nuclear-news

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

  Hunterston ‘industrial revolution’ on our doorstep

Drew Cochrane, Largs & Millport Weekly News 29th Nov 2024

When politicians of every hue have been popping up in promotional photos in recent weeks to pronounce the pathway to thousands of jobs for Hunterston in the next five years you know it’s for real.

The bad news for those in Fairlie who are of a protesting disposition (God forbid) is that the projects, spearheading Scotland’s mission towards Net Zero, will not be stopped.

First Minister John Swinney risked a nose bleed by travelling way down south to London to welcome the Highview Power plans to create the world’s largest liquid air energy facility at Hunterston which will store as much as five times Scotland’s current operational battery capacity for locally produced renewable energy.

One thousand jobs in the construction phase and 650 jobs in the local supply chain by its completion in 2030 are the headlines.

Labour’s UK Energy Minister and Scottish MP Michael Shanks visited Hunterston this month to see the ‘Converter’ station at the site of the forthcoming XLCC sub-sea cable production factory which promises 900 permanent well-paid jobs, including, crucially, 200 apprentices. Again, contractors and suppliers will also number hundreds in support work.

Electricity is being supplied from the local site to Wales by sub-sea cable as a precursor to the XLCC plan to bring renewable energy from the Sahara, via Morocco, once the production factory bursts into action by 2029, work scheduled to start in March. We also carried the story and picture of the first apprentices being trained.

Local SNP MSP Kenneth Gibson visited Clydeport which has released 350 acres of the land, designated as National Development Status by the Scottish Government. He, like myself, does not buy the argument from some quarters, that the value of properties in Fairlie will fall; quite the reverse when staff move into the area.

It won’t entirely be a smooth transition, particularly, with heavy traffic on the A78 but as I’ve said before on this page this is our biggest industrial revolution since the decades of IBM and nuclear power on our proverbial doorstep……https://www.largsandmillportnews.com/news/fairlie/24745296.drew-cochrane-hunterston-industrial-revolution-doorstep/

December 2, 2024 Posted by | energy storage, UK | Leave a comment

Germany’s national, federal highways could host 54 GW of PV

 Germany’s national, federal highways could host 54 GW of PV. A new study
by Germany’s Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt) points to strong
potential for solar deployment across the nation’s roadways and highways.

 PV Magazine 20th Nov 2024, https://www.pv-magazine.com/2024/11/20/germanys-national-federal-highways-could-host-54-gw-of-pv/

November 24, 2024 Posted by | Germany, renewable | Leave a comment

Big batteries and EVs to the rescue again as faults with new nuclear plant cause chaos on Nordic grids

Giles Parkinson, Nov 19, 2024  https://reneweconomy.com.au/big-batteries-and-evs-to-the-rescue-again-as-faults-with-new-nuclear-plant-cause-chaos-on-nordic-grids/?fbclid=IwY2xjawGqC8xleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHadLKvCjeIJudeDt86k27LkV53Q1FcfYmtcRSA_HGcWU1b1TmW7voTgIOA_aem_wwFpyxMordh4V_FbOJ3lfw

The newest and most powerful nuclear reactor in Europe that was delivered more than a decade late and nearly four times over budget is also proving to be a headache for grid operators now that it is finally up and running.

On Sunday, the 1,600 megawatt Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor tripped again, the latest in a series of faults and outages that have plagued the new facility and caused the market to reach out for back-up power to fill the gap.

Olkiluoto owner TVO says the reactor tripped on Sunday due to a turbine malfunction in the generator’s seal oil system. “The repair is taking longer than expected, and based on the current information, the plant is estimated to return to electricity production in approximately two days,” it said in a statement.

It’s not the first time the unit has failed. In October, it was forced to reduce power suddenly when one of the reactor’s control rods unexpectedly dropped into the reactor. 

Its sister reactor, Olkiluoto 2, was off line for three weeks due to a faulty water-cooled rotor that had to be replaced and will run for months at reduced output because of the fear of failure.

But on Sunday, when the entire 1,600 MW capacity of Olkiluoto 3 was taken out of the system with no notice, it had a big impact on the grid, sending frequency plunging to 49.55 Hz, well outside the normal band.

“Olkiluoto is starting to compete with the Swedish nuclear power plant, Forsmark, for being the leading cause of major (loss of generation) disturbances in the Nordic power system,” writes Andreas Barnekov Thingvad, a Denmark-based trading systems director at battery company Hybrid Greentech.

He says his company contributed to the market response to stabilise frequency (see graph on original ) and the grid with its portfolio of batteries and virtual power plants, including electric vehicles.

Olkiluoto was finally connected to the grid last year, at an estimated cost of €11 billion ($18 billion) compared to the original budget of €3 billion. That cost blowout forced its developer, the French company Areva, to be bailed out by the French government.

When it did come online, nuclear boosters in Australia hailed it as being responsible for a steep fall in electricity prices. They failed to mention the fact that the reactor was more than a decade late, and Finland was forced to turn to highly expensive Russian gas in the interim to make up the shortfall.

Indeed, TVO, the reactor owner, says now that the new reactor has been commissioned, there is often too much production on the Finnish grid, and the reactor has to be dialled down, or curtailed, in much the same way that renewables often are. It is still not allowed to run at full capacity.

“The electricity system in Finland faces on an increasingly frequent basis a situation where more down-regulating production capacity is needed because there is too much production,” TVO notes.

