementing the government’s policy of a nuclear phaseout could shave around 19 trillion won off the spent nuclear fuel project cost, the report says. While 64.13 trillion won is required for 36 reactors (including Shin-Kori reactors 5 and 6, on which construction is currently suspended, and the reactors whose construction is planned), the cost for 28 reactors (including Shin-Kori 4 and Shin-Hanul 1 and 2, which have been completely built) would be 44.89 trillion won. The total cost of decommissioning nuclear reactors could be reduced by as much as 5.15 trillion won under the policy of the nuclear phaseout, the report found. The cost of decommissioning a single reactor was 59.5 billion won when it was first calculated in 1983, but by 2015, this had increased to 643.7 billion won.

“The government is deceiving the public when it publishes a lower project cost. Considering that the post-processing costs for nuclear reactors are increasing astronomically and that safety concerns continue to be raised about the unprecedented concentration of nuclear reactors, this is a situation that calls for serious deliberation and a reasonable social consensus about phasing out nuclear power,” Lee said.

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, South Korea, wastes | Leave a comment

NuGen tightlipped about the implications of abandonment of USA’s AP1000 nuclear reactors, and Toshiba’s problems

CORE 9th Aug 2017, Respondents to NuGen’s Stage 2 Moorside public consultation which closed
one year ago will learn little from NuGen’s response to CORE’s open
letter to its CEO Tom Samson on 30th June.

Refusing to comment on some of CORE’s questions on the grounds that ‘they are commercial processes’,
NuGen has confirmed only that it intends to publish a Stage 2 interim
consultation report – ‘but this has been deferred to ensure that
changes which arise as a result of the reviews (an engineering and wider
strategic review) are appropriately reflected in the report, which will
reflect both the feedback that NuGen received and detail how NuGen will
take that feedback into account’.

CORE’s spokesman Martin Forwood commented today that “NuGen’s inability to level with consultees,
however uncertain Moorside’s prospects, reflects the extent of the
turmoil facing its project and makes a mockery of its claim that
‘openness and transparency about our plans is the key to building
trust”.

The latest news of the plug being pulled on the half-built AP1000
reactors in the US and the fall from grace on the Tokyo Stock Exchange of
NuGen’s sole investor Toshiba will further add to the increasing
uncertainties swirling around in the Moorside mists”. http://corecumbria.co.uk/news/nugen-consultees-kept-in-the-dark-as-moorside-turmoil-increases/

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

USA’s huge nuclear project failed, but top executives got $millions in bonuses!

Top SCANA executives were paid millions in bonuses for roles in failed nuclear project, The State, BY AVERY G. WILKS, awilks@thestate.com AUGUST 09, 2017 As a multibillion-dollar nuclear expansion project veered toward abandonment, the company in charge – SCANA – paid its executives millions in bonuses for a job well done.

The Cayce-based utility has paid its top officials almost $21.4 million in annual performance-based bonuses over the past decade, according to The State newspaper’s review of the utility’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Some of those payouts were to reward the executives for accomplishments related to the construction of two nuclear reactors at the V.C. Summer site in Fairfield County, SCANA said in the filings.

Late last month, SCANA and the state-owned Santee Cooper utility said they were abandoning that project, citing construction delays and cost overruns that plagued the 9-year-old venture……

Operational excellence’

Last year, SCANA’s top five executives took home $3.3 million in performance-based pay, according to the federal filings. Nearly half of that went to SCANA chief executive officer and president Kevin Marsh, accounting for about a quarter of his $6.1 million in total compensation.

The filings do not say exactly how much of the $21.4 million in performance-based pay went to reward the executives for building the two nuclear reactors……

The overall pay of SCANA’s top five executives increased to $14 million in 2016 from $8.5 million in 2007, the year the S.C. Legislature passed a law that allowed the utility to bill customers for the cost of the reactors while they were under construction. Avery G. Wilks: 803-771-8362, @averygwilks

PAY FOR PLAY

Top SCANA executives have been paid nearly $21.4 million in performance-based bonuses over the past decade. Some of that money was to reward the officials for their accomplishments in building two nuclear reactors in Fairfield County, a project the utility now says it will abandon. Here is how much the executives were paid each year.:…… http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article166298442.html

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Toshiba’s $8.8bn loss throws future of Cumbria’s Moorside nuclear project into doubt

Toshiba’s $8.8bn loss reignites fears over Cumbria nuclear project,  Telegraph, 10 AUGUST 2017 • The Japanese consortium behind the UK’s largest planned new nuclear project has unveiled an annual loss of almost $9bn (£6.9bn), underlining the stark risks of the Government’s high-cost nuclear ambitions.

