nuclear-news

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

Putin Still Selling U.S. Nearly $1 Billion in Nuclear Fuel

NewsWeek, BY ANNA SKINNER ON 5/11/23

The United States has done a thorough job of sanctioning Russia, but it still relies on the nation for one key resource.

The U.S. and other Western nations were quick to sanction Russia after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Western allies joined forces in sanctioning resources like Russian oil and gas to deprive the Kremlin of financial gain amid funneling money into its war against Ukraine. International companies located in Russia also were quick to leave, further damaging the Russian economy, but Russia still maintains a firm grasp on a horde of something that many other countries want: nuclear fuel.

Nuclear energy, which generates power through a process of splitting uranium atoms, has evaded sanctions more than a year into the war. Enriching uranium is a highly specialized process that can only be done in certain countries, such as Russia. Russia has some of the world’s largest uranium supplies, and it also excels in the necessary process of converting it to enriched uranium, which then can be used as nuclear fuel. Commercial plants converting uranium operate in Russia, Canada, China and France, with Russia having the most infrastructure needed for the conversion……………..

Because of this, Rosatom State Nuclear Energy Corporation—Russia’s collection of nuclear suppliers—provides a quarter of the U.S.’s nuclear fuel, and the United States continues to pay for the resource, spending a collective $1 billion last year, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal.

………………. In March, the U.S.’s first nuclear reactor in seven years started nuclear reactions in Georgia. CNBC reported that including the new reactor, there are 93 reactors throughout the United States providing a fifth of the nation’s energy. A quarter of the nuclear resources needed to power that energy is sourced from Rosatom.

U.S. companies are paying steeply for the resources needed to power its reactors, which means it is funding both Russia and Ukraine during the war….. https://www.newsweek.com/putin-selling-us-nearly-billion-dollars-nuclear-fuel-1799788

May 13, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, USA | 1 Comment

Sowing Seeds of Plunder: A Lose-Lose Situation in Ukraine

President Zelenskyy put the land reform into law in 2020 against the will of the vast majority of the population who feared it would exacerbate corruption and reinforce control by powerful interests in the agricultural sector. 

The largest landholders are a mix of Ukrainian oligarchs and foreign interests — mostly European and North American as well as the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia. 

Ed note: The irony of it! Ukrainians hold the hated memory of Soviet Russia starving Ukraine, as it sent their grain to Russia. Now we have the Western world helping themselves to Ukraine’s agriculture – with increasing farming for export, – pushing out the livelihood’s of Ukrainian small farmers. Zelensky – seen as a hero/saviour for now – – but how will this clown be remembered?

y Colin Todhunter, 10 May 23  https://www.globalresearch.ca/sowing-seeds-plunder-lose-lose-situation-ukraine/5818851

It’s a lose-lose situation for Ukrainians. While they are dying to defend their land, financial institutions are insidiously supporting the consolidation of farmland by oligarchs and Western financial interests.  

So says Frédéric Mousseau, Policy Director of the Oakland Institute, an independent think tank.  

Depending on which sources to believe, between 100,000 and 300,000 Ukrainian soldiers (possibly more) have died during the conflict with Russia. That figure, of course, does not include civilian casualties.  

The mainstream narrative in the West is that Russia grabbed Crimea and then invaded Ukraine. Russia is portrayed as the outright aggressor which wants to restore its control over large swathes of Europe.   

The expansion of NATO towards the east, the US-backed coup in 2014 – followed by eight years of the shelling of the ethnic Russian eastern parts of the country by the regime in Kyiv resulting in around 14,000 deaths – led up to the military intervention by Russia, which regards the expansionism and militarism as an existential threat.  

It is not the purpose of this article to explore these issues. Much has already been written on this elsewhere. But billions of dollars’ worth of military hardware has been sent to Ukraine by the NATO countries and hundreds of thousands of young Ukrainians have died.   

They died in the belief that they were protecting their nation – their land. A land that is among the most fertile in the world.  

Professor Olena Borodina of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine says:  

“Today, thousands of rural boys and girls, farmers, are fighting and dying in the war. They have lost everything. The processes of free land sale and purchase are increasingly liberalised and advertised. This really threatens the rights of Ukrainians to their land, for which they give their lives.”  

Borodina is quoted in the February 2023 report by the Oakland Institute War and Theft: The Takeover of Ukraine’s Agricultural Land, which reveals how oligarchs and financial interests are expanding control over Ukraine’s agricultural land with help and financing from Western financial institutions.  

Aid provided to Ukraine in recent years has been tied to a drastic structural adjustment programme requiring the creation of a land market through a law that leads to greater concentration of land in the hands of powerful interests. The programme also includes austerity measures, cuts in social safety nets and the privatisation of key sectors of the economy.   

Frédéric Mousseau, co-author of the report, says:  

“Despite being at the centre of news cycle and international policy, little attention has gone to the core of the conflict — who controls the agricultural land in the country known as the breadbasket of Europe. [The] Answer to this question is paramount to understanding the major stakes in the war.”   

The report shows the total amount of land controlled by oligarchs, corrupt individuals and large agribusinesses is over nine million hectares — exceeding 28% of Ukraine’s arable land (the rest is used by over eight million Ukrainian farmers). 

Amidst Chaos of War, a New Report Exposes the Stealth Take-over of Ukrainian Agricultural Land

The largest landholders are a mix of Ukrainian oligarchs and foreign interests — mostly European and North American as well as the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia. A number of large US pension funds, foundations and university endowments are also invested in Ukrainian land through NCH Capital – a US-based private equity fund, which is the fifth largest landholder in the country.   