The new reactor has also spent large periods off line (see the graph above from TVO’s most recent interim report). Its annual outage was supposed to last 37 days, but stretched to double that, to 74 days. TVO blamed “defect repairs and technical problems with inspection equipment took more time than had been planned.”

The point of this story is to highlight another bit of nonsense from the nuclear lobby, who like to claim that renewable sources such as wind and solar require back up, while nuclear does not.

That is simply not true, and the world’s big investment in pumped hydro in the 1970s and 1980s was principally designed to provide back up to nuclear reactors then in vogue. Ontario has ordered some of the world’s biggest batteries to support its nuclear fleet, most of which will be offline for several years for upgrades and maintenance.

Thingvad noted the multiple recent outages that had occurred in both the Finnish and Swedish nuclear reactors over the last few months:

  • – On November 17th, at 15:25:51, Olkiluoto 3 had another turbine failure, tripping all 1600 MW of generation and causing the Nordic system frequency to drop to 49.59 Hz. The failure is expected to last several days.
  • – On September 3rd, Olkiluoto 3 experienced a fault that caused it to drop 640 MW, leading the Nordic frequency to fall to 49.77 Hz.
  • – On June 10th, Forsmark Block 3 experienced a reactor trip of 1172 MW, causing the Nordic system frequency to drop to 49.61 Hz.
  • – On June 3rd, 2024, Olkiluoto 3, with 1600 MW, suddenly tripped due to a turbine malfunction. The Nordic system frequency dropped to 49.58 Hz.
  • – On May 13, 2024, the Forsmark Block 1 nuclear power plant in Sweden, which has a capacity of 1 GW, tripped due to a grid failure. Forsmark experienced multiple outages – each of at least a gigawatt – in 2023.
  • The scale of such outages would be significant in a grid like Australia, where the biggest single unit – at the Kogan Creek coal fired generator in Queensland – is 750 MW.

If, as the federal Coalition proposes, it wants to put in units sized at a gigawatt or more, then the market operator will have to invest in more standby capacity in case of the inevitable trips and outages.

The bigger the unit, the more back up power that is required. Wind and solar may be variable, but those variations are easily and reliably predicted. The sudden loss of a 1,600 MW facility is not.

The Australian Energy Market Operator has already made clear that its biggest headache is managing the unexpected outages of big generators, such as the ageing and increasingly unreliable coal fired power stations that the federal Coalition wants to keep open while it waits for nuclear to be rolled out and commercial SMRs to be invented.

“The repeated outages at Olkiluoto and Forsmark nuclear plants are a stark reminder of the critical need for grid resilience and diversification in our energy systems,” noted Eric Scheithauer-Hartmann, a German-based energy executive.

“It’s encouraging to see companies like Hybrid Greentech stepping up to support the Nordic power grid with advanced battery storage and intelligent energy solutions.

“As we continue to face challenges with traditional power generation, investing in smart grid technologies and renewable integration isn’t just beneficial—it’s essential for maintaining stability and meeting future energy demands.”

November 21, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY, Finland | Leave a comment

The Future of Nuclear Power is Wrought with Challenges

My analysis indicates that while advanced modular nuclear reactors might theoretically be helpful for the very long term, they cannot fix the problems of the US, and other countries in the West, nearly quickly enough. I expect that the Trump administration, which will start in January 2025, will see this program as a boondoggle.

Strangely enough, the US has no working model of a small-scale nuclear reactor, even one operating on conventional fuel.

Oil Price, By Gail Tverberg – Nov 12, 2024

The world is facing a growing shortage of uranium, the essential fuel for nuclear power plants.

The US is heavily reliant on Russia and its allies for enriched uranium, creating geopolitical risks.

Recycling spent nuclear fuel is expensive, complex, and faces significant environmental and security challenges.

It is easy to get the impression that proposed new modular nuclear generating units will solve the problems of nuclear generation. Perhaps they will allow more nuclear electricity to be generated at a low cost and with much less of a problem with spent fuel.

As I analyze the situation, however, the problems associated with nuclear electricity generation are more complex and immediate than most people perceive. My analysis shows that the world is already dealing with “not enough uranium from mines to go around.” In particular, US production of uranium “peaked”about 1980 (Figure 1 on original).

For many years, the US was able to down-blend nuclear warheads (both purchased from Russia and from its own supply) to get around its uranium supply deficit.

Today, the inventory of nuclear warheads has dropped quite low. There are few warheads available for down-blending. This is creating a limit on uranium supply that is only now starting to hit.

Nuclear warheads, besides providing uranium in general, are important for the fact that they provide a concentrated source of uranium-235, which is the isotope of uranium that can sustain a nuclear reaction. With the warhead supply depleting, the US has a second huge problem: developing a way to produce nuclear fuel, probably mostly from spent fuel, with the desired high concentration of uranium-235. Today, Russia is the primary supplier of enriched uranium.

The plan of the US is to use government research grants to kickstart work on new small modular nuclear reactors that will be more efficient than current nuclear plants. These reactors will use a new fuel with a higher concentration of uranium-235 than is available today, except through purchase from Russia. Grants are also being given to start work on US production of the more highly enriched uranium fuel within the US. It is hoped that most of this highly enriched uranium can come from recycling spent nuclear fuel, thus helping to solve the problem of what to do with the supply of spent fuel.

My analysis indicates that while advanced modular nuclear reactors might theoretically be helpful for the very long term, they cannot fix the problems of the US, and other countries in the West, nearly quickly enough. I expect that the Trump administration, which will start in January 2025, will see this program as a boondoggle.

