The bold US Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) initiative promises to build on international concerns to limit access to sensitive technologies and further tighten up the international safeguards regime. In January a similar proposal was made by Russia, for a global network of facilities under UN oversight, and in March the USA asked Russia to join the GNEP. Russia has suggested that one of its four major enrichment plants could become part of an international fuel service centre run in conjunction with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). But beyond the USA and Russia, what other countries are likely to come into line with it?
The US announcement was made after a year's preparation and discussions with the UK, France, Russia, Japan and China. In fact all would appear to be prime contenders as "partner nations [which] will develop a fuel services program to provide nuclear fuel to developing nations allowing them to enjoy the benefits of abundant sources of clean, safe nuclear energy in a cost-effective manner in exchange for their commitment to forgo enrichment and reprocessing activities, also alleviating proliferation concerns." The fuel leasing plan envisages supplying enriched fuel for initial use in customer countries before its return, followed by separation and burning of recycled components in the "fuel supplier nations" or "fuel cycle nations".
Those six countries include all five nuclear weapons states under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and all are substantially into developing the full fuel cycle. There is thus a significant resonance with Article 4 of the NPT, where "Parties to the Treaty in position to do so shall (contribute) to the further development of the applications of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, especially in the territories of non-nuclear-weapons States." The Japanese response to GNEP has listed all six countries as full "nuclear fuel cycle countries", with all others being no more than nuclear power countries, renouncing acquisition of enrichment and reprocessing technologies.
Regarding technology development to implement GNEP, there is no problem with the front end of the fuel cycle, primarily enriching uranium to prepare the fuel for power reactors - that technology is well known and proven, and most of it is already in those six countries or allied (Germany & Netherlands). The trick will be confining it there. Also the USA has put 17 tonnes of high-enriched uranium into a fuel-assurance bank. While this is equivalent to only about 3500 tonnes of mined uranium or 9% of annual mine production today, it is understood that further releases will follow.
Even at the front end, international safeguards become an issue. For instance, while many nuclear power plants in the five nuclear weapons states are under safeguards, fuel cycle facilities in these countries are sometimes considered dual-status (civil and military - eg for naval use) so would take some sorting out to be safeguarded. The UK, France and USA have all civil nuclear facilities voluntarily under safeguards, Russia has almost nothing thus.
At the back end, considering used fuel and its recycling, the picture is more complex. All of the six countries have experience using the established Purex reprocessing technology (albeit only at pilot scale in China and Japan). All could move to something like the proposed Urex+ process without undue trouble if they decided it was worth it. But the Purex process delivers the plutonium in a form ready to be recycled in normal reactors, and using this is firm policy in some places (eg Europe and Japan), under rigorous safeguards. Particularly in France, established plant is producing valuable fuel from it, and is likely to continue doing so under GNEP.
The Urex+ process is undeveloped, and while its advantages have been strongly put forward by the USA, it is not clear that the five other countries are sufficiently persuaded to make a change. Areva NC has pointed to its 30 years experience with reprocessing, giving it "unique qualifications to bring as a supplier of technology and expertise. We are at the disposal of our American friends to put that competence to work for them." The French Atomic Energy Commission is well advanced in research relevant to Urex+. Following separation of mixed transuranic elements from wastes, new fuel fabrication techniques for these need to be demonstrated.
A corollary of switching to the new reprocessing technology, so that plutonium ends up as part of a mix of heavy elements formed by neutron capture, is that fast neutron reactors will be needed to burn this mix. (Dropping them into a conventional reactor would result in more neutron capture and relatively little fission.) The only commercial scale fast reactors likely to be operating in the next five years are in Russia, Japan and India, though France might extend the life of its old Phenix, and China will have a small fast reactor operating about 2008. GNEP envisages development being under the Generation IV International Forum (GIF). Most of the designs short-listed by GIF for development are fast reactors, and the US focus is on sodium-cooled fast reactors under a collaborative deal with France and Japan under GIF. (see further: US story below)
A significant difference between the US and Russian visions of GNEP relates to reactor technology. The USA sees the normal plant in both fuel cycle supplier and user nations as being the conventional light water type, whereas Russia has suggested a wide move to fast neutron reactors with used fuel being recycled at the reactor site. Any plutonium breeding would be in the core (not a surrounding blanket assembly) so that there was no scope for producing weapons material.
In the USA the Department of Energy is formulating plans for advancing GNEP there, and is seeking expressions of interest regarding sites "suitable for demonstrating advanced recycling technologies". It hopes to start building a Urex+ demonstration reprocessing plant in 2008. There is a suggestion that some of the current partners in the GIF advanced reactor program might be natural partners, along with Russia and China.
NuclearFuel 27/2 & 13/3/06, Platts 22/2/06, 2/3/06, JAIF 24/2/06, DOE GNEP 17/3/06.
US widens nuclear energy strategy
After discussion with the UK, France, Russia, Japan and China, the US government has announced a Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) through which it "will work with other nations possessing advanced nuclear technologies to develop new proliferation-resistant recycling technologies in order to produce more energy, reduce waste and minimize proliferation concerns."
Domestic GNEP goals include reducing US dependence on imported fossil fuels, and expanding the US domestic use of nuclear power by building a new generation of nuclear power plants - incentives for which are already in place. GNEP includes co-operative development of small reactors for developing countries. Two significant new elements in the strategy are new reprocessing technologies which separate all transuranic elements together (and not reactor-grade plutonium on its own) - starting with the laboratory-proven UREX+ process - and Advanced Burner (fast) Reactors (ABR) to consume the result of this while generating power.
Apart from military experience with metal fuel, the USA has some experience with reprocessing oxide fuels - the small West Valley NY plant operated 1966-72, and a 1500 t/yr plant at Barnwell SC was built but not commissioned due to changed government policy. It is now demolished. The French, UK and Japanese oxide fuel reprocessing plants use a process which would need to be adapted for the GNEP strategy. However, it could give these plants a new lease of life. As well as the UREX+ process, GNEP is focused on pyroprocessing which is likely to be more suitable for fast neutron reactor fuels but is much less developed.
An engineering-scale demonstration (ESD) plant for reprocessing is planned for operation from 2011. The 10-25 t/yr ESD is designed to prepare the way for a 2000 t/yr full scale plant. "The US will explore collaboration with fuel supplier nations on the development of these technologies." An important implication of reprocessing, which leaves only fission products as high-level waste, is that the Yucca Mountain repository will be adequate for all wastes from all US (and many other?) reactors for a very long time. The ABR program will build on previous fast neutron reactor experience. ABRs are envisaged as modular units forming gigawatt-sized plants, and design certification of ABR units will be sought. An initial Advanced Burner Test Reactor will be 100-150 MWe to prove the concept and is to be operational about 2014. The second phase by 2023 would be an ABR standard plant consisting of several modules, followed by commercial deployment of such a plant.
Shortly before the GNEP announcement, the US President pointed out the need to replace more than three quarters of US oil imports from the Middle East by 2025. He announced an Advanced Energy Initiative to boost research in clean energy technologies, notably "zero-emission coal-fired power plants", renewables and "clean, safe nuclear energy". He also announced increased research in better batteries for hybrid and electric cars, and in hydrogen-powered vehicles - both with implications for nuclear capacity.
White House 31/1/06, US DOE 6/2/06 see also GNEP web site
Major US reactor uprate approved
After the most extensive review it has ever undertaken - over 29 months, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved a 20% power uprate for the Vermont Yankee reactor, taking it to 640 MWe capacity. The reactor started up in 1972 and an application for life extension to 2032 is being considered by NRC.
Ux Weekly 6/3/06.
National Academies report on transport
The National Academies have reported on transport of high-level wastes, finding that there are "no fundamental technical barriers to the safe transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes in the US". It said transport by road or rail was low-risk radiologically due to "rigorous international standards and US regulations" on packaging it.
National Academies, 9/2/06
US Academies' report on low-level wastes
The National Research Council of the US National Academies has issued a report on low-activity radioactive wastes. Current US regulation of these is based on the industry which produces them, creating expensive anomalies without any benefit. Such wastes from nuclear facilities are subject to onerous restrictions on handling and disposal, while higher-activity wastes from other sources can go to local landfill. The report called for regulation to be risk-based, consistent and related to international standards which focus on the radiological properties of wastes.
Nucleonics Week 16/3/06.
NRC licenses private central fuel storage
After a 9-year process, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a 20-year licence to Private Fuel Storage (PFS) - a utility consortium - for a 40,000 tonne storage facility in Utah for used nuclear fuel in robust dry casks. The land is owned by the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians, who have sought the development. Access and logistic issues remain to be resolved before construction of the $168 million facility begins. PFS is now offering the facility to the Department of Energy for use from 2008 pending Yucca Mountain repository opening, suggesting that it would be very much cheaper for DOE than leaving the used fuel at reactor sites. While fuel ownership was to remain with utility customers, the proposal to DOE is that it would take ownership at the reactor site (as was legally required by 1998) and be responsible for moving it to PFS, and ultimately to Yucca Mountain.
Nuclear Fuel 27/2 & 27/3/06.
US industry priorities for used fuel
The Nuclear Energy Institute has outlined US industry priorities in relation to used fuel and the Yucca Mountain repository. NEI has stressed the importance of expediting removal of used fuel from reactor storage to a federal facility, as well as the need to remove the 70,000 tonne political limit on the size of the Yucca Mountain repository. It also pointed out that the 0.1 cent/kWh levy to pay for all waste disposal should be quite adequate, especially as nuclear power output increases in the USA.
NEI Nuclear Energy Overview 27/2/06.
US uranium producers urge hoarding
The Uranium Producers of America has urged the US Department of Energy to retain its current inventories of some 17,700 tU "to ensure national energy security". Most of it is natural uranium (as UF6) supplied to USEC by utilities for toll enrichment and where diluted Russian military uranium has replaced it.
FreshFuel 13/2/06, TradeTech NMR 10/2/06 (cf our paper on Military Warheads as Source of Fuel)
European energy policy proposal takes shape
Against the background of sharply increased energy prices and major interruptions in gas supplies from the east, a discussion paper on achieving Secure, Competitive and Sustainable Energy for Europe has been released in Brussels, with efficiency and diversity as sub themes. While individual states will continue to make their own choices, the scope for cooperation is great. Attention is given to an EU energy grid, maintaining reliable supply of oil and gas, conservation and renewables, strategy to maintain European leadership in energy technology, and a common external policy for energy. In the next 20 years the EU's dependency on imported energy will rise to about 70%, and energy infrastructure will require investment of some EUR 1000 billion.
A major objective of the plan is to achieve 50% of EU energy from secure, low-carbon energy sources within 20 years. However, it was left to industry group Foratom to point out that this meant a major role for nuclear power in the overall mix. The green paper does acknowledge that nuclear energy currently represents "the EU's main source of largely carbon-free energy", as well as being increasingly competitive and enabling security of energy supply.
When the European Parliament voted on economic strategy on 15 March several anti-nuclear amendments were thrown out and a very positive nuclear energy statement adopted. It "Recalls that the EU possesses globally acknowledged expertise in the area of nuclear energy, which is one possible response to energy dependence and climate change" and "Recognises the role that nuclear energy currently plays in maintaining security of electricity supply, constituting a significant part of the energy mix and avoiding an estimated 312 million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year."
A week later an overwhelming majority of EU leaders at an EU summit gave strong backing to a revival of nuclear power as means to combat climte change and to reduce a growing dependence on imported energy supplies. A resolution on security of energy supply in the EU "recognises the role that nuclear energy currently plays in some member states maintaining the security of electricity supply as part of energy mix and for avoiding CO2 emissions". An amendment which was negative about nuclear power was rejected. The preamble says that "energy security should be considered as an essential component of the global security concept and has an increasing impact on the overall security of the European Union".
Foratom 8, 17, 21 & 23/3/06, NucNet news #51/06, Guardian 28/3/06.
Russia reiterates fuel cycle plans
As flagged earlier, and in line with the US Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, the head of Rosatom has reiterated that it is prepared to host four types of international nuclear fuel cycle service centers. First, a uranium enrichment centre (which incidentally would provide for Iran's professed concerns) - one of four or five worldwide. The second would be for reprocessing and storage of used nuclear fuel. The third would deal with training and certification of personnel, especially for emerging nuclear states. In this context we would need harmonized international standards, uniform safeguards and joint international centers. The fourth would be for R&D and to integrate new scientific achievements.
NuclearRu 14/2/06.
Russia sets up floating power plant directorate
Russia's nuclear utility Rosenergoatom has set up a subsidiary to supply floating nuclear power plants (BNPPs) ranging in size from 70 to 600 MWe. The plants are designed by OKBM in collaboration with others. The pilot plant, approved in 2002, is 70 MWe plus heat output and incorporates two KLT-40S reactors based on those in icebreakers. It will be on a 20,000 tonne, 140 x 30 m barge hull, probably built in China. Refuelling interval is 3-4 years on site, and at the end of a 12-year operating cycle the whole plant is returned to a shipyard for overhaul and storage of used fuel, before being returned to service. Cost including coastal facilities and training is US$ 200 million, and Chinese equity will be involved if Russian funding is constrained. The larger end of the BNPP range uses a pair of 325 MWe VBER-300 reactors on a 49,000 tonne barge. Export sales are envisaged.
Nucleonics Week 16/2/06, OKBM.
Slovakia commits to nuclear increase
The Slovak government has approved a long-term energy strategy incorporating ENELıs 2005 EUR 1.88 billion investment plan after the Italian group acquired 66% of utility Slovenske Electrarne (SE). The strategy includes completion of Mochovce units 3 & 4 (942 MWe gross) by 2011-12 as well as uprates of Mochovce 1 & 2 (62 MWe gross) and uprates of Bohunice 3 & 4 (120 MWe gross).
Energy in East Europe, 3/2/06.
Bids to build Bulgaria's Belene
Two consortia have submitted bids to build the Belene nuclear power plant on the Danube River near Romania. Both have two variants: using the old VVER-1000/320 equipment already on site, and building afresh two AES-92 units as now being built in India, with V-392 reactors. The two reactors would be completed on turnkey basis by 2011 and 2013. One consortium is Atomstroyexport plus Framatome ANP, the other led by Skoda Nuclear Engineering. Earlier, a total cost of EUR 2.7 billion was suggested.
Platts 1/2/06.
Baltic agreement on new reactor
Following an announcement by the three prime ministers in February, an agreement has been signed by Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania to conduct a feasibility study for a new nuclear reactor to be built at the Ignalina site in Lithuania and jointly owned. The results are expected in November. Meanwhile the Lithuanian parliament is considering whether to extend the life of Ignalina-2 to about 2016, when the new plant would be operating.
Nucleonics Week 30/3/06.
Russia considers power supply to China
Rosenergoatom is reportedly considering building two power plants each with two large reactors in Russia's far east to supply some 30 billion kWh/yr of electricity to China.
Ux Weekly 20/3/06.
French move on high-level waste disposal France's National Assembly is expected to vote on the Nuclear Materials and Waste Management Program bill in April and the Senate to follow in May or June. This formally declares deep geological disposal as the reference solution for high-level and long-lived radioactive wastes, and sets 2015 as the target date for licensing a repository and 2025 for opening it. The bill also affirms the principle of reprocessing used fuel and using recycled plutonium in mixed oxide (MOX) fuel "in order to reduce the quantity and toxicity" of final wastes, and calls for construction of a prototype fourth-generation reactor by 2020 to test transmutation of long-lived actinides. The cost of the repository is expected to be around EUR 15 billion: 40% construction, 40% operation for 100 years, and 20% ancillary (taxes and insurance). The bill will leave funds for waste management and decommissioning segregated but with the producers rather than in an external fund.
The bill is largely in line with recommendations to government from the National Scientific Assessment Committee following 15 years of research. Their report identified the clay formation at Bure as the best site, but was sceptical of partitioning and transmutation for high-level wastes, and said that used MOX fuel should be stored indefinitely as a plutonium resource for future fast neutron reactors, rather than being recycled now or treated as waste.
Earlier, an international review team reported very positively on the plan by Andra, the French radioactive waste agency, for a deep geological repository complex in clay at Bure.
NuclearFuel 13/2 & 27/3/06, Nucleonics Week 16/3/06.
France flush for decommissioning
Electricite de France will by 2010 have fully funded the eventual decommissioning of its nuclear power plants (from 2035). At present it holds EUR 25 billion segregated for this purpose, and is on track for EUR 35 billion in 2010. Areva has dedicated assets already provided at the level of its future liabilities.
NuclearFuel 27/3/06.
Areva sets sights, renames subsidiaries
Areva has announced that it is aiming for one third of the world nuclear fuel cycle market by 2010. As part of its integration plan its worldwide Cogema subsidiaries became Areva NC, and Framatome ANP became Areva NP from 1 March.
Areva 1 & 8/3/06.
French-Libyan nuclear agreement
The French Atomic Energy Commission has signed a nuclear technology agreement with Libya related to its research reactor and proposed nuclear desalination plants. Libya signed the Additional Protocol to its safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency in 2004.
NucNet news #58/06.
Next Chinese nuclear plant signed up
China National Nuclear Corporation has signed an agreement with one of the larger utilities, China Huadian Corporation, to build the first two units of the Hui'an nuclear power plant in Fujian province. This has been approved as part of the 11th five-year plan. CNNC will build and operate the plant, and hold the major share of the joint venture. Six units are planned for the geologically-stable coastal site.
Meanwhile the State Council has confirmed that the large advanced PWR and the high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTR) are two high priority projects for the next 15 years. The former will depend on "Sino-foreign cooperation, in order to master international advanced technology on nuclear power and develop a Chinese third-generation large PWR". This will presumably flow from the (delayed) contracts for Sanmen and Yangjiang plants. The HTR project starts with the 200 MWe demonstration HTR-PM project at Weihei to pave the way for "a complete set" of 18 of them.
CNNC 15 & 22/2/06, cf Newsletter #1/06.
New Japanese reactor starts commercial operation
The second unit at Hokuriku Electric's Shika nuclear power plant has started commercial operation, having being connected to the grid in July. It is a 1358 MWe advanced boiling water reactor - Japan's 4th third-generation unit.
Mainichi 16/3/06.
UN Security Council challenges Iran
The 15-member UN Security Council on 29 March unanimously approved a resolution demanding of Iran "full and sustained suspension of all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA" within 30 days. "The Security Council noted with serious concern that the IAEA Director Generalıs report of 27 February listed a number of outstanding issues, including topics which could have a military nuclear dimension, and that the Agency was unable to conclude that there were no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran." Iran has threatened that any UN sanctions would cause it to withhold oil supplies - about 5% of world total. The issue has come to a head after nearly 20 years of Iran flouting safeguards obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, independently of Russia building and fuelling Iran's first nuclear power plant at Bushehr.
UNSC 29/3/06, Australian 31/3/06.
Ontario power dilemma
Ontario's Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) has warned that Toronto power supplies will be threatened if the government proceeds with an election promise to close down coal-fired generating capacity by 2009. Its report said that "prudence" requires that coal stations totalling 6500 MWe - almost one fifth of the province's capacity - be kept in operation. The IESO says that maintaining reliable supply is a "challenging and complex task" requiring not only new sources of energy but a major restructuring of the entire power system. Meanwhile the 1975 MWe Lambton plant should be kept open or on standby after its planned shutdown by the end of 2007 and the dirtier 3920 MWe Nanticoke plant should be kept in operation, the report said.
A C$ 757 million contract to build a new 880 MWe gas combined cycle plant at Brampton in greater Toronto has been let to SNC-Lavalin by Sithe Global Power LLC which has a 20-year sales agreement with Ontario Power Authority. Its gas turbine part will bring 600 MWe of peaking capacity on line in mid 2007, with the steam turbine adding the balance a year later. (SNC-Lavalin is also replacing the steam generators at Bruce A nuclear plant, with units 1&2 there due on line 2009-10.) More recently a C$ 700 million 550 MWe gas-fired plant was approved for Portlands, on the Toronto waterfront.
Public hearings focused on a report by the Ontario Power Authority recommending spending up to $40-billion on nuclear power development took place in February.
Globe & Mail 3 & 14/2/06, Toronto Star 3/2/06.
Canadian team to offer new plants
Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) has teamed up with four other nuclear technology and engineering companies to offer new nuclear power plants in Ontario. With Babcock & Wilcox Canada, General Electric Canada, Hitachi Canada and SNC-Lavalin Nuclear it will offer fixed-price nuclear power plants on a turnkey basis. Initially these will be the well-proven 700 MWe Candu 6 units, but later the new third-generation 1200 MWe ACR-1000 will be an option. The provincial government is to release a new energy plan in April.
AECL 27/3/06.
Canadian uranium production
Canada's 2005 uranium production totalled 13,713 t U3O8 (11,628 tU). McArthur River had to constrain output to its licensed level of 8491 t U3O8 (7200 tU), and has applied for an increase in that to 10,000 t/yr. Rabbit Lake provided 2732 t U3O8 (2316 tU) and McClean Lake 2490 t U3O8 (2112 tU). Its 2006 production is expected to be lower due to lower grades and expansion of the mill to prepare for Cigar Lake ore in 2007. The C$ 520 million Cigar Lake project is on schedule to start production in 2007.
Cameco 31/1/06, NuclearFuel 30/1/06.
Movement at Midwest mine
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has begun environmental assessment of the Midwest project, including new mine, 15 km haul road to McClean Lake mill, and expansion of the mill. Cogema Resources Inc (now Areva NC) plans to produce 2600 t/yr U3O8 from Midwest. The planned open pit mine was originally to be underground, utilising ground freezing and water jet boring. Reserves are 16,000 t U3O8 at average grade 4.4%. Areva NC holds 69% of the project with Denison 25% and OURD Canada 6%.
CNSC 7/3/06.
Record Australian uranium production
Reflecting 15% higher output from Ranger, Australia's 2005 production of 11,222 tonnes U3O8 (9516 tU) was a record. Ranger produced 5910 t U3O8 (5012 tU), Olympic Dam 4335 t U3O8 (4359 t UOC, 3676 tU) and Beverley 977 t U3O8 (828 tU). Exports of 12,360 t U3O8 yielded A$ 573 million.
ERA 1/2/06, BHPB, Heathgate, DITR.
Australian uranium merger
Oxiana Ltd and Minotaur Exploration Ltd have merged their uranium exploration interests in the Gawler and Cunamona cratons of South Australia in a new company: Toro Energy Ltd. Toro has raised A$ 18 million (US$ 13.4 M) through a fully-underwritten and vastly oversubscribed IPO, with parent companies each retaining about 25%.
Oxiana + Minotaur 2/2/06.
India-US agreement parallels NPT
India and the USA have signed an agreement which is designed to put India on the same basis as China in relation to international trade in nuclear technology and materials. For trade with the USA, Congress needs to ratify it, and for wider trade, the 45-member Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) must agree. Legislation authorizing the US nuclear agreement with India is under consideration in the US Senate and House of Representatives. Both the House and Senate bills will be debated by the House International Relations Committee and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before being voted on in May or June. The issue will then be taken to the NSG.
The IAEA Director General welcomed the agreement as "an important step towards satisfying India's growing need for energy, including nuclear technology and fuel, as an engine for development." At the same time "It would bring India closer as an important partner in the non-proliferation regime," he said. "It would also be a step towards the universalization of the international safeguards regime" and "timely for ongoing efforts to consolidate the non-proliferation regime, combat nuclear terrorism and strengthen nuclear safety."
The agreement relates to implementation of an earlier in-principle one reached mid 2005, and involves some separation of military and civil nuclear facilities, with the latter being placed under international safeguards. India has 15 operating nuclear power reactors plus 8 more under construction, one of them a fast-breeder. It also has 5 operating research reactors - two very large ones - apparently run as military plutonium producers, and one a 40 MWt fast-breeder. These two fast-breeder units would be excluded from safeguards, but future "civil" fast breeders would be included. Of the current reactors and those under construction, 14 would be covered by safeguards. At present only four units are under safeguards, plus two of those under construction - all foreign-supplied under arrangements predating the NPT. The further eight to go under safeguards had not been identified as of 30 March.
While neither Australia nor Canada will relax embargoes to sell uranium, Russia, France, Japan and UK support the US diplomatic moves. China's position is not clear - it is reported as opposing it. In February a nuclear energy cooperation agreement was signed by France and India, though it depends on the US initiative to proceed. Russia then expanded its nuclear cooperation agreement with India and will resume supplying enriched fuel for the two small Tarapur reactors - initially 60 tonnes. These were built by GE in the 1960s and are operated under IAEA safeguards. In 2004 Russia deferred to the NSG and declined to supply further fuel for them. They have been undergoing six months refurbishment over 2005-06.
Pakistan has indicated a desire for a similar agreement, with China if not the USA, but both the NSG and the USA have indicated that they would not relax trade rules for Pakistan in the light of its track record. India's record of avoiding any export of nuclear material or technology is consistent with Article 1 of the NPT and stands in sharp contrast to Pakistan's role as a wholesale proliferator contributing to the failure of Iran and North Korea to abide by their NPT commitments.
India's different status to China arises from the fact that its first nuclear explosion was in 1974, just after the NPT came into operation, whereas China got in as a weapons state, hence without any stigma on account of its military nuclear program. By virtue of missing the boat India has been faced with the prospect of either staying outside the NPT (as it has done) or abandoning its weapons program. Its assessment of regional security needs means it has maintained the weapons program as a high priority.
NucNet news #48/06, Nucleonics Week 2, 16, 23 & 30/3/06, AP & Reuters 2/3/06.
Toshiba to share Westinghouse
Toshiba's winning $5.4 billion bid to buy Westinghouse from BNFL envisages only 51% ownership, the balance being shared with other companies. Marubini is reported to be likely to take 20% and the US Shaw Group 5%. The Toshiba share will be funded from cash flow.
Nucleonics Week 2/2 & 30/3/06.
Mexico plans new power reactors
The Federal Electricity Commission plans to construct a new US$4 billion nuclear power plant by 2020 at the latest to help meet Mexicoıs rising electricity demand, now growing 4% annually. The Commission is also spending US$150 million on uprating both 675 MWe reactors at its Laguna Verde plant, currently generating about 5% of the countryıs electricity.
TradeTech NMR 17/3/06.
2005 Reactor changes:
In 2005, there was a net increase in world nuclear power capacity on line of 2926 MWe. Changes to reactor status included the grid connection of Japan's Higashidori-1 (1067 MWe) and Shika-2 (1358 MWe), India's Tarapur-4 (490 MWe) and also Canada's Pickering-1 (515 MWe) after refurbishment; the start of commercial operation for Higashidori-1 and Hamaoka-5 (1380 MWe) in Japan and South Korea's Ulchin-6 (960 MWe); the closure of Obrigheim (340 MWe) and Barseback-2 (602 MWe); construction start (first concrete) of Olkiluoto-3 (1600 MWe) and Chashma-2 (300 MWe) and uprates totalling 337 MWe in USA, 81 MWe in Sweden and 20 MWe in Finland.
Wind goes forward in 2005
World wind generating capacity surged 25% in 2005, to 59 GWe. Much of this is in Europe (41 GWe), but the most rapid growth was in Asia, Australia, Canada and Egypt.
GWEC 22/2/06.
Reactor table
Nuclear power in world today
Safety of nuclear power reactors
Small nuclear power reactors
Uranium enrichment
Mixed oxide fuel
Waste management in nuclear cycle
Decommissioning nuclear facilities
Energy analysis of power systems
Energy balances and CO2 implications
Australia' uranium & who buys it
Nuclear power in USA
Canada's uranium & nuclear power
Nuclear power in Japan
Nuclear power in France
Nuclear power in India & Pakistan
Nuclear power in Slovakia
Nuclear power in Romania
Nuclear power in Hungary
Nuclear power in Korea
Nuclear power in South Africa
Nuclear power in China
India, China & NPT
Emerging nuclear energy countries (new)
Nuclear power plants and earthquakes
Japanese waste shipments
Transport and the hydrogen economy
Radioisotopes in medicine
Occupational safety in U mining
Environmental aspects of U mining
Australia's uranium mines (UIC mines paper)
Regulation of uranium mines in Australia (UIC mines paper - new)
See also Ux Consulting graphs
World reactor changes in last two months
USA: Vermont Yankee uprate by 110 MWe
GPO Box 1649, Melbourne 3001, Australia
phone (03) 9629 7744
fax (03) 9629 7207