President Zelenskyy put the land reform into law in 2020 against the will of the vast majority of the population who feared it would exacerbate corruption and reinforce control by powerful interests in the agricultural sector.   

The Oakland Institute notes that, while large landholders are securing massive financing from Western financial institutions, Ukrainian farmers — essential for ensuring domestic food supply — receive virtually no support. With the land market in place, amid high economic stress and war, this difference of treatment will lead to more land consolidation by large agribusinesses.  

All but one of the ten largest landholding firms are registered overseas, mainly in tax havens such as Cyprus or Luxembourg. The report identifies many prominent investors, including Vanguard Group, Kopernik Global Investors, BNP Asset Management Holding, Goldman Sachs-owned NN Investment Partners Holdings, and Norges Bank Investment Management, which manages Norway’s sovereign wealth fund.  

Most of the agribusiness firms are substantially indebted to Western financial institutions, in particular the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the European Investment Bank, and the International Finance Corporation – the private sector arm of the World Bank.   

Together, these institutions have been major lenders to Ukrainian agribusinesses, with close to US$1.7 billion lent to just six of Ukraine’s largest landholding firms in recent years. Other key lenders are a mix of mainly European and North American financial institutions, both public and private.   

The report notes that this gives creditors financial stakes in the operation of the agribusinesses and confers significant leverage over them. Meanwhile, Ukrainian farmers have had to operate with limited amounts of land and financing, and many are now on the verge of poverty.    

International financial institutions are in effect subsidising the concentration of land and a destructive industrial model of agriculture based on the intensive use of synthetic inputs, fossil fuels and large-scale monocropping.  

Much of what is happening in Ukraine is part of a wider trend: private equity funds being injected into agriculture throughout the world and used to lease or buy up farms on the cheap and aggregate them into large-scale, industrial grain and soybean concerns. These funds use pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, endowment funds and investments from governments, banks, insurance companies and high net worth individuals (see the 2020 report ‘Barbarians at the Barn‘ by Grain.org).  

Financialising agriculture this way shifts power to people with no connection to farming. In the words of BlackRock’s Larry Fink: “Go long agriculture and water and go to the beach.”  

Funds tend to invest for between 10 and 15 years, resulting in good returns for investors but can leave a trail of long-term environmental and social devastation and serve to undermine local and regional food insecurity.   

By contrast, according to the Oakland Institute, small-scale farmers in Ukraine demonstrate resilience and enormous potential for leading the expansion of a different production model based on agroecology and producing healthy food. Whereas large agribusinesses are geared towards export markets, it is Ukraine’s small and medium-sized farmers who guarantee the country’s food security.   

This is underlined by the State Statistics Service of Ukraine in its report ‘Main agricultural characteristics of households in rural areas in 2011’, which showed that smallholder farmers in Ukraine operate 16% of agricultural land, but provide 55% of agricultural output, including 97% of potatoes, 97% of honey, 88% of vegetables, 83% of fruits and berries and 80% of milk.  

In June 2020, the IMF approved an 18-month, strings-attached $5 billion loan programme with Ukraine. Also that year, the World Bank incorporated measures relating to the sale of public agricultural land as conditions in a $350 million Development Policy Loan (COVID ‘relief package’) to Ukraine. This included a required ‘prior action’ to “enable the sale of agricultural land and the use of land as collateral.”  

According to the Oakland Institute: 

“Ukraine is now the world’s third-largest debtor to the International Monetary Fund and its crippling debt burden will likely result in additional pressure from its creditors, bondholders and international financial institutions on how post-war reconstruction – estimated to cost US$750 billion – should happen.”  

Financial institutions are leveraging Ukraine’s crippling debt to drive further privatisation and liberalisation – backing the country into a corner to make it an offer it can’t refuse.   

Since the war began, the Ukrainian flag has been raised outside parliament buildings in the West and iconic landmarks have been lit up in its colours. An image bite used to conjure up feelings of solidarity and support for that nation while serving to distract from the harsh machinations of geopolitics and modern-day economic plunder that is unhindered by national borders and has scant regard for the plight of ordinary citizens.  

May 12, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, Reference, Ukraine | 1 Comment

Bill Gates, Rolls Royce, and others, in the scrum to con the UK government into buying useless nuclear reactor minitrash

Rolls-Royce mini-nukes project under threat as Bill Gates eyes bid

Global interest comes as British company scrambles to secure government contract

By Gareth Corfield, 7 May 2023

Bill Gates is eyeing a bid to build Britain’s first mini-nuclear reactor in a direct challenge to Rolls-Royce which is scrambling to secure a government contract. Seattle-based TerraPower, which was founded by the Microsoft billionaire, said it was considering throwing its hat into the ring for lucrative contracts to build Britain’s next-generation small modular reactors or “mini-nukes”.

In a blog post, Mr Gates said the nuclear energy company’s work “has drawn interest from around the globe”, citing agreements with Japan, South Korea and the Luxembourg-based ArcelorMittal steel conglomerate. TerraPower claims its travelling wave reactor design can “operate for centuries with unenriched uranium fuel”. Founded in 2006, the company secured $830m (£657m) in its most recent funding round last summer. Unlike many traditional SMR designs, the company’s plant, called Natrium, uses a molten salt heat storage system that will allow it to rapidly boost its power output at peak times.

Dozens of other nuclear energy startups are competing to bring their designs into
service, with Rolls-Royce competing against the likes of GE-Hitachi, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Westinghouse Electric. In March, US company Last Energy, signed a deal to sell 24 small modular reactors (SMRs) to British customers. While Last Energy still needs regulatory approval for its designs, the company expects the first of its SMRs to be operational by 2026 with no government funding required.

Telegraph 7th May 2023

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/05/07/bill-gates-bid-britains-mini-nukes-contract-rolls-royce/

May 9, 2023 Posted by | marketing | Leave a comment

Blaine Higgs, Premier of New Brunswick, Canada, heads to Europe to promote non-existent small nuclear reactors

Premier will promote hydrogen, natural gas and small modular reactors to thousands in Rotterdam

Higgs heads to Europe to pitch energy sources that don’t exist yet, Jacques Poitras · CBC News · May 05, 2023 

Premier Blaine Higgs is heading to Europe next week to promote three New Brunswick energy sources that remain largely hypothetical at the moment.

Higgs will be at the World Hydrogen Summit next week in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and will then travel to Paris.

The focus in Rotterdam will be pitching the province’s hydrogen, natural gas and small modular reactor projects to customers — though none of them are producing anything that exists yet. 

He’ll position all three of those sources as a key part of the transition away from greenhouse gas-emitting energy as the world seeks to limit the effects of climate change……………………………

In Rotterdam, he’ll present his case to 8,000 delegates from more than a hundred countries attending the summit…………………………………..

It’s not clear what market there would be in Europe for small modular nuclear reactors built in New Brunswick by ARC Clean Energy Inc. and Moltex Energy.

Other companies around the world are working on their own SMR designs and some countries in Europe, including Germany, have cooled to nuclear power as a fossil fuel alternative.

And for both ARC and Moltex, a working reactor remains several years away. ARC says its first will be able to start operating at Point Lepreau in 2030 while Moltex says its initial device will take more time. …………………………..  https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/higgs-energy-europe-1.6833878
—

May 8, 2023 Posted by | Canada, marketing | Leave a comment

Canada and Ontario are turning to nuclear energy as a green solution. Here’s the problem with that.

As more than $1 billion in public money is being committed to a new generation of reactors, critics are calling for a pause and a rethink, saying nuclear power’s cost overruns, construction delays and safety concerns outweigh its benefits as a provider of clean electricity.

By Marco Chown Oved, Climate Change Reporter, Thu., May 4, 2023

After a pause of more than 30 years, Ontario is poised to start building nuclear reactors again in an effort to provide the carbon-free electricity needed to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

Both Premier Doug Ford and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have lauded nuclear power as a climate change solution, one that will help reduce emissions, attract green businesses and provide abundant electricity to enable society to stop burning fossil fuels.

But as more than $1 billion in public money is being committed to a new generation of reactors, critics are calling for a pause and a rethink, saying nuclear power’s cost overruns, construction delays and safety concerns outweigh its benefits as a provider of clean electricity — especially when renewables such as wind and solar are cheaper, quicker to build and have no long-term radioactive legacy.

The last nuclear plant Ontario built was so expensive that it caused the bankruptcy of Ontario Hydro, said Mark Winfield, a professor of environmental and urban change at York University.

“People don’t remember that,” he said. “Now, we’re sleepwalking back down a nuclear path and nobody’s asking the big questions about the costs, viability, risks and alternatives.”

Winfield, who is also co-chair of the Sustainable Energy Initiative at York, said the climate crisis has opened up a window of opportunity for nuclear power, aided by the public’s short memory.

“The nuclear industry is engaged in a full-court press, trying to take advantage of the decarbonization push to rehabilitate its reputation,” he said, an assertion supported by records in the lobbyist registry in Ontario.

Building nuclear to reduce emissions is a false solution, he said, because it will burden future generations with waste that will remain radioactive for thousands of years.

“It’s climate change for nuclear waste. Are we trading one giant intergenerational problem for another.

…………………….. Winfield and other critics point to nuclear power’s record of taking longer to build and costing more than anticipated — often by large margins — as the reason why the spread of the technology stalled decades ago.

……………………………. Nuclear power was never meant to be commercially viable, said Benjamin Sovacool, a professor of earth and environment at Boston University. It was developed in the United States as a way to convince the public that the power of the atom — which had demonstrated its catastrophic destructive potential during the Second World War — could be used for good, he said.

“There was this euphoria around what nuclear power could do,” he said. The only problem? “It was never cost effective.”

Sovacool published an academic paper that analyzed the construction timelines and budgets of more than 400 large-scale electricity projects around the world over the past 80 years. He found, on average, nuclear plants cost more than double their original budgets and took 64 per cent longer to build than projected. Wind and solar, by contrast, had average cost overruns of 7.7 per cent and 1.3 per cent, respectively.

“That’s why the market has not really embraced nuclear power at all. It just can’t compete with modern renewables,” said Sovacool. “Nuclear is stagnating and declining.”

……………………………………………………………. One of the only places where enthusiasm exists for new nuclear is China.

Over the past two decades, China has commissioned 50 new reactors, more than half of all new reactors built. In the rest of the world, twice as many reactors have been decommissioned (105) as were built (48). But even China’s passion for nuclear is eclipsed by its penchant for building solar.

Since 2001, China has added 47.5 GW of nuclear power generation to its grid, according to the World Nuclear Industry Report. But in the last decade — half that time — it has also built 13 times more wind and solar (630 GW), according to the International Energy Agency.

…………………………….. The cost increases associated with these undercut the case that nuclear power is reliable and inexpensive, Ramana said, prompting the nuclear industry to lowball cost estimates and provide unrealistic construction schedules.

“If politicians and the public were given accurate estimates, they’d say: ‘No thank you,’ ” he said. “There is an incentive to lie about this. If you look into the history, you should be very skeptical about promises.”

