Emmanuel Macron picks a bad time to promote France’s nuclear nuclear technology in a marketing tour to USA

With 40 percent of France’s nuclear power plants offline, there could hardly be a more awkward time to promote the country’s know-how
Macron to promote nuclear energy in U.S., as industry faces crisis in France, By Rick Noack, November 29, 2022, PARIS — As French President Emmanuel Macron makes the rounds in Washington starting Wednesday for the first state visit of the Biden administration, high on his agenda are his plans for a nuclear energy “renaissance.” His entourage includes the major players from France’s nuclear energy industry, who will be looking to the French leader to help boost the development and export of their technology, including smaller and more versatile reactors.
But there could hardly be a more awkward time to promote French nuclear know-how.
While Macron was preparing to head to Washington, France was relying on planes traveling in the opposite direction to prevent its nuclear-reliant power grid from collapsing. U.S. and Canadian contractors have been flown in to help after safety concerns forced the closure of half of the country’s nuclear power plants. Last week, 23 out of 56 were still offline, due to concerns over corrosion cracks and an accumulation of pandemic-related inspection delays.
………….. instead of bolstering its position as an energy exporter, France has had to import electricity from Germany — the country hit hardest by the shift away from Russia. And Britain, which normally depends on France for energy to get through winter, is talking about having to encourage people to keep their ovens and dishwashers off to avoid blackouts.
Other French neighbors, including Belgium, Switzerland and parts of Italy, may be under even more pressure as a result of the French reactor problems, said Clement Bouilloux, country manager for France at energy consultancy EnAppSys.
“Everyone was relying on the French nuclear power plants,” he said.
The situation has tarnished France’s reputation as a nuclear power leader and may have contributed to the country missing out on key contracts. Only weeks ago, France’s state-owned energy company EDF lost the first part of a $40 billion contract for Poland’s first nuclear power plant to U.S. company Westinghouse………………………………………………………..
Macron has acknowledged that the French industry has “fallen behind,” but he has defended its ability to recover, striking deals on nuclear energy cooperation in recent months with countries including India and Britain.
Macron is scheduled to attend a nuclear energy session on Wednesday, alongside four French cabinet members and several executives from the country’s major nuclear energy firms and its public regulator, the Élysée Palace said last week.
A French official added Monday that one area where France anticipates possible mutual interests is the development of small modular reactors (SMRs)…………….. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/29/macron-us-state-visit-nuclear-france/
Sizewll C nuclear white elephant could cost up to £43 billion

Grant Shapps follows Johnson and Kwarteng’s example by purposefully
avoiding any discussion or interaction with those directly affected by the
proposed Sizewell nuclear development during his recent visit to Sizewell
while reconfirming the government’s commitment to the £700m investment by
way of joining EDF in a 50:50 partnership in the Sizewell C White Elephant
financial sink hole on Suffolk’s eroding coast.
Jenny Kirtley, Chair of Together Against Sizewell C, said today, ‘There is nothing new in terms of
funding – this announcement still doesn’t go beyond the £700m already
promised, followed by a lot of sticking plasters to protect the government
from the criticism of doing nothing for years to drive down electricity on
the demand side. A pathetic response from a delusional government that is
long past its sell-by date.
The government’s own risk assessment forecasts
that Sizewell C may cost up to £43 billion –
yet another example of this government’s willingness to squander £billions of public money on a project
that may never operate as it still requires the resolution of EDF’s inability to secure a permanent and reliable supply of a potable water.
TASC 29th Nov 2022
UK government desperate for investors in its Sizewell C nuclear project, as it pays out the Chinese company previously involved

Construction will not begin in earnest until the consortium has raised close to £20bn of equity and debt from private investors. That fundraising could take at least a year and has no guarantee of success.
The UK government is to pay Chinese state-owned power group CGN over £100mn to exit Britain’s £20bn Sizewell C nuclear energy project in a bid to reduce Beijing’s involvement in the country’s infrastructure. The payment to CGN for its 20 per cent stake in the proposed nuclear plant in Suffolk is part of a £679mn UK state investment in Sizewell first announced by former prime minister Boris Johnson in September and finalised on Tuesday.
Construction will not begin in earnest until the consortium has raised close to £20bn of equity and debt from private investors. That fundraising could take at least a year and has no guarantee of success. UK government officials said that the departure of CGN would clear the way for US investors to put money into Sizewell C, since the Chinese company has been put under US sanctions.
CGN remains a minority 33 per cent investor in Britain’s giant Hinkley Point C nuclear power station in Somerset, another
EDF led project. Although this has already been delayed by several years, it is intended to be the first of a new generation of nuclear power stations. The Chinese group also controls a site at Bradwell-on-Sea in Essex, where it hopes to be the lead investor in a new generator.
CGN’s planned use of its own reactor technology at Bradwell received former approval from Britain’s nuclear regulator in February. But ministers think that ultimately it will not be allowed to build at the site, which they expect to change hands in due course.
FT 29th Nov 2022
https://www.ft.com/content/a9a34ea3-649f-4a47-a4c8-ee269e07eccc
New Mexico’s revolving nuclear door: top environment officials sell out to nuclear weapons lab.

Santa Fe, NM – As part of a long, ingrained history, senior officials at the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) have repeatedly resigned to go to work for the nuclear weapons labs, the Department of Energy, or DOE contractors. In a number of cases that is where they came from to begin with.
The hierarchy of leadership at NMED starts with the Secretary, Deputy Secretaries and then Division Directors. The position of Resource Protection Division Director is particularly critical because it oversees the two NMED bureaus most directly involved with DOE facilities in New Mexico, the Hazardous Waste Bureau and the DOE Oversight Bureau. However, all four former or current Resource Protection Division Directors have gone or are going to work for the nuclear weapons labs, the DOE or its contractors. They are:
• Chris Catechis, currently Acting Resource Protection Division Director, is reportedly assuming a job at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) within days. Prior to NMED he had worked at the Sandia National Laboratories for 22 years.[1]
• Catechis’ immediate supervisor Stephanie Stringer resigned October 31 to go to work for DOE’s semi-autonomous nuclear weapons agency, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). She was Resource Protection Division Director prior to being promoted to Deputy Cabinet Secretary for Operations (second only to NMED Secretary James Kenney).
• J.C. Borrego resigned as NMED Acting Deputy Secretary and Acting Resource Protection Division Director in the last months of the Governor Martinez Administration to go to work for the Sandia National Laboratories.• During the Martinez Administration, Kathryn Roberts resigned as Resource Protection Division Director to go to work for a DOE contractor. Prior to NMED she had worked at LANL for four years as Group Leader for Regulatory Support and Performance.
This begs the question of whether the positions of NMED Deputy Directors and Resource Protection Division Directors are being intentionally targeted for co-optation by the nuclear weapons industry. The Environment Department remains underfunded and understaffed, but in contrast DOE will spend $9.4 billion in FY 2023 on nuclear weapons and related programs in New Mexico. [2] This is astonishing when the state’s entire operating budget is $8.5 billion. Exactly what the benefits are for New Mexicans from all of this nuclear weapons spending is not clear. On the downside, the Land of Enchantment is a target for nuclear waste dumping. At the same time, New Mexico is rated dead last in education[3] and quality of life for children.[4]
DOE’s largest expenditures in New Mexico are for the aggressive expansion of the production of plutonium “pits,” the radioactive cores of nuclear weapons. This will generate yet more radioactive wastes and contamination that should require robust regulation and enforcement. Despite that, top NMED officials are subverting their loyalties during an ongoing lawsuit by the Environment Department against DOE seeking to terminate a 2016 “Consent Order” that condones weak cleanup at the Lab.
The Deputy Directors and the Resource Protection Division Directors serve at the pleasure of the Governor. Yet their actions seemingly conflict with a “Code of Conduct” that Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham stipulated for state employees. It decreed:
“You shall treat your government position as a public trust… only to advance the public interest and not to obtain personal benefits… Full disclosure of real or potential conflicts of interest shall be a guiding principle… You shall not engage in any other employment or activity that creates a conflict of interest… you shall disclose any anticipated outside employment before it begins… violating some provisions of this Code of Conduct may subject you to potential civil enforcement actions and criminal penalties under the law.”[5]
To illustrate how these changing loyalties can potentially compromise environmental protection in New Mexico, Stringer and Catechis were centrally involved in recent and pending NMED decisions on:
• Granting “temporary authorization” to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), the nation’s only designated permanent radioactive waste dump, to drill a new ventilation shaft to support its expansion.
• Extending WIPP’s hazardous waste permit. The current permit expired in 2020 but has been administratively continued. DOE is now seeking to have it indefinitely extended. More than half of WIPP’s future capacity will be reserved for plutonium wastes from expanded nuclear weapons production.
