Plan for closing Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant to save money and carbon
Closing Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant Will Save Money And Carbon, Forbes, Amory B. Lovins, Cofounder and Chief Scientist, Rocky Mountain Institute, ablovins@rmi.org,www.rmi.org
A widespread claim—that dozens of nuclear plants, too costly to run profitably, now merit new subsidies to protect the earth’s climate—just collided with market reality.
The CEO of one of America’s most prominent and technically capable utilities, Pacific Gas & Electric Company—previously chairman of the Nuclear Energy Institute and the Edison Electric Institute—just announced its decision (subject to regulatory approvals) to close PG&E’s well-running twin nuclear reactors at Diablo Canyon because they’re uneconomic and won’t be needed.
Unlike previous nuclear shutdowns, some of which were too abrupt for immediate replacement with carbon-free resources, PG&E’s nuclear output will be phased out over 8–9 years, replaced timely and cost-effectively by efficiency and renewables. That means no more fossil fuel burned nor carbon emitted, all at less cost to ratepayers. How much less? Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) says at least $1 billion (net present value to 2044).
PG&E also agrees that removing the inflexible “must-run” nuclear output, which can’t easily and economically ramp down much, will help integrate more renewable power reliably into the grid. Midday solar, rather than being increasingly crowded out by continued nuclear overgeneration, will be able to supply more energy. As Germany found, integrating varying solar and windpower with steady “baseload” plants can present challenges for the the opposite of the reason originally supposed: not because wind and solar power vary (demand varies even less predictably), but because “baseload” plants are too inflexible.
The big economic lesson here is that nuclear power’s ability to displace fossil-fueled generation is not simply about tons of carbon dioxide saved. Nuclear power also incurs an operating cost that for many reactors, including Diablo Canyon, has become very high. Saving and reinvesting that avoidable cost can buy a larger quantity of cheaper carbon-displacing resources, saving even more carbon. Nearly all commentators, even Bloomberg’s astute editorial board(twice), have overlooked this advantageous swap.
As the Italian proverb says, arithmetic is not an opinion. So let’s do the math.
Renewables and efficiency cost less than operating many nuclear plants
Diablo Canyon’s forward operating cost, about $70/MWh (levelized 2014 $), is in the top quartile of the national nuclear fleet according to the industry’s latest published data. That quartile’s national average operating cost in 2010–12 averaged $62/MWh in 2013 $. (These operating costs include major repairs, called Net Capital Additions, that tend to rise in the aging fleet, but they exclude all charges for the original construction cost and its financing.)
But carbon-free replacements cost far less. In California, windpower and utility-scale photovoltaics cost around $30–50/MWh to build and run. U.S.-average renewables cost roughly $10/MWh less than in California. Here are their empirical market prices:……..
Saving carbon by closing uneconomic reactors…….
Propaganda meets reality
PG&E’s historic proposal contradicts each key premise of the crusade for more subsidies to avert the shutdown of uncompetitive nuclear plants. Most prominently, PG&E’s resource plan is designed specifically to get carbon-free replacements online to displace nuclear output before it’s turned off—not to substitute fossil fuels, as critics are vehemently assuming (as if they hadn’t read the proposal)……… http://www.forbes.com/sites/amorylovins/2016/06/22/close-a-nuclear-plant-save-money-and-carbon-improve-the-grid-says-pge/:
Every State can go Nuclear Free: California shows the way with a blue-green alliance
California Is Going Nuclear-Free, Which Means Everyone Else Can, Too, Fast Coexist.com MICHAEL SHANK 06.21.16
A historic deal to replace the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant with renewable energy could be a model for the rest of the country. “……, a new historic agreement between a major American power company and environmental groups shows that another way is possible. America can, in fact, transition off nuclear in the short-term and replace it with renewable energy, efficiency and energy storage resources. It’s totally feasible. Take a look at the groundbreaking agreement:
First, the 100-plus year-old California-based power giant, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), just agreed to shut down its two 30 year-old nuclear reactors in Diablo Canyon, letting the licenses expire in 2024 and 2025, respectively. This is a big deal, and it’ll make California, the world’s sixth largest economy, nuclear free.
This is no small thing. These two PG&E nuclear reactors, which spurred the start of the environmental organization Friends of the Earth, comprise roughly 20% of the annual electricity production in the company’s service territory and 10% of California’s annual production.
That’s a lot of power. And yet the transition off these kinds of plants is entirely doable and illustrative of switches that should happen across the U.S., including much older plants with long-expired licenses. Entergy’s Indian Point nuclear reactors north of New York City, for example, could be closed even sooner than Diablo Canyon and replaced with a portfolio of renewables, efficiency, and storage. Taking a cue from California, we should be replicating this everywhere.
Second, this agreement indicates that California is outpacing other states in how its utilities are redefining their future, as PG&E didn’t stop with the Diablo Canyon closure. They committed to ramping up their renewable energy portfolio over the next 15 years so that renewables will comprise the majority of their total retail power, at 55%, voluntarily exceeding California’s standards for 2030.
That’s also a big deal and heralds a new tide of utility leadership. PG&E sees the markets moving and wants to make the switch early. Utilities across the U.S., many of which are notoriously conservative in thinking and practice, are seeing the writing on the wall. And in the coming years, we’ll only see more of this switching as the economics are rapidly driving the conversion.
Senior EDF managers want Hinkley nuclear project to be postponed
EDF Managers Tell UK MPs That Hinkley Point C Should Be Postponed http://www.nucnet.org/all-the-news/2016/06/20/edf-managers-tell-uk-mps-that-hinkley-point-c-should-be-postponed
Plans & Construction 20 Jun (NucNet): Senior managers at EDF have told British MPs that a final investment decision (FID) on the planned Hinkley Point C nuclear project should be delayed until problems including the reactor design and “multi-billion litigation” over the Olkiluoto-3 project in Finland have been resolved.
The letter from EDF managers to the UK parliament’s energy and climate change committee is a setback for the proposed £18bn (€23bn, $26bn) nuclear station in Somerset, England. The station is a flagship of the government’s energy policy and is intended to provide seven percent of Britain’s electricity from about 2025.
In April, the state-controlled French company said it was delaying the FID until September while it consulted with trade unions.
A letter dated 13 June and addressed to Angus MacNeil, the chairman of the committee, from the Fédération Nationale des Cadres Supérieurs de l’Énergie (FNCS) union, “advises to delay the FID until better upfront industrial visibility is evidenced”.
Outstanding problems highlighted by in the letter include:
– Areva NP, the designer of the European pressurised water reactor (EPR) planned for Hinkley Point, “is currently facing a difficult situation”.
– The French nuclear safety authority (ASN) may not approve operation of the Flamanville-3 EPR under construction in northwest France due to various anomalies with the reactor vessel bottom and the reactor vessel head.
– There may be “identical flaws” in an Areva EPR being built at Taishan-1 in China.
– Litigation between Areva and the Finnish energy group TVO over delays to the Olkiluoto-3 EPR remain unsettled.
– An EDF offer to purchase Areva expired on 31 March, leaving “governance uncertainties upon the implementation of the Hinkley Point C project”.
The letter says that on 25 May, ASN declared at an annual hearing in the French parliament that financial and economic challenges that both EDF and Areva are facing would be “time consuming”. The necessary reorganisations “would need long delays before a proper recovery happens” and ASN would prioritise regulatory oversight of the existing fleet rather than any new project.
According to the letter, ASN is concerned that while EDF is dedicating its efforts to new nuclear projects, the financing of safety improvements for the normal operation of the French nuclear fleet could be delayed or even given up.
The letter says “heavy evidence” still needs to be brought prior to further commitments, in order to make those commitments “gain robustness and reliability”.
On 7 June, three French workers unions sent a letter to energy minister Ségolène Royale asking for clarification about the “orientation” of the French nuclear industry.
Vincent de Rivaz, the chief executive officer of EDF’s UK subsidiary EDF Energy told MPs last month that he could not give a definite time for when the company will make the FID.
Mr de Rivaz was called to reappear before the committee after indicating at an appearance in March that the FID could be taken by early May. The committee asked him to explain why that had not happened.
The letter is online: http://bit.ly/1Uc8N0F
Business analysts do not share the optimism of Toshiba’s new CEO, on nuclear power
Toshiba’s new CEO sticks to nuclear target branded ambitious by analysts http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/latestnews/2016/06/23/Toshibas-new-CEO-sticks-nuclear-target-branded-ambitious-analysts Fiscal Times, 23 June 16, “Its achievable,” Satoshi Tsunakawa told reporters on Thursday, a day after assuming the top post, when asked about the company’s goal of building 45 nuclear power reactors globally by the business year ending March 2031….
Historic nuclear free agreement between Pacific Gas and Electric and Friends of the Earth
Diablo Canyon nuclear plant to be shut down, power replaced by renewables, efficiency, storage
California, world’s sixth largest economy, going nuclear-free http://www.foe.org/news/news-releases/2016-06-diablo-canyon-nuclear-plant-to-be-shut-down June 21, 2016 BERKELEY, CALIF. –
An historic agreement has been reached between Pacific Gas and Electric, Friends of the Earth, and other environmental and labor organizations to replace the Diablo Canyon nuclear reactors with greenhouse-gas-free renewable energy, efficiency and energy storage resources. Friends of the Earth says the agreement provides a clear blueprint for fighting climate change by replacing nuclear and fossil fuel energy with safe, clean, cost-competitive renewable energy.
The agreement, announced today in California, says that PG&E will renounce plans to seek renewed operating licenses for Diablo Canyon’s two reactors — the operating licenses for which expire in 2024 and 2025 respectively. In the intervening years, the parties will seek Public Utility Commission approval of the plan which will replace power from the plant with renewable energy, efficiency and energy storage resources. Base load power resources like Diablo Canyon are becoming increasingly burdensome as renewable energy resources ramp up. Flexible generation options and demand-response are the energy systems of the future.
By setting a certain end date for the reactors, the nuclear phase out plan provides for an orderly transition. In the agreement, PG&E commits to renewable energy providing 55 percent of its total retail power sales by 2031, voluntarily exceeding the California standard of 50 percent renewables by 2030.
“This is an historic agreement,” said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth. “It sets a date for the certain end of nuclear power in California and assures replacement with clean, safe, cost-competitive, renewable energy, energy efficiency and energy storage. It lays out an effective roadmap for a nuclear phase-out in the world’s sixth largest economy, while assuring a green energy replacement plan to make California a global leader in fighting climate change.”
A robust technical and economic report commissioned by Friends of the Earth served as a critical underpinning for the negotiations. The report, known as “Plan B,” provided a detailed analysis of how power from the Diablo Canyon reactors could be replaced with renewable, efficiency and energy storage resources which would be both less expensive and greenhouse gas free. With the report in hand, Friends of the Earth’s Damon Moglen and Dave Freeman engaged in discussions with the utility about the phase-out plan for Diablo Canyon. NRDC was quickly invited to join. Subsequently, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245, Coalition of California Utility Employees, Environment California and Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility partnered in reaching the final agreement. The detailed phase out proposal will now go to the California Public Utility Commission for consideration. Friends of the Earth (and other NGO parties to the agreement) reserve the right to continue to monitor Diablo Canyon and, should there be safety concerns, challenge continued operation.
The agreement also contains provisions for the Diablo Canyon workforce and the community of San Luis Obispo. “We are pleased that the parties considered the impact of this agreement on the plant employees and the nearby community,” said Pica. “The agreement provides funding necessary to ease the transition to a clean energy economy.”
Diablo Canyon is the nuclear plant that catalyzed the formation of Friends of the Earth in 1969. David Brower left the Sierra Club and founded Friends of the Earth over a disagreement about nuclear power and the Diablo Canyon plant specifically. The plant was the first issue on the organization’s agenda and it has been fighting the plant ever since. This agreement is not only a milestone for renewable energy, but for Friends of the Earth as an organization.
For more information, see the final, signed Joint Proposal and the Joint Letter to the State Lands Commission.
===========================================================================
Growing list of reactor closures and looming closures
The average age of the U.S. nuclear power fleet is 35 years. That’s the equivalent of about 70 human years so it’s no surprise that a growing number of reactors are falling off the perch:
- Dominion’s Kewaunee in Wisconsin and Entergy’s Vermont Yankee have closed for economic reasons since 2013. Both plants were licensed to keep operating into the 2030s.
- Southern California Edison permanently shut down the last two operating reactors at the San Onofre plant in California in 2013, after steam generators replaced in a US$700 (€628m) million upgrade failed, only a couple of years after their installation.
- In February 2013 Duke Energy announced that the Crystal River nuclear plant in Florida would be permanently shut down, following a botched attempt to repair the concrete containment dome.
- Entergy’s FitzPatrick plant in New York will be closed in 2017, and Entergy’s Pilgrim plant in Massachusetts is slated to be closed in 2019, but could close sooner.
- Exelon’s Oyster Creek plant in New Jersey is scheduled to be permanently shut down by December 2019.
Matt Crozat from the Nuclear Energy Institute said that “several nuclear power plants around the country are vulnerable to weak market conditions, particularly smaller facilities in competitive markets.” Marvin Fertel from the same organization said on May 19 that 15‒20 reactors in the U.S. are at risk of being shut over the next 5‒10 years due to economic challenges such as low power prices, and competition from gas and renewables. He said that small, single-unit plants are the most vulnerable.
It can now be said with certainty that new build (five reactors are under construction) will be outpaced by closures this decade in the U.S., and it’s highly likely that the pattern will repeat itself in the 2020s. BP’s recently-released ‘Energy Outlook: 2016 Edition’ projects a 13% decline in nuclear power generation in North America from 2014‒2035 (and a 29% fall in the EU).
California’s nuclear energy era coming to a close
End of California Nuclear Era: Last Plant to Close by 2025, abc news, By ELLEN KNICKMEYER, ASSOCIATED PRESS SAN FRANCISCO — Jun 21, 2016, California’s last nuclear power plant will close by 2025 under an accord announced Tuesday, ending three decades of safety debates that helped fuel the national anti-nuclear power movement.
The state’s largest utility, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., and environmental groups reached an agreement to replace production at Diablo Canyon nuclear plant with solar power and other energy sources that do not produce climate-changing greenhouse gases.
The facility, which sits along a bluff on California’s central coast, supplies 9 percent of the state’s power.
Environmentalists have pressed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to close Diablo given its proximity to seismic faults in the earthquake-prone state. One fault runs 650 yards from the plant’s reactors.
Worries of earthquakes fracturing the facility have been a dominant theme since PG&E first announced plans for Diablo Canyon in the 1960s. The project helped consolidate opposition to nuclear power within the country’s then-fledgling environmental movement.
“This is an historic agreement,” said Erich Pica, president of the Friends of the Earth environmental group, founded in 1969 in opposition to Diablo Canyon.
PG&E has long said the plant is safe from the largest potential earthquake in the region. But new research has led to more questions about nearby faults, their shaking potential and how the company evaluates them.
Under the deal, the utility agreed not to renew Diablo Canyon’s license. Closing the plant should be cheaper than operating the facility through 2044 as planned, meaning the utility probably won’t have to increase rates, PG&E said………
The country has 61 nuclear plants, including Diablo Canyon, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. California already has banned construction of new facilities until the federal government finds a permanent disposal site for radioactive waste. http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/california-closing-nuclear-plant-decades-40014195
USA’s supposed nuclear renaissance is just fizzling out
The U.S. Nuclear Boom Has Turned Into a Dud, The Motley Fool, 21 June 16 One of America’s biggest nuclear power plant owners doesn’t see a future for two of its plants. Five years ago, we were supposed to be entering a nuclear renaissance. A string of new nuclear plants were being planned and there were loan guarantee programs in place from the federal government to make their construction possible.
Alas, today, the nuclear industry in the U.S. is dying. Old plants are shutting down, new plants are vastly over budget, and there doesn’t seem to be any appetite to take a risk on starting construction on next-generation plants. Where did things go wrong?
America’s nuclear champion abandons its post
Exelon (NYSE:EXC) is the country’s largest nuclear plant operator and has a huge incentive to see nuclear succeed. But it’s losing the battle to keep its older nuclear plants alive. ……
After the Illinois legislature declined to provide financial incentives to the Clinton Power Station and Quad Cities Generating Station it appears the plants are going to be the next to shut down. The company said it will close the Clinton plant next June and the Quad Cities plant a year later.
This could be a bad sign for Duke Energy (NYSE:DUK), FirstEnergy (NYSE:FE), andEntergy (NYSE:ETR), all of whom own multiple nuclear plants across the country. If Exelon can’t justify keeping plants open based on economics, how long will other plants last?
New nuclear plants have been a disaster
Older plants are being shut down, but new plants aren’t faring much better. Southern Company’s (NYSE:SO) Vogtle nuclear plant addition has seen costs surge more than 50% over the original budget to over $21 billion. And at that price, there’s no chance nuclear would be competitive on a cost basis with natural gas or renewable energy. …….http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/06/21/the-us-nuclear-boom-has-turned-into-a-dud.aspx
Financially imprudent for India to let Westinghouse build nuclear reactors
The cost of nuclear diplomacy, THE HINDU, SUVRAT RAJU, 20 JUNE 16 The government’s decision to let Westinghouse build six nuclear reactors in India smacks not only of arbitrary use of executive authority but is also financially imprudent
In their recent joint statement, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Barack Obama “welcomed the start of preparatory work… in India for six AP1000 reactors to be built by Westinghouse…” Judging by the cost of similar reactors under construction in the U.S., these six reactors may cost as much as Rs.4 lakh crore. This makes the deal potentially the largest commercial contract in the offing between the two countries.
Economically unviable When the United Progressive Alliance government announced its intention to start work on two reactors each from Westinghouse and General Electric (GE) in the 12th Plan period (2012-2017), it did little to pretend that these contracts made sense on their own merits. Instead, as the former chairperson of the Atomic Energy Commission, Anil Kakodkar, explained, India had “to keep in mind the commercial interests of foreign countries and of the companies there” and was obliged to purchase these reactors in return for U.S. diplomatic support on other issues.
Last year, GE backed out of this arrangement citing concerns about India’s liability law. This was good riddance; GE was offering India an untested design that it has not yet managed to sell anywhere in the world. But the government’s decision to deepen India’s investment in Westinghouse — even as negative news about the company has accumulated — makes little sense.
In April, Toshiba, which acquired Westinghouse in 2006, announced a $2.3 billion write-down in its value, largely because of persistent concerns about the economic viability of Westinghouse’s AP1000 design. Of more than a dozen orders that Westinghouse expected from within the U.S. a decade ago, only four have materialised. Just last month, a utility called Florida Power and Light postponed its plans for two AP1000 reactors by at least four years. And in February, the Tennessee Valley Authority, a U.S. government company, cancelled its plans for two AP1000 reactors explaining that this was “the fiscally responsible action”.
- the government has persisted in making concessions to Westinghouse. In February, it ratified the “Convention on Supplementary Compensation” (CSC) for Nuclear Damage that contradicts India’s domestic liability law and protects nuclear suppliers from liability for an accident. Now, in the event of a disaster, Indian courts may find it difficult to exercise jurisdiction over Westinghouse that is not based in India and could point to India’s international commitments under the CSC to block any potential claims against it.
- For example, Dow Chemicals has rebuffed attempts to make it contribute to a clean-up in Bhopal by arguing that Indian courts have “no jurisdiction over it”. And in a cautionary tale about how flawed international agreements can subvert the domestic legal system, in 2011, an international arbitration tribunal awarded White Industries Australia Ltd. AU$4 million under a bilateral investment treaty even as its dispute with the Indian government was sub judice in India’s Supreme Court……..http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-cost-of-nuclear-diplomacy/article8748864.ece
Call for Britain to have Russia build UK’s new nuclear stations
UK government needs a nuclear plan B, says Tim Yeo, Guardian, Terry Macalister, 19 June 16, “…….. Tim Yeo, a former chair of the energy and climate change committee, said the government should also consider whether the Russian state operator, Rosatom, or the British state could build new atomic plants.
The Hinkley project in Somerset has been hit by a series of delays, with its developer, EDF, recently postponing a final investment decision until September.
Yeo said continuing opposition from EDF unions to spending huge sums of money in Britain and political uncertainty ahead of the French elections next spring could hold up the project further……..
Yeo said the Russian political situation made it harder for the UK government, but Russian nuclear sources have previously said Rosatom would like to talk.
In 2014, a senior Decc officialconfirmed that there had been serious contact between the two sides……
The pro-nuclear campaigner said the total cost of any new reactor to energy billpayers could be reduced if the British government became directly involved, as some City analysts have claimed…….https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/19/uk-government-should-have-a-nuclear-plan-b-tim-yeo-hinkley-point-bradwell-scheme
South Carolina Electric and Gas Co slugging customers for costs of nuclear reactors that might never be built
Power surge: Cost overruns at South Carolina nuclear plant growing part of SCE&G customer bills, Post and Courier David Wren Email @David_Wren_ 19 June 16 The state legislation allowing South Carolina Electric & Gas Co. to charge customers for two new reactors at its nuclear power plant years before they are completed has been compared to making payments on a new car without knowing the final price and before it leaves the assembly line.
The monthly payments continue to rise, but it’s not certain whether the customer making those payments will ever drive the car.
At least now, SCE&G’s customers have an idea how much the expansoin of the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station is costing them each month. The state’s Office of Regulatory Staff, which represents the public’s interest in utility issues, this month said SCE&G’s customers are paying an average of $23.16 each billing period — or 16.1 percent of their total bill — toward building the Midlands nuclear plant
And that’s likely to increase if the state Public Service Commission approves the company’s request to boost the project’s cost by another $852 million to $14 billion — more than $4 billion higher than original cost estimates.
SCE&G is using a state law called the Base Load Review Act to finance the nuclear project near Jenkinsville.
The law allows the utility to charge its 700,000 customers for construction as the project proceeds. ……
Critics like Frank Knapp, president and CEO of the state’s Small Business Chamber of Commerce, say the act “has turned into a blank check” for SCE&G.
The utility is allowed by state regulators to take up to 10.5 percent of the construction costs as profit. And Knapp says the pay-as-you-go method is unfair because some customers now paying for the project will leave the utility’s service area before it comes online……. http://www.postandcourier.com/20160618/160619424/power-surge-cost-overruns-at-south-carolina-nuclear-plant-growing-part-of-sceg-customer-bills
USA nuclear plants going down like ninepins. Diablo next?
Closing Diablo would make California entirely nuke-free
Along with most nukes around the world, the only other remaining west coast reactor, WPPS2 on Washington’s Hanford military reservation, is also losing massive amounts of money.
Should California follow suit at Diablo, its conversion to a wholly green-powered economy would accelerate, likely leading Los Angeles to become the world’s first Solartopian megalopolis.
Ironically, with citizen action, a big push in that direction could now come from a state commission’s decision to enforce environmental protections signed into law by California’s most pro-nuke governor.
Because they can’t evenly compete with renewable energy or gas, a tsunami of shut-downs has swept away a dozen U.S. reactors since October, 2012. Dozens more teeter at the brink, including two at Indian Point, just north of Manhattan, and Ohio’s rapidly crumbling Davis-Besse reactor near Toledo.
5 More U.S. Nukes to Close, Will Diablo Canyon Be Next? http://ecowatch.com/2016/06/17/diablo-canyon-meeting/ Harvey Wasserman | June 17, 2016 A rising tsunami of U.S. nuke shut-downs may soon include California’s infamous Diablo Canyon double reactors. But it depends on citizen action, including a statewide petition.
Five U.S. reactor closures have been announced within the past month. A green regulatory decision on California’s environmental standards could push the number to seven.
The focus is now on a critical June 28 California State Lands Commission meeting. Set for Sacramento, the hearing could help make the Golden State totally nuke free, ending the catastrophic radioactive and global warming impacts caused by these failing plants. A public simulcast of the Sacramento meeting is expected to gather a large crowd at the Morro Bay Community Center near the reactor site. The meeting starts at 10 a.m., but environmental groups will rally outside the community center starting at 9 a.m.
The three State Lands Commissioners will decide whether to require a legally-mandated Environmental Impact Report under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If ordered, a public scoping process will begin, allowing interested groups and individuals to weigh in on the environmental impacts of operation of two nuclear reactors on California’s fragile coastline. Continue reading
Woes of France’s nuclear company AREVA, as it splits into three
French firm involved in Hinkley Point C unveils restructure plan Areva, a 10% equity participant in the Somerset scheme, reveals plans to split into three to stem losses and isolate Finnish project, Guardian, Terry Macalister, 16 June 16, Areva, one of the French companies at the heart of the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear project, has unveiled plans to break itself up into three parts in a bid to stem huge losses.
The 87% state-owned atomic engineering and uranium mining company is hoping to raise €9bn (£7bn) from the government and from selling off assets after running up losses of €2bn last year.
Areva, a 10% equity participant in the £18bn planned new Hinkley scheme, is also using the split to isolate financial commitments to a hugely delayed project at Olkiluoto in Finland……
EDF, which is also part-owed by the French state, has its own massive debt problems and had refused to buy part of Areva, as ministers wanted, unless it could take the business without any financial commitments for the Olkiluoto 3 scheme.
Areva, which is providing the same European pressurised water reactor for Olkiluoto as is planned for Hinkley, is currently in a standoff over competing legal claims with the Finnish utility TVO relating to the project in Finland…….
A formal decision to go ahead with the investment at Hinkley has been put off until September amid internal opposition at EDF from unions and others about the wisdom of taking on such a major financial commitment……..https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/15/french-firm-involved-in-hinkley-point-c-unveils-restructure-plan
Nuclear marketers see India as a saviour of nuclear industry
U.S. President Barack Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi agreed at a June 7 summit that U.S. nuclear reactor maker Westinghouse Electric, a subsidiary of Japan’s Toshiba, would build power plants in the South Asian nation. In a statement following their meeting in Washington, Modi and Obama said they welcomed the announcement by the Nuclear Power Corp. of India and Westinghouse that they would finalize a contract by June 2017. The two companies had said they would immediately begin the work of designing reactors and selecting locations.
As the nation opens its market for nuclear plants, competition is likely to intensify between the U.S., France, Japan and other countries seeking a greater market share.
France reached an agreement early this year to start a development project in western India in 2017. Although a formal agreement has yet to be signed, the country will compete with the U.S. to become the first Western country in about 40 years to deliver a reactor to India. Japan also reached a broad agreement with India in late 2015……..http://asia.nikkei.com/magazine/20160616-POWER-PERFORMERS-of-the-Asia300/Business/Nuclear-power-plant-builders-see-new-opportunities-in-India
India paying high cost to save Westinghouse’s nuclear business
The Cost of Modi’s US Visit: Offering Rs. 2.8 lakh crore to Westinghouse, News Click, Prabir Purkayastha, June 09, 2016
The 4th visit of Modi to the US has very little to show as achievements. No wonder, the headlines screamed about “the start of the preparatory work” on six nuclear reactors as a major achievement. Not content with this, the Westinghouse AP 1000 reactors were even hyped as 5th generation reactors, skipping two whole generations of reactors in between. The earlier AP 600 reactors are recognised as 2nd generation reactors, making the AP 1000 the 3rd generation, which is how they are known in the rest of the world – except to certain gentlemen in the Indian media.
The reality is that after 8 years of negotiations on the Westinghouse reactors, India has now shifted the location from Mithivirdhi in Gujarat to Srikakulam in Andhra Pradesh. The negotiations for the deal with Westinghouse are still stuck, and only a new beginning is being sought with this new site. All that Westinghouse has agreed is that they will do some preliminary work for this new site — “start of the preparatory work”.
In today’s world, nuclear energy is a dying technology. Its costs are too high, its ability to build to schedule is non existent and it faces the challenge of renewables – wind and solar – the costs of which are dropping rapidly. The US, after a brief flirtation with nuclear energy – the so-called nuclear renaissance – has pretty much decided not to invest any further in this technology.
It is only China and India that can revive the dying nuclear industry of the US. Both Westinghouse and GE are without any further orders in the US and in the EU. So it is not the US showing its willingness to “give” us nuclear reactors to India that is the issue; it is India helping to revive a patient – the US nuclear industry – which has currently one foot already in the grave.
How much are we committing to pay to revive a dying Westinghouse? Continue reading
Watts Bar-2 nuclear reactor – 43 years to build – shut down after 2 days
Nuclear fail: New reactor took 43 years to build, shut down after 2 days, REneweconomy, By Craig Morris on 16 June 2016 Renewables International
More than four decades after construction began, the Watts Bar-2 reactor was finally connected to the grid on 3 June 2016. However, two days later, while operating at 12.5 percent power, the reactor automatically shut down.
According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the reactor tripped when a high pressure turbine valve failed to open. As of 8 June 2016, the reactor has not restarted and no restart schedule has been fixed yet, according to a spokesperson for plant owner the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)……….
TVA filed the construction license application for Watts Bar on 18 May 1971. On 18 September 1972, TVA applied for the exceptional authorization of certain site preparation activities, although it had not transmitted the final environmental impact statement and the construction license was still pending. TVA argued that startup of unit 1 by May 1977 “is vital in order to permit-TVA to meet its summer 1977 peak loads” and beyond:
“The present schedule for constructing the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant is predicated on beginning construction in October 1972. This schedule is extremely tight and failure to begin construction in October casts serious doubts on TVA’s ability to meet its load commitments in the 1977-78 period.”
TVA also insisted that cost of any delay be passed on to the ratepayer:
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (81)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 