The IAEA work on ethical aspects of waste disposal led to the 1995 Principles of Radioactive Waste Management, which include; protection of health beyond national borders, protection of the health of future generations, and avoiding burdens on future generations. These principles formed a basis for the IAEA Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, which came into force in June 2001.
Another important international document is the Collective Opinion on the Environmental and Ethical Basis of Geological Disposal produced by the NEA, IAEA and EEC in 1995. This records the consensus view that the concept of geological waste disposal rests on a firm ethical basis and develops a set of guiding ethical principles that are broadly similar to those stated by the IAEA, although two issues are more strongly emphasised. The first is that "....a waste management strategy should not be based on a presumption of a stable societal structure for the indefinite future, nor of technological advance". This leads to rejection of indefinite storage strategies, requiring continuing input of resources, in favour of geological disposal concepts offering permanent protection. The second is the wish to ".....not unduly restrict the freedom of choice of future generations". An incremental process, involving development of deep repositories in a stepwise fashion over decades, meets this requirement - in particular when disposal facilities are demonstrated to be passively safe following repository closure, but also allow waste retrieval, if desired.
There have also been numerous meetings and position papers on ethical issues at a national level in countries such as Sweden, Canada, Switzerland and the USA.
The fundamental ethics underlying all the principles discussed above are fairness or equity for current and future generations - respectively intragenerational and intergenerational equity.
Intragenerational Equity
Intragenerational equity means that it is important for current generations to ensure that our finite resources are spent sensibly on solving environmental problems, taking into account the relative scale of the potential impacts and the distribution of risks and benefits.
Regulating health risks to current populations: Regulatory criteria for radioactive wastes need to be set relative to other activities which are potentially hazardous to the public. In practice, few countries have a uniform regulatory framework which could encourage this and even here, there is no real pressure to use uniform risk criteria. The 'nuclear dread' factor associated with radioactivity tends to lead to especially onerous regulations in the nuclear area, including waste management, without justifying these by showing a corresponding benefit.
Spatial distribution of burdens and benefits: At a national and an international level, the issue of distribution of burdens and benefits is a key issue in the siting of waste repositories. Today, it is a widely accepted practice that a host community should be compensated for its willingness to accept any common facility which is for the good of a wider population. Specific national negotiations on such issues have taken place in numerous countries. For an international repository, the issue of equitable distribution of the benefits between host and partner countries is of even greater importance. The benefits offered in both cases are regarded as fair compensation for offering a valuable environmental service, and not as bribes or risk premiums.
There are, of course, strong ethical reasons for not exporting hazardous wastes of any kind to a country which does not have the appropriate technological and societal structures to ensure that these wastes are properly handled. The arguments against waste transfers in the case of willing and capable host nations being prepared to accept waste imports are often less a matter of ethical principle and more of political expediency.
Public Involvement: Intragenerational equity requires that the public be given open access to information, that their concerns are appropriately weighed and that they can participate in the relevant decision making processes. In virtually all countries today, information on waste management is freely available. This position has been reached despite the initial tendency to secrecy bred in nuclear weapons programs and taken over into commercial power activities. Increasingly, there is a trend towards engaging the public in the debate and in the decision processes. A caveat, often forgotten, is that the public cannot be expected to master all of the technical issues involved, so implementers and regulators have a direct responsibility to make clear the scientific issues on which there is a broad consensus.
Polluter Pays Principle. The principle that polluters should not be subsidised is widely accepted and influences environmental legislation in almost all countries. Difficulties can arise in assessing the costs, in particular of pollution that is diluted and dispersed (e.g. CO2 emissions). Nuclear power and geological disposal are more straightforward and, as described, mechanisms to ensure that costs are covered are in place in most countries.
Intergenerational Equity
Intergenerational equity involves ensuring fairness across generations and is directly related to the topical subject of sustainability. The basic tenets are that we do not pass on burdens unnecessarily and that we leave future generations with the same freedoms and choices that we have. Geological disposal is recognised as being the only sustainable solution to managing long-lived wastes, because it does not pass on problems to future generations who may have neither the resources nor the capability to handle them. This argument applies in any country and to any size of program.
Risks to future generations: The IAEA Principles maintain that future generations should not be exposed to higher risks than current generations. This would lead to dose or risk criteria for future exposures being set equivalent to those for operating facilities. In practice, the argument is made (e.g. in Switzerland) that, since the current generation is the beneficiary of nuclear power, future doses should be less.
Burdens and benefits for future generations: The potential burdens on future generations do not only involve radiation risks. The most obvious other risk is financial, discussed below. In any ethical discussion on future impacts of waste disposal, one should also address the benefits which can result, notably the potential benefits of technology advances and increased energy availability.
For nuclear power, additional arguments are conservation of fossil reserves and reduction of greenhouse gases. Disposal of unwanted materials from disarmament also raises an important ethical argument in favour of international repositories. A responsible, secure host nation which accepted the responsibility of the guardianship of fissile materials, which might otherwise cause mass destruction anywhere in the world, would occupy high moral ground.
Financial risks to future generations: Implementing repositories will be expensive and postponing this task for long times means that these costs will fall on future generations. For this reason, serious waste management programs set aside funds to cover these future liabilities. The pioneering example is Sweden, where a fund fully segregated from the utilities and from Government was established early. Many other countries now have funds, although these are sometimes open to appropriation by Governments for other uses, as in the USA, or are left within the utilities, as was the case in Switzerland until recently.
Maximising freedom of choice: This can obviously cause conflict with the principle of minimising potential burdens, but compromise is possible. Implementers are trying to develop repositories which provide future safety whilst also retaining options for change. Retrievability of wastes has become a major topic. Achieving the correct balance between maximising freedom to change direction and minimising future burdens is very sensitive.
Precautionary Principle: This calls upon society to take prudent preventative actions to deal with risks with potentially very serious consequences, even if there are doubts and scientific controversy surrounding the evidence. For radioactive waste disposal, it can be argued that any future impacts will be localised and not of a catastrophic nature so that the precautionary principle has limited relevance.
Abridged from ARIUS Newsletter #3, January 2003, article by Charles McCombie & Neil Chapman
US vitrification plant closes down.
After completing its task of solidifying 2.27 megalitres of high-level liquid wastes left from the country's only commercial reprocessing plant, which closed in 1976, the West Valley vitrification plant in New York state has closed. It treated 890,000 TBq of liquid wastes over 1996-2002. These were mostly fission products and were incorporated it into borosilicate glass which was then siphoned into 275 steel canisters each 3 metres long and 0.6 m diameter. Some wastes were incorporated into concrete. The canisters will join the rest of US spent fuel in the Yucca Mountain repository.
Radwaste Solutions, Jan/Feb 2003.
Subject to their and BNFL's agreement by mid February, the Significant Creditors, who are owed £1260 million, will take £425 million of new bonds and up to 95% equity in the company. This amounts to a major write-down, which would leave present shareholders with 5-10% equity. Banks are owed £490 million in relation to the Eggborough coal-fired power station (on which BE wrote off £300 million in 2001-02), bondholders £408 million, and energy trading companies £365 million. The government will extend its existing £650 million credit facility providing working capital and recently approved by the EC, to 9 March. Another condition of the restructuring is that BE sell its profitable North American assets - 82% of Bruce Power by 14 February and half of AmerGen by 30 June. Proceeds will go towards repaying the government loan. (AmerGen's three reactors were bought very cheaply - $16-29 /kW for 2200 MWe in 1999-2000.)
UK fuel services contracts with government-owned BNFL have been renegotiated from £300 million per year down to about £180 million under a complex agreement related to the electricity price. This includes reprocessing of spent fuel which is still two to three times the cost of direct disposal of spent fuel as for its US operations. Beyond this, the government will pay up to £200 million per year for ten years into a new or expanded Nuclear Liability Fund for dealing with historic nuclear liabilities in UK, mainly decommissioning older reactors. A portion of the liabilities is already covered in the existing decommissioning fund. For its part BE must pay £275 million of the new bonds, £20 million per year, a fee for PWR fuel, plus 65% of available cash in to the fund to cover current liabilities. When the company was floated in 1996 it took discounted UK liabilities of £5.6 billion with it and BE has set aside c £2 billion towards these since, leaving $3.4 billion at September 2002. The government is now proposing to assume the balance of any historic liabilities not covered already or by the new fund.
BE's financial crisis was precipitated by its UK electricity production cost (including the inappropriate climate change levy and high reprocessing costs) - 1.67 p/kWh last year, being above the wholesale price of electricity which has fallen 35% in the last two years. The restructuring plan includes implementation of a new trading strategy to "reduce exposure to wholesale electricity prices".
The Department of Trade & Industry said that "if BE's plan is not delivered, then its directors may decide that administration is the only option. The government has planned for this contingency and will act to protect its key objectives of nuclear safety and security of supply. Whatever happens, the government will continue to support the operations of BE's nuclear power stations, which will continue to generate electricity." The opposition pointed to the "absurd contradiction" of baling out BE while subjecting nuclear power to the climate change levy, calling it "a restructuring deal delivered in a policy vacuum".
British Energy's interim results for six months to September 30 showed a loss of £337 million on £909 million turnover, rather worse than anticipated. However, the main component is an exceptional item of £213 million for write-downs. The balance of the loss is attributed to low UK production (30 billion kWh) and low UK wholesale prices. UK nuclear operating costs were 1.85 p/kWh. North American operations contributed £81 million towards profit.
The Chairman said that a "lack of tied retail outlets and a high level of unscheduled outages has inflicted terrible damage on our company." "The restructuring proposals agreed with the (UK) government offer our company the opportunity to start on the long path to recovery. It will involve considerable sacrifice on the part of the company's major creditors and shareholders", and if they do not agree or if there are other blockages "the company is likely to have to seek the protection of administration." The Board hopes that BE "will re-emerge as the UK's least-cost major generator and be able to compete effectively with vertically-integrated producers, offering the greenhouse-free energy that that society is coming to value increasingly."
In January a bill was introduced to UK Parliament to allow the government "to deal with any eventuality" faced by BE and to ensure the security and safety of the UK electricity supply. The bill would enable the government, if necessary, to spend cash on BE or to acquire "BE companies or their assets." It would also remove the ceiling on financial assistance in relation to nuclear liabilities, as announced conditionally in November.
BE 28/11 & 12/12/02, Times, FT 29/11/02, NucNet business news # 91/02, Conservatives web site 28/11/02, Ux Weekly 16/12/02, Platts 9/1/03.
French nuclear output increases.
France's 59 operating nuclear power units generated 415.5 billion kWh of electricity in 2002, a 4% increase and comprising 78% of the country's production. Net French electricity exports increased to 76.8 billion kWh in 2002, almost 15% of domestic production, and worth some EUR 3 billion (cf French industrial tariff of EUR 4.8 c/kWh).
NucNet news # 9/03, ESAA data.
French energy debate announced.
France has announced its first national energy debate, to expose citizens' views on different energy options, before the development of a new energy law later in the year. Announcing the debate, the French secretary of state for industry said that it had been designed in response to a "strong demand from the French people", 70% of whom have identified themselves as being poorly informed on energy questions. The same November poll showed that 67% of people think that environmental protection is the single most important energy policy goal. However, 58% think that nuclear power causes climate change while only 46% think that coal burning does so.
"We must soon make important choices, define the energy mix for the next 30 years in setting our sights on sustainable development at a European and at a global level. This will include thought as to the role and the future of nuclear, (including) taking decisions such as those concerning the European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPR), and to define the role of renewable energies in the production of electricity, in thermal uses and transport." The debate will run from March to May and is designed to give effective input from public opinion to French energy policy. Six forums will take place around the country.
Nucleonics Week 16/1/03, NucNet news # 21/03.
Sweden approves MOX use.
The Swedish government has given approval to load mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel into OKG's 3-unit Oskarshamn power plant. This enables 832 kg of separated plutonium to be utilised in the manufacture of fresh fuel (some 200 fuel assemblies) at Sellafield, UK, for Framatome, which will supply OKG about 2005. The material results from reprocessing of early Swedish spent fuel from 1979 to 1982, when the present direct disposal policy came in - all of Sweden's spent fuel is now stored centrally at the CLAB facility pending disposal. The corresponding 140 tonnes of separated uranium will be combined with downblended Russian weapons-grade uranium in Russia, and supplied to OKG this year under a separate contract with Framatome. The decision has revived discussion on Swedish use of Russian MOX made from weapons-grade plutonium, with a non-proliferation rationale.
NucNet news # 399/02, NuclearFuel 6/1/03.
Belgian Senate confirms nuclear phase-out from 2015.
Following an earlier vote by the Chamber of Representatives, the 34 to 16 vote means that each of the seven Belgian reactors will be closed after 40 years of operation - the first in 2015, and no new reactors will be built. The opposition Christian Democrat party says the country lacks reasonable alternatives for the 60% of its electricity from nuclear, and will reverse the law if it comes to power. Meanwhile Westinghouse has been awarded a contract for replacing the steam generators at Electrabel's Doel-2 reactor.
NucNet news # 27 & 32/03, Ux Weekly 20/1/03.
Bulgaria shuts down older nuclear units.
In line with a commitment to enable its accession to the EU, Bulgaria finally closed down Kozloduy-1 & 2 nuclear reactors on 31 December. These are first-generation Soviet VVER 440/230 types of 405 MWe net, and their 30-year design life would have taken them only to 2004-05. They generated about ten percent of the country's power, and their loss will curtail electricity exports. BNFL in partnership with EdF has contracted the management of their decommissioning. Units 3 & 4, being basically the same kind of reactor, are under threat of closure by 2006 but have had EUR 129 million of upgrading work done and a reprieve is being sought. The EC has pledged EUR 200 million to decommission the four units.
TradeTech NMR 3/1/03, Ux Weekly 6/1/03, Nuclear Eng Int'l Dec 02, BNFL 17/1/03, cf WNA & UIC Newsletter # 6/02
Finance package for second Romanian power reactor
After several years uncertainty, the Romanian government has announced a EUR 350 million financing package towards the completion of Cernavoda-2 nuclear power reactor. The Canadian government has guaranteed up to C$ 328 million (EUR 202 million) in loans to help complete unit 2. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) is the main contractor for the 655 MWe Candu-6 unit. Unit 1 started up in 1996 and has performed well, supplying 11% of the country's electricity. Unit 2 is now expected to start up in 2007.
NucNet news #386/02, Ux Weekly 16/12/02, TradeTech NMR 3/1/03, Ux Weekly 6/1/03.
Russian loan for Ukrainian power reactors.
The Ukrainian president has signed legislation approving a Russian loan of US$ 44 million for completion of Khmelmitski-2 and Rovno-4 nuclear power reactors. The arrangement, covering goods and services from Russia, was approved by Ukraine's parliament in November, and follows signing of a US$ 144 million agreement in June, including about US$ 100 million of fuel. Talks continue with the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development on further funds for the project, though a loan of US$ 215 million was deferred late in 2001 after Ukraine baulked at the conditions.
NucNet business news # 40, 88 & 94/02, news # 116 & 359/02.
Lithuania strategy for nuclear replacement.
The Lithuanian parliament has approved a new energy strategy which allows for its two large Soviet-era RBMK nuclear reactors at Ignalina to close in 2005 and 2009, conditional upon sufficient foreign aid to enable replacement nuclear capacity to be built. The reactor closure agreements will allow its entry into the EU in 2004. The two units contributed 80% of the country's electricity in 2002.
NucNet news # 325/02 & 24/03.
BNFL extends Russian assistance.
BNFL has secured an EC contract to assist the Leningrad nuclear power plant to upgrade safety on its RBMK reactor units 3 & 4. The work, over 2.5 years, will include changes to reactor control systems and modification to control rod systems. BNFL has been working there since 1995 on ancillary systems.
BNFL 3/12/02.
Former Japanese PM calls for return to first principles.
Mr Nakasone, a former Prime Minister of Japan, has urged the Japanese nuclear industry to go back to basics. He reviewed the early period when nuclear laws were established and noted that despite Japan's experience of atomic bombs, the people had embraced the peaceful uses of nuclear power as a matter of vital importance, nuclear applications becoming a 'civilisation determiner' which made people's lives better.
In the light of the Tepco scandals, he called for a return to the basic principles of nuclear power development - autonomy, democracy and disclosure, so that the reputation for reliability could be re-established. He said there was no need to review basic nuclear policy, simply the implementation and outworking of it.
Atoms in Japan, November 2002.
France and Japan co-operate on new reactor.
Japan's Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) and France's Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) have agreed to cooperate on development of high temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGR). Japan's HTTR test reactor has now achieved 30 MWt power with helium outlet temperature of 850°C, and 950°C is being sought. It has its fuel in blocks rather than as a pebble bed. JAERI is working on how best to utilise the heat, particularly for thermochemical hydrogen production. CEA has been interested in such reactors for some time and hopes eventually to build a fast neutron version. Meanwhile this cooperation becomes a further aspect of their nuclear collaboration initiated in 1992. (Framatome ANP and Fuji are involved with General Atomics and Minatom in developing a commercial-scale HTGR of the same kind as Japan's HTTR, in Russia.)
Atoms in Japan, November 2002.
Delay for APWRs in Japan.
In August the Fukui Prefecture notified Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade & Industry that it agreed to the construction of units 3 & 4 of the Tsuruga nuclear power station, but in the light of the Tepco scandal it then withdrew the approval. Tsuruga-3 & 4 would be the first Advanced Pressurised Water Reactors, of 1538 MWe each, and the first is expected to be commissioned by the Japan Atomic Power Co in 2010. Project cost is 55 billion yen (US$ 6.7 billion). JAPC is one of four utilities which have been developing the APWR, together with Westinghouse and Mitsubishi. It is a simplified design, combines active and passive cooling systems, and will have over 55 gigawatt days per tonne (GWd/t) fuel burn-up.
Atoms in Japan Aug 2002, Ux Weekly 17/6/02.
South Korea - Vietnam nuclear agreement.
A memorandum of understanding has been signed for South Korea to assist Vietnam in the development of its long-term energy strategy, including particularly nuclear power. Electricity demand is growing by 15% per year.
TradeTech NMR 15/11/02.
North Korea threatens return to plutonium production.
In the wake of the US response to its announced uranium enrichment program, North Korea has threatened to reactivate its program of developing gas-graphite reactors at Yongbyon. It has expelled the two IAEA inspectors responsible for surveillance of them, and has broached the IAEA seals and disabled monitoring equipment. One of these reactors, of about 35 MW thermal, started up in the late 1980s and was designed primarily for military plutonium production rather than for electricity, though it was later set up to supply a nominal 5 MWe. Both it and the associated reprocessing plant were shut down under the 1994 framework agreement. The construction of two larger gas-graphite reactors was frozen then.
The main trade-off was that two large light water reactors would be built in North Korea to supply electricity - their design removing any ambiguity of purpose. This program has looked increasingly in doubt since the October revelation about the clandestine centrifuge enrichment program for uranium, and is long-delayed in any case because of the country's non-compliance with IAEA requirements regarding verification of past activities.
media reports December & January, cf appendix to Safeguards paper.
Indonesia announces revived nuclear plans.
Indonesia has announced that is aiming to start construction of a nuclear power plant in 2010 with a view to having it on line in 2015, to meet increasing electricity demand. A four-year feasibility study was completed in May 1996 and legislation was then passed to regulate the development of commercial nuclear power, including construction of up to twelve nuclear power units. Plans for the initial plant on the Muria Peninsula in central Java were then deferred indefinitely early in 1997. The Java-Bali interconnected system accounts for more than three quarters of Indonesia's electricity demand.
Ux Weekly 13/1/03.
BE expects to receive C$ 770 million (about £310 million) subject to contingencies and adjustments. This will comprise C$ 630 million initially (by 14 February) plus C$ 100 million if two Bruce A units are started on schedule (15 June and 1 August 2003), plus two C$ 20 million contingent sums. A further C$ 80 million is being retained to cover tax liabilities, and the consortium will pay two further sums of C$ 100 million to fund an 'estimation allowance' and to the Province as an expediting fee. There are a variety of other caveats and conditions, including the necessary government and shareholder approvals, and the retention of senior staff.
Bruce Power runs four 860 MWe Candu reactors at Bruce (units 5-8) and is working towards restarting two older 769 MWe units (3 & 4) before the summer peak at a cost of some C$ 400 million. All are leased from the owner - Ontario Power Generation, and C$ 225 of deferred rent payments will become due as the deal is closed. BE's half share of a new 9 MWe wind farm on the Bruce site is also being sold.
Cameco's financial commitment is C$ 198 million for the purchase and about C$ 200 million in financial assurances, all of which it will fund from cash and existing credit facilities. The deal protects Cameco's existing rights, including limits on future capital and other commitments, and its role as sole uranium supplier to Bruce Power is retained.
BE 23/12/02, Cameco 23/12/02 (C$ = US$ 0.64, £ 0.40).
Ontario's Bruce A reactors cleared to restart.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has accepted the environmental assessment allowing a restart of Bruce units 3 & 4, and has authorised moves to allow fuel loading. The reactors have been laid up for five years while being refurbished at a cost of some C$ 400 million.
CNA Nuclear Canada 8/1/03.
ERA has announced the highest production from Ranger for five years - 1419 tonnes U3O8 (1203 tU) for the December quarter, giving 4470 t U3O8 (3790 tU) for the year - a 6% increase. ERA sales were 5145 t U3O8, including 628 t of purchased material.
WMCR 14/1/03, ERA 28/1/03.
Australian Repository EIS concluded.
The federal government has released the Supplement to the Draft EIS for the proposed low-level radioactive waste repository in central South Australia. It is designed to accommodate all Australia's low-level and short-lived intermediate-level wastes. The 99-page Supplement includes the substance of all 667 submissions (most being form letters) made on the Draft in 2002, plus federal government responses to them. Environment Australia will now complete an Assessment Report for the Minister for the Environment & Heritage, who will specify any conditions required in approving the project and selecting which of three sites in the area is used. Most (2010 m3) of the 3700 m3 of LLW currently awaiting disposal is already at Woomera.
DEST 23/1/03.
The analyses used a fully-fuelled Boeing 767-400 of over 200 tonnes as the basis, at 350 mph - the maximum speed for precision flying near the ground. The wingspan is greater than the diameter of reactor containment buildings and the 4.3 tonne engines are 15 metres apart. Hence analyses focused on single engine direct impact on the centreline and on the impact of the entire aircraft if the fuselage hit the centreline (in which case the engines would ricochet off the sides). In each case no part of the aircraft or its fuel would penetrate the containment. Looking at spent fuel storage pools, similar analyses showed no breach. Dry storage and transport casks retained their integrity. "There would be no release of radionuclides to the environment".
EPRI Dec 2002 report on NEI web site
Turbine test rig shows promise for Pebble Bed Reactor.
A "major boost of confidence in the technical feasibility of the PBMR concept" has been provided by performance of the first closed-cycle, multi-shaft gas turbine in the world. Since it started in November it has demonstrated on a small scale the business end of the PBMR project. The main objective of the rig, near Johannesburg, is to show that the recuperated Brayton Cycle can be sustained and controlled, and is stable.
Modern Power Systems Dec 2002, NucNet Business News 2/03.
"Future betrayed" by greens?
Speaking as an environmentalist at an industry conference, Prof Sir Frederick Holliday said that "the future is indeed being betrayed, and ... a substantial part of the blame lies with people who would regard and present themselves as environmentalists," due to their "unrealistic view of human nature". He expounded this in the context of globalisation, notably "the spread of lifestyles and aspirations characteristic of the west" which governments could not resist, hence a huge increase in energy demand was inevitable. But climate change concerns meant that future energy needs must be met sustainably, without increased carbon emissions. "Unreasonable fears of nuclear power and its security should not be placed ahead of our care for the global environment. We are at risk of drifting towards a degraded and disappointed world. Sustainability requires nuclear energy."
BNIF 5/12/02, on www.bnif.co.uk
Uranium price back above US$ 10 mark.
For the first time since August 1999 the spot price for uranium is above US$ 10/lb U3O8 (US$ 25.95/kg U) and seems likely to stay there. The spot price got as low as US$ 7.10 at the end of 2000. While most uranium is sold on contract at higher prices, the spot price provides a significant market indicator. In 2002 about 17% of uranium sales were on the spot market.
Ux weekly 23 & 30/12/02, TradeTech NMR 31/12/02, Platts 2/1/03.
Kyoto Protocol nears threshold.
With Canada and Poland ratifying the 1997 Kyoto Protocol in the last week, its entry into force is brought much closer. Only Russia now needs to ratify for the required 55% of 1990 carbon dioxide emissions to be covered. A total of 100 governments including most industrialised countries and many developing countries have now ratified the Protocol "as an instrument of global cooperation to address a global problem". Australia and the USA have declined to do so. The Protocol commits parties to reducing their collective emissions of six greenhouse gases by 2112.
UN FCCC 18/12/02.
Brazil opens uranium enrichment plant.
The first cascade of a new enrichment plant for uranium has been opened at Resende by Industrias Nucleares do Brasil (INB). Stage 1 will be four modules supplying 115,000 SWU/yr and costing US$ 140 million. The first module is expected to be completed by the end of 2003, and is domestically developed but 'very similar' to Urenco technology. Stage 2 will take capacity to 200,000 SWU/yr, meeting all Brazil's present enrichment requirements, for two Angra reactors totalling 1855 MWe. Eventually this could be doubled, allowing for some export.
Ux Weekly 16/12/02, NucNet background # 17/02.
Nuclear power in the world today
Reactor table
Economics of nuclear power
India & Pakistan
Nuclear power in Japan
Accelerator-driven nuclear power
Renewable energy & electricity
Australia's electricity
Glossary
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