Canada was an early proponent of nuclear power, with the first experimental nuclear reactor outside the U.S. operating at Chalk River in the 1940s. Canada then developed its own civilian power technology — called CANDU — with prototypes built at Douglas Point, Ont., and Gentilly, Que., in the 1960s. The first large-scale reactor was built in Pickering in 1971, followed by Bruce in 1977, Point Lepreau, N.B., in 1983 and Darlington in 1990.

In Ontario, all three plants — Pickering, Bruce and Darlington — took longer and cost more to build than expected. Darlington, the last one to be completed, ended up costing $14.4 billion — triple the original budget.

Built to meet projections of soaring demand for electricity that didn’t materialize after the recession of the early ’90s, Darlington nuclear power plant bankrupted Ontario Hydro and led to the once-profitable public utility being broken into three.

The promised electricity price reductions also failed to materialize.

Now, three decades later, Ontario gets 53 per cent of its electricity from nuclear, but faces growing demand for noncarbon emitting electricity as industry returns to the province and cars and home heating electrify.

So Queen’s Park is turning to nuclear again.

Midway through $26 billion in refurbishments to extend the production lives of Darlington and Bruce, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) asked the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to prolong its operating licence for Pickering, Canada’s oldest operating reactor.

But that won’t be enough. The Independent Electricity System Operator said new nuclear reactors will be needed to get the province’s electricity supply to net-zero emissions. So, OPG has started the licensing process to build a first-of-its-kind small modular reactor (SMR)……………………………………

SMRs are supposed to solve the cost overruns and construction delays that plagued larger nuclear projects. They are to be assembled mostly in a factory, where costs can be better controlled, and their smaller size means they will be quicker to construct.

The SMR proposed for Darlington will have a 300 MW capacity. By contrast, each of the four existing reactors at Darlington have a capacity of nearly 900 MW.

But the very logic of going small undercuts the economies of scale that large nuclear reactors relied on, said Lyman. While they may cost a lot, full-scale reactors produce incredible amounts of electricity. Lyman doubts the smaller reactors will end up being much cheaper, but they’ll definitely produce less electricity — and he has concerns they could be less safe.

“In the drive to show these things are going to be cheaper, they’re cutting too many corners,” he said. “There may be a way to make it safe enough, but that’s not the way we’re going.”

The hypothetical consequences of a nuclear accident would be far worse in Ontario, where Darlington and Pickering are located very close to millions of homes, than most other nuclear plants around the world, said Theresa McClenaghan, a lawyer with the Canadian Environmental Law Association.

“We have been numbed to the danger,” she said. “The emergency planning zone extends well into Toronto.”……………….  https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/analysis/2023/05/04/the-problemswith-canada-and-ontarios-new-push-for-nuclear-energy.html?rf

May 6, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, Canada | 1 Comment

US Sells Taiwan 400 Harpoon Anti-Ship Missiles – Profits and Provocations, Not Protection 

There are no clear solutions for Taiwan if it continues down the path of US-sponsored separatism and antagonism toward the rest of China, so much so that the only logical solution to “defeat” a Chinese blockade of the island is to not provoke one in the first place.

US Sells Taiwan 400 Harpoon Anti-Ship Missiles as US-Chinese Tensions Rise

03.05.2023 Author: Brian Berletic

As the US continues its proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, it also continues preparations for a similar conflict with China using the island province of Taiwan as its proxy of choice in Asia.

Toward this end, the US continues flooding the island province with billions of dollars worth of weapons.

One of the more recent announced weapon sales was 400 Harpoon anti-ship missiles.

Washington’s Flawed “Porcupine Strategy” for Taiwan 

The anti-ship missiles manufactured by Boeing would presumably be part of developing much wider anti-access area denial (A2AD) capabilities for the administration’s armed forces on the island.

A Taiwan-based analyst, Pei-Shiue Hsieh, in an article for The Diplomat titled, “Building Taiwan’s Own Area Denial Capabilities,” would claim:

While some assert that Taiwan cannot counter a Chinese invasion on its own, the results of my analytical wargames show the opposite. The drills by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) last month likely demonstrated Beijing’s intentions to impose a naval blockade on the island in the event of a military confrontation. Taiwan’s military needs to prevent Chinese fleets from moving into their tactical positions or, if unable to prevent the blockade’s establishment, to disrupt ongoing PLA Navy (PLAN) operations.

In order to do so, the author suggests:

Taiwan must develop its own anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategy, which incorporates guided weapons and reconnaissance systems. Currently, Taiwan’s military possesses two possible options for guided anti-ship weapons: the ground-launched Hsiung Feng II/III and the ground- or air-launched AGM-84 Harpoon. With the reconnaissance information gathered by naval surveillance radars and MQ-9B SeaGuardian unmanned aerial vehicles, these legacy anti-ship missiles remain potent defenders of the island. However, as the PLAN is rapidly growing, Taiwan needs more than short- and medium-range options to cope with the PLA threat.

The Hsiung Feng III and Harpoon anti-ship missiles have ranges of 400 km and 139 km respectively. While these ranges may seem like more than enough to target and destroy Chinese warships imposing a sea blockade on the island of Taiwan, the problem is that while the missiles themselves have active radar homing, finding Chinese ships to home in on in the first place will be very difficult for Taiwan’s armed forces…………………………………………..

In a scenario where China is attempting to blockade Taiwan and China feels its surface vessels are at risk from anti-ship missiles, it can also employ submarines while using its formidable missile force to strike at and destroy not only military capabilities based on Taiwan, but also ports receiving military aid from abroad as well as ships attempting to deliver it. A blockade by any other name is still a blockade.

The other problem Taiwan’s administration faces is the time frame purchased weapons would actually reach the island. The 400 purchased Harpoon anti-ship missiles will take years at the earliest to arrive……………………

According to most estimates, the gap in military capabilities between China and the United States is set to close somewhere around 2025. By 2029, the gap would be in the process of widening, but this time in China’s favor.

Contracts for munitions like the LRASM are not even being publicly discussed, but should such contracts be signed, it’s likely Taiwan will be waiting as long or longer for the missiles to arrive, and that is assuming the missiles are developed into ground-launched systems to adapt to the reality Taiwan’s air force will not play a role in any hostilities with the rest of China.

Profits and Provocations, Not Protection 

While Boeing is certainly profiting from the sale of 400 Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Taiwan, the move hardly enhances Taiwan’s military capabilities relative to the rest of China, nor does it do so within the window of opportunity the US seeks to provoke an armed conflict with China over Taiwan. If any blockade imposed by China around the island province of Taiwan is to be broken, it will have to be by the US military using a combination of anti-ship missiles and anti-submarine warfare.

US policymakers having wargamed an armed conflict between the US and China noted that the US would likely exhaust its arsenal of long-range anti-ship missiles of all kinds, a result of America’s limited military industrial capacity, a shortfall on demonstration amid its proxy war with Russia in Ukraine at the moment.

But even if the US didn’t run out of missiles and if the US was successful in thwarting China’s use of naval vessels to impose a blockade, a de facto blockade can still be imposed through the use of China’s long-range missiles fired from the mainland at Taiwan’s ports and any ships attempting to utilize them.

There are no clear solutions for Taiwan if it continues down the path of US-sponsored separatism and antagonism toward the rest of China, so much so that the only logical solution to “defeat” a Chinese blockade of the island is to not provoke one in the first place.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.  https://journal-neo.org/2023/05/03/us-sells-taiwan-400-harpoon-anti-ship-missiles-as-us-chinese-tensions-rise/

May 6, 2023 Posted by | marketing, Taiwan | Leave a comment

Newbuild: How Much of Vogtle Nuclear Plant’s Capital Costs Can Southern Recover?

 Energy Intelligence Group , Apr 28, 2023, Stephanie Cooke, Washington

As the first of two AP1000 newbuilds ramps up to commercial operation at Georgia Power’s Vogtle plant in the US state of Georgia, an “epic battle” is brewing over how much the operator can recover in capital cost overruns from ratepayers. Preparation for a possible standoff between the Southern Co. subsidiary and staff of the state Public Service Commission (PSC) is already under way against a toxic political backdrop. 

 Voter rights litigation challenging ossified Republican dominance on the commission is delaying a PSC election previously slated for November. Now the question is to what extent a delayed PSC election, and pressure from the two Democratic contenders, might influence the outcome of “prudency” hearings that will determine how much ratepayers will be on the hook for capital expenditures at the Vogtle-3 and -4 newbuilds.

Much is at stake for Georgia Power and its ratepayers. The latter have been charged for the financing portion — but not the actual capital costs — of Georgia Power’s construction bills since 2011, well before the first concrete was poured for Vogtle-3 on Mar. 2, 2013. By the end of the year, ratepayers will have on average paid approximately $913 per person for the project, according to PSC testimony earlier this year. 

Once Unit 3 is in commercial operation, the utility is authorized to include $2.1 billion of capital costs in the rate base. And when fuel loading begins at Unit 4 the PSC will begin hearings to determine the “prudency” of billions more in capital expenditures as a basis for passing on the cost to ratepayers.

Earlier this year PSC staff said Georgia Power may ultimately seek to recover as much as $9.7 billion of its capital costs, translating into a potential rate hike of 15%, or $17.20 extra per month for each customer based on an average monthly bill of $131. This figure is 120% higher than the $4.4 billion in capital costs expected at certification, and both figures are only a fraction of total capital costs, as Georgia Power is only a 45.7% owner of the Vogtle newbuilds. Georgia Power provided no response to Energy Intelligence questions as to what Vogtle capital cost recovery it will seek.

For Southern, the key is getting both reactors into commercial operation, after which all capital expenditures become fair game for inclusion in the rate base…………………

…………. any additional technical glitches — Unit 3 was forced to shut down for a week earlier this month because of an electrical malfunction — could delay recovery of capital costs. And at some point Georgia Power might face a very different PSC. If one or both Democratic candidates succeed in ousting current PSC commissioners, they would likely not shift the majority vote in disputed rate cases, but they would be better positioned to draw media attention to any Georgia Power capital cost recovery requests.

“There’s never been any single financial decision this large in the state of Georgia,” said Patty Durand, a candidate running to unseat Commissioner Tim Echols, whose term technically expired in December. In Georgia, it’s “going to be the epic financial battle of the century.”

Even getting on the ballot has been a challenge for Durand and for Shelia Edwards, who is challenging Commissioner Fitz Johnson, and now both candidates must wait until a federal court case over the PSC electoral process is decided……………………………………………….

…………………………………… Sources close to the PSC suggest that the total Vogtle project cost, including financing costs and on a 100% basis, may ultimately surpass $35 billion.  https://www.energyintel.com/00000187-b4f4-d9b3-afdf-f6f7d5780000—

May 4, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Preparing for War: The Global Military Budget

2022 proved to be a boon for militarists the world over

May 1, 2023: Dr Binoy Kampmark  https://theaimn.com/preparing-for-war-the-global-military-budget/—

US$2.24 trillion is a mighty amount. It’s also a sickening figure when considering the object of this exercise. The flickering tease of war, the promise of bloodshed and an increasingly large butcher’s bill, are inevitable suggestions from such a figure. The scenes are also clear: well-paid suits dazed by theories of the next war; policy wonks jabbering over mock war games. A huge amount of money is being pushed into the venture, and the sceptics are being held at bay.

Much of this news comes from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s latest findings that countries are spending 2.2% of the world’s gross domestic product on armaments. Of that amount, the United States, China and Russia accounted for 56% of the total. Global military spending, the SIPRI report also notes, grew by 19% over 2013-2022, rising every year since 2015.

The amount is slightly more than the previous year, when SIPRI announced that total military expenditure had risen by 0.7% in real terms in 2021 “to reach $2113 billion.” The largest contributors to the binge on that occasion were the United States, China, India, the United Kingdom and Russia. In sum, the five countries accounted for 62% of expenditure.

This reads differently from the more optimistic International Monetary Institute’s assessment from 2021: “Worldwide military spending, when estimated on the basis of unweighted country averages, has declined by nearly half, from 3.6 percent GDP during the Cold War period (1970-90) to 1.9 percent of GDP in the years following the global financial crisis.” When it comes to variations on the figures in this field, best stick with SIPRA.

2022 proved to be a boon for militarists the world over, though there were particular regions that saw more growth than others. In Europe, levels of spending had reached levels unseen since the Cold War, up from 13% from the previous twelve months. The reason commonly given: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In East Asia, the justification is the increasingly hostile US-Chinese rivalry, though those in Washington’s corner are ever pointing the finger to the Yellow Horde’s ambitions in Beijing.

The picture in Europe is an ugly one, with concerns being expressed in certain strategic circles that not enough is being done to move away from dependency on the US imperium. The European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) has even posited that Europe is the victim of US “vassalisation”, notably in light of the Ukraine War. Visions of strategic autonomy are more distant than ever.

Such sentiments, however, do little to discourage the militarists: whether Europe chooses to throw in its lot with Washington or not, the arms dealers and manufacturers will do a merry jig. To prove that point, the ECFR advocates the deployment of “western European forces to the east in greater numbers, offering to replace US forces in some cases.” The only difference here is the burden shared, rather than the amount spent.

In terms of individual countries, Finland’s military expenditure rose by 36% in 2022 to reach $4.8 billion, the largest in the country’s year-on-year increase since 1962. Polish military expenditure grew by 11%, reaching $16.6 billion over the course in 2022. The passage of the Homeland Defence Act, designed to reorganise the military and raise defence spending, promises to eventually push the levels to 4% of GDP. Warsaw has made no secret of the fact that it wishes to have the continent’s largest army, a daft and distinctly draining exercise.

The figures are also significant given the increasingly proxy nature of the Ukraine War’s balance sheet. Ukraine, for its part, rose from its position at 36 on the league of arms spenders to 11 in 2022, with a figure of $44 billion. But SIPRI has a modest confession to make: it is unable to furnish us “an accurate assessment of the total amount of financial military aid to Ukraine.” This is largely because the donor countries have, for the most part, not released disaggregated data. A rough estimate of $30 billion is provided, which “includes financial contributions, training and operational costs, replacement costs of the military equipment stocks donated to Ukraine and payments to procure additional military equipment for the Ukrainian armed forces.”

Some of this must be factored into the increased budgets of the UK (top European spender at 3.1%), with Germany and France coming in at 2.5% and 2.4% respectively. Of the three, the UK has given the most military aid to Ukraine, and is second only behind the United States, which allocated $19.9 billion.

As for the US itself, the Biden administration has already mooted the idea that it will increase the number of troops deployed to Europe by 20,000 personnel to 100,000. The measure is part of the European Deterrence Initiative (EDI), an effort to, according to the US Department of Defense, “enhance the US deterrence posture, increase the readiness and responsiveness of US forces in Europe, support the collective defense and security of NATO allies, and bolster the security and capacity of US allies and partners.”

While China, with a bill of $292 billion, is leant upon as an excuse for increased military expenditure by other powers, the United States remains the undisputed premier spender, making up a staggering 39% of the global total at $877 billion. Hardly the sort of figure to be sported by a peacemaker.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, business and costs, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK courts Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates for investments to salvage the nuclear dream

Gulf states poised to bail Britain out of energy crisis

Bahrain and the UAE courted by energy secretary Grant Shapps for fresh nuclear investment

By Rachel Millard, 30 April 2023 

Gulf states are poised to help bankroll Britain’s efforts to build new
nuclear power stations to keep the lights on, the energy security secretary
has indicated. Grant Shapps visited the region in January and said he
remains “in constant contact” with investors in the region who are
“very interested” in the nuclear sector. Countries such as the UAE and
Bahrain have built up vast sovereign wealth funds which are now pushing
into clean energy amid global efforts to cut fossil fuel use.

 Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, met with the UAE’s Mubadala, a sovereign investment firm,
in February, and has abandoned plans to toughen tax rules for sovereign
wealth funds. Mr Shapps said: “I was in the Gulf states [this year] and
I’m in constant contact with our friends and colleagues over there. “They
have already been investing massive amounts in renewable energy – and
they’re very interested in nuclear power as well. The scale of their
ambitions are pretty big – watch this space.” 

Ministers are trying to drum up investment for EDF’s planned £20bn power plant in Suffolk as well as other nuclear projects as part of a push on the carbon-free [?] power
source. Legal & General, Britain’s biggest money manager with £1.3 trillion
of assets, has said it is focused on supporting other “viable, and
cost-effective” {?] clean [?] energy solutions. 

French state energy giant EDF
owns Britain’s nuclear fleet but will need outside investors to build its
planned Sizewell C project in Suffolk. The Government and EDF have pushed
China’s CGN out of the project amid concern about China’s involvement in
critical national infrastructure.

Telegraph 30th April 2023

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/04/30/gulf-states-poised-to-bail-britain-out-of-energy-crisis/

May 3, 2023 Posted by | marketing, MIDDLE EAST, UK | Leave a comment

Swedish reactor shutdowns nearly double Finland’s electricity price overnight

Swedish reactor shutdowns nearly double Finland’s electricity price
overnight. A short circuit encountered during maintenance near Stockholm
forced the closure of two nuclear reactors in Forsmark, Sweden.

YLE 27th April 2023

https://yle.fi/a/74-20029194

April 30, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, Finland | Leave a comment

Nuclear vs Solar: The Race For Renewable Dominance

oil Price, By Alex Kimani – Nov 11, 2020

“………………………………………………………….. now some nuclear experts and activists are suggesting a middle-ground: The Green Nuclear Deal.

Far more Republicans (65%) than Democrats (42%) are pro-nuclear as per Gallup Polls.

………………………………………………….. The United States Department of Energy (DOE), Nuclear Engineering & Science Center at Texas A&M, and the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) have partnered with Chicago-based Clean Core Thorium Energy (CCTE) to develop a new thorium-based nuclear fuel they have dubbed ANEEL. ANEEL, which is short for “Advanced Nuclear Energy for Enriched Life”, is a proprietary combination of thorium and “High Assay Low Enriched Uranium” (HALEU) that hopes to solve some of the knottiest problems nuclear power faces, including high costs and toxic wastes.

That said, we pointed out that the main sticking point to the promotion of thorium as a cleaner nuclear fuel is that it remains unproven on a commercial scale. Thorium MSRs (Molten Salt Reactors) have been in development since the 1960s by the United States, China, Russia, and France, yet nothing much ever came of them. Further, only about 50 of the world’s 440 reactors can currently be configured to run on thorium.

We have also highlighted how scientists have finally broken ground by kicking off the five-year assembly phase of the massive International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), the world’s largest fusion reactor, in Saint-Paul-les-Durance, France. Funded by six nations, including the U.S., Russia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea, ITER will be the world’s largest tokamak fusion device with an estimated cost of ~$24 billion and capable of generating about 500 MW of thermal fusion energy as early as 2025. Unfortunately, practical nuclear fusion remains a long-shot and could be decades away from becoming a commercial reality. 

We simply don’t have the luxury of time.

Further, nuclear power in the U.S. faces an uncertain future. Of the country’s 97 currently active commercial nuclear reactors, 11 are scheduled for retirement by 2025. Only the Watts Bar plant in Tennessee has been commissioned over the past two decades, though two new reactors at the Vogtle plant in Georgia could be pressed into action as early as 2021.

The biggest obstacle for nuclear power, however, is that it remains a tough sell with well-publicized nuclear disasters such as Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Three Mile Island still looming large in the American public’s psyche. A Morning Consult survey has revealed that just 29% of Americans view nuclear energy favorably with 49% viewing it negatively thus making it the most unpopular energy source.

Solar rising

Whereas the nuclear sector comeback has its work cut out for it, solar power has clearly been on the ascendancy thanks in large part to falling costs………………………………….

Strongly Bullish 

Despite challenges, the solar sector remains strongly bullish.

Indeed, S&P Platts says that the shift to renewable energy is likely to continue full steam ahead regardless of fed policies noting that the energy transition has “clearly been moving forward on a regional basis,” despite lacking clear endorsement at the federal level under Trump.

It remains to be seen whether nuclear energy can command the same level of support. https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Nuclear-vs-Solar-The-Race-For-Renewable-Dominance.html

April 30, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, USA | 1 Comment

Amid maintenance delays and strikes in nuclear industry, France restarts one reactor

France’s EDF has restarted the 1.5-GW Civaux-2 reactor while delaying both
planned maintenance and returns elsewhere amid ongoing worker strikes,
transparency data showed April 24.

EDF further delayed planned return dates
for Gravelines 1 and Blayais 1, where strikes have been ongoing for over
five weeks. The start of maintenance at Cruas 4 was also delayed further,
with annual refueling pushed back another fortnight to May 6. Initial
planning set an April 20 return date for the reactor, now scheduled to
remain offline until June 16.

Civaux-2 has been awaiting a restart, having
been delayed by strikes after a failed attempt in early March. The reactor
has been offline since late 2021 for stress corrosion repairs that were
completed in February.

SP Global 24th April 2023

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/042423-frances-edf-returns-civaux-2-reactor-delays-others-amid-strike

April 27, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, France | Leave a comment

Nuclear liability issues not yet resolved for Jaitapur project: French company EDF

Delays despite assurances by Minister Jitendra Singh that all technical, commercial, legal issues would be sorted by “early 2023”

The Hindu, SUHASINI HAIDAR April 24, 2023 

Two years after the French energy company Electricite de France (EDF) submitted its techno-commercial offer for the construction of six nuclear power reactors in Maharashtra’s Jaitapur, talks between Indian and French officials over several issues, including liability, have not resulted in any breakthrough yet.

According to sources in Delhi and Paris, the talks over the high cost of power per unit has also become a major issue in the conclusion of the agreement for the 9,900 MW project, which is the world’s biggest nuclear power generation site under consideration at present.