• Allowing or not allowing LANL to release up to 100,000 curies of gaseous radioactive tritium into the air.
• Approving or not LANL’s request to “cap and cover” existing buried radioactive and toxic wastes, instead of comprehensive cleanup that would eliminate the threat to groundwater.
• NMED’s lawsuit against DOE to terminate the ineffective 2016 Consent Order governing cleanup at LANL.
NMED Deputy Secretary Stephanie Stringer doubled as Chair of New Mexico’s Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC). She recently opposed a motion by the citizen groups Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety (CCNS) and Honor Our Pueblo Existence to reverse a state groundwater discharge permit. CCNS’ Joni Arends questioned Stringer’s decision, saying, “The important LANL Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility (RLWTF) handles, treats and stores hazardous wastes, hence it is required to be regulated by the NM Hazardous Waste Act. But under her leadership, the Water Quality Control Commission rejected our petition for review of the permit on jurisdictional grounds, while granting a stay of the proceedings as requested by NNSA.”
“We learned that Stringer submitted her job application to NNSA on August 7, two days before a WQCC hearing that she presided over as Chair. On August 30, she signed the Commission’s order granting the NNSA’s motion to stay all proceedings on the RLWTF. The very next day NNSA offered Stringer a salaried position. On October 31, 2022, Stringer resigned her position with NMED and on November 6 reported for work at NNSA. At no time did Stephanie Stringer disclose her new job before leaving NMED. Her conduct disqualified her from serving on the WQCC and is highly improper and in violation of the Governor’s Code of Conduct – all to the detriment of the citizens and environment of New Mexico.”[6]
The example of former Resource Protection Division Director Kathryn Roberts is particularly troubling. After working at LANL she was employed at NMED and in time became the Resource Protection Division Director. In that capacity she was the lead negotiator with Christine Gelles, then-manager of the DOE Environmental Management Los Alamos field office, for a revised 2016 Consent Order that weakened cleanup at LANL. Roberts resigned from NMED a half year after the revised Order went into effect, joining Gelles at Locknecker and Associates, a LANL cleanup contractor.[7] The new Consent Order allowed the Lab to settle any outstanding violations of the more stringent and enforceable 2005 Consent Order. Existing violations were waived when New Mexico could have collected more than $300 million in stipulated penalties had NMED vigorously enforced the 2005 Consent Order. At the time, the Land of Enchantment was facing a budget crisis with a projected $600 million deficit. In effect, NMED gave away half of that deficit to a polluting nuclear weapons site that now has an annual budget of $4.5 billion.
Other examples of NMED’s revolving door of regulators selling out to the regulated:
• Katheryn Robert’s immediate boss at the time, NMED Secretary Ryan Flynn, resigned to become executive director of the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association that lobbies against environmental regulations.
• In the 1990’s, after drafting state regulations governing the release of mixed radioactive and hazardous air emissions, NMED air quality specialist Bill Blankenship left to work at LANL, in part to enable a Clean Air Act permit for a major plutonium facility for nuclear weapons.
• Pete Maggiore, NMED Secretary July 1998 – August 2002, joined NNSA’s Los Alamos Office in 2011.
• Susan McMichael, NMED Office of General Counsel in the late 1990’s, resigned to become an attorney for LANL.
• Kathryn Lynnes, Environmental Compliance Specialist, Hazardous Waste Bureau 2004 – 2006, subsequently worked for LANL and then for the Air Force on the Kirtland Air Force Base’s aviation fuel groundwater contamination, a very contentious issue for the State of New Mexico.
Jay Coghlan, Nuclear Watch New Mexico Director, commented, “New Mexico needs to quit being a nuclear banana republic. We can’t have our top Environment Department officials selling out to the state’s largest polluters. I call upon the Governor to enforce the Code of Conduct that she stipulated. Moreover, state legislators should pass a law that the regulators can’t go to work for the regulated for at least two years after leaving their positions with the New Mexico Environment Department.”
Ineos corporation to join Rolls Royce’s messy consortium, to push for Small Nuclear Reactors in the Great British Nuclear Swindle

Rolls-Royce is in talks with Ineos to build a mini nuclear reactor to power the chemicals group’s Grangemouth refinery.

Rolls is heading a government-backed consortium to develop between 20 and 30 small modular nuclear reactors but is in need of customers to help to reduce the risk of the venture.
Ministers are finalising plans to support SMRs through a body called Great British Nuclear, which will be responsible for getting
planning permission and undertaking the preparation work on the new sites. Rolls’ talks with Ineos, first reported by The Sunday Telegraph, are understood to be at an early stage. Ineos’s Grangemouth refinery in Scotland is a joint venture with PetroChina and refines crude oil and produces chemicals.
Times 28th Nov 2022
UK government PR exercise “Great British Nuclear” headed for financial failure.

Letter Steve Thomas: Six months after it was announced, it is clear that
Great British Nuclear was no more than a government PR exercise. You report
that it “could prevent a repeat of the Wylfa and Cumbria farragoes”.
That would be remarkable.
The Cumbria project failed because the reactor
supplier, Westinghouse, went bankrupt; Wylfa failed because, although the
government offered to take a 30 per cent stake, no other investors came
forward.
he problem with nuclear is not that we don’t have the
organisation quite right. It’s that nuclear is far too expensive and
economically risky and takes much too long to build to be any use.
Times 25th Sept 2022
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/admit-it-nuclears-going-nowhere-tclmnr89f
Middle East investors and French developers for Sizewell C nuclear station to be paid by “an extra tax” on UK public’s bills ?

Alison Downes of campaign group Stop Sizewell C criticised the idea of foreign investors paid with money from ‘an extra nuclear tax on our bills’. She added: ‘The promise of UK energy independence looks pretty hollow if Sizewell C turns out to be French-built and Middle East-funded.’
UAE wealth fund may invest in Sizewell C – Mubadala one of main names in frame to back £20bn nuclear plant. Emirati sovereign wealth fund Mubadala has been tipped as a potential investor in Sizewell C. Sources said the investment group, whose board includes the owner of Manchester City FC, is one of the main names in the frame to back the £20billion nuclear plant.
They suggested talks with the fund may already have taken place. Mubadala is chaired by UAE president Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. Its vice-chairman Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan bought Manchester City in 2008.
The Government is expected to give the go-ahead to Sizewell C within days with a ‘general investment decision’ that will formalise taxpayer support. The Government and French energy firm EDF, which is developing the power station, are each taking a 20 per cent stake. They are racing to recruit investors to fill a 60 per cent funding gap.
Ministers have put in place a new funding model, the ‘regulated asset base’, which lets investors receive cash back during construction. This is intended to attract pension funds and institutional investors. But they are also said to be approaching potential supporters in the Middle East, Australia and North America.
Alison Downes of campaign group Stop Sizewell C criticised the idea of foreign investors paid with money from ‘an extra nuclear tax on our bills’. She added: ‘The promise of UK energy independence looks pretty hollow if Sizewell C turns out to be French-built and Middle East-funded.’
A BusinessDepartment spokesman said it would ‘not be appropriate to comment on potential investors’.
Mail on Sunday 26th Nov 2022
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-11472637/UAE-wealth-fund-invest-Sizewell-C.html
Kamala Harris, nuclear saleswoman extraordinaire, touting small nuclear reactors to Thailand

US to help Thailand harness nuclear energy, Manila Times. By Agence France-Presse, November 28, 2022
IN SEARCH OF CLEAN FUEL A staff member works at the production line of Dunan Metals Co. Ltd in the Thai-Chinese Rayong industrial zone in Rayong province, Thailand, Nov. 8, 2022. The United States will help Thailand develop nuclear power through a new class of small reactors, part of a program aimed at fighting climate change, Vice President Kamala Harris announced on a visit Saturday, November 26. XINHUA PHOTO
BANGKOK: The United States will help Thailand develop nuclear power through a new class of small reactors, part of a program aimed at fighting climate change, Vice President Kamala Harris announced on a visit Saturday.
The White House said the assistance was part of its Net Zero World Initiative, a project launched at last year’s Glasgow climate summit in which the United States partners with the private sector and philanthropists to promote clean energy.
Thailand does not have nuclear power, with the public mood on the issue souring after the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.
The White House said it would offer technical assistance to the Southeast Asian country to deploy the developing technology of small modular reactors, which are factory-built and portable………………
The White House did not give a timeline but said it would support Thailand, which is highly vulnerable to climate change, in its goal of going carbon neutral by 2065.
Harris is visiting the US ally for an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit and discussed climate efforts in a meeting with Thai Prime Minister Prayut Chan-O-Cha………… https://www.manilatimes.net/2022/11/28/news/world/us-to-help-thailand-harness-nuclear-energy/1868041
Small Modular Nuclear Reactor cost overruns: the same old problems haunt new nuclear in Utah

Much hope is being placed on Small Modular Reactors (SMR) making new
nuclear plants competitive. But David Schlissel at IEEFA summarises their
research into the publications, updates and statements coming from the
stakeholders involved with the SMR by UAMPS (Utah Associated Municipal
Power Systems) and NuScale Power Corporation that shows that costs are
going out of control, a persistent problem in the nuclear industry.
The original target power price of $55/MWh has risen to $100 (with subsidies)
and is likely to rise further by the time it’s switched on in 2030, says
Schlissel. Construction costs and delays are the main causes (as usual). So
concerned are potential customers that, since February 2022, only 101MW of
the plant’s total 462MW have been subscribed to.
It will be difficult to
secure financing for the plant without a fully subscribed project.
Meanwhile, IEEFA figures say renewable resources and battery storage will
provide reliable electricity at lower cost than the UAMPS plant, even if
the price for the power from the project is just $58 per MWh. And
renewables and battery costs are still declining.
Energy Post 25th Nov 2022 more https://energypost.eu/small-modular-reactor-cost-overruns-the-same-old-problems-haunt-new-nuclear-in-utah/
The projected cost of new nuclear power has risen by fourfold since 2008 – and it is still rising

The projected cost of new nuclear power has risen by almost fourfold since
the UK Government made estimates in 2008, and the cost is still rising.
Nuclear analysts warn that the cost to consumers of funding Sizewell C
through the so-called ‘Regulatory Asset Base’ (RAB) model will be much
higher than has been projected by the Government.
In 2008 as the Government argued for more nuclear power stations to be built, the Government, in a
White Paper on nuclear costs, said that each 1.6 GWe EPR reactor would cost
around 2.8 billion. But the most recently released (by EDF) cost of the
Hinkley C EPR double reactor is £25.5 billion (in 2015 prices) and assumes
the plant will be completed by 2027.
This equates to £12.75 billion per
each 1.6 GWe reactor, as reported by World Nuclear News. This is nearly
four times the estimate made by the UK Government in 2008 after inflation
is taken into account.
100% Renewables 25th Nov 2022
UK government underestimated the cost to the public of Regulated Asset Base financing of nuclear power

The government has been accused of under-estimating the cost to customers
of its new financing support mechanism for nuclear power, which could add
£100 onto annual bills if ex-prime minister Boris Johnson’s pledge to
roll out a new fleet of the plants is honoured.
At a meeting of the
All-Party Parliamentary Group on Energy Costs, held at the House of Commons
on Wednesday (23 November), University of Greenwich emeritus professor of
energy Steve Thomas criticised the use of the Regulated Asset Base (RAB)
for nuclear projects.
Utility Week 24th Nov 2022
Rolls-Royce calls for formal funding talks over small nuclear plants

Ft.com Nathalie Thomas in Edinburgh and Sylvia Pfeifer in London, 23 Nov 22
Rolls-Royce has urged the UK government to enter formal negotiations over the funding for small nuclear reactors, which it hopes to build in England or Wales by the early part of next decade.
Tom Samson, head of the company’s small modular reactor business, told a committee of MPs on Wednesday that Britain would face an electricity crisis next decade if it did not push ahead with building more “baseload” power stations that offer a reliable [?] source of generation when weather-dependent renewables including wind and solar are not producing.
Rolls-Royce is leading a consortium that has designed a 470-megawatt [that’s LARGE !] small modular nuclear reactor, which could produce enough power for a city the size of Leeds and would be built in factories before being deployed at existing nuclear sites in England and Wales.
It wants the government to enter formal talks over potential funding models and how the technology could be deployed so it can start building factories. The first Rolls-Royce-designed SMR would cost £2.5bn, although the UK engineering company has argued the cost of each plant will drop to £2bn once it has a pipeline of orders.
……….. the first Rolls-Royce SMR would probably need a funding model underpinned by the government or bill payers.
The company has previously talked about models such as “contracts for difference”, which are used for technologies such as offshore wind and guarantee developers a set price for their output.
Alternatively, it has said it may consider a “regulated asset base” mechanism, whereby a surcharge is added to consumer energy bills long before any plant is operating to help finance schemes.

Samson warned the government it did not have the luxury of spending another two to three years talking about whether to build more nuclear capacity……………
Former prime minister Boris Johnson said while in office that he wanted up to 24 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050 — up from just 5.9GW at present — but chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s recent Autumn Statement referred only to the 3.2GW Sizewell C nuclear project in Suffolk, about which the government is in negotiations with French state-backed energy group EDF. Opponents of nuclear argue that is expensive compared with other technologies.
……………. “The government is investing in these new technologies through the £385mn Advanced Nuclear Fund including £210mn towards the Rolls-Royce SMR programme,” a BEIS spokesperson said. https://www.ft.com/content/21a54a90-1b51-4561-ba9e-c1677e0262ed
—
USA Vice-President For the Nuclear Industry Kamala Harris on a marketing jaunt for NuScam’s Small Nuclear Reactors to Southeast Asia

Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia – nuclear reactors such a jolly idea in this earthquake ring of fire ?
US to supply Thailand, Philippines with modular nuclear reactors
BenarNews staff, 2022.11.23, Bangkok.
The United States says it will help Thailand and the Philippines with a new civilian nuclear technology to reduce climate-damaging emissions, but experts warn the final products are years away from being operational and other hurdles exist.
Plans by the U.S. to supply its longtime Southeast Asian allies with so-called small modular reactors (SMRs) were unveiled during Vice President Kamala Harris’ trip to both countries in recent days.
While attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meetings in Bangkok last weekend, Harris launched a new clean energy partnership with Thailand.
From there, the vice president went to the Philippines where she announced that Washington and Manila were starting negotiations on the 123 Agreement, which would allow for civilian nuclear cooperation.
The U.S. nuclear technology plans for Thailand and the Philippines are firsts involving Southeast Asian nations.
The SMRs, which can be as small as a bucket and transportable, are to be constructed under “the highest standards of safety, security and nonproliferation,” officials said.
Another country in Southeast Asia that has shown interest in developing such reactors – Indonesia – appears to be looking at designs from several countries. [Never mind about the earthquakes?]
In a press release, the White House said the new partnership with Thailand would “build capacity for the secure and safe deployment of advanced nuclear reactor technologies.”
“This partnership will help Thailand take advantage of the unique benefits of SMRs that provide 24/7 reliable power, complement other clean energy sources, use a small land footprint and incorporate advanced safety features.”
The Thai government has set a goal of Net Zero Emissions by 2065, but no timeline for the SMR partnership. Washington praised the “unique benefits” of reactors which, besides providing reliable power, also fight climate change.
Small modular reactors generally are defined as advanced nuclear reactors with a capacity of less than 300 MW, according to the International Energy Agency.
A reactor could be as small as a five-gallon (18.9-liter) bucket. The traditional design has fuel and control rods, and energy is transported through boiling water, according to NuScale, a U.S. SMR manufacturer, which estimated initial costs at about U.S. $500 million.
The agreement with Manila calls for the U.S. and the Philippines to cooperate on advanced nuclear technologies to ensure energy security as that Southeast Asian country transitions to clean energy.
Once in force, the 123 agreement “will provide the legal basis for U.S. exports of nuclear equipment and material to the Philippines. The United States is committed to working with the Philippines to increase energy security and deploying advanced nuclear reactor technology as quickly as safety and security conditions permit to meet the Philippines’ dire baseload power needs,” the White House said in a statement.
Under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s father, the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos, the Philippines began construction of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant in 1976, in an area about 100 km (62 miles) west of Manila. The plant, constructed above a major fault line, was mothballed amid safety concerns after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
Today, the Philippines runs a couple of research reactors for training and education purposes while Thailand has no nuclear power.
……….. Tanagorn said Thais were concerned about safety in light of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster caused by a tsunami in Japan. Other obstacles are the limited number of investors and the lack of domestic laws and regulation of nuclear activities.
John Timmer, science editor of Ars Technica, a web portal focusing on science and technology, said that with nuclear reactors, the principle is always “safety first.”
“The approval process for that reason tends to be long and includes a lot of documentation,” he said.
“The SMRs are designed to be much safer, but they haven’t been built (in the U.S.) in a final form yet, so it’s difficult to say whether the real-world experience will show that to be the case and also how useful they’ll be for addressing climate change,” Timmer told BenarNews.
“I’ve been hearing about SMRs for about a decade,” he said, adding that “until we build and get a sense what operating them is like and what costs are like, I’m going to be a bit skeptical.”
Cost is another obstacle.
“We’ve never built one of these, so this is going to be a learning experience and for the first few years. It’s going to be more expensive and more complicated to complete,” Timmer said.
‘Widespread misconceptions’
Economist John Quiggin, a professor at the University of Queensland in Australia, listed economic viability of nuclear power plants compared to coal, gas or solar and wind facilities as one of the “widespread misconceptions.”
“When pressed, nuclear fans will mostly shift the argument to the ill-defined notion of ‘small modular reactors,’ which don’t actually exist, and may never [exist],” Quiggin said, noting there are operating examples of small reactors, but “those are made on a one-off basis and are expensive because they forgo size economies.”
Once the reactors can be factory-produced “the ‘modular’ idea is to counter this loss with the economic gains of high-volume,” he said.
“There has been a lot of talk lately about a revival of nuclear power, partly in response to the need to replace the energy previously supplied by Russia, and partly as a longer-term response to climate change,” Quiggin said.
While in office U.S. President George W. Bush launched a nuclear power program, which led to talks of a “nuclear renaissance” but yielded only two projects despite no effective opposition “except from consumers objecting to the massive costs.”
Quiggin expects that the number of SMRs constructed will be also “tiny.”
“The work of decarbonizing energy supply will be done almost entirely by the sun and the wind,” he said.
Jason Gutierrez in Manila contributed to this report. https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/philippine/nuclear-reactors-11232022142149.html
U.S. Nuclear Reactors Among the Oldest in the World
NUCLEAR PROGRAMS
Statista, by Katharina Buchholz, Nov 23, 2022,
The United States’ 92 nuclear reactors currently in operation have a mean age of 41.6 years, the third oldest in the world. The only nuclear fleets that are older are those of Switzerland (46.3 years) and Belgium (42.3 years). Also older are the singular reactors in use in Armenia and the Netherlands.
The U.S. was among the first commercial adopters of nuclear energy in the 1950s, explaining the number of aging reactors today. A building boom between the 1960s and 1970s created today’s nuclear power plants in the United States. The five reactors completed in the 1990s and the one finished in 2016 were all holdovers of delayed construction projects from the 1970s experiencing roadblocks due to regulatory problems and mounting opposition to nuclear energy. The most recent construction start date of a completed U.S. reactor today is 1978 – one year before the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island, which further cemented the public’s rejection of nuclear energy and the challenges of updating nuclear reactor infrastructure today. However, two reactors started at Vogtle power plant in Georgia in 2013 will join the grid soon as the newest additions to the U.S. fleet. They too experienced many regulatory and other delays, culminating in the bankruptcy of the reactor construction company. The U.S. government stepped in with a loan so that the project can now be finished almost 17 years after its initial proposal.
The U.S. today is one of only 15 countries which the World Nuclear Industry Status Report lists as actively pursuing nuclear energy. This includes new nuclear programs in the United Arab Emirates, Belarus and Iran that were started in the past decade only, as well as a younger program in China that started producing power in 1991 and today has a mean reactor fleet age of just nine years. India, running a nuclear energy program since 1969, nevertheless saw much more recent construction than the U.S., achieving a current mean reactor age of 24.2 years. Many European countries which were early adopters of the technology are meanwhile phasing out their programs, at times before the end of reactors’ expected lifespans……….. https://www.statista.com/chart/28805/mean-age-of-nuclear-reactor-fleets-in-selected-countries/
Costs of NuScam’s Small Modular Nuclear Reactors revised upwards – yet again!

According to industry reports the builders of the NuScale small modular reactor (SMR) project recently submitted revised cost estimates to their muni and co-op partners. Initial cost estimates were for power to be produced at about $58/MWh. This figure was recently revised upwards to roughly $90-$100/Mwh, a projected price increase of 60-70%.
The causes cited by management for these price increases were twofold: inflation (in material costs, i.e. steel) and higher interest rates. This initial NuScale project located at the federal government’s Idaho National Laboratories in Idaho Falls would consist of six 77 MW reactors with the units slated to enter commercial service in 2029-2030. These estimates of per KWH cost are significantly above those we have seen recently for renewables plus storage.
Oil Price 21st Nov 2022
-
Archives
- June 2026 (162)
- May 2026 (306)
- 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)
-
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



