Nuclear power: just not economic

Meltdown: A Gloomy Look at the Economics of Nuclear Power

The WALL STREET JOURNAL

By Keith Johnson 16 Sept 09

There’s a new paper out from Spanish researchers at Universidad Pontificia Comillas exploring nuclear economics. Spain, you may recall, has its own debate about the future viability of nuclear energy.

The paper poses a simple question: Does nuclear energy add up to a rational investment in a liberalized energy market? Continue reading →

September 18, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 2 WORLD, business and costs | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive | Leave a comment

Big push for nuclear in italy

Energy Collective by Dan Yurman on 09/16/2009″…………Italy is moving to build eight new nuclear reactors after earlier this year overturning a two-decade old ban on them……… Continue reading →

September 17, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, Italy | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

AREVA’s flagship nuclear reactors – costs are out of control

European Expert: U.S. Policymakers Are ‘As Wrong As They Can Be’ About The French Experience With Nuclear Power Marignac Says

REUTERS WASHINGTON, Sept. 15 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/

………………..The French EPR Reactor is a new reactor design developed by the company Areva in cooperation with the German firm Siemens. Serious doubts have been raised about the safety and cost of the EPR. Experience in the construction at the two sites where EPRs are being built, in Finland (Olkiluoto 3) and France (Flamanville 3), has revealed serious and fundamental weaknesses in design, problems during construction phases and soaring costs. Continue reading →

September 16, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, France | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive | 1 Comment

Mega Uranium’s losses due to mismanagement

Mega Shareholders
Megames, African September 15, 2009
Are the shareholders aware of the loses incurred by the public officers because of negligence :

1. US$ 35,000 (LOSS) – Legal Fees – Lost court battle in SA and Mega Uranium subsidiary was liquidated

2. US$ 54,000.00 (LOSS) – Cash in bank – Mega Uranium subsidiary was liquidated

3. US$ 246,000.00 (LOSS) – Drilling Machine – Mega Uranium subsidiary was liquidated

This equates to a loss of more than US$ 335,000.00 LOSS which is a lot less than creditors were owed in SA for which Mega Uranium refused to settle.So is this the way shareholders funds should be used?
Megamess: Mega Shareholders

September 16, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, South Africa | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, uranium | Leave a comment

French expert debunking the myths of the nuclear “renaissance”

Leading European Industry Expert to Debunk Myth of ‘French Nuclear Model’
REUTERS 14 Sept 09
For U.S. 50 Years of French Failings in Nuclear Power Seen As Poor Model for U.S.; Nation’s Nuclear Woes Seen Escalating in Huge Cost Overruns at Finnish, Flamanville Reactor Projects Continue reading →

September 15, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, 2 WORLD, business and costs | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

Grim financial outlook for nuclear power

The medical and economic costs of nuclear power
OnLine opinion By Helen Caldicott – 14 September 2009
“………………Turning from the human health costs to the monetary, another relevant study related to the nuclear power debate examined the economic feasibility of a “nuclear renaissance” at this time. The World Nuclear Industry Status Report published in August 2009 states that the nuclear industry continues to face steadily increasing construction costs and future cost estimates. Continue reading →

September 15, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, 2 WORLD, business and costs | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear spin, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

‘Nuclear Renaissance’ dragging on slowly but not surely

A ‘Nuclear Renaissance’ Stumbles Forward
The New York Times September 9, 2009, By Matthew L. Wald
A dispatch from the uneven march toward new nuclear reactor construction:…………………..With a recession that has both reduced demand for electricity and made it difficult for utilities to borrow money, considerable uncertainty surrounds planned reactor projects — despite the expedited process.. Continue reading →

September 10, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs | Leave a comment

Oyster Creek nuclear plant aging and problematic

Nation’s oldest nuclear plant showing its age
Google News By WAYNE PARRY (AP) 10 Sept 09 LACEY TOWNSHIP, N.J. — As the nation’s oldest nuclear power plant shows its age, some call it Oyster Creak.The latest problems — a series of radioactive water leaks — were found just days after the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station got a new 20-year license that environmentalists bitterly fought for four years. Continue reading →

September 10, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive | Leave a comment

Belarusian Nuclear Power costly and dangerous

Belarusian Nuclear Power Project: Dangerous and Expensive
BIELAR.US 8 Sept 09 “…………a nuclear plant built by Russia on a Russian loan, serviced by Russian technicians and fed with Russian fuel might be a very good deal for Russia, but will hardly make Belarus more independent. Continue reading →

September 8, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, Belarus, business and costs | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear wastes, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

AREVA’s profits wiped out by new nuclear reactor troubles

OL3 EPR wipes out AREVA profits
Nuclear Reaction 5 Sept 09
The OL3 nuclear European Pressurized Reactor (EPR), being built by French nuclear giant AREVA at Olkiluoto in Finland, is in such desperate financial trouble it has single-handedly wiped out the company’s half year profits. Continue reading →

September 5, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, France | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, radioactive | Leave a comment

AREVA threatening Finland’s TVO company over nuclear reactor fiasco

The Nukes of (legal) Hazard: Areva threatens work stoppage at Finnish nuke
Climate progress 1 Sept 09
Escalating a dispute between the companies as to who is to blame for the schedule slippage, Areva said Monday it will not proceed with work on the delayed Olkiluoto nuclear reactor project in Finland until Finnish utility TVO makes unspecified changes to the project.Areva, the French government-owned nuclear giant, made that disclosure in a financial statement for the first half of 2009.

Ouch. That is from Energy Daily (subs. req’d). The Financial Times story begins:

The financial risks of nuclear power were cast into sharp relief on Monday as Areva, the French state-owned group, revealed new provisions on its troubled Finnish reactor project that virtually wiped out interim operating profits.

Double ouch!

The ongoing saga between Areva and Finland is now more like an episode of Desperate Housewives than a sitcom,

The Nukes of (legal) Hazard, Episode 5: Areva threatens work stoppage at Finnish nuke « Climate Progress

September 5, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, Finland | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, nuclear costs | Leave a comment

US Dept of Energy preventing tax-payer comment about nuclear loan money?

civil-liberty-2sm The U.S. Department of Energy is attempting to fast track its nuclear loan guarantee program by drastically limiting the opportunity for the public to comment on changes to its regulations.

On August 7^th, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) posted an announcement in the Federal Register in which it weakened the rules, as by moving taxpayers further back in the line of lenders who would be paid back in the event of nuclear project default. This puts taxpayers at increased risk of being left holding the bag for tens of billions of dollars in loan repayments when new nuclear projects go belly up.

Despite such astronomical financial risks, and the complex technical nature of the regulatory changes, DOE has allowed just 30 days for the submission of public comments. The month-long comment period just happened to coincide with the August Congressional recess, with watchdog groups as well as House and Senate Members and staff away on travel. Many could well remain unaware of the changes until Congress resumes the day after Labor Day – the very day comments are due – Tuesday, Sept. 8^th.

Read the details on DOE’s proposed nuclear loan guarantees.

September 3, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, USA | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, uranium | Leave a comment

Costly delays in fixing nuclear plant

Point Lepreau refurbishment 9 months late
September 2, 2009 ATCBC News

The troubled $1.4-billion refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear reactor is suffering another setback, pushing the massive project nine months behind schedule, CBC News has learned.

Sources inside NB Power say the refurbishment of the reactor is being stalled because of problems with the installation of the plant’s new calandria tubes…………

Point Lepreau is the first Candu-6 reactor to undergo a complete gutting and rebuild. It was intended to be a showcase for AECL to display its ability to revive the 1980s-era reactors.

When the refurbishment project started, it was supposed to last 18 months and have the reactor back on line in October 2010

However, crews at Point Lepreau struggled to deconstruct the old reactor, finally finishing that stage in late July, almost eight months behind schedule.

NB Power has acknowledged delays at Point Lepreau will cost $20 million a month.

Point Lepreau refurbishment 9 months late

September 3, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, Canada | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive | Leave a comment

Finland’s nuclear plant: more delays, cost overruns

More Delays at Finnish Nuclear Plant
The New York Times. September 2, 2009, By James Kanter
AREVA a French nuclear construction company, said this week that its project to build the world’s most powerful reactor remained mired in delays and was over-budget by 2.3 billion euros, or about $3.3 billion.

The price tag of the plant in Olkiluoto, Finland — the first of a fleet of so-called evolutionary power reactors that Areva foresees building in coming years — was about $4.3 billion in 2003 and costs have steadily increased.

The reactor was meant to have gone online early this summer but Areva no longer is committing to any dates for its completion. Patrice Lambert de Diesbach, an energy analyst with CM-CIC Securities in Paris, said the latest developments were “bad news” for Areva and “should be sanctioned by the market.”

The problems faced by Areva are important a time when the nuclear power industry is promising to build safer and more reliable reactors than during the last building boom in the 1960s and early 1970s. …………………………

So far there are few signs of a breakthrough in Finland.

Areva said this week that it would not begin work on the final stages of the reactor until the Finnish utility agreed to a new set of proposals and modifications.

More Delays at Finnish Nuclear Plant – Green Inc. Blog – NYTimes.com

September 3, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, business and costs, Finland | antinuclear, AREVA, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment

Paladin loss, as uranium price slips

Money Sept 2 09
…….- Paladin’s loss was greater than the broker expected, given greater ramp-up and exploration costs. With cashflow tight Paladin has been forced to draw down on its debt facility although first half FY10 inventory sales mean it’s just a bridging deal.

Paladin’s realised uranium price was also lower than expected given a higher level of spot over contract sales. As the U price continues to drift and the Kayakelera ramp-up remains slow, the broker sees no positive catalysts. Hold retained on slightly lower earnings forecasts.

FN Arena Broker Call Headlines – 2 Sep 2009

September 3, 2009 Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, 2 WORLD, business and costs | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, radioactive, uranium | Leave a comment