“The topic [of liability] has been discussed between the French and Indian governments and my understanding is that it is progressing towards convergence. It is a key topic for France and the EDF, and so this topic would have to be solved before any contract can be signed,” an EDF official said in response to a question from The Hindu, as part of a presentation to a larger group of international journalists invited to Paris. 

The statement is significant, as in October 2022, the Minister of Space and Atomic Energy, and Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office (MoS PMO), Jitendra Singh, promised an early resolution to all the issues, within months………………..

PM to visit Paris in July……………………

The EDF official, who requested not to be identified, but spoke on behalf of the company, said that the issue, arising from India’s Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act that India passed in 2010, remains an item on the “agenda for both countries”. India’s CLND Act, which was brought in addition to the International Convention on Supplementary Compensation (CSC), is considered excessive by foreign companies, which could be liable to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in the event of a nuclear accident. As a result, despite signing civil nuclear deals with a number of countries, including the U.S, France and Japan, the only foreign presence in India is that of Russia in Kudankulam, projects that predate the Law.

A recent report in Al Jazeera also points to the fact that despite planning an insurance pool of ₹1,500 crores ($200 million) in 2015, the government’s ‘India Nuclear Insurance Pool” (INIP) has only been able to collect about half, ₹700 crore-₹800 crore, thus far. Concerns over safety after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, prompted Germany to switch off its last nuclear power reactor this month.

Another factor will be the time taken by the Jaitapur project, for which the original MoU was signed in 2009 with EDF’s predecessor Areva. In 2016, EDF and NPCIL signed a revised MoU, and in 2018, the heads of both signed an agreement on the “industrial way forward” in the presence of Mr. Modi and Mr. Macron. However, officials said nuclear projects do take time, pointing to EDF’s latest construction of an EPR in Finland, Olkiluoto 3. Its work began in 2005 and was completed after a delay of about 14 years, finally starting regular production on April 16 this year.  https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/nuclear-liability-issues-not-yet-resolved-for-jaitapur-project-french-company-edf/article66774668.ece

April 26, 2023 Posted by | business and costs, India, politics international | Leave a comment

France’s struggle to deliver a second nuclear era

An ambitious reactornconstruction programme aimed at reducing carbon emissions is running into the realities of skilled worker shortages.

For 10 years, Gaetan Geoffray
worked as a plasterer and painter, before learning metalwork at a company
that made cranes. Arnaud Dupuy was a policeman. A third colleague at their
factory in the depths of rural Burgundy used to be a baker.

The factory is owned by Framatome, a subsidiary of state-controlled power utility EDF, and the trio are hoping to qualify for one of the most sought-after jobs in
France, as nuclear-grade welders. If all goes well, they’ll one day be
allowed to work on the most intricate features of the steel parts assembled
in the plant, where the all-important 24-metre-long casings protecting the
core of atomic reactors are made.

For now, that goal is at least three to
four years off, so exacting are the demands in a field in which imperfect
finishes can delay a project by months and cost millions, if not billions,
of dollars. For France, the next intake of hires and welding apprentices
can’t come a day too soon.

After years of political dithering over whether
or not to cut its reliance on nuclear power, a hesitation echoed globally
after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan, the country has gone
all-in with Europe’s most ambitious atomic construction project in decades.
In order to stand a chance of turning this vision into reality, the
government estimates it needs to find another 100,000 nuclear specialists
of all guises, from engineers and project supervisors to boilermakers and
electricians, over the coming six years.

Looming large, beyond hurdles with
design approvals and financing for the €52bn programme, is an even more
basic question — whether France, Europe’s main atomic nation, still has
the industrial capacity and people to make the projects happen on a scale
it has not contemplated since the 1970s.

FT 23rd April 2023

https://www.ft.com/content/d23b14ae-2c4e-458c-af8a-22692119f786

April 26, 2023 Posted by | employment, France | Leave a comment

Oh Goody – America is going to sell heaps of Holtec’s Small Nuclear Reactors to Ukraine!

“This cooperation agreement will lead to economic development, creation of jobs, establishment of modern manufacturing facilities, training facilities, R&D, and thus help Ukraine emerge as the regional hub for Holtec’s nuclear reactor technology…….”

Mass deployment of Holtec SMRs in Ukraine is part of accord’s aims

WNN 24 April 2023, Up to 20 Holtec SMR-160 plants will be built in Ukraine under a cooperation agreement signed between Holtec International and Ukrainian national nuclear operator Energoatom. The agreement calls for the first plant to begin supplying power by March 2029.

The agreement was signed on 21 April by Energoatom President Petro Kotin in Kiev and Holtec CEO Kris Singh in Camden, New Jersey, USA. The ceremony was also attended by Ukraine’s Minister of Energy Herman Galushchenko and the vice president of Holtec International operations in Ukraine Riaz Avan……………………………………………..

“This cooperation agreement will lead to economic development, creation of jobs, establishment of modern manufacturing facilities, training facilities, R&D, and thus help Ukraine emerge as the regional hub for Holtec’s nuclear reactor technology…….”

………………………………………………………… In June 2019, Holtec, Energoatom and Ukraine’s State Scientific and Technology Centre formally entered into a partnership to advance the SMR-160 for deployment in Ukraine. The partners ratified the creation of a consortium partnership that bound the three companies into a cooperative undertaking to progress the deployment of the SMR-160 small modular reactor in the country. The consortium is a US company registered in Delaware with each of the three parties owning allotted shares. Its technology operation centre will be based in Kiev, Ukraine.  https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Accord-sees-mass-deployment-of-Holtec-SMRs-in-Ukra

April 25, 2023 Posted by | marketing, Ukraine | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »