With Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan and India all in the news on account of nuclear programs or activities there have been fresh calls to review what is arguably the United Nations' most successful endeavour - the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its associated safeguards, administered by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA was set up in 1957 by unanimous resolution of the UN to help nations develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
At the time the IAEA was being established, there was considerable concern that many countries would seek to develop or acquire nuclear weapons, and projections published in the 1960s envisaged 25-30 nuclear-armed states by 2000. The fact that this did not occur is a major achievement of the NPT and IAEA safeguards.
Most countries have renounced nuclear weapons, recognising that possession of them would threaten rather than enhance national security. They have therefore embraced the NPT as a public commitment to use nuclear materials and technology only for peaceful purposes.
The NPT entered into force in 1970 and was extended indefinitely in 1995 - 186 states plus Taiwan have signed it. It is complemented by several regional treaties. During the 1990s, other developments in response to Iraq's clandestine weapons program which was revealed in the Gulf War have helped to flesh out the non-proliferation regime. Foremost is the Additional Protocol which enhances the IAEA's ability to provide assurances that all nuclear activities and material in the country concerned have been declared for safeguards purposes. It gives much greater (and more intrusive) powers to IAEA inspectors and is designed to detect undeclared nuclear activities. But so far only 28 countries have Additional Protocols in force, enabling the IAEA to provide credible assurance of the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities.
At present under the NPT there are five nuclear-weapon states, and some 181 non-nuclear-weapon states. Three countries have remained outside the NPT and the comprehensive safeguards system Ð India, Israel and Pakistan - and now North Korea, by announcing its intention to withdraw from the NPT, is seeking to join them.
The nuclear-weapon states include those who had manufactured and exploded a nuclear weapon before 1967, and consist of the USA, the Soviet Union (now Russia), the United Kingdom, France and China. These countries are not required to accept IAEA safeguards, but the NPT contains certain obligations concerning disarmament which apply to them. All have, however, accepted safeguards on some or all of their peaceful nuclear activities. It is noteworthy that India would almost certainly have been alongside China as a nuclear-weapon state had it exploded its 1974 device a few years earlier.
In return for access to peaceful nuclear technology, the non-nuclear-weapon states must agree not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. These states are obliged to conclude agreements with the IAEA for the application of safeguards on the full scope of their nuclear program.
IAEA safeguards are intended to reveal whether a nation is adhering to its undertakings in relation to nuclear materials. It is then up to the world community (eg UN Security Council) to bring pressure to bear on such a country if diversion of nuclear materials from its peaceful program is demonstrated. International nuclear safeguards established under the NPT and administered by the IAEA require nations to:
* Report to the IAEA what nuclear materials they hold and their location.
* Accept visits by IAEA inspectors to verify independently their material reports and physically inspect the nuclear materials concerned to confirm physical inventories of them.
The IAEA also administers safeguards procedures for some facilities in the countries that have not joined the NPT. IAEA safeguards are the principal nuclear control procedures in the world today, and cover over 900 nuclear facilities and other locations containing nuclear material in 63 non-nuclear-weapon countries party to the NPT. Today's pressures on the NPT are several:
North Korea (DPRK) was an example of the success of safeguards in detecting illicit activities in 1992 and bringing about their cessation. After the IAEA reported its non-compliance to the UN Security Council in 1993, the USA brokered an ad hoc arrangement that essentially froze North KoreaÕs nuclear program for the better part of a decade. Now, however, North Korea has breached that agreement and further violated its NPT obligations by establishing clandestine enrichment capacity. In response to international pressure for it to desist, it has now expelled IAEA inspectors, announced its intention to withdraw from the NPT, and restarted a reactor at Yongbyon designed for production of military plutonium. In mid March the IAEA Director General Dr El Baradei said: "At this stage, the Agency cannot provide any assurance about the DPRK's nuclear activities, and we are unable to verify that its nuclear material has not been diverted to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices." What he called the "blatant defiance of its NPT obligations" is now for the UN to deal with via sanctions and political action.
North Korea has no nuclear power program, though construction started on two light water power reactors (which have minimal potential for military use) and which were a major part of the US-North Korea agreement. The further construction of these is in considerable doubt.
India has a major and expanding nuclear power program aimed at producing a significant amount of its electricity. It has 14 small power reactors, four of which are under IAEA safeguards. Most of its civil nuclear facilities are not under safeguards. After 1970 India was left with the choice of remaining outside the NPT or relinquishing any possibility of maintaining even a minimal nuclear deterrent. In the light of perceived strategic challenges from both China and Pakistan, India chose the nuclear deterrent. However, it has been scrupulous in ensuring that its weapons material and technology are guarded against commercial or illicit export to other countries and has offered to join the NPT as a nuclear weapons state. For nuclear-weapon states the NPT itself requires only that internationally traded nuclear material and technology provided to non-nuclear-weapon states be safeguarded - a condition that India has continually made clear it is willing to accept, even though it declines to disarm and join the NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon state.
However, in 1992, in an effort to induce expanded participation in the NPT, the informal 'club' of nations called the Nuclear Suppliers Group decided to prohibit all nuclear commerce with nations (other than the recognised nuclear-weapon states) that have not agreed to full-scope safeguards. This policy effectively requires countries to join the NPT as non-nuclear-weapon states if they are to participate in nuclear commerce, and it has thus left India out on a limb. India's response has been to intensify its self-reliance as it continues its dual policy of maintaining a small nuclear deterrent while pursuing peaceful nuclear power on a ever-larger scale.
Pakistan has a small nuclear power program with two power reactors, the latest supplied by China and both under IAEA safeguards (though other facilities related to its civil program are not safeguarded). It also has a significant weapons program based on high-enriched uranium and with the possibility of weapons plutonium production. It maintains close links with China on nuclear technology and reportedly provided North Korea with its illicit enrichment capacity. Pakistan has offered to disarm and join the NPT as a non-nuclear-weapon state if India would do so.
In Iran, Russia is constructing a large nuclear power plant at Bushehr under international safeguards, with the prospect of a second one there. Agreement has been reached for Russia to supply the fuel for this and to take back the spent fuel. Iran has long been a member in good standing of the NPT, with no violation having been detected. However, in 2000 Iran declared its intention to build a uranium conversion plant, and at the same time started building at Natanz a very sophisticated enrichment plant, which it declared very recently.
In February the IAEA Director General visited Teheran to discuss the new facilities and urge Iran to sign the NPT Additional Protocol as a sign of its good faith and peaceful intentions. This was declined, but Iran agreed to amend its 1974 safeguards agreement to give the IAEA earlier notification of any other plans. In reporting to the IAEA board in mid March, Dr El Baradei said that "during my visit, I emphasised to the Iranian authorities that it is important for all States, and particularly those with sensitive nuclear fuel cycle facilities, to be fully transparent in their use of nuclear technology." The IAEA "is currently discussing with the Iranian authorities a number of safeguards issues that need to be clarified, and actions that need to be taken."
Iraq, without any plans for a nuclear power program, had moved a long way down the track of producing atomic bombs from a clandestine uranium enrichment program when its endeavours were exposed and terminated by the 1992 Gulf War. When Iraq was shown to be in breach of its NPT obligations, the UN Security Council ordered the destruction of its nuclear weapons capability and the IAEA Action Team (as part of UNSCOM team) carried out this instruction. UN inspections in 2002-03 did not find evidence of a resumed nuclear program. Meanwhile, technically, Iraq remains a member of the NPT.
Israel is understood to have developed nuclear weapons but details are not known. It has no nuclear power program and has always been outside the NPT.
Thus today there are three countries (India, Pakistan and Israel) outside the NPT, and two countries (North Korea and Iraq) which are signatories but in violation and under special scrutiny. North Korea's exit from the NPT becomes effective in April. There are also many NPT signatories that have yet to sign the Additional Protocol accepting strengthened IAEA safeguards Ð an instrument which now assumes great importance for the credibility of individual NPT members.
For the NPTÕs future, the highest priority is for NPT members to find way to induce more of their number to subscribe to the Additional Protocol. This would be helped by nuclear-weapon-state members moving more rapidly down the disarmament track as they pledged to do in 1970. The fact that one tenth of US electricity now comes from recycled Russian warheads is a marvellous outcome from the US-Russian disarmament treaties to reduce nuclear arsenals by some 89% by 2003. Still, further progress could help to persuade those non-nuclear-weapon states which have yet to sign the Additional Protocol that the future depends on credible assurance of the absence of nuclear weapons programs in volatile parts of the world.
Dr El Baradei reminded his IAEA Board in March that where states do not have safeguards agreements in force with the Additional Protocol, assurance provided by the safeguards system that "undeclared nuclear material and activities" are absent "remains limited".
Price Anderson Act renewed by the Senate
As part of a US$ 390 billion omnibus spending package, new legislation extends the Price Anderson Act, which provides a framework for immediate, no-fault insurance in the event of a nuclear accident, for 14 years. It brings in DOE contractors and also allows for modular reactors. While well supported on a bipartisan basis last year, the legislation was not finalised then.
NEI Nuclear Energy Overview 27/1/03.
Industry call to control Nuclear Waste Fund
The Nuclear Energy Institute has called for reform of the management of the US Nuclear Waste Fund so that the Department of Energy has readier access to it. Consumers of nuclear-generated power put in nearly $775 million each year and interest adds some $400 million pa, but Congress is reluctant to release even a quarter of this for work on the Yucca Mountain repository. The Fund, now nearly $20 billion, was originally established as a separate account in federal treasury, but has since become something of a slush fund. Annual disbursements for the purpose it was created have to be part of the budget appropriations process.
NucNet news # 89/03.
Utah nuclear waste storage plan stalled
An arm of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has held up approval for a private initiative for storing spent nuclear fuel on land owned by the Skull Valley Goshute Indian community in Utah. It ruled that the Private Fuel Storage consortium's application did not adequately account for the effects of aircraft crashes, due to a nearby US Air Force base. Utah state opposes the application but cannot veto it because the Goshutes are a sovereign tribe.
AP 11/3/03.
President boosts hydrogen economy
President Bush has announced US$ 1.2 billion in research funding for hydrogen-powered vehicles, part of $1.7 billion over five years. The Fuel Initiative - $720 million of this, will be focused on the production and storage of hydrogen. The Energy Secretary said that hydrogen production was a major reason for the Administration's support for nuclear energy. There is wide political support for reducing US dependence on Middle East oil.
NEI Nuclear Energy Overview 3/2/03, DOE EERE web site 5/2/03.
Ambitious "clean coal" project
The US Department of Energy has announced a $1 billion project to design, build and operate a nearly emission-free coal-based electricity and hydrogen production plant. The FutureGen initiative will comprise an oxygen-fed coal gasification plant with additional water-shift reactor, to produce undiluted hydrogen and carbon dioxide. About one million tonnes of CO2 (at least 90% of throughput) will then be separated by membrane technology and sequestered geologically. The hydrogen will be burned in a 275 MWe generating plant and later in fuel cells. The project is designed to show that by 2020 electricity can be generated in such ways with only a 10% cost premium and that hydrogen can be produced at $3.80 per GJ, equivalent to petrol at 12.7 cents per litre.
DOE 27/2/03.
Nuclear power for space travel boosted In the US FY 2004 budget a major boost is provided for developing nuclear fission power for space travel. Last year NASA announced its Nuclear Systems Initiative for space projects - now this has been renamed Project Prometheus and the nuclear fission propulsion part of it given increased funding. Its purpose is to enable a major step change in the capability of space missions. Nuclear-powered space travel will be much faster than is now possible and will enable manned missions to Mars.
The prime objective of Prometheus, which is a NASA-DOE collaborative project, is to produce a space fission reactor system that is safe to launch and which will operate for many years. Power of 100 kWe is envisaged for a nuclear electric propulsion system driven by plasma. The FY 2004 budget proposal is $279 million, with $3 billion to be spent over five years. This consists of $186 million ($1 billion over 5 years) building on last year's allocation plus $93 million ($2 billion over five years) for a first flight mission to Jupiter - the Jupiter Icy Moon Orbiter, expected to fly within a decade.
space.com 24/1 & 7/2/03, cf new Reactors for Space paper
While the government is clearly serious about achieving major reduction in carbon emissions, no targets are set for generation from particular fuels. The priority is to strengthen the contribution of energy efficiency and renewables, with measures to support the latter costing £1 billion per year by 2010. Nevertheless, the actual contribution of renewables is "uncertain". Nuclear power is acknowledged as an important source of carbon-free electricity, but "current economics make it unattractive" for new capacity and there are "issues of nuclear waste to be resolved" - it not being stated that this awaits action by the UK government itself. It is clear that "future new nuclear build might be necessary if we are to meet our carbon targets," and "we will keep the option open" - but without doing anything in particular.
"Central to the future market and policy framework will be a carbon emissions trading scheme," envisaged as EU-wide. Vital also is a UK "planning system that is more helpful to investment in infrastructure and new electricity generation, particularly renewables" - but hopefully not confined to them.
Overall, "this will not be the last major strategic statement on energy policy", and in particular, "if new nuclear power plant is needed to help meet the UK's carbon aims, this will be subject to a later decision" with a further white paper. But no "significant new investment in non-renewable power stations (is envisaged) over the next five years or possibly longer".
Leading up to the white paper release, the Royal Society urged the government to show political courage by spelling our exactly how nuclear power, renewables and energy efficiency measures can reduce carbon emissions. Nuclear power will be required in the short to medium term. "The government needs to introduce a charge for the right to produce carbon dioxide" in order "to balance the economic arguments surrounding energy generation". Coherent policy is needed which takes account of both carbon dioxide and radioactive wastes, and while a long-term strategy for the latter is required, a decision on building new nuclear plants need not wait for it, according to the Royal Society.
Royal Society 10/2/03, DTI 24/2/03, White paper. cf NucNet Features # 1/03.
British Energy creditor agreement
British Energy has met its deadline set by the UK government to obtain agreement from its 'Significant Creditors' and BNFL for the restructuring package announced in November. Some £275 million in new bonds (and later some new shares) will be issued to the creditors in respect to their £761.5 million claims. The UK government "will meet the cost of BE's historic back-end fuel liabilities with BNFL" which have done much to make BE uncompetitive. All this follows shareholder agreement for the sale of BE's 82% stake in Ontario's Bruce Power, its main profitable business, with £270 million immediate proceeds going to the UK government towards repayment of a loan. BE said that "the return, if any, to existing shareholders will represent a very significant dilution of their existing interests". The agreement "is just one step along a road which may take another 18 months" to rebuild the company on a competitive basis solely for "the UK energy market".
BE 14/2/03, cf WNA & UIC Newsletter 1/03.
UK to close first-generation reactors
BNFL has announced that the last of four reactors at Calder Hall power station will close at the end of March. The power station, with four 50 MWe Magnox reactors was opened in 1956, so has supplied UK power for almost 47 years. Its planned closure was to be in 2006, but low wholesale power prices make such small units uneconomic now. Its twin at Chaplecross - also with four 50 MWe reactors and which started up in 1959, will now close in the next two years.
BNFL 19/3/03, NucNet news # 112/03.
EU survey highlights energy attitudes
An official Eurobarometer survey of 16,000 people across the EU early in 2002 has shown that environmental protection is a major priority in relation to energy supply, along with keeping prices low for consumers. In the report Energy: Issues, Options & Technologies, 88% said that global warming was serious and needed immediate attention, and about half said that management and disposal of radioactive wastes and nuclear safety were high-priority issues for governments (though food safety was more of a concern than nuclear safety). However, almost half thought that nuclear power contributed to global warming. Just over one third said they were prepared to pay more for renewable energy.
EU report December 2002, NucNet news # 100/03.
French publish cost projections
The French Energy Secretariat has published updated figures for new generating plant. The advanced European PWR (EPR), which has been identified as France's next generation of standardised reactors, would cost EUR 1650-1700 per kilowatt to build, compared with EUR 500-550 for a gas combined cycle plant and 1200-1400 for a coal plant. The EPR would generate power at 2.74 cents/kWh, competitively with gas which would be very dependent on fuel price. Capital costs contributed 60% to nuclear's power price but only 20% to gas's. While the figures are based on 40-year plant life, the EPR is designed for 60 years.
Nucleonics Week 20/2/03.
France to restart its fast-breeder reactor.
The French nuclear safety authority has approved the restart of the Phenix fast breeder reactor at Marcoule. The 563 MWe reactor, which started up in 1973, has been shut down for several years and has undergone some modernisation. Its immediate role will be to carry out experimental work on transmutation of long-lived radionuclides in waste.
NucNet news # 12/03.
US & Russia revive plutonium shutdown plans
A new agreement has been signed to provide US support for the final shutdown of three Russian plutonium production reactors which two Russian cities in the Krasnoyarsk and Tomsk regions depend on for heat and power. A 1997 agreement called for their closure by 2000, but in the absence of replacement power (about 270 MWe in total) they continued operation and will now close when replacement capacity is commissioned - in 2008 and 2011. They date from 1964-65 and are the last three reactors designed primarily to produce weapons-grade plutonium in Russia - some 11 other have been shut down. The new agreement will implement the Elimination of Weapons-Grade Plutonium Production Program and enable the building of one new fossil fuel power plant and the refurbishing of another for some US$ 500 million. (US production of weapons-grade plutonium ceased in the late 1980s as a result of US-Soviet arms control treaties.)
AP 12 & 14/3/03, TradeTech NMR 14/3/03, NucNet news # 109/03.
Russia takes over Armenian reactor
In response to unpaid fuel bills of some US$ 40 million, Russia's United Energy Services has taken over financial management of Armenia's Metsamor nuclear power plant, which produces 35-40% of the country's electricity. Ownership remains Armenian. Discussions continue on operating the 376 MWe VVER plant past its nominal 2008 close-down date, since no replacement capacity is in sight. It started up in 1979 but was shut down for six years due to earthquake concerns.
Ux Weekly 10/2/03.
Japanese High Court blocks re-start of Monju fast reactor
The Nagoya court said that government approval in December of Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute's (JNC) plan to modify the Monju plant was annulled because the safety case for its operation was inadequate. The Nuclear & Industrial Safety Agency and the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC) both approved plans in December. The 280 MW reactor at Tsuruga, Fukui Prefecture, has been shut down since a sodium leak in 1995. The government is making a determined appeal against the decision, since abandoning Monju would be a major setback to implementing longstanding Japanese policy for greater energy independence. The Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry criticised the court ruling for its "unrealistic speculation", and the NSC issued a statement refuting the court's "unscientific" incompetence.
A joint statement in March from nuclear energy and research organisations in the USA, France and Japan pointed out that as "the accumulation of the various data necessary for the commercialisation of fast reactor technology on a global scale is expected to be achieved through the operation of Monju, Japan should make every effort toward the early resumption of the operation of this reactor."
Ux Weekly 27/1/03, Platts 29/1/03, NucNet news #48, 62, 127 & 128/03, Nikkei Weekly 3/2/03.
Tepco submits final inspections report on its reactors
With most of its reactors shut down and awaiting permission to restart, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) has submitted its final report to Japan's Nuclear & Industrial Safety Agency on the apparent falsification of voluntary nuclear plant inspection records. The investigations went back over 14 years and found "no fraud that could violate technical regulations or duties to report to administrative agencies." Tepco checked some 8 million pages of documents concerning past inspections by the company and its contractors. It identified some errors and omissions as well as defects which would neither cause safety problems nor need to be reported to the authorities. Only three of its 17 reactors are now operating, and these are due to be shut down for inspection through to mid April, leaving no capacity in reserve.
NucNet news # 92/03.
India ready to build large fast reactor
As a central part of its strategy to utilise thorium for making electricity, India will use fast neutron reactors burning plutonium to breed U-233 from thorium. Construction of the 500 MWe prototype fast breeder reactor at Kalpakkam is now due to begin in April and take seven years, without foreign assistance. It will be fuelled with uranium-plutonium carbide (the reactor-grade Pu being from its existing heavy water reactors) and will have a thorium blanket to breed fissile U-233. This will take India's ambitious thorium program to stage 2, and set the scene for eventual full utilisation of the country's abundant thorium to fuel reactors.
TradeTech NMR 14/2/03.
Canada's 2002 mine production drops
Total Canadian uranium production for 2002 was 13,689 tonnes U3O8 (11,607 tU), 7% down on 2001.
Cameco reported production from the mines it operates: 8490 t U3O8 (7199 tU) from McArthur River/Key Lake and 519 t U3O8 (440 tU) from Rabbit Lake. The Key Lake mill is now basically treating McArthur River ore blended with "special waste rock" from Key Lake to give mill feed of 4% U3O8 - instead of over 20%. US operations yielded 752 t U3O8 (636 tU). Its Canadian production in 2003 is expected to increase due to Rabbit Lake contributing 2700 t U3O8 - about one third of its remaining reserves. Cameco's uranium revenue increased 11% to C$ 524 million, though total net earnings dropped to C$ 46 million.
Cogema Resources' production from the mines it operates was 1626 tU (1918 t U3O8) from Cluff Lake for the full year and 2342 t tU (2762 t U3O8) from McClean Lake. Cluff Lake is now mined out and closed down, McClean Lake is producing from stockpiled ore representing several years of mill feed, intensive mining having provided this up until February 2002. Parent company Areva reported a small increase in its total uranium production (from Canada and Africa) to 7458 tU, with a 10% increase in revenue from uranium mining.
Cameco 11 & 14/2/03, CRI 17/2/03, Ux weekly 17/2/03.
Bruce Power sale finalised in Canada
The sale of British Energy's 82.4% share in Ontario's Bruce Power, to a Canadian consortium led by Cameco, has been finalised.
Nuclear Canada 20/2/03, cf Newsletter # 1/03
Olympic Dam radiation dose monitoring
WMC Resources has published the radiation monitoring data from Olympic Dam over the year 2001-02, showing that as in previous years no employee reached as much as half of the recommended 20 mSv dose limit. The average dose for all designated employees was 2.6 mSv above background, and the maximum dose was 8.9 mSv. In the mine, dose components were 4% dust, 48% radon decay products and 48% gamma radiation. In the mill they were 70% dust, 6% radon decay products and 24% gamma. As well as personal dose monitoring, about 16,500 measurements of radiation were made in the mine and plant.
WMC Occupational & Environmental Radiation Dose Review 2001-02.
US report homes in on nuclear threats
A Harvard University report commissioned by the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) has recommended "steps to accelerate and strengthen programs to upgrade security for Russian nuclear warheads and materials and calls for expanding these efforts to address insecure nuclear stockpiles around the globe." The report, Controlling Nuclear Warheads and Materials: a report card and action plan with appendix provides "the most comprehensive assessment ever published of nuclear threat reduction programs to date." While focused on bilateral US-Russian issues, it notes that terrorists have been actively trying to get hold of bomb-grade materials around the world and that "most of the work of securing these stockpiles remains to be done", notably in Russia and with HEU-fuelled research reactors elsewhere. The report also recommends US-sponsored upgrading of security in other states with nuclear weapons, notably those outside the NPT, through new partnerships.
Another recent report, commissioned by the US Dept of Energy, deals with the wider agenda of constraining so-called weapons of mass destruction under the G-8 Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Destruction. This program is seen as pivotal in relation to tackling the specific question addressed in the NTI study. In presenting his FY 2004 budget request in January, the US Energy Secretary said that the Global Partnership "may well be the single most important achievement in the history of our non-proliferation efforts" and the very detailed action plan prepared for the Partnership should be tackled. It includes disposition of fissile materials, dismantling decommissioned Russian submarines, and sustainable employment of former weapons scientists. NTI 12/3/03 - www.nti.org/cnwm, NY Times 13/3/03.
Proposal for accelerated removal of weapons uranium
A privately-funded joint US-Russian study is looking at increasing the rate of blending down Russian weapons uranium, perhaps by a factor of two. Under the 1993 agreement, 30 tonnes per year is blended down to 4.4% U-235 in Russia and then sent to USA, where it provides about half of the annual civil reactor requirements - it is equivalent to about 9000 tonnes of natural U per year. The study will look at various enrichment levels up to 19% for the blended down material and whether it would be sold immediately or stored.
Meanwhile the 2004 Dept of Energy budget includes US$ 30 million for Russian HEU activities including the removal of 6.5 tonnes HEU, most of which would be blended down to 19.5% and stored.
NEI Nuclear Energy Overview 3/2/03, Ux Weekly 3/2/03.
Huge Russian military clean-up clear to begin
A breakthrough in negotiations will allow a massive international clean-up of military nuclear waste and spent fuel to begin in northwest Russia. Agreement has been reached on the Multinational Nuclear Environment Program (MNEPR) and it is scheduled to be signed later this year. Tax issues were a major sticking point, with Russia wanting to tax goods and services imported for the clean-up. The MNEPR agreement will pave the way for US$ 20 billion over ten years to be provided from the G8 Global Partnership Fund Ð half from the USA, to deal with clean-up, decommissioning nuclear weapons and related projects.
Nucleonics Week, 23/1/03.
Europe's record year for wind
In 2002, 5871 MWe of new wind capacity was added to European electricity grids, representing an investment of EUR 5.8 billion and taking overall EU capacity to 23,056 MWe. EWEA figures suggest 46 billion kWh/yr from this - 23% capacity factor. Germany, Spain and Denmark accounted for most of the new capacity, Germany now having 12,000 MWe - 11.5% of its total capacity.
EWEA 6/2/03 & Wind Force 12.
Review: Practical Applications of Radioactivity and Nuclear Radiations, by G.C.Lowenthal & P.L.Airey, Cambridge UP, 2001, 337 pages, ISBN 0 521 55305 9, RRP £70 US$100.
This is something of a handbook on the subject, with early chapters on the science of radioactivity and how to use it (in its many varied forms), later ones focus on the practical applications of radiation and radioisotopes. Its audience is students and engineers or environmental technologists with some grasp of physics but who may be unfamiliar with the nuclear sciences and their many and expanding applications. The emphasis is in industry rather than medicine.
The book ranges over the nature of radioactive decay, neutrons, activation processes, short- and long-half life radionuclides uses and production, safety, then turns in detail to the individual kinds of emissions and their general applications and measurement. "This was done at somewhat grater length than is normal for books dealing with applications because the basic nuclear sciences are no longer as widely taught in schools and universities as they used to be." The last three chapters are the core of the book and cover industrial applications of each kind of radiation, tracer technology and environmental studies very comprehensively. One wonders if those who oppose building Australia's replacement research reactor at Lucas Heights have the slightest notion of the many roles of radiation and radioisotopes in today's world. This book will certainly undergird education at all levels to expand those roles still further.
IH-L
Advanced reactors
Enrichment
Safeguards (N.Korea appendix)
Global Warming
"Clean Coal" technologies (new)
Nuclear power in South Korea
Australia's uranium
Nuclear fusion power
Radioisotopes in industry
Small nuclear power reactors
Nuclear Reactors for Space (new)
Energy analysis of power systems
Canada's uranium production
Australia's uranium mines (mines paper)
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