Two issues ago we reported on the views of two leading environmental spokesmen in UK. Here we reproduce a thoughtful article by Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace in 1971. He was President of Greenpeace in the late 1970s and a member of the international Board to 1986. His PhD in science made him a natural spokesman for the movement at that stage. But since then he perceives that the environmental movement has shifted away from its early scientific base and has embraced a religious technophobia. The only position he has significantly changed in 35 years is on nuclear power, which he now favours. So while he is now focused on the implications of sustainable development for the world's 6 billion inhabitants, the movement he founded has dug in to oppose the very policies and technologies which would make the planet inhabitable long-term. The article is wider in scope than energy, highlighting several contentious issues affected by green ideology.
I am often asked why I broke ranks with Greenpeace after fifteen years as a founder and full-time environmental activist. While I had my personal reasons - spending more time with a growing family rather than living out of a suitcase most of the year - it was on issues of policy that I found it necessary to move on.
Beginning in the mid-1980s, Greenpeace, and much of the environmental movement, made a sharp turn to the political left and began adopting extreme agendas that abandoned science and logic in favour of emotion and sensationalism. I became aware of the emerging concept of sustainable development - the idea that environmental, social, and economic priorities could be balanced. I became a convert to the idea that win-win solutions could be found by bringing all interests together around the same table. I made the move from confrontation to consensus.
Since then, I have worked under the banner of Greenspirit to develop an environmental policy platform based on science, logic, and the recognition that more than six billion people need to survive and prosper, every day of the year. The environmental movement has lost its way, favouring political correctness over factual accuracy, stooping to scare tactics to garner support. Many campaigns now waged in the name of the environment would result in increased harm to both the environment and human welfare if they were to succeed.
So we're faced with environmental policies that ignore science and result in increased risk to human health and ecology. To borrow from the vernacular, how sick is that?
Genetic Enhancement:
Activists persist in their zero-tolerance campaign against genetically enhanced varieties of food crops when there is zero evidence of harm to human health or the environment, and the benefits are measurable and significant. Genetically enhanced (GE) food crops result in reduced chemical pesticides, higher yield, and reduced soil erosion. Golden Rice, for example, could prevent blindness in 500,000 children per year in Asia and Africa if activists would stop blocking its introduction. Other varieties of food crops will contain iron, Vitamin E, enhanced protein and better oils. No other technology can match the potential of GE to address the nutritional deficiencies of billions of people. The anti-GE campaign seeks to deny these environmental and nutritional advances by using "Frankenfood" scare tactics and misinformation campaigns.
Vinyl:
Greenpeace wants to ban the use of chlorine in all industrial processes, yet the addition of chlorine to drinking water has been the single greatest public health advance in history, and 75% of our medicines are based on chlorine chemistry. My old Greenpeace colleagues also call for a ban on polyvinyl chloride (PVC or vinyl), claiming it is the "poison plastic". There is not a shred of evidence that vinyl damages human health or the environment. Apart from its cost-effectiveness in construction, and ability to deliver safe drinking water, vinyl's ability to incorporate anti-microbial properties is critical to fighting germs in hospitals. Banning vinyl would further raise the cost of an already struggling health care system, ultimately denying health care to those who can least afford it.
Hydro Electricity:
International activists boast they have blocked more than 200 hydroelectric dams in the developing world and are campaigning to tear down existing dams. Hydro is the largest source of renewable electricity, providing about 12% of global supply. Do activists prefer coal plants? Would they rather ignore the needs of billions of people?
Wind Power:
Wind power is commercially feasible, yet activists argue the turbines kill birds and ruin landscapes. A million times more birds are killed by cats, windows and cars than by all the windmills in the world. As for aesthetics, wind turbines are works of art compared to some of our urban environments.
Nuclear Power:
A significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions seems unlikely given our continued heavy reliance on fossil fuel consumption. Even UK environmentalist James Lovelock, who posited the Gaia theory that the Earth operates as a giant, self-regulating super-organism, now sees nuclear energy as key to our planet's future health. Lovelock says the first world behaves like an addicted smoker, distracted by short-term benefits and ignorant of long-term risk. "Civilization is in imminent danger," he warns, "and has to use nuclear - the one safe, available energy source - or suffer the pain soon to be inflicted by our outraged planet."
Yet environmental activists, notably Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth, continue to lobby against clean nuclear energy, and in favour of the band-aid Kyoto Treaty. We can agree renewable energies, such as wind, geothermal and hydro are part of the solution. But nuclear energy is the only non-greenhouse gas-emitting power source that can effectively replace fossil fuels and satisfy global demand.
Forestry:
Anti-forestry activists are telling us to stop cutting trees and to reduce our use of wood. Forest loss, or deforestation, is nearly all caused by clearing forests for farms and cities. Forestry operations, on the other hand, are geared towards reforestation and the maintenance of forest cover. Forests are stable and growing where people use the most wood, and are diminishing where they use less. When we use wood, we send a signal to the marketplace to plant more trees and produce more wood. North Americans use more wood per capita than any other continent, yet there is about the same forest area in North America today as there was 100 years ago.
Trees, and the materials they produce, are by far the most abundant, renewable and biodegradable resource in the world. If we want to retain healthy forests, we should be growing more trees and using more wood, not less. This seems lost on activists who use chilling rhetoric and apocalyptic images to drive us in the wrong direction.
The Prognosis:
Environmentalism has turned into anti-globalisation and anti-industry. Activists have abandoned science in favour of sensationalism. Their zero-tolerance, fear-mongering campaigns would ultimately prevent a cure for Vitamin A deficiency blindness, increase pesticide use, increase heart disease, deplete wild salmon stocks, raise the cost and reduce the safety of health care, raise construction costs, deprive developing nations of clean electricity, stop renewable wind energy, block a solution to global warming, and contribute to deforestation. How sick is that?
Co-founder of Greenpeace, Dr. Patrick Moore is Chairman and Chief Scientist of Greenspirit Strategies Ltd. in Vancouver, Canada. www.greenspiritstrategies.com.
Related to this, in an article Death of the Movement, Lawrence Solomon, Executive Director of Urban Renaissance Institute and Consumer Policy Institute - divisions of Toronto-based Energy Probe Research Foundation, refers to a 12,000 word critique of the environmental movement by Shellenberger & Nordhaus. He wrote:
The authors correctly identify one great cause of environmentalists' failure - "as a community, environmentalists suffer from a bad case of groupthink." Speaking from my own experiences, where once environmentalists challenged orthodoxy and accepted free markets, privatization, property rights and other approaches that would accomplish their goals, today's environmentalists are no longer free-thinking - they have become ideologues who care more about socialism and political correctness than getting to the nub of problems, and who dismiss contrary opinions out of hand. As Shellenberger told Grist, an activist magazine, "There is no place for public debate in the environmental movement. Even librarians have much fiercer public debates and dialogues than the environmental community."
National Post 12/3/05.
First fuel from US weapons uranium delivered
The first shipments of fuel fabricated from US military uranium stocks have been delivered to TVA's Browns Ferry nuclear power plant. The high-enriched uranium (HEU) was blended down by Nuclear Fuel Services at Erwin, Tennessee under the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium (BLEU) program. The Department of Energy originally designated 33 tonnes of off-specification HEU (with significant concentrations of U-236) to the program, but has since added another six tonnes. So far 46 tonnes of BLEU have been produced at Erwin, but at DOE's Savannah River site 7.1 tonnes of HEU averaging 64% U-235 has been blended down with depleted uranium to produce 105 tonnes of BLEU of 4.95% U-235. (The U-236 impurity is a neutron absorber, formed in a nuclear reactor and hence present in recycled uranium.)
NuclearFuel 31/1/05.
US approval for interim storage facility
The licensing board of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has dismissed the remaining challenges to licensing a 40,000 tonne centralised surface dry storage facility on land owned by the Skull Valley band of the Goshute Indians, in Utah. Proceedings so far have dragged on eight years due mainly to state government opposition, and Private Fuel Storage LLC (PFS) hopes for an early licence. PFS is a consortium of eight utilities which plan to store used fuel on the site for up to 40 years pending disposal.
NuclearFuel 28/2/05, Nucleonics Week 3/3/05.
Cameco reprieve for UK conversion plant
Canada's Cameco Corporation has bought ten years of toll conversion services from BNFL's UK Springfields conversion plant, which had been due to close next year. From mid 2006 BNFL will convert 5000 tonnes of uranium per year to UF6 for Cameco. The feed will be UO3 from Cameco's Blind River refinery in Ontario, which also supplies its Port Hope conversion plant. Port Hope's capacity is 12,500 tU/yr for UF6 and it processed 9500 tU in 2004. Cameco has secured long-term commitments from utility customers to match much of its increased capacity, and says that Blind River's output has hitherto been limited by Port Hope's capacity. Cameco's increase in market share will come with minimal capital investment. Springfields has operated conversion since 1951, the current plant having been commissioned in 1993. From 1 April, it will be managed by Westinghouse under contract to the new UK Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. Conversion services are currently quoted at US$ 11-12/kgU, valuing the contract in the region of US$ 50 million per year.
Cameco 16/3/05, BNFL 16/3/05.
EdF seeks investment in new reactor
Electricite de France is seeking direct investment by energy-intensive European industry in its new 1600 MWe EPR to be built at Flamanville, as a means for those industry consumers to secure favourable long-term power prices. Meanwhile discussions continue with other European utilities, and Italy's Enel is reported to be interested in taking 25% equity in the project for about EUR 750 million. The deal is likely to involve technology transfer to rehabilitate Italy's nuclear capacity and skills base. Italy imports some 20 billion kWh per year from EdF, almost twice what the new EPR plant will produce. Enel has recently purchased 66% of Slovenske Elektrarne (SE), Slovakia's nuclear generator, for EUR 840 million plus EUR 1.1 billion debt.
Nucleonics Week 17/3/05, Nuclear Eng Int'l 23/2 & 16/3/05.
French reprocessed uranium for long-term storage
Government auditors have pointed out that Electricite de France's (EdF) reprocessed uranium arising from used fuel "appears not to be destined for re-use in the near future," since EdF has made provision to store it for up to 250 years as a strategic reserve. Currently, reprocessing of 1150 tonnes of EdF used fuel per year produces 8.5 tonnes of plutonium (immediately recycled as mixed oxide - MOX - fuel) and 815 tonnes of reprocessed uranium (RepU). Of this about 650 tonnes is converted into stable oxide form for storage. EdF has demonstrated the use of RepU in its 900 MWe power plants, but it is currently uneconomic due to conversion costing three times as much as that for fresh uranium, and enrichment needing to be separate because of U-232 and U-236 impurities (the former gives rise to gamma radiation, the latter means higher enrichment is required). Reprocessing of used nuclear fuel is central to French nuclear energy policy.
NuclearFuel 31/1/05.
Finland construction licence
The Finnish government has issued a construction licence for the new 3rd reactor at Olkiluoto. The Framatome ANP 1600 MWe EPR unit is expected to start commercial operation in 2009, and will play a significant role in reducing Finland's greenhouse gas emissions in the Kyoto Protocol commitment period to 2012.
TVO 17/2/05.
Swedish political change of view
In the 1970s the Centre Party in Sweden started the anti-nuclear debate which culminated in the 1980 referendum canvassing three options for phasing out nuclear energy. Since then the Centre Party has lined up with the three socialist parties on nuclear power, but the three non-socialist parties on other issues. Recently the leadership of the Centre Party has indicated a substantial reversal of this earlier anti-nuclear position, saying that climate change must be put ahead of nuclear decommissioning. The Chairman of its Youth League in particular has said that Sweden needs to keep its nuclear reactors operating and avoid closing any. This view is in line with the overwhelming majority of public opinion - a March poll (N=1027) showed 83% support for maintaining or increasing nuclear power in Sweden, and a similar proportion saying that limiting greenhouse gas emissions should be the top environmental priority.
Nucleonics Week 3/2/05, Energiforum 4/2/05, NucNet news #57/05.
UK turnaround in nuclear sentiment
A MORI poll (N=2000) has found that 35% of Britons support the construction of more nuclear power plants, compared with 30% against and wanting to phase out nuclear power. In 2001 it was 19% for more nuclear and 60% against. The change reflects public concern and media coverage related to energy security and climate change issues.
NIA 21/1/05.
Belarus looks to nuclear power
The President of Belarus says that embarking upon a nuclear power program is only a matter of time. The country imports 90% of its gas from Russia - much of it for electricity, and overall aims for 25-30% energy independence, compared with half that now. A single nuclear plant would be expected to reduce gas imports by US$ 200-400 million per year and lower the cost of electricity by 20%. Studies are proceeding on both a domestic plant using Russian technology, or Belarus participation in a new nuclear unit at Smolensk or Kursk in Russia.
Nucleonics Week 17/2/05.
Gas pipes highlight energy security issues
Unresolved discussion over renewal of a gas supply contract led to Turkmenistan cutting off supply to Ukraine for three days on 31 December, until Ukraine agreed to pay 32% more, at $58 per 1000 cubic metres for 36 billion m3, in 2005. Nearly half of Ukraine's gas comes from Turkmenistan, and it is also heavily dependent on Russia for gas. Russian gas supplies to Turkey, Latvia and Belorussia have been similarly interrupted over the last couple of years due to commercial or political disputes.
More than 85% of Russian Gazprom gas exported to the EU - 110 billion m3 per year - transits Ukraine, and the country gains $1.5 billion per year from this as owner of the pipelines. A $2.8 billion project will increase this flow by 29 billion m3/yr. Some 44 billion m3/yr of Turkmen gas also transits Ukraine to Europe. Germany depends on Russian gas for 40% of its supply, and the proportion is growing.
In December the OECD's International Energy Agency warned that Europe will rely mainly on Gazprom for 80% of its gas needs over the next 30 years, most of it via Ukraine, so EU countries should take urgent steps to diversify their energy sources.
The UK imports an increasing proportion of its gas. "High and volatile gas prices reached new levels" at the end of February, leading the UK chemical industry to warn that it "can no longer absorb these Š prices, which have a knock-on impact to electricity costs. Current gas prices are seriously damaging UK industry competitiveness and [if they] remain at this level the economic impact could be severe".
FT 8/12/04, 12/1/05, Energy in E Europe 7/1, 21/1 & 4/2/05, UK Chemical Industries Association 28/2/05.
German wind report reconfigured
A report for the German government's Energy Agency (dena) supported by the supply companies and the wind industry was withdrawn for re-editing due to its adverse findings. Mr Trittin, the Green Party environment minister, said that "we do not want the findings of this report to be misinterpreted". The 500-page EUR 900,000 grid study report was then released at the end of February. It showed that for the increased renewables scenario beyond 2015, "no system solution for the integration of wind power could be found." The scope was therefore limited to a 2015 time frame.
More specifically the report says that if Germany presses ahead to double the capacity of wind turbines to 36 GWe as intended by 2015, conventional capacity can be reduced by 2.2 GWe with replacement of base-load plant by gas turbines. However, the additional annual costs for consumers (who actually subsidise wind energy) will rise to EUR 1.6 - 2.3 billion in 2015. In addition the government will need to invest EUR 1.1 billion in grid infrastructure by then to cope with the fluctuation in wind-derived supply. (A further EUR 5 billion for connecting new wind farms to grid nodes is borne by the developers from tariffs.) The report also says that the cost of avoiding the emission of a tonne of carbon dioxide by using wind energy ranges from EUR 41 to EUR 77 in 2015 - well down on the 2007 figures, but it raises questions about the greenhouse gas emission savings from increased wind power.
News Telegraph 2/2/05, Nucleonics Week 3/3/05, dena press release 24/2/05, Dena Grid study summary 15/3/05.
China power plant bids submitted
At the end of February three bids were submitted to build four large new nuclear reactors in China. The competing vendors were Westinghouse-Mitsubishi, Framatome ANP and Atomstroyexport (ASE) - for AP1000, EPR and V-392 reactor types respectively. The US, French and Russian governments were reported to be giving firm support as finance and support arrangements were put in place. The US Export-Import bank approved $5 billion in loan guarantees for the Westinghouse bid, and the French Coface company was expected similarly to finance Areva for Framatome ANP's bid. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave approval for Westinghouse to export equipment and engineering services as well as the initial fuel load and one replacement for the four units. Bids for both 2-unit plants were received in Beijing on behalf of the two customers: China Guangdong Nuclear Power Co for Yangjiang, and China National Nuclear Corp. for Sanmen (in Zhejiang province). Bids are for the nuclear portion of each plant only, the turbine tenders will be called for subsequently - Alstom and Siemens being mentioned as likely suppliers.
Meanwhile the Guangdong Nuclear Power Group has signed contracts with Chinese designers and manufacturers for two 1000 MWe reactors as phase 2 of the Lingao power station. Construction will start in December and the units are due on line in 2010 and 2011. The Group currently operates the Daya Bay and Lingao phase 1 plants totalling 4000 MWe gross, largely supplied and built by Framatome ANP. Lingao phase 2 will virtually replicate phase 1 but be fully indigenous.
Also Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency, has said that the first of two 1000 MWe AES-91 units it has been building at Tianwan in Jiangsu province is ready to start up once permission is received from regulators. It has been delayed by equipment problems.
Nucleonics Week 24/2/05, 3/3/05, People's Daily 17/3/05.
China to build pebble bed power reactor
The Huaneng Group Co. - China's largest generating utility but hitherto without nuclear capacity - has announced that it will lead a consortium to build a 450 MW thermal/ 195 MWe pebble bed demonstration reactor at Weihai in Shandong Province. This HTR-PM is expected to come on line in five years. China Nuclear Engineering & Construction (CNEC) will have a 35% stake and Tsinghua University's Institute of Nuclear Energy Technology (INET) - which operates a small demonstration pebble bed reactor - 5%. Cost is expected to be US$ 1500/kWe, slightly more than the Eskom-BNFL PBMR which has a similar schedule. The HTR-PM is to be the first of an anticipated 18-module full-scale power plant based on it.
FT 8/2/05 INET 15/2/05.
..... and South Africa gets into (pebble) bed with China An agreement between PBMR of South Africa and Chinergy of Beijing brings together the two developers of High Temperature Reactors using inherently safe pebble bed fuel. PBMR Pty Ltd is has been taking forward the concept (based on earlier German work) since 1993 and is ready to build a 125 MWe demonstration plant. Chinergy Co. is drawing on the small operating HTR-10 research reactor at Tsinghua University which has achieved an operating temperature of 950°C and is the basis of the 195 MWe HTR-PM demonstration unit - see above, though it too derives from the earlier German development. Both PBMR and HTR-PM are planned for operation about 2010. The new agreement is for cooperation on the demonstration projects and subsequent commercialisation, since both parties believe that the inherently safe pebble bed technology built in relatively small units will eventually displace the more complex light water reactors. Chinergy is a 50-50 joint venture of Tsinghua University's INET and CNEC.
The PBMR unit is to have the helium coolant directly driving the gas turbine, but the HTR-PM takes a more conservative approach and will produce steam for conventional cycle, though a later move to direct Brayton cycle is envisaged for commercial units after the initial 18 modules.
PBMR 10/3/05.
New Japanese reactor on line
The first unit of Tohoku's Higashidori nuclear power plant has been connected to the grid after starting up in January. Commercial operation of the 1067 MWe BWR is expected in October. A second Tohoku unit is planned there , and before that two Tepco Higashidori units are to be built nearby - all 1385 MWe Advanced BWRs.
JAIF Atoms in Japan 9/3/05.
Large new Indian reactor starts up
The first of a new series of 540 MWe (gross, 490 MWe net) nuclear reactors has started up at Tarapur in India. The Tarapur 3&4 units are developed indigenously from the 220 MWe (gross) model of Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor, ten of which have been operating for up to 21 years. These in turn are based on Canadian technology as in the two small units operating at Rawatbhata since 1973. The first two units at Tarapur are small BWRs built by GE and commissioned in 1969. The Tarapur 3&4 units were built by National Power Corp of India Ltd, a public entity under the Department of Atomic Energy. Tarapur-4 criticality comes five years from pouring first concrete and seven months ahead of schedule. Connection to the western grid is expected in August. Its twin - unit 3 - is about nine months behind. Seven other reactor units are under construction in India, six by NPCIL and one by BHAVINI, which is focused on fast neutron reactors.
NPCIL 6/3/05.
Russian-Iranian fuel deal signed
After two years delay due to Iran's reluctance to return spent fuel to Russia without being paid for it, two agreements have been signed at Bushehr in Iran covering both supply of fresh fuel for the new Bushehr nuclear reactor and its return to Russia after use. The 950 MWe VVER unit is due to start up next year and a second reactor is planned at the site. Supply of the fuel was originally contingent upon Iran's signing the Additional Protocol to its safeguards agreement with the IAEA. It has done this but not ratified it. The Russian agreement means that Iran's nuclear fuel supply is secured for the foreseeable future, removing any justification for enrichment locally. It also means that the anticipated 6-7 TWh/yr from the new reactor will free up about 1.6 million tonnes of oil per year which can be exported for hard currency.
NucNet news in brief # 25/05, various.
South Korean plans for hydrogen
The Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) has embarked upon a US$ 1 billion R&D and demonstration program aiming to produce commercial hydrogen using nuclear heat around 2020. KAERI has close links on hydrogen with the Institute of Nuclear & New Energy Technology (INET) at Tsinghua University in China, and is forming other links with its counterpart in Japan. It plans to develop the sulfur-iodine (SI) process for hydrogen production while also developing high-temperature reactors and the alloys enabling them to be used with heat exchangers for chemical plants. Prototype SI hydrogen production is expected about 2011, followed by a pilot plant in 2016, which will then be connected to a high-temperature reactor. Which type of reactor will be decided in 2006.
Nucleonics Week 3/2/05.
Tenth Japanese waste shipment
Cogema is despatching a tenth shipment of vitrified high-level wastes back to Japan. Five casks with 124 canisters are involved, and will be on a dedicated vessel as usual. A further 13 casks remain to be returned, but all the Japanese spent fuel sent to Cogema has now been reprocessed.
Platts 16/2/05.
Chinese coal mine disaster
A methane explosion at the Sunjiawan mine in north-eastern China has killed at least 203 miners. Last year's official death toll in China's coal mines was 6027, 6% down on 2003.
FT 16/2/05.
Areva offers help to complete Brazilian reactor
Areva is reported to have offered financing and technical assistance to complete Brazil's 1224 MWe Angra 3 nuclear power plant. While 70% of the equipment is on site, construction has not started and Areva is being paid some US$ 20 million per year to maintain the equipment. Eletrobras has been seeking a private partner with US$ 1.8 billion to complete the plant.
Decision to refurbish two Ontario reactors
After six months negotiation, Bruce Power has reached tentative agreement with the provincial government on refurbishing Bruce 1 & 2 nuclear reactors which have been shut down for some years. Both entered commercial operation in 1977, then unit 2 was closed down in 1995 and unit 1 at the end of 1997. Returning the two 769 MWe units to service will involve replacement of pressure tubes and steam generators, and will cost some C$ 2 billion (US$ 1.6 billion). Bruce power leases the eight Bruce reactors from Ontario Power Generation, and in 2003-04 returned units 3 & 4 to service after a more modest refit. Cabinet needs to approve the agreement.
Toronto Star 22/3/05, Nucleonics Week 24/3/05.
BHP Billiton bids for WMC Resources
After anxiety regarding a hostile bid from Swiss-based Xstrata, BHP Billiton has offered A$ 9.2 billion (USD 7.3 billion) for WMC Resources, including the Olympic Dam copper-uranium mine, valued recently at up to A$5.4 billion (USD 4.3 billion) by Grant Samuel. WMCR directors have unanimously recommended acceptance and have agreed to a A$92 million break fee in the event that the bid is derailed or fails. BHPB said that the bid was based on a positive view of the prospects for a A$5 billion expansion of Olympic Dam to triple production. Commentators have pointed to the significance of the world's largest mining company taking control of one third of the world's uranium resources - from a position of no involvement with uranium, and underlining the key significance of it in the world's sustainable energy future.
WMC Resources has committed A$ 90 million (US$ 70 million) to further drilling at Olympic Dam, designed to take the resource categorization of the southern orebody through to proven reserves, and thus demonstrate the viability of a much expanded operation - up to 15,000 t/yr U3O8.
Areva, whose subsidiary Cogema accounted for 13% of world uranium production in 2003, had earlier expressed some interest in Olympic Dam, which supplied 7.5 % of world mine production. Areva subsidiaries have a substantial role in China, seen as a significant future market for Australian uranium - talks with a view to establishing a bilateral safeguards agreement have begun.
Age 25/2, 9 & 14/3/05, WMCR 1 & 11/3/05.
Record nuclear output in 2004
Preliminary figures suggest that world nuclear output rose nearly 4% in 2004 to 2696 billion kWh, due to increased capacity and good performance especially in Sweden and the USA.
Nucleonics Week 10/2/05.
Nuclear competitiveness improved since 1998
A joint report by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Energy Agency shows that nuclear power has increased its competitiveness over the last seven years. The principal changes since 1998 are increased nuclear plant capacity factors and rising gas prices. The study does not factor in any costs for carbon emissions from fossil fuel generators, and focuses on over one hundred plants able to come on line 2010-15, including 13 nuclear plants. Nuclear overnight construction costs range from US$ 1000/kW in Czech Republic to $2500/kW in Japan, and average $1500/kW. Coal plants are costed at $1000-1500/kW, gas plants $500-1000/kW and wind capacity $1000-1500/kW.
At 5% discount rate nuclear generating costs come out at EUR 2-4 cents/kWh depending on country, coal 3-5 c/kWh, gas 4-6 c/kWh and wind around 8 cents. Nuclear costs were lowest in Korea, Czech Rep, Canada and France, and highest by far in Japan. Nuclear is comfortably cheaper than coal in seven of ten countries, and cheaper than gas in all but one. At 10% discount rate nuclear ranges 3-5 cents/kWh (except Japan: near 7 cents, and Netherlands), and capital becomes 70% of power cost, instead of the 50% with 5% discount rate. Here, nuclear is again cheaper than coal in seven of ten countries, and cheaper than gas in all but two. Among the technologies analysed for the report, the new EPR if built in Germany would deliver power at about 2.38 c/kWh - the lowest cost of any plant in the study.
Nucleonics Week 17/3/05.
IAEA raises capacity projection
The International Atomic Energy Agency has significantly increased its projection of world nuclear generating capacity 15 years hence. It now anticipates at least 60 new plants in the next 15 years, making 430 GWe in place in 2020 - 130 GWe more than projected in 2000 and 17% more than now. The change is based on specific plans and actions in a number of countries, including China, India, Russia, Finland and France, coupled with the changed outlook due to the Kyoto Protocol. This would give nuclear power a 17% share in electricity production in 2020. The fastest growth is in Asia.
IAEA 1/3/05.
Call for acceleration of nuclear renaissance
Ministers, senior officials and experts from 74 countries attended a 2-day conference in Paris organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in cooperation with the OECD and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and hosted by the French Government. They affirmed the important role of nuclear power as a proven and economically competitive technology in meeting world energy needs in the light of environmental, energy security and price stability considerations. However, non-proliferation and waste management questions must be addressed more strongly.
WNA Director General John Ritch called for the UN and other international bodies to be proactive in pushing nuclear power developments. "As a step toward energy independence and as an urgent environmental imperative, it is essential that national governments take the steps necessary to incentivise immediate nuclear investments. This pump-priming can be achieved by a temporary production subsidy, by absorbing some first-of-a-kind-engineering costs, or just by redistributing these costs from pioneers to those who follow. The goal is not to subsidise long-term nuclear operations but simply to accelerate the nuclear renaissance for reasons of national interest and the global environment." Furthermore, the UN development system needs to be reoriented to support the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, rather than fiddling "in a safe cocoon of political correctness. Governments must now direct the World Bank and the UN Development and Environment Programmes to act in pursuit of a clean-energy vision in which nuclear power holds a central role."
Final statement 23/3/05, WNA.
UN expert report urges multilateral control of facilities
An expert group commissioned by the International Atomic Energy Agency has suggested ways to strengthen controls over sensitive nuclear materials and technologies of proliferation concern. The focus is on multinational approaches to enrichment, reprocessing, and spent fuel repositories and storage. The report notes that multilateral approaches are already established in Europe and merit emulation elsewhere. Proposals include: reinforcing commercial market mechanisms including fuel leasing & take-back, international supply guarantees involving IAEA, transferring control of existing facilities to multinational arrangements, and setting up new facilities with multinational ownership and management. Representatives from 26 countries were involved in the study.
IAEA 22/2/05.
Kyoto Protocol in force
Now ratified by 141 nations accounting for 62% of developed countries' greenhouse gas emissions, the Kyoto Protocol has now entered into force. It requires the 34 industrialised countries to reduce emissions by an average of 5.2% by 2012.
19 April to 20 April 2005
Global Uranium Market Outlook Conference, Beijing China
Contact Julia Ho: Tel 65 6732 1970; Fax 65 6733 5087
E-mail: Julia.ho@ibcasia.com.sg
WWW: http://www.informa.com.au/uranium
Reactor table
The hydrogen economy
Sustainable energy
Australia's uranium & who buys it
Canadian U production & nuclear power
Nuclear power in India
Nuclear power in Russia
Nuclear power in China
Nuclear power in France
Renewable energy & electricity
Nuclear powered ships
Uranium exploration in Australia (UIC mines paper)
See also Ux Consulting graphs
World reactor changes
Japan: Higashidori-1 1067 MWe grid connected
China: planned 8 units 8000 MWe
Canada: planned 4 units 2570 MWe
GPO Box 1649N, Melbourne 3001, Australia
phone (03) 9629 7744
fax (03) 9629 7207