 Current problems with nuclear electricity generation are surprisingly hidden. World electricity generation from nuclear has been close to flat since 2004.

Although there was a dip in world generation of nuclear electricity after the tsunami that affected nuclear reactors in Fukushima, Japan, in 2011, otherwise world production of nuclear electricity has been nearly flat since 2004 (Figure 3 on original)……………………………………………………………………………………………………

Recycling of spent fuel to recover usable uranium and plutonium has been accomplished only to a limited extent. Experience to date suggests that recycling has many issues……………………………………………..

There seem to be several issues with building units to recover uranium from spent fuel:

  1. Higher cost than simply mining more uranium​ 
  2. Pollution problems from the recycling plants​ 
  3. Potential for use of the output to make nuclear warheads​ 
  4. Potential for nuclear accidents within the plants​ 
  5. Remaining radioactivity at the site at the end of the reprocessing plant’s life, and thus the need to decommission such plants​ 
  6. Potential for many protestors disrupting construction and operation because of issues (2), (3), (4), and (5)

The US outlawed recycling of spent fuel in 1977, after a few not-very-successful attempts. Once the purchase of Russian warheads was arranged, down-blending of warheads was a much less expensive approach than reprocessing spent fuel. Physics Today recently reported the following regarding US reprocessing:

“A plant in West Valley, New York, reprocessed spent fuel for six years before closing in 1972. Looking to expand the plant, the owners balked at the costs required for upgrades needed to meet new regulatory standards. Construction of a reprocessing plant in Barnwell, South Carolina, was halted in 1977 following the Carter administration’s ban.”

Japan has been trying to build a commercial spent fuel reprocessing plant at Rokkasho since 1993, but it has had huge problems with cost overruns and protests by many groups. The latest estimate of when the plant will actually be completed is fiscal year 2026 or 2027.

The largest commercial spent fuel reprocessing plant in operation is in La Hague, France. It has been in place long enough (since 1966) that it has run into the issue of decommissioning an old unit, which was started as a French military project. The first processing unit was shut down in 2003. The International Atomic Energy Administration says, “The UP2-400 decommissioning project began some 20 years ago and may be expected to continue for several more years.” It talks about the huge cost and number of people involved. It says, “Decommissioning activities represent roughly 20 per cent of the overall activity and socio-economic impact of the La Hague site, which also hosts two operating spent fuel recycling plants.”

The cost of the La Hague reprocessing units is probably not fully known. They were built by government agencies. They have gone through various owners including AREVA. AREVA has had huge financial problems. The successor company is Orano. The currently operating units have the capacity to process about 1,700 metric tons of fuel per year. The 1700 metric tons of reprocessing of spent fuel from La Hague is reported to be nearly half of the world’s operating capacity for recycling spent fuel.The plant would process 800 metric tons of fuel per year.

I understand that Russia is working on approaches that quite possibly are not included in my figures. If so, this may add to world uranium supply, but Russia is not likely to want to share the benefits with the West if there is not enough to go around……………………………………………………………………………………….

The US is trying to implement many new ideas at one time with virtually no successful working models to smooth the transition.

Strangely enough, the US has no working model of a small-scale nuclear reactor, even one operating on conventional fuel. A CNBC article from September 2024 says, Small nuclear reactors could power the world, the challenge is building the first one in the US…………………………………………………………………………………….

Starting at this level, it is difficult to see how reactors with the new technology and the HALEU fuel to feed them can possibly be available in quantity before 2050.

It is difficult to see how the cost of electricity generated using the new advanced modular nuclear reactors and the new HALEU fuel, created by reprocessing spent fuel, could be low.

As far as I can see, the main argument that these new modular electricity generation plants will be affordable is that they will only generate a relatively small amount of electricity at once —about 300 megawatts or less, or about one third of the average of conventional nuclear reactors in the US. Because of the smaller electricity output, the hope is that they will be affordable by more buyers, such as utility companies.

The issue that is often overlooked by economists is that electricity generated using these new techniques needs to be low cost, per kilowatt-hour, to be helpful. High-cost electricity is not affordable. Keeping costs down when many new approaches are being tried for the first time is likely to be a huge hurdle. I look through the long list of problems encountered in recycling spent fuel mentioned in Section [6] and wonder whether these issues can be inexpensively worked around. There are also issues with adopting and installing the proposed new advanced modular reactors, such as security, that I have not even tried to address.https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/The-Future-of-Nuclear-Power-is-Wrought-with-Challenges.html

November 15, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY, USA | Leave a comment

Donald Trump’s election victory deals blow to US clean energy industry.

Developers of solar and battery recycling projects put plans on hold amid concern
about policy and federal funding support.

Donald Trump’s US election victory has dealt a blow to the renewable energy industry, prompting at least half a dozen developers to put projects on hold and investors to dump
shares.

Canadian solar manufacturer Heliene is pausing progress on its
$150mn plan to manufacture solar cells in the US until it gets more policy
clarity from the incoming Trump administration. Battery recycling start-up
Princeton NuEnergy is reconsidering its timeline to build a $300mn factory
in 2028, the companies told the Financial Times. Clean energy fears Trump’s
re-election spells doom for the industry.

The president-elect has vowed to
turbo-charge the country’s oil and gas production and do away with
President Joe Biden’s climate policies on the campaign trail, including
repealing the Inflation Reduction Act, the strongest action the US has
taken to boost renewable energy.

