The coming wave of shutdowns of old nuclear reactors in America
One-Third Of US Nuclear Reactors Are Near Mandatory Retirement The Daily Caller, ANDREW FOLLETT, 29 Mar 16 A 39-year-old nuclear plant in Ohio, which was only designed to operate for 40 years, was shut down Sunday for life-extending maintenance.
The Ohio reactor isn’t unique either. The average age for American nuclear reactors is 35, nearly obsolete by modern design standards and near the end of 40-year operating licenses. Sixteen American nuclear reactors are more than 42 years old, according to government data compiled and mapped last week by The Daily Caller News Foundation…….
$47 billion and counting – the cost of nuclear safety upgrades, post Fukushima
Nuclear safety upgrades post-Fukushima cost $47 billion, The Barrel, Platt’s, 20 Mar 16 Five years after the accident at Fukushima I in Japan resulted in three reactor meltdowns, the global nuclear industry is spending $47 billion on safety enhancements mandated after the accident revealed weaknesses in plant protection from earthquakes and flooding. This is according to a Platts review put together by Steven Dolley in DC, Benjamin Leveau in London, Yuzo Yamaguchi from Tokyo, as well as Platts correspondents in Sweden, South Korea and China.
Reactions to the March 11, 2011 accident ranged from pauses in new nuclear construction programs in China to Germany’s decision to gradually phase out nuclear generation.
But in the majority of countries with nuclear power, plans for new reactors have been scaled back, not just because of the Fukushima I accident but for economic reasons, as competing sources of power become less expensive, renewable energy grows in popularity and slow economic growth curbs demand.
Global nuclear regulators carried out reviews of the accident, and in most countries nuclear plant operators were required to install backup sources of electric power and cooling water along with additional protection from earthquakes and flooding. A record-setting earthquake triggered a tsunami that swamped backup emergency power generators and disabled on-site power distribution systems at Fukushima I, leading to a complete loss of cooling.
Those safety improvements have come at a high cost.
A Platts review found that in nine of the 13 countries with the largest nuclear fleets, costs to comply with post-Fukushima requirements will total more than $40 billion, mostly before 2020. Those countries accounted for 289, or two-thirds, of the power reactors in operation worldwide.
The median of the costs was $46.9 million/reactor.
If the remaining reactors not covered in the Platts survey spent the median amount to meet post-Fukushima regulatory requirements, the global cost to make post-Fukushima enhancements would be $47.2 billion. The greatest cost per country was in Japan, where operators may spend $640 million per reactor to enhance safety.
The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency released a five-year status report on the Fukushima I accident, concluding that actions implemented by member countries had improved the overall safety of the world’s nuclear fleet, but that enhancing safety remains “a long-term process.”……..
Anti-nuclear groups have said the regulatory and industry response following the Fukushima I accident has been insufficient. Regulators in the US have “capitulated” to industry by failing to order vent filters, the group Beyond Nuclear said in a March 10 statement.
Measures to protect nuclear plants from earthquakes and flooding have left unaddressed vulnerabilities in areas such as plant security, the group said.
The biggest problem facing US nuclear plant operators recently has been economic. Low natural gas prices and an abundance of cheap renewable electricity in some markets have created financial problems for nuclear plants in competitive electricity markets. Entergy in late 2015 said it would permanently shut two stations, the 849 MW FitzPatrick in New York state and 728 MW Pilgrim in Massachusetts.
Japan’s nuclear reactors were all shut following the Fukushima I accident, and only two have met regulatory requirements and restarted.
The country’s nuclear industry has budgeted about Yen 3.1 trillion ($27.5 billion) for earthquake and tsunami protection following the accident………http://blogs.platts.com/2016/03/29/nuclear-safety-upgrades-post-fukushima/
India’s push for solar power to bring over a million jobs
India Solar Power Push May Produce Over 1 Million Jobs http://cleantechnica.com/2016/03/23/india-solar-power-push-may-produce-over-1-million-jobs/ March 23rd, 2016 by Smiti Mittal Originally published on Sustainnovate. India’s massive solar power capacity addition target is expected to be a revolution in the Indian jobs market as well.
According to a report by the Natural Resources and Defense Council (NRDC), India may end up creating over a million new jobs in its endeavour to have 100 GW of operational solar power capacity by March 2022.
The report suggests that a massive army of engineers, construction, and maintenance workers shall be required set up the scores of solar power capacity planned by the central and state governments.
Around 210,800 site engineers and designers would be required to set the large-scale as well as rooftop solar power systems rolling. Around 624,600 semi-skilled workers would be needed for the construction and on-field execution of the projects. To monitor ongoing operations at the power plants and their maintenance, another 182,400 semi-skilled workers would be needed. Thus, a total of 1,017,800 jobs are expected be created if India indeed manages to set up a cumulative operational capacity of 100 GW by 2022.
Jobs creation and empowering youth is one of the major policies of the current government. The ‘Skill India’ program launched by the Indian government aims to provide employment to youth by providing them industrial training in the solar power sector. Several agencies across the country have already started such training programs.
Some state governments have also announced financial support to unemployed youth to set up rooftop solar power systems to help them generate a source of income.
Nuclear safety too costly for Japan- scraps 6th nuclear reactor
Japan scraps 6th nuclear reactor since tsunami disaster over heavy safety costs http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/japan-scraps-6th-nuclear-reactor-since-tsunami-disaster-over-heavy-safety-costsTOKYO (AFP) – Japanese nuclear power operator said on Friday (March 25) it would decommission an ageing reactor because of the cost of upgrading, the sixth to be scrapped due to tougher rules brought in after the Fukushima disaster.
Japan is pushing to restart its nuclear reactors, which were shuttered after a huge earthquake-triggered tsunami sent the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant into meltdown in 2011.
But safety regulations brought in after the disaster, which require companies to build structures to guard against huge waves and earthquakes, means it could cost billions to overhaul old reactors. Only two are on line after passing the tests, while power companies have already announced plans to scrap at least five other old reactors.
Shikoku Electric Power had planned to restart the No. 1 reactor at Ikata nuclear complex in Ehime, western Japan, but said Friday it would decommission the 39-year-old technology instead.
The Nikkei business daily estimated safety upgrades needed to meet the new safety standards could cost 200 billion yen (S$2.43 billion).
Japan set up an independent watchdog, the Nuclear Regulation Authority, after the Fukushima disaster, replacing the previous arrangement where the industry ministry both oversaw the regulator and promoted nuclear power.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and utility companies have been pushing for a return to nuclear power as the disaster forced Japan to turn to pricey fossil fuels to plug the energy gap left by the shutdowns.
USA’s nuclear industry in death spiral?
Has U.S. Nuclear Power’s Death Spiral Begun? With carbon markets and subsidies in doubt, nuclear is no longer affordable IEEE Spectrum, By Peter Fairley 25 Mar 2016 U.S. nuclear power plant operators are fighting a war on two fronts: Crashing prices for natural gas and accelerating market penetration of renewable energy have both contributed to dramatic drops in wholesale power price levels—in some states, they’ve fallen by more than two-thirds over the past decade. This has left nuclear power, whose operating costs are pretty much fixed, with few options other than surrender.
That marks quite a reversal, says Gregory Jaczko, former chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “It’s been a widely held belief that nuclear is incredibly cheap to operate. That was the case 10 years ago, when nuclear plants were cash cows. That’s not the case today, especially as the plants age,” he says.
Fission is already giving ground. Two plants, in Wisconsin and Vermont, shut down in 2013 and 2014, respectively. More shutdowns are anticipated in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York, and at least half a dozen more plants are teetering on the brink of insolvency.
Nuclear operators had been expecting President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which would have established national carbon regulations and increased the cost of fossil-fuel-generated electricity, to offer them a reprieve. But their hope was short-lived: The U.S. Supreme Court decided in February to stay implementation of the plan.
Operators’ next best hope is that state governments will be motivated to step in and save them. ……
By June, state regulators plan to detail special payments for New York’s nuclear plants. For companies that open their books and show that their plants are losing money, New York is vowing to make them whole.
“It’s probably the stickiest energy policy question there is in the electric sector,” says Julien Dumoulin-Smith, a senior power markets analyst with New York City–based UBS Investment Research.
New York is not alone. Several states, including Illinois and Ohio, are seeking to give nuclear power plants an extra boost. Exelon lists the dual-reactor Quad Cities site in Illinois among its uncompetitive plants. Dumoulin-Smith says local power prices are being “pummeled” by wind power, noting that Quad Cities sits just across the border from Iowa, which leads the United States in wind power penetration.
Quad Cities, along with Exelon’s nine other reactors in Illinois, caught a break from regional grid operator PJM, which last year began offering more supplements to power plants that commit to staying in its energy market for several years, thus backstopping its power supply. Those Illinois plants raked in more than US $1.5 billion from PJM’s capacity market last September, ensuring that Quad Cities will remain in operation through mid-2018.
But experts say that tougher times could lie ahead, as the extension of tax breaks for wind and solar power voted through the U.S. Congress in December fuels further growth in renewable generation. New York’s program appears to anticipate this, positing that assistance to nuclear reactors is more of a temporary lifeline than a long-term guarantee. State aid is, according to a white paper from the N.Y. Public Service Commission, a means of supporting “a smooth emission-free transition from nuclear to nonnuclear resources” in the event that energy prices “are not able to support the continued financial viability of the [fission] plants.” This article appears in the March 2016 print issue as “U.S. Fission Fizzles.” http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/nuclear/has-us-nuclear-powers-death-spiral-begun
Safety upgrade costs spur Shikoku Electric to ditch plan to restart aging Ehime reactor
Japan Times 25 Mar 16 OSAKA – Shikoku Electric Power Co. plans to give up restarting reactor 1 of its Ikata nuclear complex in Ehime Prefecture and scrap it because extending the aging unit’s lifespan would be hugely expensive, company sources said Friday. – (subscribers only) http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/03/25/national/safety-upgrade-costs-spur-shikoku-electric-ditch-plan-restart-aging-ehime-reactor/#.VvS2Sex97Gh
Years more delay for EDF’s Flamanville nuclear power station
EDF’s French nuclear plant faces years of further delay, Ft.com 20 Mar 16 Kiran Stacey and Tom Burgis EDF’s new nuclear power station in France faces years of further delays if tests confirm that the steel used in its reactor is flawed, the country’s atomic watchdog has warned.
It is one of the clearest signals to date of the scale of the setback faced by the French utility. The flagship plant at Flamanville in Normandy has already been subject to years of delays and cost overruns, which have made it difficult for EDF to fund the identically designed £18bn reactor at Hinkley Point in the UK — a key element in Britain’s energy strategy.
Initially, Flamanville was expected to cost €3.3bn and start operations in 2012 — it is now planned to start in 2018 at a cost of €10.5bn.
But Julien Collet, the deputy director of France’s Nuclear Safety Authority, has said that it could be delayed further by several years, depending on the results of tests started last year and due to end this summer on the steel being used in the reactor core.
If the steel fails the tests, regulators could order EDF to rip out and replace the top and bottom of the reactor vessel. Mr Collet told the Financial Times: “It takes a lot of time to build new components like this — we’re talking years.”……
The concerns over the steel used in the Flamanville plant are only the latest in a string of misfortunes at that project and another in Finland, both of which use Areva’s European Pressurised Reactor, or EPR, model.
These delays have caused difficulties for EDF’s contentious new project at Hinkley Point in Somerset, which was originally planned for 2017 but is now set to be built by 2025…….
EDF was thrown a lifeline last week, however, when Emmanuel Macron, the French economy minister said his government would recapitalise the company if necessary.
But executives will come under scrutiny on Wednesday when they are grilled in Westminster about Hinkley Point by MPs on the cross-party energy select committee. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/73d62552-ec65-11e5-bb79-2303682345c8.html#axzz43g9nsyxB
AREVA’s huge loss on Finland nuclear project
Areva Posts 2.04 Billion-Euro Loss on Finnish Project http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-25/areva-delays-results-by-24-hours-after-securing-bridge-loan, 25 Feb 16 Francois De Beaupuy
The company, 87 percent owned by the French government, had a net loss of 2.04 billion euros in 2015 after a loss of 4.83 billion euros a year earlier, the company based near Paris said Friday in a statement. It took a 905 million-euro charge related to the Finnish power station project due to extra operating costs and the “probable impact” of further discussions with the customer to settle the disputes over the project and bring it to completion.
Areva said it expects negative net cash flow from operations in 2016 in the range of 1.5 billion to 2 billion euros, due partly to expenses to be incurred on large projects and an unfavorable change in working capital requirements.
As a result, Areva’s credit rating was downgraded in December by Standard & Poor’s to B+, four steps below investment grade. Shares of the company have dropped 32 percent this year, extending a drop of 40 percent in 2015. The company delayed its earnings report by one day in order to finalize a bridge loan.
EDF has said it will buy a majority stake in Areva’s reactor unit provided it’s not exposed to the Finnish atomic plant project.
Russia funding and building new nuclear power station in Finland
Russian nuclear corporation to start construction of Hanhikivi NPP in Finland in 2017 http://tass.ru/en/economy/864293 NOVO-OGAREVO, March 22. /TASS/. Construction of the Hanhikivi 1 nuclear power plant in Finland to be implemented by the Russian nuclear corporation Rosatom will start in 2017. Such information is contained in materials for the working visit of Finland’s President Sauli Niinisto to Moscow.The power plant is expected to start generating electric power in 2024.
In December 2013, Rusatom Overseas [Rosatom’s subsidiary – TASS] and Finnish Fennovoima signed the contract for construction of Hanhikivi-1 nuclear power plant. Along with the construction contract, a ten-year fuel contract was signed with Russia’s company TVEL.
Russia’s revenues from the Hanhikivi-1 nuclear power plant project will amount to €17.5 bln , head of Rosatom Sergey Kiriyenko said earlier. Of this amount only taxes to the federal budget will exceed €3 bln, he added.
According to Finnish media, the project’s cost will reach €6-7 bln, of which €1.6 bln will be invested by Fennovoima and the rest by Rosatom. The commissioning of the new nuclear power plant is scheduled for 2024.
Rusatom Overseas is to supply 1,200Mt reactor for Hakhikivi-1.
Future for nuclear energy in South Africa is not looking good.
Future looks bleak for nuclear energy: expert, Times Live Matthew le Cordeur | 22 March, 2016 Nuclear power generation has turned into an expensive operation, even when the machines are amortised, said nuclear expert Mycle Schneider. Schneider, author of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report, told Fin24 on Monday that he questioned whether nuclear power can be seen as an alternative to a whole range of other energy options.
Schneider’s 2015 report, which was released in South Africa this month, concluded that “the promise that Generation III+ designs would be simpler and therefore easier to build appears not to have been fulfilled”.
“Real costs have increased significantly compared to their predecessors suggesting the attempt to reduce complexity was not a success.
“The ‘nuclear renaissance’ appears, in retrospect, to have been a last chance for light water reactor technology,” the report says. “Given the failure to reduce costs – and there are few who would forecast costs are going to go down at all, much less decline to the levels originally claimed – and the apparent failure to reduce the incidence of construction overruns, the future looks bleak for light water technology.”
South Africa is forging ahead to build 9.6 GW of nuclear energy, which critics believe will drain the country’s fiscus due to the large upfront infrastructure costs they say will experience time and budget overruns.
Request for proposals – which would focus on the Generation III+ designs – will be released before the end of the month, the Department of Energy said.
Nuclear for SA would only be ready by 2025
“Nuclear power has the longest lead time of any option to generate electricity,” Schneider told Fin24. “The average construction time of the 40 nuclear reactors that have been brought on line in the world in the past 10 years was about 9.5 years, to which one has to add several years of site preparation and licensing procedures.
“In other words, new nuclear would only be available in SA after 2025. Other options, especially efficiency and renewables, can be implemented within months,” he said.
Schneider said that nuclear energy’s high capital expenditure (capex), low operating expenditure (opex) paradigm is gone.
“Nuclear power generation has turned into an expensive operation, even when the machines are amortised,” he said. “As assessments by the French Energy Regulatory Commission (CRE) and the French Court of Accounts have shown, all of the cost items have increased significantly, to reach a 20.6% increase between 2010 and 2013 to reach about 60 €/MWh.
“The ‘base load’ concept is also rapidly outlived by reality in the market,” he said. “With increasing penetration of renewables, flexibility is the master word.”
Nuclear the least flexible power
“Nuclear power is the least flexible of all of the power generating technologies and is therefore hardly suitable for a future orientated power grid with high levels of decentralised renewables,” he said……..http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2016/03/22/Future-looks-bleak-for-nuclear-energy-expert
New York looks to fees to save uneconomic nuclear power stations
NY eyes fee to save some nuclear plants Democrat and Chronicle March 20, 2016 ALBANY – New York’s energy regulators have a problem. ……… two of the state’s three upstate nuclear plants — the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in Wayne County and the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant in Oswego County — are facing financial trouble and could close as soon as mid-2017. The third, Nine Mile Point, is also in Oswego County.
A fourth plant — the Indian Point Energy Center in Buchanan, Westchester County —is facing opposition from Gov. Andrew Cuomo as owner Entergy Corp. seeks new federal licenses.
The solution? Money……..
“Nuclear is one thing. Nuclear a stone’s throw from 20 million people when you have no evacuation plan is problematic,” Cuomo told reporters Wednesday in Rochester.
In December, Cuomo directed the Public Service Commission to install the state’s carbon-cutting goals into state regulations. As part of that, Cuomo — who appoints the commission’s members — directed the board to come up with a plan to help save the “upstate nuclear facilities,” but not Indian Point.
The commission outlined its plan in late January. And, as expected, the proposal excluded Indian Point: Only plants with valid federal licenses through 2029 would be eligible. And Indian Point’s licenses are technically expired, though it is awaiting federal approval.
The remaining three nuclear plants — Ginna, FitzPatrick and Nine Mile Point — would be eligible……
EDF’s Flamanville nuclear power project – ever more delays
EDF’s French nuclear plant faces years of further delay,Ft.com, 20 Mar 16 EDF’s new nuclear power station in France faces years of further delays if tests confirm that the steel used in its reactor is flawed, the country’s atomic watchdog has warned.
It is one of the clearest signals to date of the scale of the setback faced by the French utility. The flagship plant at Flamanville in Normandy has already been subject to years of delays and cost overruns, which have made it difficult for EDF to fund the identically designed £18bn reactor at Hinkley Point in the UK — a key element in Britain’s energy strategy.
Initially, Flamanville was expected to cost €3.3bn and start operations in 2012 — it is now planned to start in 2018 at a cost of €10.5bn.
But Julien Collet, the deputy director of France’s Nuclear Safety Authority, has said that it could be delayed further by several years, depending on the results of tests started last year and due to end this summer on the steel being used in the reactor core.
If the steel fails the tests, regulators could order EDF to rip out and replace the top and bottom of the reactor vessel. Mr Collet told the Financial Times: “It takes a lot of time to build new components like this — we’re talking years.”
The difficulties EDF is having with the steel at Flamanville have been caused by problems with the process of cooling and cutting a 450-tonne ingot of steel, which created an area the size of a dinner plate that was slightly more brittle than it should have been.
Areva, the French nuclear company in whose reactor business EDF is due to take a controlling stake, is working with regulators to test an identical piece to determine if it could lead to weakness in the reactor vessel.
The problem was discovered in late 2014 but EDF opted to push ahead with construction, potentially making it much more difficult to replace the faulty steel if needed……..
having agreed to fund 66.5 per cent of the [UK’s Hinkley Point C nuclear] project last year, EDF has delayed giving it final approval, with some at the top of the company arguing more investors should be brought in first.
Finding outside investment has been difficult because of the problems being experienced with other EPRs in France and Finland, according to senior people within the company………http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/73d62552-ec65-11e5-bb79-2303682345c8.html#axzz43TzEfz49
High costs loom for Xcel Energy’s nuclear reactors
Xcel Energy faces more big investments to keep its nuclear units running Xcel faces $487 million in upgrades at its Prairie Island facility by 2020 By David Shaffer Star Tribune MARCH 19, 2016
The high cost of upgrading 40-year-old nuclear reactors is confronting Xcel Energy again.
Investments in the Prairie Island nuclear power plant in Red Wing, Minn., are projected to cost more than expected — $487 million by 2
20, with more spending needed in the next decade.
It’s not a replay of cost overruns at Xcel’s other reactor in Monticello, Minn. That 2013 surprise, which state regulators blamed on imprudent management, led Xcel to write off $125 million last year………
in a fresh surprise, Xcel also has offered to study shutting down Prairie Island years before the reactors’ operating licenses expire in 2033-34. Xcel isn’t pushing early retirement, which would accelerate the costly job of decommissioning. It’s an option being presented to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, which regulates Xcel’s rates and investments.
Two nuclear plants, including one in Wisconsin, have shut down for economic reasons since 2013. Four other nuclear plants in other states face similar challenges and are slated to close by 2019.
Even if Xcel retires its Prairie Island units in the 2020s, the Minneapolis-based utility said significant investment is needed just to keep them operating for a few years. One of the plant’s two generators is the original unit, and is to be replaced in 2018 if not sooner. Four cooling towers also need refurbishment or replacement, as do dozens of decades-old pumps, motors and controls, the utility said…….. the near-term investment in the Prairie Island plant isn’t the end of the story. Xcel said another $600 million to $900 million in additional work likely will be needed at Prairie Island in the 2020s………http://www.startribune.com/xcel-energy-faces-more-big-investments-to-keep-its-nuclear-units-running/372610701/
UK taxpayers up for huge liabilities if Hinkley nuclear power project goes ahead?
“The £22bn ‘poison pill’ effectively reduces the risk to zero for EDF and its backers, which is great for them. But from an outside perspective, it smacks of desperation.”
“Energy economics are changing rapidly and so the momentum is towards decentralised, smart and flexible energy systems. It is moving away from large, inflexible power plants like Hinkley. If it ever gets funded, it will be a white elephant before it is even finished and this government, with this £22bn ‘poison pill’, will have tied the next generation into paying for it, for no reason that I can understand. If it is simply political saving face, it really is pitiful.”
Hinkley Point C nuclear deal contains £22bn ‘poison pill’ for taxpayer
Public left with huge liability for a government closure of power plant before 2060 under UK’s agreement with EDF, Guardian, Damian Carrington, 18 Mar 16, The Hinkley nuclear power deal contains a “poison pill” which could leave taxpayers with a £22bn bill if a future UK government closed the plant before 2060, according to an official document seen by the Guardian.
The huge liability shows Hinkley is a “terrible deal” for the UK public, according to critics, with the company also guaranteed three times today’s price for electricity for 35 years. The project has recently been battered by financial warnings and resignations at its prime backer EDF, although on Thursday France’s economics minister, Emmanuel Macron, said that the French state would bail the company out.
The deal the UK government has agreed with EDF, set out in an unpublicised “minute”, commits the British public to pay subsidies of up to about £40bn in real terms and provides state guarantees on nuclear waste disposal and insurance, while allowing the plant to begin producing electricity as late as 2033.
A shutdown that triggers the “poison pill” compensation is not entirely within the control of the UK government but could also be forced by the EU or an international regulator such as the International AtomicEnergy Agency, according to the document. [ EU par inserted here on original]
“This is a dreadful agreement for the nation,” said Prof Catherine Mitchell, an energy policy expert at the University of Exeter. “The government is already paying a high price, index-linked for an incredibly long 35 years. This should be more than sufficient for a professional, business contract.
“The £22bn ‘poison pill’ effectively reduces the risk to zero for EDF and its backers, which is great for them. But from an outside perspective, it smacks of desperation.”
“There could be so many reasons over 35 years that you would want to close the plant,” she said, including rising costs, changes to the UK’s energy system or loss of public confidence.
Green party MP Caroline Lucas said: “Even before we knew about this ‘poison pill’, Hinkley represented a terrible deal for taxpayers and a huge burden on bill payers too. This flies in the face of relentless ministerial rhetoric on value for consumers – especially compared to the costs of solar power and wind – which are already cheaper than nuclear and continue to fall.”………
Former Conservative energy secretary Lord Howell has criticised the Hinkley dealas “one of the worst deals ever” for British consumers and industry and has protested against “endless government guarantees for risk-free returns to the investors”.
Tom Burke at thinktank E3G, a former special adviser to three Conservative environment secretaries, said: “Why would a Conservative government want to buy 35 years of electricity ahead of time? They are supposed to believe in the market. But they have tied themselves in knots and now it is too embarrassing to untie it.”
The UK government argues that new nuclear power is essential to provide large amounts of reliable, low-carbon energy.
But Mitchell said: “Energy economics are changing rapidly and so the momentum is towards decentralised, smart and flexible energy systems. It is moving away from large, inflexible power plants like Hinkley. If it ever gets funded, it will be a white elephant before it is even finished and this government, with this £22bn ‘poison pill’, will have tied the next generation into paying for it, for no reason that I can understand. If it is simply political saving face, it really is pitiful.” http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/18/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-deal-22bn-poison-pill-taxpayer
Toshiba to dump its nuclear business, as U.S. units probed?
Toshiba says it may write down nuclear business, U.S. units probed, Reuters TOKYO | BY MAKIKO YAMAZAKI AND RITSUKO ANDO , 18 Mar 16, Japan’s Toshiba Corp (6502.T) said on Friday it was looking at whether it would need to write down its nuclear business given damage to the company’s credit profile after a $1.3 billion accounting scandal last year.
The electronics conglomerate also confirmed a report that U.S. authorities are probing accounting at its U.S. units, although its Westinghouse nuclear power subsidiary denied that its finances were under investigation.
Wanting to draw a line under the accounting scandal, Toshiba has sought to move on to streamlining its businesses, whose poor performances had been masked by years of false bookkeeping.
At a business strategy update on Friday, it unveiled an extra 3,000 job cuts, taking its planned total to 14,000 – a restructuring measure that comes on top of a $5.9 billion sale of its medical equipment unit as well as the sale of its home appliances business announced this week.
But the latest developments concerning its nuclear business and the probe highlight that its accounting woes are far from over…….
The Asahi newspaper reported earlier on Friday that Toshiba is considering a 200 billion yen ($1.8 billion) writedown for Westinghouse, fanning investor concerns that the value of assets and goodwill related to the unit were overstated.
Nuclear power has become less popular since Toshiba’s acquisition of Westinghouse in 2006, especially in the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima disaster which prompted many countries to freeze nuclear energy expansion plans.
Toshiba confirmed a Bloomberg report that several U.S. units have received a request forinformation
from the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding accounting issues…..http://www.reuters.com/article/us-toshiba-accounting-idUSKCN0WK02J
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 (82)
- 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 