Greenhouse concerns seem certain to put a permanent premium on non-carbon generation of electricity, and there is now enough wind capacity in place for both the virtues and limitations of that source to be evident. The uranium spot price steadily rose 35%, though the proportion of supply through the spot market rose only slightly to 11% of total. Cost projections for new nuclear power plants came down.
On 20 December the 50th anniversary of the first electricity to be delivered from a nuclear-powered generator (EBR-1 in Idaho, now a historical national monument) went largely unnoticed. Two new reactors - Volgodonsk-1 (nee Rostov-1) and Onagawa-3 started up in Russia and Japan. In the USA authorities are preparing for and have solicited applications to construct new reactors at both existing and new sites.
Ux Weekly 7/1/02, NucNet news # 347, 393/01 & 5/02.
A new study for the US Dept of Energy's Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee suggests that seven of the advanced reactor designs it evaluated could be deployed by 2010. The report said that capital costs (excluding interest) would need to be held to US$ 1500 per kilowatt. Based on vendor information, the total cost of electricity for the types considered ranged from US$ 3.6 to 4.6 cents/kWh (relative to expected market prices of 3.5 to 5.5 cents/kWh). Operating costs (fuel, O&M) should be held to 1 cent/kWh. Several promising advanced designs were not evaluated in the study, including the Framatome EPR, the CANDU-NG and two Russian models.
Reactors evaluated for near-term deployment in USA
| Design | Supplier | Features |
|---|---|---|
| ABWR | GE | 1350 MWe BWR, advanced evolutionary design certified by NRC, built & operating in Japan |
| SWR 1000 | Framatome ANP | 1013 MWe BWR with passive safety features, designed to meet European requirements |
| ESBWR | GE | 1380 MWe passively safe BWR, based on simplified BWR, under development |
| AP600 | Westinghouse | 610 MWe PWR with passive safety features, design certified by NRC |
| AP1000 | Westinghouse | 1090 MWe PWR with passive safety features, not yet certified, but overall operating cost 30% less than AP600. |
| IRIS | Westinghouse | 100-300 MWe integral primary system PWR, conceptual design stage, under development |
| PBMR | Eskom et al | 110 MWe modular direct cycle helium-cooled pebble bed reactor, planned for construction in South Africa |
| GT-MHR | General Atomics | 288 MWe modular direct cycle helium-cooled reactor, being licensed for construction in Russia |
The report was produced by the Near-Term Deployment Group, which complements the US-based Generation IV International Forum (GIF) looking at the 30-year perspective for advanced reactors and fuel cycle R&D.
Separately, AECL has said that the cost of its 2-unit CANDU power station three quarters complete at Qinshan, China, is US$ 1550/kW, and that it expects its CANDU-NG advanced reactor capital cost to be US$ 1000/kW with a total electricity cost target of 3 cents/kWh.
A feasibility study on the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor last year was very positive, and Exelon (the US member of the consortium developing it) is exploring the prospect of building up to 40 units in the USA. The date for starting construction of the first unit in South Africa was recently slipped to 2003 to allow Exelon's design improvements to be incorporated, thereby expediting its US licensing prospects. Start of first US construction would be 2006, at about $150 million per unit. The new Price Anderson Act proceeding through US Congress has a clause allowing multiple PBMR units at the same site to be treated as one unit for liability purposes.
Another major international evaluation is the IAEA's International Project on Innovative Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO). This brings together technology holders and technology users to foster the development of economically-competitive reactor and fuel cycle innovations based on systems with inherent safety features, minimal proliferation risk and low environmental impact. INPRO is separate from an ongoing three-agency study (by IAEA, OECD/NEA & OECD/IEA) examining R&D on innovative reactor designs and from the GIF, but will seek input from both. It is distinct from GIF in its involvement of users, including developing countries, and in its breadth, including a wide range of nuclear technologies for all parts of the fuel cycle.
NucNet news # 237 & 331/01, Ux Weekly 10/12/01, FreshFuel 10/12/01, Nucleonics Week 15/11/01, summary DOE report 31/10/01, IAEA Worldatom.
Licence renewal for further nuclear plant.
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued its fourth 20-year licence renewal, for the two-unit Edwin Hatch power plant in Georgia. The utility Southern Nuclear applied almost two years ago to renew the licences for the boiling water reactors (797 & 806 MWe), which started up in 1974 and 1978. They will now be licensed to run for 60 years, to 2034 & 2038.
This means that out of 103 operating US nuclear power reactors, eight have been granted licence renewal, while applications for 14 more are under consideration.
NucNet news # 14/02.
Recommendation on Yucca Mountain repository.
Following nearly two decades of exhaustive analysis, the US Energy Secretary has notified Nevada that he intends to recommend to the President next month that he approve the Yucca Mountain site as a permanent deep geological repository for the nations' spent nuclear fuel and some military wastes. If the President accepts this, the Department of Energy will apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a licence to build and operate the repository. Some delay is likely if, as anticipated, Nevada forces a Congressional vote on the decision.
NucNet news # 10/02.
US trade dispute ruling.
The US International Trade Commission has ruled 4-0 that USEC, the monopoly enrichment company and importer of blended-down Russian ex-military uranium, was being harmed by imports of low-enriched uranium from its competitors in Europe. At least one of these, Urenco, is considering an appeal in the Court of International Trade. The ruling will now go to the Department of Commerce, which is expected to implement the duties announced in December: 2.2% on Urenco's material and 32% on Eurodif's, for dumping subsidised uranium of the US market.
The EU has threatened to take the matter to the World Trade Organisation, and 19 US utilities warned of higher fuel costs and potential plant closures if these financial penalties were imposed on the European imports. Cogema, the major shareholder in Eurodif, said that this was an "erroneous application of the law to incorrect interpretation of the facts" and protested that Eurodif is not subsidised. It said that to interpret Eurodif commercial contracts with French utility EDF as involving subsidies "requires convoluted logic of immense proportions". Cogema said it would seek to overturn the ruling.
NucNet business news # 101/01 & 6/02, Ux Weekly 28/1/02.
Urenco and Exelon push US enrichment plans.
Urenco, with its strong background in European centrifuge enrichment and Exelon, the largest US nuclear generator, have met with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to discuss building a new $1 billion centrifuge enrichment plant in the USA. An early decision is envisaged. Plans build on the Louisiana Energy Services proposal of the mid 1990s for a 1.5 million SWU plant, which was aborted in 1998 due to despair caused by regulatory delay and obstruction. The new plant would be about twice the size of the earlier proposal and located on an existing nuclear industry site. Now involving the main nuclear utilities, the move is seen as a strategic challenge to USEC's monopoly at a time when it still relies on outdated and inefficient technology which will not be replaced for several years.
Ux Weekly 10/12/01.
Exelon announces record nuclear performance.
The US utility Exelon Nuclear has announced that its fleet of 17 reactors achieved a capacity factor of 94.4% in 2001, which is expected to be a few percent above the national average. In 2000 the US figure was just under 90%, which represents a dramatic rise over previous years: in 1980 it was only 56%, it reached 70% in 1991 and did not pass 80% until 1999.
NucNet business news # 7/02, Ux Weekly 21/1/02.
USA narrows focus on plutonium disposition.
The US Department of Energy has completed an exhaustive review of the options for securely disposing of 34 tonnes of weapons plutonium surplus to military stockpiles. Despite its earlier commitment to a dual-track strategy, the immobilisation option in a modified form of Synroc has now been dropped, and all 34 tonnes will be burned in mixed oxide (MOX) fuel.
In 1998 the DOE published an EIS dealing with disposition of 50 tonnes of plutonium, 17 tonnes of which were to be immobilised and 33 tonnes used for MOX fuel for civil reactors. The recent review affirms the MOX route as a proven technology, and is said to save nearly US$ 2 billion by eliminating the immobilisation pathway. MOX fuel fabrication and related facilities will be built at Savannah River, South Carolina, and the project is expected to cost US$ 3.8 billion over 20 years. The 34 tonnes Pu in question (equivalent to about 9000 tU from a mine) is the amount specified for each country under the 2000 US-Russian Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement. Russia is also committed to using the plutonium as MOX.
NucNet news # 32/02, DOE 23/1/02, Ux Weekly 28/1/02.
Finland's four existing reactors (2656 MWe total) generated a record 22.5 billion kWh last year, about one third of the country's electricity. These reactors are remarkable in the extent to which they have been uprated since they were built. Olkiluoto 1 & 2 started operation in 1978-79 at 690 MWe (gross), they now produce 870 MWe each and their lifetime has been extended to 60 years.
TVO's application is based primarily on economic criteria (lowest kWh cost, lowest sensitivity to fuel price increases), but it notes the considerable energy security and greenhouse benefits. Climate policy is a major reason for government support for the proposal, while its detractors support a massive increase in natural gas use (from Russia) for electricity generation. Projections suggest that about 7500 MWe of additional capacity is needed by 2030.
The site of the new unit will be either at TVO's Olkiluoto plant or near Fortum's Loviisa plant, each with two nuclear reactors already in operation. Six potential designs have been submitted to TVO and reviewed by the national regulatory authority: a 1360 MWe General Electric BWR (ABWR), a 1000 MWe Westinghouse PWR (APR-1000), a 1500 MWe Westinghouse-Atom BWR (BWR 90+), a 1550 Framatome PWR (EPR), a 977 MWe Siemens BWR (SWR) and a 1070 MWe Russian PWR (probably similar to those being built in China with Finnish modifications).
NucNet news # 19/02, Foratom 17/1/02, Nucleonics Week 17/1/02, Helsingin Sanomat 18/1/02.
UK government revamps nuclear establishment.
The UK government has announced that it will set up a Liabilities Management Authority (LMA) to handle "the clean-up of the legacy created by the early years of Britain's military and civil nuclear programs". In particular it will take over all of the public sector civil nuclear liabilities now held by the UK Atomic Energy Authority (£7 billion) and most of those held by BNFL (£35 billion), together with all BNFL's assets at Sellafield , Capenhurst, Drigg and the elderly Magnox reactors which came under BNFL's wing in 1998. BNFL will continue to operate these facilities, notably the THORP and Magnox reprocessing facilities and the new MOX plant, under 10-15 year contracts. Once these end BNFL will have to compete to keep the work (though Magnox reprocessing will have concluded by then anyway). The relationship between the LMA and BNFL will be much the same as between the US DOE and its contractors.
BNFL will become essentially a two-business company in terms of its balance sheet: Fuel Manufacture and Reactor Services through Westinghouse, and Nuclear Decommissioning & Cleanup, with the Spent Fuel & Engineering business unit and Magnox Generation becoming contractors.
Details will await a white paper and legislation in 2002, but essentially the LMA will undertake on behalf of the government "to sustain a clean-up program extending into the next century", bringing together all the expertise available. "The LMA will work in partnership with site licensees, initially the UKAEA and BNFL, and the safety, security and environmental regulators to achieve the most effective and safe means of discharging the liabilities." On its part, BNFL has revised its balance sheet regarding historic nuclear wastes arising from the early years of the UK nuclear program, resulting in an increase in liabilities of £1.9 billion. This will be addressed by the LMA, enabling privatisation to be progressed in 2004-05.
DTI 28/11/01, BNFL 28/11/01, NucNet news 357/01, Economist 1/12/01, SpentFuel 3/12/01.
UK Lords criticise government sloth on wastes.
The House of Lords Science & Technology Committee, which issued a major report on UK radioactive wastes early in 1999, has criticised the UK government's lack of action on these wastes. Its Chairman said that "the technology to solve the problem is there but apparently not the will. The government's consultative paper, which has taken the better part of two years in gestation, is consulting only about how we would like to be consulted. Effective action is now urgently required." Their report points out that terrorist threats mean that "underground storage [is] the only realistic option" and "effective action needs to begin now on the difficult and decades-long task of developing repositories". However, lack of a coherent waste strategy should be no bar to planning more nuclear power capacity in UK.
Lords 26/11/01.
UK disagreement over energy policy.
The energy policy review which has been undertaken by the cabinet office for the UK government has been delayed by disagreement over the future role of nuclear energy. The report is to form the basis of a white paper on energy policy. A series of leaks have disparaged nuclear energy and it now appears that conflict between two senior ministers is being sorted out by the Prime Minister. The Energy Minister has pointed out that without nuclear power, security of supply would be compromised as the UK became "70% dependent on gas, 90% of which would be imported, some of it from places which I don't think we would wish to stake our children's future on". Others are concerned that affirming nuclear would mean backing off wind development and energy conservation.
Guardian 23/1/02.
French outline electricity options.
The French ministry of economics, finance & industry has published a detailed study of long-term electricity generation options, after 2020. It concludes that the least expensive, most flexible and most judicious option is to extend the operating lifetimes of its 58 existing nuclear power units. This would involve some modest refurbishment costs, but would result in very competitive electricity production costs of about FF 8 cents/kWh (<1.1 cent US). Alternatively the progressively-retired nuclear reactors could be replaced by combined gas cycle plants, giving an electricity cost of about FF 15 cents/kWh if gas prices remain low, plus significant macroeconomic effects. Thirdly, if safety authorities did not approve lifetime extension, present reactors could be replaced by new ones which would produce at about FF 10 cents/kWh.
NucNet background # 24/01.
German and Swedish opinion remains pro-nuclear.
The latest poll in Sweden shows that 75% of people give top environmental priority to restraining greenhouse gas emissions, 12% to protecting unspoiled rivers from hydro-electric development, and 10% to phasing out nuclear power. On nuclear power matters, 19% support premature closure of Barseback-2 nuclear plant (as planned by the government), 37% favour continued operation of all the country's 11 nuclear power units, a further 28% favour this plus their replacement in due course, and 11% want to further develop nuclear power in Sweden. The pro-nuclear total thus amounts to 76%, which is in line with earlier polls.
A September 2001 poll (N=2071) just published shows continuing strong public support in Germany for nuclear energy. Most believe that nuclear power will continue to be very important for the country and that the current government policies driven by minority coalition partners will not persist. Indeed, opposition policies for this year's federal election are already flagging nuclear energy as a significant policy issue, with a view to reversing the present long-term phase out intentions.
NucNet news # 391/01, 17 & 20/02.
BNFL commissions MOX plant.
Following issuance of its licence from the government Health & Safety Executive, BNFL has begun transferring plutonium-bearing material into its Sellafield MOX plant. This is the first stage of commissioning, exactly on schedule. The plant will ramp up to full commercial operation this year.
NucNet business news # 102/01.
Hungary to extend plant lifetime.
Following a detailed technical and economic study, a decision has been taken to extend the operating licence of the four Paks nuclear units by 20 years. Paks has the lowest generating cost of any Hungarian power plant, at about US$ 2.0-2.2 cents/kWh, and the study shows that lifetime extension will be much cheaper than building any replacement capacity. The four Russian VVER-440 units (model 213, the second generation of that type) came on line 1983-87, and the review concluded that there was no obvious reason why the units should not run for 50 years, after some further investment. This comes on top of existing plans for an 8% increase in their capacity.
NucNet business news # 98/01.
Russia signs up to complete Ukrainian reactors.
Russia and Ukraine have signed an agreement to fund the completion of the two Ukrainian reactors, Khmelnitsky-2 and Rovno-4 after the European Bank for Reconstruction & Development (EBRD) was spurned. It had been ready to confirm approval of a US$ 215 million loan, releasing a total of US$ 1480 million to complete the reactors in upgraded form to western safety standards. Loan conditions would have required higher electricity prices and enhancement of safety at the other 13 Ukrainian power reactors.
The new agreement draws on funding already in Russia's 2002 budget and does "not exclude" future EBRD involvement. EBRD then announced that it had postponed consideration of the loan, but some negotiations on revised conditions continued in December. After conflicting statements, at the end of January the way forward was unclear.
NucNet news # 389/01, EBRD 29/11/01, Nucleonics Week 30/11/01, 3/1/02, Ux Weekly 21/1/02.
German energy policy constrained.
The German economics minister has published a long-awaited government energy policy paper which makes it plain that its 40% greenhouse gas emission reduction target is in practical terms incompatible with any major reduction in nuclear energy. Meeting the climate target without the country's 19 emission-free nuclear plants which provide 31% of the electricity would require a doubling of gas consumption from much increased imports. The paper also presented cost estimates for nuclear phase-out, which have proved contentious.
NucNet news # 356/01, Nucleonics Week 29/11/01 & 17/1/02.
German MOX plant chopped.
Siemens has confirmed that it will dismantle its unused mixed oxide fuel fabrication plant at Hanau. The decision was taken after the G-8 summit in June failed to provide political or financial backing for exporting the plant to Russia for disposition of 34 tonnes of excess military plutonium under the US-Russian bilateral arms reduction agreement.
NucNet background # 20/01.
European discussion on reactor safety standards.
December's EU summit in Laeken raised the question of EU safety standards for nuclear power reactors. There was an assertion that EU standards needed to be "higher than those set by the IAEA", though there has been no serious suggestion that that IAEA safety standards fall short of any operational or regulatory desideratum. Foratom, the industry association, has urged compliance with IAEA safety principles for aspiring EU members.
The 1994 Convention on Nuclear Safety sets international benchmarks based on published IAEA safety criteria, but it is not designed to ensure fulfilment of obligations by Parties through control and sanction. It is based on their common interest to achieve higher levels of safety, and entered into force in 1996. Today the IAEA is fostering explicit harmonisation of standards particularly in the areas of emergency preparedness and response, legal and governmental infrastructure, site evaluation, reactor design and operation, and quality assurance.
NucNet insider #45, Foratom, IAEA Worldatom.
The China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC) has reported the start of site works at Sanmen, near Qinshan in Zhejiang province. Two 1000 MWe PWRs are to be built, apparently the first of a major tranche under the current 5-year plan. The technology base for these remains undefined. CNNC has been working with Westinghouse to develop a Chinese standard 3-loop design, but Framatome ANP has also been commending its CNP-1000 version developed from Daya Bay and Lingao, with high (60 GWd/t) burn-up and up to 24 month refueling cycle.
Eight units already under construction or commissioning are: Qinshan phase 2 (units 2 and 3), locally-designed and constructed reactors scaled up from Qinshan-1; Qinshan phase 3 (units 4 and 5) using CANDU 6 technology, with Atomic Energy of Canada (AECL) being the main contractor of the project; two Lingao reactors using French technology supplied by Framatome ANP in Guangdong province; and two Russian VVER-1000 reactors at Jiangsu Tianwan in Liangyungang province being constructed by Minatom but incorporating Finnish safety features and Siemens instrumentation and control systems. All these, totalling 6320 MWe, are due to start up over the next four years.
With air pollution, particularly from coal burning, now said to be the main cause of deaths and disease in China's cities, the nuclear program is acquiring a popular impetus.
NucNet news #1/02, business news # 104/01 & 2/02, Nucleonics Week 14/1/02, Nuclear Engineering International October 2001, Australian 19/1/02, briefing paper on Nuclear Power in China.
Further Japanese waste transport.
The seventh shipment of high-level radioactive wastes from France has been shipped to Japan via the Panama Canal, arriving in January. The six robust casks containing 152 canisters of vitrified waste from reprocessing Japanese spent fuel were returned for disposal.
NucNet news # 376/01, 34/02.
Kansai suspends French MOX orders.
The Japanese utility Kansai Electric Power has suspended its orders for mixed oxide (MOX) fuel from France's Melox plant after Japan's ministry of economy, trade & industry refused to accept Kansai's and Melox's quality assurance procedures for the fuel. This follows quality assurance problems with eight MOX fuel assemblies supplied to Kansai by Britain's BNFL from a small demonstration plant. Melox is a large highly-automated plant which has been operating for seven years and last year received the Quality Award from the French ministry of economics, finance & industry for its quality assurance measures.
NucNet business news # 105/01.
Japan softens on Kyoto Protocol.
The Japanese government has agreed not to subject industry to any mandatory greenhouse gas emission reductions for at least the next three years. The 1997 Protocol commits Japan to a 6% reduction from its 1990 emission level by 2010-12, though current emissions are well over the 1990 level. The decision thus undermines any intention to ratify the climate change treaty, which would involve making the 6% national emission reduction target legally binding.
While Japan has been eager to ensure the success of the Kyoto Protocol, its manufacturing industry is conscious of the fact that China next door has no constraint on carbon emissions. In November, under some political pressure from Europe, Japan announced that it would ratify the treaty despite US disengagement from it. Without Japan it would be unlikely that the present treaty could come into effect.
The Australian 1/1/02.
Myanmar (Burma) plans research reactor.
The Myanmar government has announced that it will acquire a 10MW Russian research reactor, to be built from 2003 by Minatom for the Ministry of Science and Technology. The country recently created a Ministry of Atomic Energy, and specialists have been trained in Russia. The reactor will produce radioisotopes for medicine, agriculture and education.
NucNet news # 22/02.
ERA has announced drummed production of 1154 tonnes U3O8 (979 tU) from Ranger for the three months to end of December, giving a year's figure for 2001 of 4203 t U3O8 (3564 tU) - slightly down on 2000. Sales revenue was A$ 161 million for the 12 months on 4430 tonnes (4022t from Ranger, 408t other), giving "disappointing" earnings (EBIT) of A$ 21.5 million, or $8.1 million after tax.
This brings the calendar 2001 Australian production apart from Beverley (Heathgate Resources has not so far published any data) to 8558 tonnes U3O8 (7257 tU) - representing almost half of Australia's energy exports in thermal terms.
In 2001 Australia's total uranium exports, including from Beverley, rose slightly to 9239 tonnes U3O8 (7834 tU) - to ten countries. The largest customer country was the USA, 3140 tonnes, followed by Japan - 3071 tonnes, then South Korea 874t, UK 683t, France 659t, Canada 210t, Sweden 204t, Belgium 176t, Germany 165t and Finland 165t.
WMC 14/1/02, ERA 30/1/02, DITR 24/1/02.
World Energy Council unequivocal on nuclear energy.
In its conclusions and recommendations from its 18th Congress in October 2001, WEC said: "For base-load electricity generation, the most effective means currently in use to reduce CO2 emissions are nuclear power and hydroelectric power. Those countries with the highest proportion of nuclear and/or hydro power have the lowest CO2 emissions per kWh. Nuclear energy and large hydro have advantages in terms of global warming, cost stability and high capacity factors which make them compatible with the goals of sustainable development for tomorrow's world. They should continue to play an important role in electricity generation.
"In particular, in the case of nuclear power there is a range of options including plant life extensions, new plants, reprocessing of spent fuel to maximise its use (where economically feasible), and innovative technologies which address design, licensing, fabrication, construction, performance, safety and effective waste management. With the help of governments and industry, public acceptance of this significant source of energy will continue to improve.
"In the short term, some renewables, such as wind and geothermal, are a very suitable complement rather than a replacement for large-scale generation."
WEC.
The statement says that it is unacceptable that so few resources are applied to reducing medical radiation doses (95% of the artificial radiation received) compared with the high funding given to radiation protection in the power industry. It goes on to address disinformation about radiological risks from nuclear wastes and the health effects of the Chernobyl accident. Concerning wastes, the Academy says that attention needs to be on potential individual doses, not collective dose. It confirmed that no increase in thyroid cancer outside of the USSR could be attributed to Chernobyl.
Nucleonics Week 13/12/01.
The report presents the latest information on Australia's uranium resources, and descriptions of the geology of the deposits and prospects. In addition it gives a summary of the development of the uranium mines, including present operations and earlier operations of the 1950s and 1960s.
Available on the Geoscience Australia website at:
Part A: (5.2 Mb) http://www.agso.gov.au/pdf/RR0030.pdf
Part B: (4.0 Mb) http://www.agso.gov.au/pdf/RR0031.pdf
Complete full resolution version (33.0 Mb) suitable for printing at: http://www.agso.gov.au/pdf/RR0076.pdf
It is available on CD but there are no present plans to publish hard copy.
Reactor table
Nuclear power in the world today
Energy subsidies & external costs (new)
Processing of Nuclear Wastes (new)
Renewable energy & electricity
Uranium & depleted Uranium
India & Pakistan
Australia's research reactors
Australian uranium & who buys it
Military warheads as a source of nuclear fuel
Uranium exploration in Australia
See also Ux Consulting graphs
GPO Box 1649N, Melbourne 3001, Australia
phone (03) 9629 7744
e-mail: uic@mpx.com.au
fax (03) 9629 7207