FT 11th Nov 2024 https://www.ft.com/content/8bcb24f3-4deb-4500-8880-cf46a4670463

November 13, 2024 Posted by | renewable | Leave a comment

At COP29, IRENA Outlook calls for ambitious NDC update a ‘Make or Break’ for Global Goal to Triple Renewables by 2030 

Even if all COP announcements to date were to be fully implemented, a
significant CO2 emission gap would still need to be closed by 2050,
according to IRENA’s World Energy Transitions Outlook 2024.

Released at the opening of the UN Climate Conference COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the
Agency’s 1.5°C Scenario outlines a net-zero path by mid-century, offering
a framework for governments to develop energy transition strategies that
better align energy planning with climate policies to channel investment.

The Outlook shows that current country pledges could cut global
energy-related CO2 emissions by 3% by 2030 and 51% by 2050. Achieving the
global goals of tripling renewable power capacity and doubling energy
efficiency by 2030, as agreed at COP28, would keep the energy transition on
track for net-zero emissions by 2050. These 2030 targets are crucial to
limiting global temperature rise to below 1.5°C, as underscored by the UAE
Consensus.

IRENA 11th Nov 2024, https://mailchi.mp/73121b5cd521/press-release-ndcs-30-a-make-or-break-for-global-goal-to-triple-renewables-by-2030

November 13, 2024 Posted by | renewable | Leave a comment

Clean Energy Community Mobilizes as Trump Rises, Supporters Embrace Project 2025

Energy Mix 8th Nov 2024, Primary Author: Mitchell Beer

 As leaders, citizens, and climate and energy practitioners around the
world absorb the prospect of a second Donald Trump term in the White House,
two overlapping realities are beginning to emerge.

The next U.S. government will be determined to reverse and defeat efforts to get climate change under control and speed up the shift to a clean energy economy. And the
response is already taking shape—from industries and technologies that
are far more advanced and entrenched than they were eight years ago, and
from an international community that is determined to keep the transition
going, with or without the next Trump administration at the table.

How those two forces collide will largely determine how badly the U.S. falls
short of its 2030 emission reduction target under the Paris climate
agreement, and how much is left of the already-diminished prospect of
meeting the global goal of holding average global warming to 1.5°C…………. https://www.theenergymix.com/clean-energy-community-mobilizes-as-trump-rises-supporters-embrace-project-2025/

November 11, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY | Leave a comment

Minimal role for nuclear in UK government agency’s Clean Energy plan

NFLA 6th Nov 2024 https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/minimal-role-for-nuclear-in-government-agencys-clean-energy-plan/

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have noted that a report from Labour’s new National Energy System Operator (NESO) just out identifies a miniscule contribution from nuclear in Britain’s future clean energy mix.

Clean Power 2030 highlights the priorities for the new agency and two primary pathways – one with and one without a flexible contribution from biomass, hydrogen and Carbon Capture and Storage – to achieve a clean power network by the end of this decade.

In a network generating 143 gigawatts (GW) through a mix of renewable technologies, nuclear is only earmarked to provide a supplement of 4.1 GW.

The report calls for a tripling in offshore wind generation from 15 to 43 – 50 GW, a doubling in onshore wind from 14 to 27 GW, and a tripling of solar panel generation from 15 to 47 GW.

NESO also emphasises the need to dramatically increase battery storage capacity from 5 GW to over 22 GW, to increase long-duration storage capacity from 3 to 8 GW, and to invest significant sums to quickly roll out the necessary enhanced transmission system to support the transition of heat, industry and transport to electrification[i].

The derisory contribution from nuclear is clearly a sop to the nuclear industry and unions, and a means to retain the necessary transferable knowledge to maintain Britain’s nuclear arsenal.

It is calculated by assuming that one reactor at Hinkley Point C will come on-line by 2030 and that an existing Advanced Gas Cooled reactor plant and Sizewell B remain in operation[ii].

Generation from Hinkley’s second reactor will come sometime beyond that date, and any deployment of Small Modular Reactors and development of Sizewell C remains uncertain.

Commenting NFLA Chair Councillor Lawrence O’Neill said: “NESO recognises that a clean power future means our reliance upon electricity generated by renewables. Renewable generation can be delivered quicker and cheaper, without risk or radioactive contamination, deliver many new jobs, and provide this nation and its people with homegrown energy security.

“Not so long ago there was much talk of the need for nuclear power as a baseload, but in this report, this myth is destroyed as the contribution of nuclear power is identified as marginal. Its inclusion in the mix is clearly them a sop to the nuclear industry and unions, and a means to retain the necessary transferable knowledge to maintain Britain’s nuclear arsenal.

“Nuclear and clean power should not be seen in the same room for how can nuclear be clean when the National Audit Office has recently identified that to ‘clean up’ the radioactive legacy at Sellafield could cost taxpayers up to £253 billion in a mission lasting a further 100 years?”

“Nuclear and clean power should not be seen in the same room for how can nuclear be clean when the National Audit Office has recently identified that to ‘clean up’ the radioactive legacy at Sellafield could cost taxpayers up to £253 billion in a mission lasting a further 100 years?”

.For more information contact NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email to richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk

[i] Page 18, https://www.neso.energy/document/346651/download

[ii] Page 28, Ibid

November 10, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY, politics, UK | Leave a comment

IEA: Countries not on course to double rate of energy efficiency improvement by 2030

Stuart Stone, 07 November 2024

Much faster progress on energy efficiency is needed to meet target set at
COP28 Climate Summit, International Energy Agency warns.

One year on from the historic pledge at COP28 to double the rate of energy efficiency
improvements by 2030, a new analysis has cautioned that signatories to the
agreement brokered in Dubai are not badly off track to meet the goal.

According to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Energy Efficiency 2024
report, global primary energy intensity, the overarching measure of energy
efficiency, is set to improve by around one per cent in 2024 – the same
rate as in 2023, and around half the average rate experienced between 2010
and 2019.

At the COP28 Climate Summit in Dubai last year almost 200
countries signed up to the UAE Consensus, which included headline targets
to treble renewables capacity and double the rate of energy efficiency
improvements by 2030, which would mean improving energy intensity from two
per cent in 2022 to four per cent by the end of the decade.

Business Green, 7th Nov 2024 https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4377058/iea-countries-course-double-rate-energy-efficiency-improvement-2030

November 10, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY | Leave a comment

Compelling Economics of Renewables Unmask Fossil Fuels and Nuclear

Posted to Energy November 07, 2024, by Francesco La Camera, Paul Dorfman,
https://dcjournal.com/compelling-economics-of-renewables-unmask-fossil-fuels-and-nuclear/

The renewable energy revolution is happening, but it is running too slow. 

Renewables set a record in 2023 with 473 gigawatts added. Yet, we need to triple capacity by 2030 to stay aligned with the Paris Agreement. 

While renewables are overtaking fossil fuels and nuclear as the primary choice for new power, the transition isn’t fast enough to limit global warming. In fact, renewable power capacity must triple by 2030, as recommended by International Renewable Energy Agency and agreed on by world leaders in the UAE Consensus at the last U.N. Climate Conference in Dubai.

Peaking fossil fuels is not enough; we need deep and rapid carbon dioxide cuts in the limited time we have to keep within our vanishingly small carbon budget. 

The choices we make about the use of technologies will largely determine the success of our climate actions. We need low-carbon, or even no-carbon technologies. The concept of technology neutrality, understood as the capacity to cut carbon dioxide emissions, should also include the dimensions of costs and the time needed to reach the desired outcome. 

Recently, nuclear energy has attracted attention as a technology to cut emissions and diversify energy supplies.   

We are not challenging the choice of technology as a matter of national sovereignty. Instead, energy technologies (nuclear, renewables, fossil fuels) are compared in the context of the fight against climate change, where time is the most relevant variable. 

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, accelerating renewables coupled with energy efficiency measures are the most realistic means to reduce global emissions by 43 percent by 2030 and at least 60 percent by 2035.

Due to lower cost and higher efficiency, the IPCC has stated that renewables, particularly solar and wind, are ten times more effective at cutting carbon dioxide emissions than nuclear. 

Nuclear’s share of global electricity production has almost halved from 1996 to 2023, largely due to the high costs of, and delays to, building and operating nuclear reactors. Far from improving, the latest nuclear reactor designs offer the worst-ever record of delays and cost escalation. 

According to studies from Stanford University, new nuclear power plants cost 2.3 to 7.4 times those of onshore wind or solar per kilowatt-hour of electricity, take five to 17 years to deploy, and produce nine to 37 times the emissions per kilowatt-hour as wind.

New nuclear adds only as much electricity in a year as renewables add every few days. For example, China is now installing wind and solar capacity equivalent to five new nuclear reactors weekly.

Nuclear delivers far less power per dollar. 

Because of significant costs and delays, the emphasis has moved to small modular reactors (SMRs).  Their economics are costly and share the same significant security and waste problems. To date, several key SMR projects have fallen by the wayside. 

Instead of wasting money on expensive non-renewable technologies, limited financial resources should be channeled into realistic solutions to climate change, including electrification; the expansion of renewables across all sectors; expansion and modernization of grids; storage, efficiency solutions and smart demand-side management.

The last decade represents a seismic shift in the balance of competitiveness between renewable technologies and incumbent fossil options. 

The notion that renewables are expensive is outdated. According to IRENA data, 81 percent of the record renewable additions in 2023 were cheaper than fossil fuel and nuclear alternatives. 

The total renewable power capacity deployed globally since 2000 has saved $409 billion in fuel costs in the power sector.

Factoring in the wider economic and environmental benefits of renewable power in reducing fossil fuel imports, improving a country’s balance of payments and enhancing security of affordable energy supply by reducing exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices in global markets makes it even more compelling.

The world is increasingly rallying behind renewables to do the heavy lifting for the net-zero energy transition. We have the knowledge, the technology and the means. We are fully equipped to adjust the trajectory of the transition and reduce the carbon footprint of the global energy system. 

We must move faster.

November 9, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, renewable | Leave a comment

Amazon’s nuclear datacenter dreams stall as watchdog rejects power deal

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission cites grid stability concerns

The Register, Dan Robinson, Mon 4 Nov 2024 

Amazon has hit a roadblock in its plans for nuclear-powered US datacenters. Federal regulators rejected a deal that would let it draw more power from a Susquehanna plant to supply new bit barns next to the site, on the grounds this would set a precedent which may affect grid reliability and increase energy costs.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued an order on November 1 rejecting an amended Interconnection Service Agreement (ISA) that would have increased the amount of co-located load from 300 to 480 MW, and to “make revisions related to the treatment of this co-located load.”

Co-located load means the Cumulus datacenter complex that Talen Energy built next to the 2.5 GW Susquehanna nuclear plant in Pennsylvania which it operates, and which Amazon acquired in March via a deal worth $650 million.

The online megamart announced plans in May to expand the site with more than a dozen new datacenters for its Amazon Web Services (AWS) cloud subsidiary over the next decade.

Soon after that, official objections were filed by two utility companies, American Electric Power (AEP) and Exelon. They argued that the revised agreement between Talen and PJM Interconnection, the regional power grid operator, would give the Cumulus site preferential treatment and may result in less energy going to the grid in some circumstances.

Exelon and AEP also argued that the amended ISA should be subject to an official hearing because “it raises many factual questions,” and, in the absence of any such hearing, that FERC should reject the amended ISA. It seems a majority of the commissioners agreed.

Specifically, Exelon and AEP said the amended ISA had not been adequately supported, meaning no good reason was given as to why the amendments were necessary………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..


The move highlights the difficulties datacenter operators face in expanding their facilities to keep pace with the booming demand for training and operating the latest AI models, and the challenges that power companies face in delivering the energy required.

As The Register has covered recently, access to enough power has become a major issue in building or expanding those bit barns, with one major commercial property developer in the UK citing this as the single biggest constraint it faces.

Yet according to Bloomberg, the hyperscalers – Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft – are set to collectively splash out well over $200 billion this year chasing the AI dragon, despite increasing warnings the AI market is a bubble set to burst and many investors and enterprises are not seeing much return for all the cash they are throwing at it.

Amazon itself said in its recent earnings report it expects to spend $75 billion on capex this year and even more in 2025, largely due to rising demand for AWS services related to generative AI.

We asked the company to comment on the rejected Susquehanna power proposal.

The company has also recently pursued small modular reactors (SMRs) via a $500 million investment into three projects to develop these miniature nuclear plants.  https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/04/aws_nuclear_datacenter_ferc/


November 6, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY, USA | Leave a comment

Endangered Bees Halt Meta’s Nuclear-Powered AI Data Center Plans

Mark Zuckerberg is trying to find more renewable energy sources for his AI ambitions.

By Kate Irwin, Nov 05, 2024,  https://au.pcmag.com/ai/108105/endangered-bees-halt-metas-nuclear-powered-ai-data-center-plans

Meta’s plans to set up a nuclear-powered AI data center in the US have been halted in part because a rare bee species was found on the land, the Financial Times reports.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told staff about the issue in an all-hands meeting, according to sources familiar with the situation. The project has also faced other environmental and regulatory hurdles, and Meta is now looking for other ways to access carbon-free energy for its AI data centers.

Zuckerberg previously said Meta would build bigger AI computing clusters if the company could get the electricity to do so, admitting that limited energy resources are the main bottleneck for AI expansion.

Because AI uses a lot of electricity (and water), energy is one of its biggest challenges. Because of existing rules, adding new sources to US grids can take years, and utility firms may not want to add large, new power plants to their systems because of the challenges associated with the additions, MIT researcher and energy council member Robert Stoner previously told PCMag.

A 2017 report from the Center for Biological Diversity found that there are 347 endangered bee species in North America and Hawaii. It noted that 90% of wild plants require pollinator activity in order to survive, meaning that disrupting bee habitats could result in not only extinct species but also a loss of plant life, which could further accelerate climate change.

The 1973 Endangered Species Act currently only protects one species of endangered bee in the continental US: the Rusty Patched Bumblebee. While it’s unclear which bee species has posed a challenge to Meta’s nuclear plans, according to a map from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, there are only about 471 Rusty Patched Bumblebees left, and most of them are in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, and around the Virginia-West Virginia border.

Meta’s website currently lists nearly two dozen data centers worldwide, with the majority concentrated in the US. A map shows 26 data centers either completed or being built in addition to 75 different solar power locations, 21 wind power locations, and 25 “Water Restoration” projects.

Meta isn’t the only big tech firm eyeing nuclear power, though. Google has ordered six or seven small modular nuclear reactors from Kairos Power, and Microsoft has made plans to reopen Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania to power its AI plans.

November 6, 2024 Posted by | ENERGY, environment, USA | Leave a comment

Why Nimbys are wrong about solar farms

Opponents of solar farms often say that solar panels should be put on roofs and that fields should be left for agriculture so i asked the experts on whether they agreed

By Tom Bawden, Science & Environment , November 3, 2024 ,
https://inews.co.uk/news/environment/why-nimbys-are-wrong-about-solar-farms-3355702

Tory leadership loser Robert Jenrick said that solar panels are “for roofs not fields” when asked byi last month if he supported a proposed giant solar farm in his Nottinghamshire constituency.

He is by no means alone in that view, which is a common argument given by opponents of solar farms.

Those who protest against solar farm developments argue fields would be better used for growing food, while solar panels could and should be concentrated on roofs, of which there are quite literally millions in the UK.

“I’ve said that we must ban solar farms from prime agricultural land and I mean it. These facilities are despoiling our beautiful countryside and jeopardising our food security. We must end it,” Mr Jenrick added.

But since Labour came to power Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has approved four of the five biggest solar farms to be given planning permission in the UK.

Mr Miliband has vowed to take on “the blockers, the delayers, the obstructionists” who oppose large solar and onshore wind development to help the UK meet its ambitious targets to make the country’s energy supply virtually carbon neutral in just six years.

As the Government steps up its campaign to drive through new solar and wind projects, it is likely we will be seeing more projects of a similar scale too that opposed by Mr Jenrick in the coming years.


i asked experts whether it was feasible for the UK to do without new solar farms and instead confine new solar panel installations to the rooftops of households, offices and other business properties, and what effect this could have on food security.

The sale of the solar challenge

Experts were clear that there needs to be a huge and rapid increase in renewable energy generation if the UK is to have any chance of meeting its highly ambitious climate targets.

And, as the cheapest source of renewable energy – now costing less than onshore and offshore wind, according to government figures – solar will inevitably play a key role in the transformation of the UK’s energy supply.

The Conservative’s British Energy Strategy in April 2022 outlines the need for 70 gigawatts (GW) of solar power to be installed by 2035 – enough to power 20 million homes, according to National Grid.

As of June 2024, the UK only had about 17GW installed capacity (powering around 4.5million homes), meaning the country needs to quadruple its solar power generation in the next 11 years.

Two thirds of the current solar power is generated by solar farms with panels on the ground – known as “ground mount” – with the remaining third coming from the rooftops of businesses and over 1.5 million homes.

Meanwhile, government advisor the Climate Change Committee estimates that we will need 90GW of solar by 2050 (5.3 times current capacity) if we are to hit our legally binding target of becoming Net Zero.

Dr Simon Harrison, a member of the Government’s new advisory commission to help make the UK’s power generation virtually carbon neutral by 2030, told i the task is so great that it’s “going to require vastly more renewable energy generation” – meaning that “in practice both solar farms and roof top solar will be needed at scale to meet our needs”.

“There’s a significant role for both,” added Professor Rob Gross, who also sits on the commission.

What are the advantages of solar farms?

The first major advantage of solar farms is the sheer amount of energy they produce.

The 600 MW Cottam Solar farm that was granted planning permission in September would be the UK’s largest – supplying 180,000 homes, or 1,500 homes for every 5MW of energy generated.

By contrast, large solar rooftop installs, say over an airport or large of space, typically generate hundreds of kilowatts (kW) potentially up to a few megawatts (MW).

While the average solar rooftop installation size on someone’s home for their own use is typically 4kW.

So the Cottam Solar project would generate at least 200 times the electricity of the very largest commercial roof top installations and around 150,000 times as much as a typical household solar panel setup.

Tony Slade, technical director of Beaverbrook Energy, which designs, finances and builds low-carbon energy generators, told i: “Ground mounted solar farms also suffer from less ‘shading’ (blocking of direct sunlight through obstacles and obstructions) and ‘directional losses’ by being angled in the wrong direction.

“About 50 per cent of roofs face the wrong way and of those that face the right way about 25 per cent suffer from shading issues,” he said.

Are solar farms cheaper than roof panels?

Yes, in part because they benefit from economies of scale. In other words, the bigger the solar farm, the cheaper each unit of electricity will be, as more panels can benefit from the infrastructure.

Professor Gross, who is also director of the UK Energy Research Centre coalition of researchers, told i “the principal advantages are economic”.

“It is far cheaper to install each solar panel in a large array of thousands of panels than it is to install a handful of panels on a roof.

“Ground mounted is cheapest, followed by larger arrays on commercial units, followed by new build, followed by residential retrofit. All categories are getting cheaper but it is impossible to get away from the fundamentals – the cheapest solar will always be the simplest to install, in the largest arrays,” he said.

“And ground mounted developers building large schemes may also be able to negotiate the best deals for panels and equipment,” he added.

Mr Slade explains that greenfield ground mount solar panels on fields typically cost two thirds as much, per unit of energy, as large scale solar panel arrays on commercial buildings such as warehouses, shopping centres and factories – as well as new build domestic and commercial buildings, where the solar panels are fitted as part of the original construction.

Meanwhile, installing solar panels above car parks is typically twice as expensive as wind farms and retrofitting homes is about three times as expensive, he said.

What about food security?

Opponents of large solar farms often argue that the land would be better used for agriculture and that too many of them could impact food security.

But the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero firmly rebuts those suggestions, arguing the amount of agricultural land involved would make very little difference to the UK’s food production.

“Our plans to boost solar power do not risk the UK’s food security. The total area of agricultural land used for solar is very small and is often the lowest grade quality for food production.

“Even in the most ambitious scenarios, solar would still occupy less than 1 per cent of the UK’s agricultural land, while bringing huge benefits for the British public and our energy security,” the spokesperson added.

Meanwhile, in July, National Farmers’ Union boss Tom Bradshaw warned MPs against making “sensationalist” claims about food security.

“It’s a small amount of land which is being taken out of production,” he told the Politico Europe website.

The role of rooftop solar panels

“They can potentially play a very important role, accounting for perhaps 40 per cent of new installation of solar. But it’s important to be clear that rooftop and ground based are additive not competitive,” Professor Gross said.

Dr Harrison says “there are serious considerations to make on where solar is placed”, meaning that sometimes roof top solar power can be far more suitable than those in fields.

“In the simplest terms, there is more space in rural areas for solar panel installations and it is often easier to optimise their positioning for greater energy capture. But they are generally further from existing grid connections and with sometimes competing requirements for land use,” he said.

“On the other hand, rooftop solar, most commonly in urban settings, often avoids use of congested electricity networks, especially when combined with local batteries, and when used in homes tends to drive greater awareness and action by residents in other areas such as energy efficiency improvements, as well as reducing bills. In practice both will be needed at scale to meet our needs.”

The Government estimates there are 250,000 hectares of south-facing, industrial roof space across the country. That’s an area bigger than London and Manchester combined, with the potential for a vast amount of solar panels.

Even a very conservative estimate suggests that this commercial roof space could provide an area big enough to generate approximately 25GW of energy.

This amounts to nearly half the total amount recommended by the Climate Change Committee (CCC), according research by University College London for the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).

Mr Ramandani agrees that fields and rooftops can play different, complementary, roles in UK energy generation.

“We need about 18GW more of rooftop solar to hit 70GW by 2035 to keep us on the right path to Net Zero. So it will play a massive role,” he said.

“Rooftop solar can power people’s homes and business onsite without needing to pull from the grid, and excess generation can be stored or exported back to the grid, which supports the flexibility and security of the grid. And they operate at a smaller scale with some export to the overall grid system.

“Solar farms, meanwhile, are not onsite generation – they operate at a much bigger scale and power the grid with greater quantities of energy, which is used by the whole system and not specific to a home or business (before they export the excess generation that they don’t use or store).”

Is there a big role for household solar panels?

UK households are already waking up to solar panels, receiving record sums last year for the amount of excess energy they generated that they sold back to the grid, Ofgem said last week.

Homeowners received more than £30m for the energy they didn’t need in the year to March 2024, four times the £7.2m they made the previous year.

Although this amounted to a relatively small amount of energy – enough to power 88,000 homes – experts say there is considerable scope to increase this and they expect this to happen in the coming years.

“There is definite major role for rooftop solar in the UKs future energy mix,” said Mr Slade. “As installations become cheaper and the market for excess generation becomes fairer to the home owner rooftop domestic solar will continue to grow,” he said.

Mr Ramandani says: “Onsite solar rooftop generation takes money off consumer’s bills as they purchase less from the grid, and excess generation can be exported to the grid for income. This in turn creates a stable grid system with less demand side pressure, as well as supplementary energy generation from homes and businesses.

For a typical house, installing a PV system could lower bills by the equivalent of nearly 330 every year over the 30-year lifespan of the system, according to a study by Cambridge University and the Think Three property development company for Solar Energy UK.

November 5, 2024 Posted by | renewable, UK | Leave a comment

Grazing sheep among solar panels could produce higher quality wool, study finds

Sophie Vorrath, Nov 1, 2024,
https://reneweconomy.com.au/grazing-sheep-among-solar-panels-could-produce-higher-quality-wool-study-finds/

The co-location of solar farming with sheep grazing does not have a negative affect on wool production and could even improve the quality of the wool produced, a new study has found.

The study is based on the results of a second round of wool testing at the Wellington solar farm, south east of Dubbo in New South Wales, which has shared its site with 1,700 merino sheep for the past three years.

Legend has it that the decision to graze sheep at the solar farm came about when an employee of Lightsource bp, the owner of the Wellington project, complained to a local, sixth-generation wool farmer about the hassle and cost of mowing the solar farm six times a year.

According to Tony Inder, who heads up the Allendale Merino Stud, the effect on his sheep has been a lot better than he thought it would be – he says the wool quality they are producing has “increased significantly.”

But Lightsource bp – which is now wholly owned by the oil and gas giant BP, after completing the acquisition of the remaining 50.03% interest – has used the opportunity to gather some formal data.

The study, conducted by EMM Consulting with support from Elders Rural Services, compares two groups of merino sheep – one group grazed in a regular paddock and the other at the Wellington solar farm.

The latest findings show grazing sheep among solar panels does no harm to wool production, even in the case of pre-existing high-quality standards. And it says that some parameters even indicate an improvement in wool quality, although conclusive benefits require further long-term measurement.

Lightsource bp says that while the study at the Wellington solar farm is ongoing, it is another indication that solar farms can exist side-by-side with sheep farming, for the benefit of both enterprises.

“These results are very encouraging and highlight the potential for solar farms to complement agricultural practices,” says Emilien Simonot, Lightsource bp’s head of agrivoltaics.

“By integrating sheep farming with solar energy production, we can achieve dual benefits of sustainable energy together with agricultural output.” . By co-locating grazing with renewable energy, land can remain in agricultural use, offering farmers additional revenue while contributing to cleaner energy for the planet.

“Finding ways for agriculture and clean energy to work together is crucial for a more sustainable future,” says Brendan Clarke, interim head o environmental planning Australia and NZ at Lightsource bp.

“The promising results from this study indicate that we are on the right path, and working closely with farmers to grow our knowledge in this area is paramount.”

As for the sheep, Inder says they “just do really well” when grazing among the Wellington solar farm panels.

“I like to say that panel sheep are happy sheep.”

Sophie Vorrath

Sophie is editor of One Step Off The Grid and deputy editor of its sister site, Renew Economy. She is the co-host of the Solar Insiders Podcast. Sophie has been writing about clean energy for more than a decade.

November 4, 2024 Posted by | New Zealand, renewable | Leave a comment

IEA: Global clean tech market set to be worth $2tr a year by 2035.


 Business Green 30th Oct 2024

The global market for clean technologies such as solar panels, wind
turbines, and electric vehicles (EVs) is set to triple to more than $2tr a
year over the next decade, eclipsing the value of the oil and gas markets
in the process, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

In a “first of its kind” analysis today, the IEA estimates the global market for
six leading mass-manufactured clean technologies – solar PV, wind turbines,
EVs, batteries, heat pumps, and green hydrogen electrolysers – is set to
surge in the coming years.

The report estimates that based on today’s
policy settings the global market for these technologies is set to rise
from $700bn in 2023 to more than $2tr by 2035, which would put it on a
similar level to the value of the global crude oil market in recent years.
https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4374453/iea-global-clean-tech-market-set-worth-usd2tr-2035

November 3, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, renewable | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »