nuclear-news

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

In just one year, Sellafield nuclear clean-up bill jumps an extra £5bn

Cost of nuclear clean up at Sellafield increased an extra £5bn in the past year Chronicle Live UK By   15 Mar 15 The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority has been slammed by MPs for the ever-increasing costs at the site in Cumbria Constantly increasing costs for the clean up of Sellafield are Britain’s bill for the Cold War, an MP has claimed.

This week MPs launched a fresh attack against the rising cost and delays of decommissioning and cleaning up the Sellafield nuclear site.

Leading figures from the nuclear industry were questioned by the Public Accounts Committee following the revelation that the expected costs have increased by £5 billion in a year, to £53 billion.

In a recent progress report on the work, the National Audit Office (NAO) criticised the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which oversees the plant, for delays in cancelling a clean-up contract with the consortium Nuclear Management Partners (NMP) after demands from MPs a year ago to do so.

The report said the contract was terminated only last month, at a cost to the taxpayer of £430,000 in cancellation fees.

  • The site is used to store nuclear material from across the UK and was the host of a facility which secretly produced nuclear materials for the UK’s defence programme during the Cold War which was finally demolished in 2014……..

Labour MP Margaret Hodge, who chairs the committee, described the rise as “astonishing” and repeated her criticism during a hearing on Wednesday.

Delays had increased by 86 months since September 2013, while costs were going up by billions of pounds, she said…..

She said she was struck by the “unpredictable massive burden on future generations”, telling the nuclear industry officials it was a good idea to have strong targets and ambitions……..http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/cost-nuclear-clean-up-sellafield-8838478

March 16, 2015 Posted by | business and costs, decommission reactor, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear lobby looking for tax-payer funded guinea pigs to test their new gimmicks

Scientists Outline Research Wish List for Nuclear Energy, abc news, ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — Mar 5, 2015  By SUSAN MONTOYA BRYAN Associated Press Engineers and researchers from national laboratories and universities around the country said Thursday that the United States needs to develop a proving ground where the latest innovations in nuclear energy can be put to the test…….

D.V. Rao, a staff member at Los Alamos National Laboratory, said scientists have no way to persuade investors to jump on board without a way to test new ideas on a small scale……..
Participants outlined numerous recommendations and areas where the U.S. could do better to boost innovation in nuclear energy. Everything from stable funding and safety to regulatory changes, new reactor designs, the availability of water and the public’s perception of nuclear power was discussed during the three-day workshops…….
Gates'-travelling-Wave-Nucl
TerraPower, a Washington-based company chaired by billionaire Bill Gates, hopes to build a next-generation, prototype reactor by 2025 and have commercial plants ready a decade later.

March 16, 2015 Posted by | politics, USA | 1 Comment

Finland’s coming election: majority of candidates oppose further nuclear reactors

ballot-boxSmflag-FinlandMajority of election candidates oppose further nuclear reactors YLE UUTISET 15 Mar 15 An Yle survey of 1,800 parliamentary hopefuls ahead of next month’s election found that 57 percent say they would not grant any more licences to construct nuclear plants. The conservative National Coalition Party was by far the most in favour of nuclear power, with the Greens and Left Alliance the most strongly opposed.

The majority of candidates in Finland’s upcoming parliamentary election have said they would oppose granting licences to build any new nuclear reactors.

Responding to questions on their attitudes to nuclear power during Yle’s interviews with 1,800 election hopefuls, 57 percent of candidates said they would not agree to any more building licences being granted.

The majority of candidates expressed clear views on the divisive issue of nuclear power, with only five percent of respondents saying they were neither in favour or against……http://yle.fi/uutiset/majority_of_election_candidates_oppose_further_nuclear_reactors/7869059

March 16, 2015 Posted by | Finland, politics | Leave a comment

France’s nuclear company AREVA – too big to fail?

areva-medusa1France’s nuclear love affair too strong to let Areva fail http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/03/11/uk-france-nuclear-areva-idUKKBN0M71FF20150311 BY MICHEL ROSE AND GEERT DE CLERCQ PARIS   (Reuters) – The future of France‘s nuclear industry has never looked bleaker, with a government pledging to wean the country off atomic power, cut-throat rivalry in world export markets and the debt of flagship nuclear group Areva in junk territory.