Toshiba has delayed publishing its full-year results while teams of auditors pore over the financial damage wrought by the collapse of its US-based nuclear developer Westinghouse, before finally revealing the $8.8bn (£6.7bn) loss for 2016 three months later than planned.

The electronics giant has avoided crashing out of the Tokyo stock exchange for filing its accounts late, but its commitment to building the Moorside power plant in Cumbria remains in doubt.Toshiba is now the only investor propping up the Nugeneration consortium that plans to build the 3.8GW Moorside project, and the approved reactor design is Westinghouse-made.

The GMB union said the “fiasco” over Toshiba’s financial state “highlights the folly of allowing foreign companies to be in control of the UK’s critical future energy needs”…….

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Toshiba’s $8.8b in losses

Delayed Toshiba earnings report reveals $8.8b in losses By Tech Wire Asia | 10th August 2017 | @techwireasia AFTER several delays, Toshiba Corp. has finally released an audited earnings report, which revealed the company’s losses are valued at JPY965.7 billion (US$8.8 billion) for the 2016-2017 financial year ending March this year, reported Bloomberg.

Though a startling number, it should be noted those losses are comparable to the initial estimates by independent analysts who predicted Toshiba would lose an average of JPY977.4 billion (US$8.9 billion). Toshiba’s own outlook was far more bleak, with their own financial officials reporting they expected to lose JPY1.01 trillion (US$9.2 billion)…..

suspicions about the company’s opaque finances have resulted in slipping stock prices, a situation exacerbated by the bankruptcy of its Westinghouse nuclear business…..

The company is facing a possible delisting from the Tokyo Stock Exchange as a result of the manipulation of its account books. The matter is under investigation and if Toshiba fails to clean up its act and pull itself out of the red by next March, expulsion is almost a given…….http://techwireasia.com/2017/08/toshiba-earnings-report-huge-losses/#mMpeeOZFUAVImZpQ.97

August 11, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, Japan | Leave a comment

USA: Georgia’s “Jenga” nuclear reactors

Kempner: Georgia Power’s nuclear tower teeters; EMCs ‘concerned’ By Matt Kempner – The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 6 Aug 17,  

Our bumbling aspiration in Georgia to build more nuclear power is looking suspiciously like that wooden block game, Jenga.

You know, the one where you take turns pulling out a block at a time, hoping not to topple the teetering tower.

How many pieces can be pulled out before Georgia Power’s nuclear expansion at Plant Vogtle metaphorically collapses and takes with it billions of dollars in consumer money?

The few remaining blocks left at the project’s base look shaky to me. (Well, except maybe Georgia Power’s eagerness to continue with a project the state ensures will be delightfully profitable for the power company even though Vogtle is billions of dollars over budget and years behind on completion.)………

Some elected members of the Georgia Public Service Commission rushed to put distance between South Carolina’s project and the Vogtle one they green lighted and showered with love……..

PSC chairman Stan Wise pounded out a statement highlighting “the dissimilarities of these projects.”

This is ironic, because just last year, Georgia Power stressed to the PSC just how similar the two projects are. (That served Georgia Power’s interests at the time because it wanted the regulators to give the company essentially the same sweetheart deal that South Carolina regulators had given SCANA.)

A consultant for the Vogtle team concluded the project is “sufficiently similar to Summer Units 2 and 3 so that one could reasonably compare construction outcomes. This is proven by the fact that there are many similarities in the EPC contracts, generally the same primary plant equipment suppliers, similarities in construction milestone dates, similarities in construction contractors, and evidence that GPC and SCE&G have been and continue to collaborate on the design, construction, and training on these projects.”

Here’s a few more similarities: Both projects suffer soaring costs and stretched timetables. Also last week, Southern disclosed figures suggesting the total price of Vogtle may be close to double the original forecast. And the first juice won’t flow from a new reactor before February 2021 at the earliest, it said, more than a year later than the previous target.

There really are differences between the Georgia and South Carolina projects, though. One of the most important is that there are a bunch more players involved in — and at risk on — the Vogtle expansion.

And those are the blocks anyone wondering about the future of nuclear expansion in Georgia should be eyeballing. (Building nuclear plants is generally a group project to mitigate the massive risk. Because who would be so nutty as to try to do it on their own?)