But even with a painful overhaul and lean years ahead for the nuclear sector, the fuel which after World War Two powered France’s rise to the Group of Seven nations remains the bedrock of its energy independence and is so strategically vital that Paris will not let Areva (AREVA.PA) fail.

That is the premise underpinning a new industrial strategy due to be announced by Areva and domestic utility EDF (EDF.PA) in coming months, while President Francois Hollande is softening his resolve to reduce the share of nuclear in France’s electricity mix.

“Neither the government nor EDF can afford to let Areva die,” said former Areva executive Bertrand Barre, who noted that U.S. nuclear giant Westinghouse suffered a 30-year order drought but survived – albeit as part of Japan‘s Toshiba. (6502.T)

Areva’s record 4.83 billion euro (3.4 billion pounds) 2014 loss underlined the troubles of a group which since its 2001 creation never managed to become a world leader in nuclear newbuild.

Over the last few years a series of shockwaves have jolted the case for nuclear: the 2011 Fukushima disaster; Germany‘s exit from nuclear; rising renewable energy output; and the U.S. shale gas revolution.

Already weakened by billions of euros lost on a fixed-price, turnkey reactor project in Finland and an African uranium mine, Areva had limited reserves to ride out the storm.

Hollande has charged Areva’s new management team, led by Philippe Varin, to work with EDF to come up with a new industrial and financial strategy by end July.

Details are scarce so far, but industry sources agree that one likely outcome is a deeper involvement of EDF, possibly a capital stake, in Areva’s reactor business and a possible sale of part of its uranium mines to Chinese investors.

Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron told Reuters on Monday the two firms could forge an industrial alliance and that EDF may consider a capital investment in Areva’s reactor business.

ROYAL “TURNAROUND”

At the same time, there has been a toning down of Hollande’s campaign promise to cut the share of nuclear power in France’s electricity generation from 75 percent to 50 percent by 2025.

“We never said we wanted to exit nuclear energy altogether. We want to exit the previous all-nuclear policy,” Energy Minister Segolene Royal said in January.

Despite repeated questions, including from Reuters, Royal has refused to commit to Hollande’s 2025 target, made during his election campaign, and has come out in support of building new nuclear plants to replace older ones, the first time for a member of this government.

It remains to be seen whether the target will survive Royal’s energy transition bill, which is currently going through parliament, but analysts notice a subtle shift.

Montpellier University professor Jacques Percebois said France realises that if it wants to sell reactors abroad, it needs to be careful about how it winds down nuclear at home.

“That is what is behind the turnaround that we are seeing now – including from Segolene Royal,” he said.

That turnaround would come at a political cost to Hollande, whom ecologists will accuse of breaking his promises. But with the Ukraine crisis pushing security of supply to the fore,France – which gets just 15 percent of its gas from Russia – suddenly feels quite comfortable about nuclear.

Even if it were to reach its 2025 target, France is so deep into nuclear that it is unlikely to want to spend much on German wind turbines or Chinese solar panels and will focus on saving the 220,000 jobs in its nuclear industry.

Half of EDF’s 58 reactors will reach their designed age limit of 40 years in the 2020s and the utility has estimated it will cost about 300 billion euros to modernise its fleet and replace it with new reactors from 2030 onwards.

AREVA’S FUTURE

This is a potential windfall for Areva, which will work on extending the lifespan of EDF’s nuclear fleet while it waits for France to start building new reactors again.

When it finishes the sole reactor it is building in France, Areva is expected to get a significant part of EDF’s 55 billion euro budget to extend the lifespan of its reactors.

It can also make money from countries getting out of nuclear altogether.

In Europe, where dozens of reactors will be dismantled in Germany, Britain, Belgium and other countries in the next decade, Areva is a top player in nuclear decommissioning, which already generates 500 million of its 8.3 billion euro revenue.

“Areva is well placed, as it is one of the few players with experience in decommissioning various types of nuclear installations, including reactors,” an Areva spokeswoman said.

The company has built nearly 100 reactors around the world, in France, Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, Spain and China and is servicing more than 250 of the 440 operating reactors worldwide.

More than half of these reactors are over 30 years old and 73 are more than 40 years old, IAEA data show.

“It’s a future engine of growth, even if it’s not revving up yet” said Jean-Marie Chevalier, a energy economics professor at Dauphine University in Paris.

(Editing by Mark John and Anna Willard)

March 13, 2015 Posted by | France, politics | Leave a comment

Four years later – all Japan’s nuclear reactors remain closed

“Some people will suffer a great deal if the nuclear power plants are not restarted.  And those people are extremely influential in the corridors of power, and Prime Minister Abe is their man,”

Japan’s Nuclear Reactors Remain Offline 4 Years After Fukushima Meltdown VOA, Brian Padden March 11, 2015 SEOUL— In Japan thousands of people are still homeless and all of the nation’s nuclear reactors are still offline, four years after a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and tsunami caused the world’s worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has promised a five-year reconstruction plan for the areas still devastated by the disaster, but he remains a nuclear energy advocate despite strong public opposition.

More than 120,000 residents who lived within 20 kilometers of Japan’s Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima were evacuated in March of 2011 after the damaged nuclear plant started leaking radiation.

These nuclear refugees still cannot return home because of high radiation levels, and they still worry about suffering from long-term health implications like cancer due to the radiation exposure.

Professor Jeff Kingston, the director of Asian Studies at Temple University Japan, said they have come to symbolize the danger of nuclear power.

“These people all understand very well about the myth of safety that the government and utilities have propagated over preceding decades,” said Kingston.

Prime Minister Abe vowed this week to come up with a new-five year plan to rebuild the Pacific coastal region that was ravaged by the tsunami. The government has reportedly already spent $50 billion in the hardest hit areas.

Japan has allocated more than $15 billion for a project to lower radiation in towns near the plant where radioactive trash is being kept in 88,000 temporary storage facilities.

Tokyo also plans to build a more permanent nuclear storage facility near the plant, despite opposition from some residents.

After the Fukushima disaster, all of Japan’s 48 nuclear reactors were shut down.  They remain closed because of safety concerns and because opinion polls indicate more than 60 percent of the public now oppose nuclear energy.

Yet Abe, who recently won re-election by a wide margin, remains a nuclear power supporter. Professor Kingston said the prime minister’s unpopular stand was somewhat calculated in that it garnered him the support of business leaders with vested interests in the nuclear industry.

“Some people will suffer a great deal if the nuclear power plants are not restarted.  And those people are extremely influential in the corridors of power, and Prime Minister Abe is their man,” said Kingston…….http://www.voanews.com/content/japan-observes-anniversary-of-earthquake-tsunami-disaster/2675471.html

March 13, 2015 Posted by | Japan, politics | Leave a comment

Hinkley Nuclear Power Plant – Game Over?

Hinkley-nuclear-power-plantflag-UKHinkley Point: the Beginning of the End, Jonathon Porritt, 11 Mar 15  I’ve always said that the two proposed new reactors at Hinkley Point would never get built. Now I’m not just saying it: I’m absolutely convinced that they’ll never get built.

A couple of weeks ago, EdF formally confirmed that no decision would be taken on Hinkley Point before the General Election, and probably not before the end of the year. The reason it gave was that: “We are in the final phase of negotiations, but that phase can take a considerable amount of time, depending on the number of problems left to resolve.”

And that list of problems is daunting. First, it needs to be able to sign final deals with co-investors, including the Chinese, who are beginning to cut up rough; then it needs final confirmation from the European Commission and the UK Government for a whole load of issues regarding the waste transfer contract; it needs to finalise a £10bn loan guarantee from the Treasury; and, despite months of discussions, it needs to conclude negotiations with the UK Government regarding the subsidy contract.

protest-Hinkley-C

You’ll notice that this list does not include any delays that may be caused by the Austrian Government challenging the EU’s decision to approve as ‘legal’ (within the EU’s state aid rules) the billions of pounds of subsidy that the UK Government will pump into the project. EdF doesn’t talk about that, as it still hopes that the Austrians will be ‘persuaded’ by the UK Government to withdraw its challenge.

And the UK Government is certainly intent on doing exactly that. Over the last few months, details have been trickling out about the retaliatory measures UK Ministers are now threatening in a demonstration of state bullying that beggars belief. A leaked memo showed UK ministers asserting that “the UK will take every opportunity to sue or damage Austria in the future.”

Which shows just how desperate the Coalition Government has become, having put all its notionally ‘low carbon’ eggs in the nuclear basket – a decision that has forced ministers to go to extraordinary lengths to get the Hinkley Point project over the line. Influential commentator Dr Philip Johnstone, Research Fellow at the Science Policy Research Unit, put it as follows:

“Every wish of the nuclear industry has been granted by the UK Government. The British planning system has been ‘streamlined’, with nuclear a key inspiration of the need to speed things up. The Government has created one of the best institutional contexts in the world for developing nuclear, with a new Office for Nuclear Regulation and the Office for Nuclear Development, and has ensured that nuclear regulators are equipped to pre-license designs for new build. As well as this, a strategic siting assessment and environmental assessment were carried out, further ‘streamlining’ the process of new nuclear construction. Electricity Market Reform has been brought in, where, despite being a mature technology, nuclear was granted Contracts for Difference at double the current market rate for the next 35 years.”

But none of that cuts much ice with the Austrians, and if their challenge proceeds, nobody quite knows how long a delay that might entail. It will certainly be years, not months……..

All this chaos and confusion must surely mean that, post Election, we might at last be able to get back to a serious debate about energy policy here in the UK, without Hinkley Point distorting every single aspect of today’s Electricity Market Reform, shadowing out every single policy alternative, and holding back the mindset andbehavioural revolutions amongst both business and the general public on which our energy future really depends.

We’ve already paid a very significant price for Labour’s sad surrender to the seductive lies of the nuclear industry, and for this Coalition Government’s near-incomprehensible decision to pursue the EPR reactor design for Hinkley Point. Between them, they’ve dug a hole already so deep that they have no idea what to do other than to keep on digging.

So let’s just hope that those Austrians stick to their guns with their legal challenge, for this is by far the longest and by far the most robust rope-ladder up which those benighted politicians – and ever-more benighted pro-nuclear greenies – will soon – ever so thankfully – be able to climb. http://www.jonathonporritt.com/blog/hinkley-point-beginning-end

March 11, 2015 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

US Republican Senators undermine nuclear talks: reactions from Iran and White House

Experts point out that the letter misconstrued a central principle of international law, namely that governments are bound by any agreements signed by their predecessors, whether or not these take the form of treaties
exclamation-SmIran condemns ‘untrustworthy’ America as Senate letter casts doubt over nuclear deal Philip Hammond, the Foreign Secretary, warns that the letter from 47 Republican Senators “could become a spanner in the works” of nuclear talks Telegraph By , and Peter Foster in Washington 10 Mar 2015
Iran’s foreign minister denounced America as “untrustworthy” on Tuesday after a letter from 47 Republican senators cast new doubt over the chances of settling the confrontation over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Philip Hammond, the Foreign Secretary, warned that the letter “could become a spanner in the works” of the negotiations, due to resume on Monday, with an “unpredictable effect on opinion” inside Iran.

The US senators sent an unprecedented “open letter” to the “leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran”, warning that a future US president might “revoke” any agreement on the country’s nuclear programme “with the stroke of a pen”. Continue reading →

March 11, 2015 Posted by | Iran, politics, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

USA Republicans tried to derail Iran nuclear talks

Obama denounces Republican letter on Iran nuclear talks Guardian,  10 Mar 15 White House accuses senators of making common cause with Iranian hardliners, while Tehran expresses surprise at Republican tactics The Obama administration has reacted furiously to an open letter to Iran from Republican senators aimed at derailing nuclear negotiations. The White House accused them of seeking to circumvent the constitution and trigger a “rush to war”.

Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, also poured derision on the Republican letter in a statement expressing astonishment that members of Congress would seek to undermine a US administration by writing directly to a foreign power, and suggesting that the letter’s authors had much to learn about international and even US law.

However, the sharpest reaction to Monday’s open letter came from the White House. President Obama accused its 47 Republican signatories of “wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran”.

The US vice-president, Joseph Biden, said the letter, drafted by Tom Cotton, a freshman senator from Arkansas, was “expressly designed to undercut a sitting president in the midst of sensitive international negotiations”.

It was “beneath the dignity of the institution I revere”, Biden said in a statement. Continue reading →

March 11, 2015 Posted by | Iran, politics, politics international, USA | Leave a comment

China’s slow nuclear start: approves first nuclear project since Fukushima

China approves first nuclear project since Fukushima  http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/10/china-nuclear-approval-idUSL4N0WC3N620150310  China has given the go-ahead for the launch of a major domestic nuclear power project, marking the first such approval since a temporary freeze on new construction following Japan’s Fukushima disaster.

China General Nuclear Power Group has received state approval to build two one-gigawatt (GW) reactors in the second phase of a project called Hongyanhe in the northeastern province of Liaoning, the Xinhua news agency reported on Tuesday.

The project will use what the company calls home-grown “third-generation” reactor technology, dubbed ACPR1000, the report said, citing Yang Xiaofeng, general manager of the Hongyanhe project.

China froze new construction and implemented a year-long safety review after the Fukushima disaster in 2011.

While it lifted the construction ban at the end 2012, China has been slow to approve new nuclear projects. Beijing has promised to stick to the highest safety standards, using third generation reactors.

In an estimated $100 billion expansion programme, China aims to raise its domestic nuclear power capacity to 58 GWs by 2020 from 20.3 GW at the end of 2014. Nuclear capacity would still only meet 3 percent of China’s total electricity needs by 2020.

Buy-China-nukes-1China is also seeking to export its home-grown third-generation reactors, such as Hualong 1 and CAP1400, to an overseas market potentially worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

But industry executives and analysts say it faces a major obstacle: it needs to show it can build and safely operate these reactors at home first.

China General Nuclear is the state-owned parent of CGN Power , which raised $3.2 billion in an initial public offering in Hong Kong in December. (Reporting by Charlie Zhu in Hong Kong and David Stanway in Beijing; editing by David Clarke)

March 11, 2015 Posted by | business and costs, China, politics | Leave a comment

Financial meltdown looming for South Africa’s state-owned nu­clear com­pany, Necsa

Nuclear body faces financial meltdown Pelind­aba brass scram­ble to pay sci­en­tists   JAN-JAN JOU­BERT jou­bertj@sun­day­times.co.za

SOUTH Africa’s be­lea­guered state-owned nu­clear com­pany, Necsa, has for the first time ad­mit­ted to fi­nan­cial strain, but vows to keep pay­ing staff salaries on time de­spite “the ac­tual cash in­flow not be­ing re­alised as per plan”.

Ac­cord­ing to leaked in­ter­nal doc­u­men­ta­tion, Necsa will not be able to pay its al­most 2 000 staff this month un­less Fi­nance Min­is­ter Nh­lanhla Nene’s cash­strapped Na­tional Trea­sury can find an ex­tra R212-mil­lion by March 31……..

Ac­cord­ing to the leaked doc­u­ments, Necsa has failed to pay sup­pli­ers since Novem­ber, de­spite Pres­i­dent Ja­cob Zuma’s pol­icy di­rec­tive that the state pay all its sup­pli­ers within 30 days of ser­vices ren­dered.

The doc­u­ments also claim Necsa is un­able to pay its au­tho­ri­sa­tion fees to the Na­tional Nu­clear Reg­u­la­tor, plac­ing the ac­cred­i­ta­tion of its nu­clear sci­en­tists at risk, and rais­ing the spec­tre of a skills ex­o­dus on the eve of the planned nu­clear build pro­gramme.

The cur­rent ex­pec­ta­tion is that Rus­sia will build new nu- clear re­ac­tors, and that Necsa staff’s skills could con­trib­ute to man­u­fac­tur­ing the fuel.

If not, fuel will have to be con­tin­u­ally im­ported at great cost from other ma­jor pro­duc­ers such as Rus­sia, rais­ing the con­sumer price of elec­tric­ity even fur­ther………

DA MP and en­ergy spokesman Gor­don Mackay lamented Necsa’s and the reg­u­la­tor’s anger, call­ing for trans­parency in­stead.

“While cor­rup­tion can be dealt with swiftly by re­mov­ing those con­cerned, the long-term cost of mal­ad­min­is­tra­tion is worse as highly skilled scarce staff quit Necsa for greener in­ter­na­tional pas­tures,” he said…….

The DA will raise ur­gent ques­tions in par­lia­ment to clar­ify how Necsa came to find it­self in such a po­si­tion and what can be done to save the sit­u­a­tion…….. ttp://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/sunday-times/20150308/281556584293429/TextView

 

March 11, 2015 Posted by | politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

The danger of big corporations controlling renewable energy systems

Whose renewable future? New Internationalist  MARCH 2015 Is big business poised to capture the renewables revolution? Danny Chivers draws up the battle lines. 

question“……Who has power over power?

As wind and solar technology gets cheaper – and if low oil prices and increasing climate regulation and extraction costs make fossil fuels less profitable – we can expect more and bigger corporate players to move into the sector, including existing oil and gas corporations.

Energy supply in many countries is already in the hands of privatized utility companies, thanks to decades of privatization driven by neoliberal Northern governments and institutions like the World Bank. This has led to rising energy bills and the continuing failure to supply grid electricity to harder-to-reach (and thus less profitable) rural communities. Around 1.3 billion people worldwide still have no access to electricity, while many others struggle to afford it.

There are vital battles still to be fought over the ownership, control of and access to renewable energy. Who will pay for and own the building materials, the factories, the technical knowledge, the site of installation, the equipment and the energy it produces? The more democratic control that can be exerted over each stage of this process, the greater our chances of creating low-impact, climate-friendly energy systems that supply affordable energy to all. We also need the transition to be a fair one that retrains and transfers workers from the fossil energy sector; this will only happen if the voices of workers carry more weight in the process than the desires of the energy companies.

It’s hard to imagine the big privatized companies voluntarily working to reduce energy consumption in the North; it’s equally hard to envision them supporting a phase-out of fossil fuels as renewables expand, or supporting policies to provide affordable energy to those most in need. These companies have been driving our civilization towards a cliff edge, and now they are eyeing up the keys to our shiny, new, renewably powered electric bus……… http://newint.org/features/2015/03/01/renewable-energy-keynote/

 

March 9, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, politics, renewable | Leave a comment

South African government keeps public in the dark on costs of its nuclear energy plan

scrutiny-on-costsflag-S.AfricaHow will South Africa’s new nuclear power stations be paid for?, My Broadband, 9 Mar 15 If the government is so determined to pursue nuclear power stations, why was no mention of the financing for this included in the minister of finance’s budget speech? By  – March 8, 2015 The South African government has committed itself, by means of its Nuclear Energy Policy and Integrated Resource Plan, to an energy mix consisting of coal, gas, hydro, nuclear, solar and wind.

Yet, if the government is so determined to pursue nuclear power stations, why was no mention of the financing for this included in the minister of finance’s budget speech?

One would expect that since government wants to use nuclear power to address the shortage of electricity in South Africa, and in the light of high-level delegations which have signed inter-governmental agreements regarding nuclear power, that this expenditure would have been a focus in the energy portion of this year’s budget speech.

This was, however, not the case. Instead, the public was told that the electricity levy will be increased by a whopping 57% from 3,5 to 5,5 c/kWh, and that Eskom would receive additional equity to the tune of R23-billion in three tranches.

The public was also told that although the extra 2 c/kWh levy would be removed in time, a carbon tax can be expected soon. The fact that the R23-billion would be in the form of additional equity means that Eskom will not have repay the money.

This additional backing is meant to prop up the power utility’s balance sheet which should make it easier for the utility to borrow money on the open market.

Economists have pointed out however, that it will be impossible for Eskom to borrow money to build a fleet of nuclear power stations because of the vast amount of money needed. The capital cost of a nuclear power station is extremely high.

So who will fund these nuclear power plants? It has been suggested that the country which builds the stations will fund it, so-called vendor funding, and that South Africa would repay the debt over time as it sells the electricity generated by the plants over a lengthy period.

But surely that will make electricity very expensive because of the large debt and the interest incurred……..

In 2013; the South African government’s estimate was $6500/kW; and recent reports show that a Hungarian nuclear power station, built by the Russians, cost $7000/kW, while the French-built nuclear power station at Hinckley Point, UK, cost $7900/kW. The figures quoted are for the new-build costs alone and do not include operating costs or interest.

Despite the high cost of nuclear power stations, and the obvious fact that South Africa cannot afford such an enormous outlay, the departments of energy, public enterprises, and trade and industry all appear to be in favour of this form of generation.

How much electricity does South Africa the country actually need? Eskom’s website shows an existing total generation capacity of 42 000 MW excluding the additional power from IPPs.

The renewable energy independent power producers (REIPPs) have already added 1500 MW to the grid, and an additional 2500 MW is expected soon…….

South Africa may have more power capacity than it needs at exorbitant cost to the country’s economy. Expensive electricity will result in the country’s manufacturing sector losing its competitive advantage which will mitigate against growth and job creation.

At the same time the drive towards energy efficiency, which, according to the budget speech will be rewarded by an energy-efficiency savings incentive, set to increase by 111% to 95 c/kWh, will surely motivate people to use less electricity……..http://mybroadband.co.za/news/energy/121180-how-will-south-africas-new-nuclear-power-stations-be-paid-for.html

 

March 9, 2015 Posted by | business and costs, politics, South Africa | Leave a comment

We need a democratically controlled, people-focused clean energy system built from the grassroots up.

Renewable energy does offer us a (solar) ray of hope amidst the climate doom and gloom. These technologies give us the potential to build a new, decentralized, democratic energy system that meets the needs of the many rather than providing profits to the few. But there are powerful economic forces and vested interests lined up against us, ready to steer renewable energy in a very different direction.
Whose renewable future?  New Internationalist  MARCH 2015 Is big business poised to capture the renewables revolution? Danny Chivers draws up the battle lines. 

In January this year, the energy researcher Jeremy Leggett made a bold claim. He told the Guardian newspaper that we should expect a major oil firm to turn its back on fossil fuels soon and shift to renewable energy. ‘One of the oil companies will break ranks,’ he said, ‘and this time it is going to stick.’1

Leggett points to the collapsed oil price, the falling costs of renewable-energy generation and potential government action on climate change as key factors that could persuade an oil corporation to jump ship. His comments were excitedly shared online by anti-fossil fuel campaigners.

But hang on a minute. Would this really be good news? To avoid catastrophic global climate change, we need to leave at least 80 per cent of known fossil fuels in the ground, and renewable energy will have a major part to play in that. But do we want our new, clean energy system to be owned and operated by the same corporations that have got us into our current mess? Do we trust the likes of BP, Exxon and Total to develop renewables in a fair and sustainable way?

To answer this question, we don’t need to look far. All over the world, companies and governments that have grown rich on our current fossil-fuelled system are doing their best to slow down, interfere with, co-opt and control the growth of renewable energy. We need to fight back with a different vision: of a democratically controlled, people-focused clean energy system built from the grassroots up.

A renewables revolution? Continue reading →

March 9, 2015 Posted by | ENERGY, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Big utilities fight back against rooftop solar

“Independent studies show that distributed solar benefits all ratepayers by preventing the need to build new, expensive power plants or transmission lines,” said Matthew Kasper, a fellow at the Energy & Policy Institute, a pro-solar think tank. “Utilities make their money by building big, new infrastructure projects and then sending ratepayers the bill, which is exactly why utilities want to eliminate solar.”

“It’s really about utilities’ fear that solar customers are taking away demand,” said Angela Navarro, an energy expert with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “These customers are installing solar at their own cost and providing a valuable resource: additional electricity for the grid at the times when the utilities need it most. And it’s all carbon-free.”.

fossil-fuel-fightback-1Flag-USAUtilities wage campaign against rooftop solar WP By Joby Warrick March 7  Three years ago, the nation’s top utility executives gathered at a Colorado resort to hear warnings about a grave new threat to operators of America’s electric grid: not superstorms or cyberattacks, but rooftop solar panels.

If demand for residential solar continued to soar, traditional utilities could soon face serious problems, from “declining retail sales” and a “loss of customers” to “potential obsolescence,” according to a presentation prepared for the group. “Industry must prepare an action plan to address the challenges,” it said.

The warning, delivered to a private meeting of the utility industry’s main trade association, became a call to arms for electricity providers in nearly every corner of the nation. Three years later, the industry and its fossil-fuel supporters are waging a determined campaign to stop a home-solar insurgency that is rattling the boardrooms of the country’s government-regulated electric monopolies.

The campaign’s first phase—an industry push for state laws raising prices for solar customers—failed spectacularly in legislatures around the country, due in part to surprisingly strong support for solar energy from conservatives and evangelicals in traditionally “red states.” But more recently, the battle has shifted to public utility commissions, where industry backers have mounted a more successful push for fee hikes that could put solar panels out of reach for many potential customers. Continue reading →

March 9, 2015 Posted by | decentralised, politics, USA | Leave a comment

Renewable energy development could be taken over by the same old neocolonial racist corporations

questionWhose renewable future?  New Internationalist  MARCH 2015 Is big business poised to capture the renewables revolution? Danny Chivers draws up the battle lines.

“………. What are we up against?

Let’s not kid ourselves. The fossil fuel industry’s main response to clean energy is to try to squash it. Selling the highly concentrated energy in oil, coal and gas is far more profitable in the short term than the slow-release, distributed energy from wind or solar power – especially when you factor in generous government fossil fuel subsidies, an international energy infrastructure already set up to use these fuels, and free rein to pump carbon pollution into the air at little or no cost. Whether it’s funding pro-fossil politicians, forging cosy links with officials or pouring money into anti-renewable front groups, the big oil, gas and coal companies are working hard to keep society hooked on their highly profitable products, and prevent alternatives from getting off the ground.6

There are exceptions to this rule. If those alternatives can provide decent short-term returns or access to new subsidies without disrupting the existing energy markets, then the big players might be tempted to step in. This is why the likes of BP, Shell and Exxon have moved into liquid biofuels, and why major power plants like Drax in Britain are starting to mix large quantities of woodfuel in with their coal supply.

We need a democratically controlled, people-focused clean energy system

Industrial biofuels and wood-fired power stations – along with the continued destruction caused by large hydropower dams – provide perfect examples of what can happen if supposedly ‘renewable’ energy sources are exploited for maximum profit, without proper consideration for people and the environment. Energy crops and hydroelectricity may both be sustainable on a small, local, carefully managed scale – but the current profit-driven rush to turn food crops and forests into fuel is leading to hunger, land grabs and deforestation; while megadams threaten huge areas of natural habitat along with the homes, lands and livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of people.

These projects should act as a stark warning. Wind and solar power are still relatively small industries on a global scale, but are growing fast. These technologies are far less destructive than fossil fuels, but that doesn’t mean they’re impact-free – especially if they develop to the scale we need for a fossil-free future. Will they be carefully manufactured in renewably powered workshops with strict respect for workers’ rights and environmental standards; using largely recycled materials, and built as part of community-run, co-operatively owned and democratic energy schemes which benefit the communities where they are sited? Or will they be churned out in nightmarish sweatshop conditions, using minerals from exploitative mining projects and sited in giant energy parks on cleared rainforest land from which the residents have been forcibly evicted?

It could go either way. Renewables could transform our energy system, with solar panels particularly well-suited for decentralized use: 85 per cent of today’s solar panels are spread over millions of rooftops, with only 15 per cent in solar parks. Increased access to and control over energy could empower millions of people, improving lives and livelihoods and boosting the political and social influence of marginalized communities.

Unfortunately, the risks are also clear. Wind and solar generators require a significant amount of building material and land space. Though requiring less than 1 per cent of the extraction needed to keep pulling coal, oil and gas out of the ground, ramping up renewables will mean a significant spike in demand for steel, cement, aluminium and copper that could have serious local impacts around the world if not carefully managed. Wind power, unlike solar, is far more efficient when built on a large scale; big wind farms typically require levels of capital investment that are out of the reach of community groups. They’re more likely to be installed by governments or large utility companies such as E.ON. Seventy-five per cent of all wind turbines are manufactured by just 10 companies.

The Desertec initiative gives us an example of what a profit-driven, centralized solar energy future might look like. We shouldn’t be surprised to see it develop along the same neo-colonial and racist lines as our current fossil fuel industry, where the rights of Indigenous peoples and communities of colour around the world are trampled in the pursuit of ‘cheap’ energy for the industrialized nations…….” http://newint.org/features/2015/03/01/renewable-energy-keynote/

 

March 9, 2015 Posted by | 2 WORLD, decentralised, politics, renewable | Leave a comment