Georgia Power is managing partner on Vogtle, with just under 50 percent of an ownership stake in the expansion. But also in the mix with almost a third of the ownership is Oglethorpe Power, which represents dozens of community electric membership corporations in Georgia. Most are at risk on this project, too.

The Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, owned by bunches of small city power systems across the state, has nearly a quarter of the Vogtle ownership. And the city of Dalton has a small piece of the project.

Every one of those players has a different comfort (or fear) level on sticking with Vogtle. I suspect leaders of EMCs may be among the most nervous……..

Some other utilities limited their exposure to Vogtle early on.

MEAG, the body representing city utilities, sold rights (and cost responsibilities) for two-thirds of the project’s first 20 years of power to PowerSouth in Alabama and JEA in Jacksonville, Fla. That’s according to Marietta’s mayor, Steve “Thunder” (fun, right?) Tumlin, who is on MEAG’s board.

“We spread the risks,” he told me.

If the Vogtle expansion gets killed, “it would hurt, but not kill” the Marietta system, Tumlin said. Customer power bill rates might go up “a few percentage points.”

So far, he said, the consortium of Vogtle owners has “steadfastly stood together and is not panicking.” But they have to be convinced it makes sense to stick with the program.

Otherwise?

Jenga!  https://www.myajc.com/business/kempner-georgia-power-nuclear-tower-teeters-emcs-concerned/wJb830Vfybvq2shcFxxc5H/

August 7, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Never mind Trump – the market is moving away from fossil fuels

Trump falls flat with climate change retreat, Markets, not politics, drive energy sector’s push to cut greenhouse gas emission  Ft.com by: Ed Crooks, 7 Aug 17, US Industry and Energy Editor On Friday, the US state department submitted a notification to the UN that the administration intended to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement reached in 2015. The statement, confirming the decision that President Donald Trump announced in June, is at one level momentous. The world’s largest economy and second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is quitting a deal that the governments of leading European countries have described as “a vital instrument for our planet”. In terms of the consequences for the global energy industry, however, its impact has so far been negligible.

Of course, the full implications have yet to play out. But in the nine weeks since Mr Trump announced that leaving the agreement would be “a reassertion of America’s sovereignty”, energy companies around the world have been making plans that suggest their views on the outlook have not changed in any significant way.
 The most important reason for that is that moves towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions are going with the grain of energy markets, regardless of political decisions. The plunging costs of renewable power and electricity storage, the rise of electric cars, the availability of cheap gas for power generation, and the prospect of abundant supplies of oil, for a while at least, all point towards investment decisions that would curb emissions.
 The comments from oil companies reporting earnings over recent weeks have provided a stark illustration of that point. For years, environmental groups have been raising concerns about stranded assets: projects that cannot be viable in a world where greenhouse gas emissions are constrained.
 When they first started making that argument, with oil at about $100 per barrel, it was often a tough sell, says Andrew Grant of the Carbon Tracker Initiative, which has pioneered analysis in this area. Now, he adds, they are “pushing at an open door”.
 The central idea is that in a world where fossil fuel consumption is curtailed to cut greenhouse gas emissions, investment in high-cost assets is likely to be wasted………..
Whatever happens to international climate policy in the aftermath of Mr Trump’s decision, unless some other shock comes along to shake the industry out of its current mindset, downward pressure on costs and caution on investment decisions are likely to remain the prevailing rules. https://www.ft.com/content/2f687cfe-7abb-11e7-9108-edda0bcbc928

August 7, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, climate change, USA | Leave a comment

Georgia Power to finalize Vogtle assessments by end of August

 Guru Focus, PR Newswire, ATLANTA, Aug. 4, 2017  Georgia Power expects to complete its comprehensive schedule and cost-to-complete assessment, as well as cancellation cost assessment, for the Vogtle nuclear expansion by the end of the month. The final recommendation is expected to be filed with the Georgia Public Service Commission (PSC) as part of the 17th Vogtle Construction Monitoring (VCM) Report. Once submitted, Georgia Power will work with the Georgia PSC to determine the best path forward for customers…….

Construction work continues at the Vogtle nuclear expansion under a new service agreement with Westinghouse while Georgia Power’s assessments, as well as assessments by Oglethorpe Power, MEAG Power and Dalton Utilities, are finalized…….

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Certain information contained in this communication is forward-looking information based on current expectations and plans that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking information includes, among other things, statements concerning estimated cost and schedule information for Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 and other future actions related to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4. Georgia Power cautions that there are certain factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking information that has been provided. ……..

Editor’s note:  How’s this for one sentence?  could be a record?

The following factors, in addition to those discussed in Georgia Power’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, and subsequent securities filings, could cause actual results to differ materially from management expectations as suggested by such forward-looking information: the results of Westinghouse’s bankruptcy filing and the impact of any inability or other failure of Toshiba to perform its obligations under its guarantee, including any effect on the construction of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4; state and federal rate regulations and the impact of pending and future rate cases and negotiations; the impact of recent and future federal and state regulatory changes, as well as changes in application of existing laws and regulations; current and future litigation, regulatory investigations, proceedings, or inquiries; available sources and costs of fuels; effects of inflation; the ability to control costs and avoid cost overruns during the development construction and operation of facilities, which include the development and construction of generating facilities with designs that have not been finalized or previously constructed; the ability to construct facilities in accordance with the requirements of permits and licenses, to satisfy any environmental performance standards and the requirements of tax credits and other incentives, and to integrate facilities into the Southern Company system upon completion of construction; advances in technology; legal proceedings and regulatory approvals and actions related to Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, including Georgia Public Service Commission approvals and Nuclear Regulatory Commission actions; interest rate fluctuations and financial market conditions and the results of financing efforts; changes in The Southern Company’s or Georgia Power’s credit ratings, including impacts on interest rates, access to capital markets, and collateral requirements; the impacts of any sovereign financial issues, including impacts on interest rates, access to capital markets, impacts on foreign currency exchange rates, counterparty performance, and the economy in general, as well as potential impacts on the benefits of U.S. Department of Energy loan guarantees; and the effect of accounting pronouncements issued periodically by standard setting bodies. Georgia Power expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking information. https://www.gurufocus.com/news/549936/georgia-power-to-finalize-vogtle-assessments-by-end-of-august

August 7, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Kuwait getting right out of nuclear investment, as it sells shares in the beleagured AREVA group

Kuwaiti fund to sell Areva shares in bid, stay away from nuclear – sources,  KIA to sell five pct Areva stake in delisting buyout https://www.reuters.com/article/areva-restructuring-kia-idUSL5N1KQ3A5

* Kuwait sovereign wealth fund to take 86 pct loss on Areva

* KIA declined French offer to buy stakes in NewCo, Areva NP

* World’s biggest SWF to stay away from nuclear investment

By Geert De Clercq, PARIS, Aug 4 (Reuters) – Kuwait Investment Authority (KIA) will sell its nearly five percent stake in Areva to the French state as the nuclear group is delisted and will stay away from nuclear investments for now, sources familiar with the situation told Reuters.

Kuwait’s sovereign wealth fund, one of the world’s biggest, paid 600 million euros ($712 million) for its 4.82 percent stake stake in 2010, but since then Areva’s stock has plunged as its equity has been wiped out by years of losses.

Following a state-funded 4.5 billion euro rescue and restructuring of Areva, the French state will pay 4.5 euros per share for KIA’s 18.46 million shares, or about 83 million euros, representing an 86 percent loss for the fund.

When it decided to buy the Areva stake nearly seven years ago, Kuwait was one of several Gulf countries considering developing nuclear power to meet demand for electricity and water desalination.

Two sources with direct knowledge of the situation told Reuters that the French state had proposed that KIA take equity stakes in nuclear fuel group Areva NewCo and reactor building unit Areva NP, which will both be spun off from the legacy Areva SA in which KIA is the main minority shareholder.

“A proposal was made to KIA but they have not followed up. KIA has no further development projects in nuclear,” a source close to Areva told Reuters.

The source said that as main minority shareholder after the French state – which directly and indirectly owns nearly 89 percent of Areva SA – KIA was kept informed about the restructuring but had no interest in taking part in it in any way and will sell its shares to the French state.

Prior to the delisting of Areva SA, the state has launched a buyout offer that runs from Aug. 1 to 14.

Areva’s uranium mining and nuclear fuel activities have been spun off as Areva NewCo, while its nuclear reactor unit Areva NP is being sold to state-owned utility EDF. Japan’s MHI will buy minority stakes in both units.

The restructuring leaves legacy Areva SA, once the vanguard of France’s nuclear export drive, as an empty shell with mainly the liabilities related to the troubled Olkiluoto 3 nuclear newbuild project in Finland.

KIA officials were not available for comment.

August 5, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, MIDDLE EAST | Leave a comment

Nuclear power now is really losing the race against renewables

It’s Official: Nuclear Power Can’t Compete With Renewables, EcoWatch, By Paul Brown, 4 Aug 17 

The nuclear revival the global industry has been hoping for took another hammer blow this week when two reactors under construction in South Carolina were abandoned, only 40 percent complete.

The plan had been to build two Westinghouse AP1000 pressurized water reactors to lead the nuclear revival in the U.S., but cost overruns and delays dogged the project and will have the opposite effect. This is a further humiliation for Westinghouse, the U.S. nuclear giant that earlier this year filed for bankruptcy because of the costs associated with this new design. Hopes that a new generation of reactors could be built in the U.S. and sold to the rest of the world rested on the success of this project, and it has spectacularly failed.

By this week, construction had already cost $9 billion, almost the entire original budget, with years of building still to go. The reactors were originally scheduled to begin producing power in 2018, but this had been put back to 2021. Cost overruns had meant the final cost could be $25 billion. Around 5,000 construction workers have lost their jobs.

Changing context

The two owners of the project who had taken control after the Westinghouse bankruptcy, South Carolina Electric & Gas and Santee Cooper, announced they would halt construction rather than saddle customers with additional costs……..

Nuclear power did find favor in some quarters in the U.S. because it was regarded as a low carbon source of electricity. But President Trump is trying to dismantle legislation that would have helped the industry get credit for this.

The repercussions of the decision to abandon the building of the South Carolina reactors will be felt across the Atlantic in the UK, where three reactors of the same design were due to be built in Cumbria in the northwest of England. NuGen, the UK company that planned to build them, is, like Westinghouse, a subsidiary of the Japanese giant Toshiba. It was already reviewing its plans to build them before this week’s news broke.

Officially this is still the position, but it seems unlikely that the company would gamble on trying to build reactors of a design that could not be completed successfully in the U.S.

All big nuclear companies have new designs being constructed on home turf. Their plan has been to demonstrate how well they work and then export them. But this is currently not working anywhere, most spectacularly in Europe, where the French giant EDF is in deep trouble with its flagship design, the even larger 1,600 megawatt pressurized water reactor.

Rapid delay

Prototypes under construction at Olkiluoto in Finland and Flamanville in France are, like the AP 1000, years late and over budget.

Construction has started on two more at Hinkley Point in Somerset in the West of England, but already, within weeks of the first concrete being poured, a delay has been announced.

Although the British Government still supports the project, it has already been questioned by the UK National Audit Office, which polices government finances. The NAO said consumers will be paying far too much for the electricity even if the project is finished on time, which on the industry’s past record seems extremely unlikely.

With renewables providing more and more cheap power in Europe and across the world, it seems unlikely that any of the new generation of large nuclear plants will ever be able to compete.

Phase-out planned

Japan, still suffering from the after effects of the Fukushima disaster of 2011, is unlikely to be able to resuscitate its nuclear industry, and South Korea, with arguably the most successful nuclear construction record, has a new government which wants to phase out the industry.

Only China and Russia, where what is really happening in their nuclear industries is a closely guarded secret, remain as likely exporters of new nuclear stations.

Both countries offer to supply fuel to countries which buy their reactor models. As well as building them, they offer as part of the package to get rid of the spent fuel and waste, so any country that buys nuclear power from China and Russia is effectively tied to them for a generation or more.

So for Russia and China, selling nuclear power stations is a political decision to extend their influence rather than an economic one—and it could be an expensive option for all concerned. From a purely economic perspective, however, it appears the nuclear industry is reaching the end of the road. https://www.ecowatch.com/westinghouse-nuclear-2469123144.html

August 5, 2017 Posted by | 2 WORLD, business and costs | Leave a comment

Nuclear power is just not economic: the demise of VC Summer heralds its end

Vermont Law School’s Cooper on demise of VC Summer: Nuclear power is uneconomic, http://www.vermontbiz.com/news/2017/august/04/vermont-law-schools-cooper-demise-vc-summer-nuclear-power-uneconomic, Vermont Business Magazine 4 Aug 17, The abandonment this week of the VC Summer nuclear project in South Carolina heralds the likely demise of “new” nuclear in the United States (including the Vogtle project in Georgia and North Anna 3 in Virginia) and also should put an end to state or federal bailouts for the failing nuclear industry, according to four experts who held a media briefing Thursday, sponsored by NIRS, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.

Nuclear economist Dr Mark Cooper, senior fellow for economic analysis, Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School, said the V.C. Summer shutdown should lead to a similar step at the Vogtle project in Georgia and to a renewed focus on renewable energy.

Cooper said: “The message for Vogtle is simple, nuclear power is uneconomic. It will take massive federal, state and vendor subsidies to be completed and the cost of power will still be two to three times the cost of power from alternatives. The capital cost of renewables is between one-eighth and one quarter the cost of VC Summer.  Even adjusted for load factors, nuclear power is two to three times more costly then the alternatives.”

Peter Bradford, former Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Commissioner, past chair of the New York and Maine state utility regulatory commissions, said that “new” reactor construction financed in advance from ratepayers in states like Virginia (home to Dominion’s proposed North Anna 3 reactor) are V.C. Summer-like debacles waiting to happen.

Bradford said: “The primary lessons for Georgia, Virginia, and other states, from the South Carolinacancellations (as well as Levy County in Florida and Kemper in Mississippi) is that laws and regulatory decisions placing economic risks on customers instead of the investors and lenders who should properly bear them are a disastrous mistake.  Freed of responsibility for the consequences of their mistakes, utility executives too often plunge into ill-advised schemes to pad their rate bases (and individual compensation) when they should be managing competitive processes designed to select the most cost-effective alternative.”

After a surge of state bailouts for nuclear in 2016 in New York and Illinois, the industry has failed in 2017 in Ohio, Connecticut, Pennsylvania and New Jersey.  The push in Ohio faltered in the face of extensive public criticism and was relegated in Connecticut to a study report  by the state’s governor.  In Pennsylvania and New Jersey, bailout backers were unable to even get promised legislation introduced.

A federal bailout for the nuclear industry would come at staggering cost. If based on the New Yorkmodel, the cost to consumers would be $150 billion to $275 billion, depending on whether the subsidies applied to all reactors, or just those that are determined to be unprofitable. (The latter may seem like a common-sense outcome, but Exelon crafted bailout legislation in Illinois that allows it to be paid even if energy prices rise.) If a federal bailout were based on a new and expanded nuclear production tax credit, as a Department of Energy advisory committee recommended last year (at $27/MWh), the cost to taxpayers would be nearly a quarter of a trillion dollars:  $228 billion, according to calculations by the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS).

NIRS Executive Director Tim Judson said: “Nuclear power is failing despite the fact that it is already heavily subsidized. Canceling the Summer reactors proves that the industry has no future, but it only tells half the story. Nuclear generators are pushing for billions of dollars in subsidies and bailouts for their aging reactors, and those efforts are mostly failing, as well. Hoped-for momentum from 2016 bailouts in New York and Illinois did not materialize, as state legislatures rejected nuclear subsidy bills this year. With renewable energy now surpassing nuclear by widening margins, it’s clear that subsidizing nuclear is an expensive way to slow down the growth of clean, safe, affordable, job-creating energy sources.”

Even if there is no new federal bailout for nuclear, taxpayers could still end up on the hook for billions of dollars if the Vogtle project goes belly up. Ryan Alexander, president, Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonprofit and nonpartisan taxpayer advocacy group, said: “The VC Summer project relied on the same problematic reactor designs and contractor, the recently bankrupt Westinghouse Corporation, as Southern Company’s Plant Vogtle. Westinghouse’s AP1000 design was being used in both VC Summer and Vogtle. Both projects have experienced multiple delays and significant cost overruns. Westinghouse’s recent bankruptcy pushed both projects further into turmoil. Unlike VC Summer, Vogtle managed to win themselves more than $8 billion in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees. So while federal taxpayers should and must watch any efforts to contribute to the bailout of the state of South Carolina and the players involved in the VC Summers project, billions in tax dollars are already at risk with the Vogtle project. It seems clearer than ever that the writing is on the wall for taxpayers. We’ve said it for 8 years: These massive nuclear reactor projects were doomed from the start, and taxpayer money should not be risked on them.”

Where does the industry go from here? The V.C. Summer project collapse means that any remaining illusions about a resurgence of nuclear power in the United States is now dead.

As Bradford explained: “In fact, there never was an actual ‘nuclear renaissance’, just the 31 paper applications on file at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by early 2009.  Now nearly all but two are cancelled, leaving a trail of economic waste in their wake. The intent of the renaissance dream was to show that new reactor designs and an expedited licensing process from which the public was largely excluded would produce reactors that could be completed ‘on time and on budget’ as well as at competitive costs.  The expectation was that private financing, without subsidy from customers and taxpayers, would then become available to nuclear power.  That dream is now in ruins. The Westinghouse bankruptcy and subsequent events in South Carolina make the lessons so clear that even the most ardent nuclear propagandists probably can no longer shout them down.”

MORE ABOUT THE EXPERTS…….

August 5, 2017 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »