UIC NEWSLETTER # 3, 2005

May - June 2005


ISSUE HIGHLIGHTS


International collaboration boosts pebble bed prospect

While the second generation of the well-proven and widely-accepted light water reactors quietly gives way to early and then later third generation designs in the same technological tradition, a different kind of development is occurring with high temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTRs). Its advocates expect these designs eventually to replace the familiar and almost ubiquitous - but inherently more complex - water-cooled and -moderated types.

When the world's two leading developers of the pebble bed variety of HTR signed an agreement in March, it brought together two strongly innovative streams of development from a common German stock, which after 22 years of operational experience had been aborted on its home ground. However, it offers the prospect of a simple and inherently safe reactor which does not require emergency cooling provisions or large exclusion zone, and in fact aims for a step change in safety, economics and proliferation resistance.

Two German pebble bed reactors were built and operated before the program was shut down in 1989. In 1991 China picked up the German HTR trail and with input from Siemens designed its HTR-10, a small high-temperature pebble-bed gas-cooled experimental reactor at the Institute of Nuclear & New Energy Technology (INET) at Tsinghua University north of Beijing. This started up in 2000.

In 1996 South Africa's Eskom bought the German technology. As well as changing some aspects of the design, it drew on the expertise of Russia's Kurchatov Institute in Moscow to test design concepts.

The fuel is a distinguishing feature of these plants. Kernels of enriched uranium are surrounded by four layers of carbon and silicon carbide giving a containment for fission products which is stable to 1600°C or more. These particles - approximately 1 mm diameter - are then embedded in 50 mm graphite balls which are coated with graphite, giving a hard 60 mm billiard ball sized 'pebble'. Hundreds of thousands of these fuel elements cycle continuously through the reactor, so that each makes six to ten trips in its 3-year life before depletion. This fuel has a high level of inherent safety, including strong negative temperature coefficient whereby fission slows as temperature rises. The 'pebble' fuel elements are packed in the annular space of the core, and the reactor itself is lined with graphite which functions as the moderator.

Last year the small Chinese HTR-10 reactor was subject to an extreme test of its safety when the helium circulator was deliberately shut off without the reactor being shut down. The temperature increased steadily, but the physics of the fuel meant that the reaction progressively diminished and eventually died away over three hours. At this stage a balance between decay heat in the core and heat dissipation through the steel reactor wall was achieved and the temperature never exceeded a safe 1600°C. This was one of six safety demonstration tests conducted then. The high surface area relative to volume, and the low power density in the core, will also be features of the full-scale units (which are nevertheless much smaller than most light-water types).

China's INET is now preparing to build the HTR-PM, a 195 MWe demonstration unit scaled up from the HTR-10. Its rationale is both eventually to replace conventional reactor technology for power and also to provide for future hydrogen production. INET is doing the design, Chinergy (a joint venture of INET with China Nuclear Engineering & Construction Co) will build it and Huaneng Co - China's largest electric utility, hitherto without any nuclear involvement, will lead the owner-operator consortium (Huaneng 50%, CNEC 35%, INET 5%, others 10%). Projected cost is US$ 1500/kW, and generating cost about 5c/kWh. Start-up is scheduled for 2010. Two sites are under consideration: one at Weihei in Shandong province being preferred. Each is capable of hosting the lead unit and then 18 more modules.

South Africa's PBMR Pty company is seeking US$2.3 billion for its demonstration phase including the plant at Koeberg, which is due to be built in 2007 for operation in 2010. A contract for the pebble fuel plant at Pelindaba has been let. The first commercial units are expected on line in 2013. Eventual construction cost (when in clusters of eight units) is expected to be very competitive and generating cost below 3 c/kWh. Investors in the PBMR project are Eskom, the South African Industrial Development Corporation and British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL). The South African government envisages building 25 to 30 of the 170 MWe units there.

The PBMR-Chinergy collaboration will evidently focus on the nuclear reactor itself. For the time being, the two diverge on generation, with the Chinese driving a conventional steam turbine for the initial HTR-PM and the next 18 units, while the South Africans go straight to a more efficient direct cycle gas turbine. China's conservative approach will not leave it standing though - the HTR-10 is now being converted to drive a gas turbine to provide small-scale experience from 2006.

PBMR Pty has joined a consortium led by Westinghouse to bid for the US Department of Energy's Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project at the Idaho National Laboratory. This envisages both power and hydrogen production. It has also commenced discussions towards the design certification process with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

By about 2012 we should start to get an idea of whether the rest of the world will be buying Chinese or South African reactor technology for inherently-safe nuclear power plants. By then too, the application of HTRs directly for high temperature process heat will be exciting more interest.


In more detail:

Between 1967 and 1988, the AVR experimental pebble bed reactor at Jülich, Germany, operated for over 750 weeks at 15 MWe, most of the time with thorium-based fuel. The fuel consisted of about 100,000 billiard ball-sized fuel elements. The thorium was mixed with high-enriched uranium (HEU). Maximum burnups of 150 GWd/t were achieved.

The 300 MWe THTR reactor in Germany was developed from the AVR and operated between 1983 and 1989 with 674,000 pebbles, over half containing Th/HEU fuel (the rest graphite moderator and some neutron absorbers). These were continuously recycled and on average the fuel passed six times through the core. Fuel fabrication was on an industrial scale. Several design features made the AVR unsuccessful, though the basic concept was again proven. It drove a steam turbine.

An 80 MWe HTR-modul was then designed by Siemens and licensed in 1989, but was not constructed. This design was part of the technology bought by Eskom in 1996

The fuel is in the form of TRISO particles less than a millimetre in diameter. Each has a 0.5 mm kernel of uranium oxycarbide or oxide, with the uranium enriched in U-235 more than in a light water reactor. This is surrounded by four layers of carbon and silicon carbide. The TRISO microspheres are then embedded in 60 mm pebbles of graphite encased in silicon carbide, each with up to 15,000 fuel particles and up to 9g uranium.

China's HTR-10, a small high-temperature pebble-bed gas-cooled experimental reactor at the Institute of Nuclear & New Energy Technology (INET) at Tsinghua University started up in 2000 and reached full power in 2003. It has its fuel as a 'pebble bed' (27,000 elements) of oxide fuel with average burnup of 80 GWday/t U. Each pebble fuel element has 5g of uranium enriched to 17% in around 8300 particles. The reactor operates at 700°C (potentially 900°C) and has broad research purposes. Eventually it will be coupled to a gas turbine, but meanwhile it has been driving a steam turbine.

INET plans to start construction of a larger version, the 195 MWe HTR-PM, in 2007 at a coastal site. This will use 9% enriched oxide fuel (520,000 elements) in an annular core giving 80 GWd/t discharge burnup. It will drive a steam turbine. This demonstration reactor is to pave the way for an 18-module full-scale power plant on the same site, also using the steam cycle. Plant life is envisaged as 60 years with 85% load factor.

South Africa's Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) is being developed by a consortium led by the utility Eskom. Production units will be 170 MWe. The PBMR will have a direct-cycle gas turbine generator and thermal efficiency about 42%, the helium coolant leaving the bottom of the core at about 900°C. Up to 450,000 fuel pebbles 60 mm diameter and containing 9g uranium enriched to 8% U-235 recycle through the reactor continuously (about six times each) until they are expended. This gives an average enrichment in the fuel load of 4-5% and average burn-up of 80 GWday/t U (eventual target burn-ups are 200 GWd/t). The reactor core is lined with graphite and there is a central column of graphite as reflector. Control rods are in the side reflectors and cold shutdown units in the centre column. Performance includes great flexibility in loads (40-100%), with relatively rapid change in power settings. Each unit will finally discharge about 19 tonnes/yr of spent pebbles to ventilated on-site storage bins.

Nuclear Engineering International March 2005, INET Feb 2005.


USA

Agreements on new reactor development
NuStart Energy Development LLC has signed a cost-sharing agreement with the US Department of Energy to split the estimated $520 million expenses for completing detailed engineering work on one of two reactor designs. Both are expected to be part of combined construction permit and operating licence (COL) applications, a major step toward building a new nuclear plant. NuStart is made up of nine energy companies - Constellation Energy, Duke Energy, EdF International, Entergy Nuclear, Exelon Generation, Florida Power & Light, Progress Energy, Southern Co., and Tennessee Valley Authority, as well as reactor vendors GE Energy and Westinghouse. NuStart has separate agreements with GE and Westinghouse for the detailed engineering and licensing work on their ESBWR (Economic Simplified BWR) and AP1000 designs, respectively. NuStart anticipates selecting by October two plant sites, one for each design, and is targeting 2008 for filing COL applications with a view to having them granted in 2010.

In April the consortium led by Dominion signed a similar $440 million agreement with DOE for its COL program focused on its North Anna site. The consortium includes Bechtel and GE. The technology is GE's ESBWR, and development costs will be shared with NuStart.

Duke Power and Constellation have also called upon the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to expedite approval of Framatome ANP's EPR, to provide an extra option in the US market.
Nucleonics Week 12/5/05, Nuclear Energy Overview 9/5/05.

US House passes energy bill
The US House of Representatives has passed comprehensive energy legislation by a vote of 249-183. Included in the bill (HR 6) are provisions that renew the Price-Anderson Act for 20 years covering industry funding of nuclear liability insurance, funding of $3.1 billion for the Department of Energy to establish an advanced reactor for hydrogen production at Idaho National Laboratory, and some $3 billion for nuclear energy research programs over the next five years. In addition the bill updates tax treatment of utility nuclear decommissioning funds. It also encourages construction of LNG import terminals and allows oil drilling in the Alaska Arctic Wildlife Reserve. The bill was strongly supported by President Bush but faces some hostility in the Senate due to provisions related to oil.
Platts 21/4/05, AP 21/4/05, NEI 21/4/05.

US boost for nuclear investment?
Addressing a business conference, the US President has called for measures to reduce US dependence on foreign energy sources, starting with more nuclear power. He has asked the department of Energy to draft changes in the law to reduce uncertainty in nuclear plant licensing and to provide federal risk insurance for the first four new plants built. "A secure energy future for America must include more nuclear power." He also called for increased effort to develop fuel cells for vehicles, referred to the nuclear hydrogen initiative, and supported $1.9 billion tax incentives for wind energy. Finally, he promised international collaboration "to develop advanced nuclear technologies that are safe, clean, and protect against proliferation. With these technologies, with the expansion of nuclear power, we can relieve stress on the environment and reduce global demand for fossil fuels."
White House 27/4/05.

Two more reactor licence extensions
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has granted 20-year life extensions to Southern Nuclear Operating Co's two Farley reactors, taking their operating lives to 2037 and 2041. These bring total US licence extensions to 32.
Ux Weekly 16/5/05.

Fine for reactor operator
The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed fining FirstEnergy $5.45 million for restarting the Davis-Besse nuclear power reactor in 2002 without finding and fixing corrosion damage to the reactor vessel head. This is the largest fine ever proposed by the NRC. After inspections revealed the problem, the reactor remained offline for two years.
NRC 21/4/05.

Framatome ANP aims at US market
Areva's US subsidiary, Framatome ANP Inc., has commenced formal discussions with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) aimed at submitting a design certification application for the 1600 MWe EPR reactor design late in 2007. It already has a pre-application review under way for the SWR-1000 design, but has decided that the EPR - now being built in Finland - has better prospects in North America because of its evolutionary technology. The company is seeking a US utility partner in order to secure higher priority attention with NRC, and envisages that the EPR could enter the combined construction and operating licence (COL) process. The main adaptation required is conversion from 50 to 60 Hz (cycle) frequency.
Nucleonics Week 31/3/05, Nuclear Eng Int'l March 2005.

MOX on course for US reactors
After environmental and safety reviews, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has authorised construction of a mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication plant at the DOE Savannah River site in South Carolina by Duke, Cogema, Stone & Webster (DCS). It will make civil MOX from depleted uranium and weapons-grade plutonium, unlike other MOX plants which use reactor-grade plutonium having around one third non-fissile Pu isotopes. US reactors using the fuel will need to licensed for it. DCS is under contract to the National Nuclear Security Administration, which will own the plant. The USA is committed to dispose of 34 tonnes of weapons-grade plutonium as MOX fuel, matching the same in Russia.

Meanwhile the first four MOX fuel assemblies fabricated from US military plutonium have been shipped back to the USA. The plutonium was made into 2 tonnes of pellets at the Cadrache plant and then fabricated into fuel assemblies at the Melox plant in France. They will be used in the Catawba nuclear power plant in South Carolina on a trial basis, and incorporate 140 kg of weapons-grade plutonium.
Platts 23/3/05, NRC 30/3/05, SpentFuel 4/4/05.

US report on used fuel storage
After some months of discussion on what would be in the public version of a National Academies' report on security of interim storage of used fuel at US reactors, it has now been released. It says that some pool storages may pose a risk due to possible high temperature combustion of fuel cladding in the event that water is drained, but that the likelihood of terrorists using spent fuel for a 'dirty bomb' is very low. The report strongly favoured dry cask storage on security grounds. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry say that the report exaggerates the risks and does not take full account of safety measures implemented since 2001.

In fact, about 25 of 64 US nuclear power plants have been moving used fuel out of ponds and into dry cask storage on site. This is largely due to shortage of space which in turn is due to the government's failure to start taking used fuel in 1998.
NucNet news # 66/05, NEI Overview 4/4/05, Dow Jones 29/3/05, NY Times 30/3/05.

EUROPE

Bulgaria commits to new nuclear plant
The Bulgarian government has approved the construction of the country's second nuclear power plant, of 2000 MWe, at Belene on the Danube River near the Romanian border, where development earlier came to a halt. Construction of the first VVER-1000/320 unit started in 1987 but was aborted in 1991 due to lack of funds. Then in 2003 five reactor vendors expressed interest to the Energy Ministry in completing Belene or building new units there. In February 2005 Parsons E&C Europe was appointed architect-engineer for the project to oversee redesigning and installing one incomplete V-320 reactor unit and building a new second one - a V-466 type. This option is expected to cost EUR 2.68 billion. Building two new ones would be EUR 2.73 billion. Tenders have been invited.

For supply of the reactors two consortia are interested: Framatome ANP with Atomstroyexport, and another led by Skoda Praha and Westinghouse. Final bids are expected in August, with commissioning of the first unit about 2011. A new company will be set up to own and operate the plant, with the government holding a majority stake.
Nucleonics Week 7/4/05, Energy in E.Europe 18/2/05, Reuters 8/4/05.

Italian-French accord on EPR investment
Electricite de France and Italy's ENEL have agreed that ENEL will take a share in a series of advanced reactors to be built in France, and 12.5% of the first EPR at Flamanville. It would also be able to draw on up to 1500 MWe of peak capacity from EdF at market prices. ENEL imports some 18% of Italy's power from France.

EdF is seeking German or other investment in a further 37% of the EUR 3 billion Flamanville-3 1700 MWe unit. The cost is high because it is effectively first-of-a-kind, though German utilities have already contributed to development costs and are therefore seeking a better deal then ENEL.
Platts 14/4/05, FT 15/4/05, Nucleonics Week 12/5/05.

German reactor closure
EnBW's 37-year old Obrigheim nuclear reactor has shut down as a result of the government policy to start phasing out nuclear power. The 340 MWe unit is Germany's demonstration PWR, the oldest and smallest in operation, and as announced in 2002, the first to be closed as a result of the policy (Stade's closure in 2003 was on economic grounds). Decommissioning through to 2020 is expected to cost about EUR 500 million. If the present policy continues beyond the next federal election, several large plants will be forced to close, creating a significant supply problem and raising concern from industrial consumers. Wholesale electricity prices have increased by more than a third in the last twelve months (due to rising fossil fuel prices) and closures of large plants will exacerbate this trend. Utilities are preparing for a change in policy after the election however, extending all 17 reactor lifetimes initially to 40 years (now 32 years) and then individually seeking extensions to 60 years as in the USA.
Nucleonics Week 5 & 12/5/05, Ux Weekly 16/5/05.

Ukraine plans 11 new reactors
A nuclear power strategy involving building and commissioning 11 new reactors by 2030 is under consideration in Ukraine to enhance its energy independence. The first pair would be built at Khmelnitski, which already has two units, and an international tender would open up the choice of technology, though earlier plans had VVER-1000 reactors there. The operating lives of existing plants would also be extended subject to safety and economic considerations.

Also proposed are a fuel fabrication plant and a centralised dry storage facility for spent fuel. Financing is likely to be a problem. State utility Energoatom has sought to raise wholesale electricity prices to US 1.8 c/kWh, but the regulator has only allowed 1.3 c/kWh.

Meanwhile the EU has announced that it wants to strengthen its strategic partnership with Ukraine, including funding the new Chernobyl shelter and also upgrading the two new nuclear power reactors which started up last year. The EU aims to support the new government's reforms and assist its greater identification with Europe by increasing its financial assistance through the European Bank for Reconstruction & Development (EBRD) for infrastructure and energy.
NucNet news # 70/05, Nuclear Ru 17/5/05, Nucleonics Week 19/5/05.

UK's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority launched
From 1 April, the British Nuclear Group (part of BNFL) made the transition from owner-operator of most of the UK's nuclear sites to being manager and contractor to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), their new owner. The NDA was set up by the government under the 2004 Energy Act and is focused on the management and clean-up of UK public sector nuclear plants built in the 1940s-60s, on 20 sites. These include 39 reactors, 5 fuel reprocessing plants as well as other fuel cycle and research facilities. It has an annual budget of £2.2 billion, half of this from operational revenue. BNG was hived off by BNFL at the same time, as a decommissioning and clean-up business operating in Europe and the USA, but primarily in UK. It now operates under contracts with NDA of two to four years.
BNG 31/3/05, NDA 31/3/05, Nucleonics Week 31/3/05.

Leak closes Thorp in UK
An April pipe failure inside a hot cell at Thorp - the large Sellafield reprocessing plant managed by British Nuclear Group - has raised questions about the future of the plant, now owned by UK's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The pipe was carrying dissolved spent fuel in nitric acid. The spill was contained in the cell but the incident was provisionally rated 3 on the International Nuclear Event Scale - a serious incident without off-site radiological consequences. The front end of the plant remains closed. Recovery of the spilled liquid and clean-up is expected to take several weeks.
NDA 5/05, Platts 17/5/05.

UK plods ahead on wastes
The UK government-appointed Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) has released its short list of options for long-term management of UK nuclear wastes. These state the obvious, focus on deep geological disposal, and continue the elaborate procrastination of recent years.
CoRWM 4/4/05.

ASIA, AFRICA

General Electric heads for China
Having so far left the Chinese reactor market to others, GE is commending its new reactor designs for the next tranche of orders there. China has had a de facto policy of favouring pressurised water designs, but GE will offer its two boiling water types - the ABWR which is operating in Japan and under construction there and in Taiwan, and the newer ESBWR which features strongly in US plans for new capacity. GE Nuclear and its Japanese partners are in discussion with the China National Nuclear Corporation and provincial governments, who are likely to be influential in technology choice for the next batch of projects.

Meanwhile China Power Investment Corporation has identified a number of inland as well as coastal sites for nuclear plants, and more than 16 provinces, regions and municipalities have announced intentions to build new nuclear plants.
Nucleonics Week 14/4/05, China Daily 7/4/05.

Major contracts for new Chinese plants
For two of the eight new reactors in China, Lingao phase 2, contracts have been let to Alstom for generators (EUR 80 million) and to Areva for coolant and instrument & control systems (EUR 400 million). These will be essentially Chinese-built units. Another pair at Qinshan will be more fully indigenous, and four 3rd-generation types are being bid from overseas. Meanwhile China National Nuclear Corporation says that as many as 30 new reactors may be built at six sites on the eastern seaboard under the forthcoming eleventh five-year plan.
Nucleonics Week 19/5/05.

Green light for Japanese reactor
A permit for construction of unit 3 of the Shimane nuclear power plant has been issued to Chugoku Electric Power by the Ministry of Economy, Trade & Industry. Construction of the 1375 MWe advanced boiling water reactor is due to begin in September, so that it comes on line in 2011.
NucNet news in brief #48/05.

South Korea buys into Kazakh uranium
South Korea's Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy has agreed with Kazakhstan to set up a joint company to develop uranium there. Production of about 1000 t/yr is envisaged from 2010.
Yonhap News 22/4/05.

China accord with Bangladesh
China and Bangladesh have signed an energy co-operation agreement covering coal and nuclear energy. China already has close collaboration on nuclear power with Pakistan.
Reuters 7/4/05.

Pakistan to triple nuclear capacity by 2015
As part of the government's 25 year energy security plan, 900 MWe of new nuclear capacity is planned by 2015 and a further 7500 MWe capacity by 2030. Present capacity is 425 MWe, from two reactors, and work has begun on the site of a third - a 300 MWe Chinese unit.
TradeTech NMR 25/3/05, Platts.

India edges in from the cold
Both Russia and the USA are looking at ways to increase nuclear co-operation with India, following its passing of strong anti-proliferation law which emphasises the stark difference between it and its other non-NPT neighbour. Russia has raised the question of building further large reactors at Kudankulam, and resuming supply of fuel for the old Tarapur plant.

Earlier, after the US Secretary of State announced increased co-operation with India on energy matters, including nuclear power, India ratified the international Convention on Nuclear Safety, which requires its civil plants to be open to international peer reviews. Ratification had been withheld in protest at trade embargoes on nuclear technology. The Indian government then said that "India shares the objective of the Convention on Nuclear Safety of maintaining a high level of nuclear safety worldwide through .... international co-operation, including safety-related technical co-operation." Furthermore, India considers nuclear power "an indispensable component for meeting the development needs of a large and growing economy".
Nucleonics Week 7/4 &12/5/05, Ux Weekly 16/5/05.

Indonesia revives nuclear plans
The Indonesian government has confirmed in principle approval of the country's first nuclear power plant, consisting of four 1000 MWe units, on the Muria peninsula on Central Java. The site had been selected for its tectonic stability. It appears that the project may be tendered in 2008, with construction starting in 2010 and commercial production beginning in 2016. About 45% of Indonesia's electricity is generated by oil and gas, so as well as catering for growth in demand in its most populous region, the move to nuclear power will free up oil for export. A South Korean-sourced nuclear desalination plant is also under consideration.
Agence France Presse 19/4/05.

Local government approval for Japanese MOX plant
The Aomori prefecture has approved construction of Japan Nuclear Fuel's Rokkasho plant to produce mixed oxide (MOX) fuel. An agreement has been signed by the Governor of the prefecture, the mayor of Rokkasho-mura and the head of JNFL. The Governor urged the Federation of Electric Power Companies "to step up their efforts towards realisation of the MOX-use program." The approval is seen as a significant step forward in closing the fuel cycle in Japan, enabling use of plutonium created during reactor operation. It is strongly supported by the federal government, Atomic Energy Commission and utilities. JNFL has now applied for a licence to build and operate the 130 t/yr MOX plant. Construction is expected to begin in 2007 and operation about 2012.
Atoms in Japan 20/4/05.

South Africa contract for fuel plant
The PBMR company has awarded a US$ 20 million contract to Uhde, a local subsidiary of Germany's Thyssenkrupp Engineering, to build a plant at Pelindaba near Pretoria to manufacture the fuel pebbles for the planned demonstration pebble bed modular reactor. The fuel plant is expected to be completed by 2010.
PBMR 28/4/05.

CANADA

Ontario study costs electricity options
A major study commissioned by the Ontario Ministry of Energy has costed four options for electricity in the province, the two main ones being status quo with coal, and replacing the coal with refurbished nuclear and some gas. The figures include external health and environmental costs, and show that overall the status quo is more than twice as expensive as the nuclear/gas replacement. Levelised costs are 16.4 c/kWh for status quo and 7.2 c/kWh for nuclear/gas with the health & environment proportion 77% and 21% respectively. The net benefit of replacing coal with nuclear/gas is C$ 2.44 billion per year. The report is designed to guide energy policy.
DSS cost benefit analysis April 05: www.energy.gov.on.ca

AUSTRALIA & NZ

New Zealand announces carbon tax
The NZ government is to introduce a carbon tax from April 2007, provisionally set at the "modest level" of NZ$15 (USD 11) per tonne CO2. About one third of NZ electricity comes from fossil fuels, mostly gas. The government has retained the option of introducing emissions trading as an alternative to the carbon tax if the international carbon market is functional and the price is reliably below its own NZ$25 cap.
NZ Climate Change Office 4/5/05.

Hot dry rocks show promise
In NE South Australia hot granite 4.4 km deep has successfully produced 10 MW of steam. Geodynamics Ltd has two wells 500m apart and has hydraulically fractured the rock between them in a successful start to its reservoir testing program. If the geothermal reserve is proven at Habanero as expected in August, a demonstration generation plant will be built, giving zero-emission electricity. Then a 275 MWe power station is envisaged with 37 wells drawing energy from 7 km2 of hot rock. Water is recycled.

There is increasing interest in other dry rock geothermal prospects in South Australia, with many granites ranging 15-40 ppm uranium and 15-40 ppm thorium, but some are ten times this. Typical granite is about 4 ppm U. The geothermal heat is mostly from radiogenic decay in the uranium and thorium series.
Geodynamics 26/4 & 10/5/05, AFR 7/5/05.

INTERNATIONAL

Environmentalist attitudes to change?
Stewart Brand, founder of The Whole Earth Catalogue, has written about Environmental Heresies in the May issue of MIT's Technology Review. "Over the next ten years, I predict, the mainstream of the environmental movement will reverse its opinion and activism in four major areas: population growth, urbanisation, genetically engineered organisms, and nuclear power.

"The success of the environmental movement is driven by two powerful forces - romanticism and science - that are often in opposition. The romantics identify with natural systems; the scientists study natural systems. The romantics are moralistic, rebellious against the perceived dominant power, and combative against any who appear to stray from the true path. They hate to admit mistakes or change direction. The scientists are ethicalistic, rebellious against any perceived dominant paradigm, and combative against each other. For them, admitting mistakes is what science is.

"There are a great many more environmental romantics than there are scientists. That's fortunate, since their inspiration means that most people in developed societies see themselves as environmentalists. But it also means that scientific perceptions are always a minority view, easily ignored, suppressed, or demonized if they don't fit the consensus story line.

"There has yet to be a public debate among environmentalists about genetic engineering. Most of the scare stories that go around have as much substance as urban legends about toxic rat urine on Coke can lids."

But "the most profound environmental problem of all [is] global climate change. ... So everything must be done to increase energy efficiency and decarbonize energy production. ... The only technology ready to fill the gap and stop the carbon dioxide loading of the atmosphere is nuclear power.

"Nuclear certainly has problems - accidents, waste storage, high construction costs, and the possible use of its fuel in weapons. It also has advantages besides the overwhelming one of being atmospherically clean. The industry is mature, with a half-century of experience and ever improved engineering behind it. Problematic early reactors like the ones at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl can be supplanted by new, smaller-scale, meltdown-proof reactors like the ones that use the pebble-bed design. Nuclear power plants are very high yield, with low-cost fuel. Finally, they offer the best avenue to a "hydrogen economy", combining high energy and high heat in one place for optimal hydrogen generation.

"The environmental movement has a quasi-religious aversion to nuclear energy. The few prominent environmentalists who have spoken out in its favour - Gaia theorist James Lovelock, Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore, Friend of the Earth Hugh Montefiore - have been privately anathematized by other environmentalists. Public excoriation, however, would invite public debate, which so far has not been welcome."
http://www.techreview.com/

NPT conference in May
State parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which entered force in 1970 are convening in New York to review the NPT's operation over the last five years and the challenges that have arisen both under it and around it. Exposure of North Korean and Iranian breaches of the NPT have given rise to calls for stricter interpretation of Article IV concerning "the inalienable right of all the Parties ... to develop ... nuclear energy for peaceful purposes". It is suggested that countries must first demonstrate full compliance with Articles I, II & III of the treaty regarding avoiding proliferation and demonstrating that, and also that the right to develop proliferation-sensitive technologies is not inherent in the right to develop and enjoy the benefits of nuclear power.

Developing countries however are suspicious of moves to limit them, especially to preclude uranium enrichment, and some assert that the NPT's five nuclear weapons states have made too little progress in disarming. Meanwhile two of the three nuclear-capable states outside the NPT - India and Pakistan - loom large on the world stage for different reasons. India for having an ambitious nuclear power program advanced with careful regard for non-proliferation, and Pakistan which seems to have supplied sensitive technologies far and wide, contributing substantially to present concerns. Finding a way to bring both these countries under the NPT would be a major step forward, but is likely beyond the hopes of this conference.

Much attention is likely to be on improved verification within member countries, and in particular on confirming the role of the IAEA's model Additional Protocol as the NPT verification standard. This is supplementary to each state's safeguards agreement with the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency and is so far in force in less than half the NPT parties, though two thirds of the states with significant nuclear activities have signed an Additional Protocol. Australia is to make the Additional Protocol a pre-condition for the supply of uranium to non nuclear weapons states.
Trust & Verify March-April 2005, IAEA Bulletin March 2005, Minister Foreign Affairs 4/5/05.

French report of low dose radiation
The French Academies of Medicine and Science have issued a report on the carcinogenic effect of low-dose radiation. On the basis of emerging radiobiological knowledge it questions the validity of current means of assessing the risks of low doses (less than 100 mSv) of radiation and even more for very low doses (less than 10 msv). these means involve extrapolating to zero from known effects of high doses. it notes that epidemiological studies have not been able to confirm significant risks to populations from doses below 100 mSv.
Academy of Medicine, April 2005.

Uranium price booms
In the last eight weeks the spot price of uranium has increased more than one third to the highest level in 25 years - US$ 29/lb U3O8. The latest sharp rise coincides with the listing of a Canadian company, UPC, which is set up to buy and hold uranium in anticipation of further price increases.
Ux Weekly 9/5/05, Platts 10/5/05.

Regulatory collaboration helps design licensing
French nuclear safety authorities (DGSNR) have been working closely with their Finnish counterparts (STUK) on licensing the EPR advanced reactor design, now being built in Finland and in 2007 to get under way in France. The French authorities consider this to be an excellent model of international collaboration and have now offered to assist the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in respect to the Framatome ANP application for EPR design certification in USA. They also said that they would welcome NRC input in the event of a US vendor seeking design approval in France, eg Westinghouse for AP1000, or GE for ESBWR designs. While this is not contemplated, those designs are likely to be considered elsewhere in Europe.

DGSNR has a senior STUK official in an advisory role, and DGSNR inspectors are monitoring fabrication of large components of Finland's new reactor for STUK.

In the USA, the NRC has made it plain that it doesn't have the resources for considering licence applications for unfamiliar designs, such as the small sodium-cooled 4S 'nuclear battery' proposed for remote towns in Alaska, or any high-temperature gas-cooled reactor.
Nucleonics Week 7/4/05, Platts 6/4/05.


CONFERENCES

12 to 15 July 2005
Nuclear Power Asia Pacific Conference, Conrad Hotel, Hong Kong
Contact Amy Wang: Tel +61 2 9005 0760; Fax 9281 3950
E-mail: amy.wang@terrapinn.com
Web: http://www.terrapinn.com/2005/nps_au/


Briefing & mines papers updated in last two months include:

Reactor table
Economics of nuclear power
Plans for new reactors worldwide
World energy needs & nuclear power
US nuclear power industry
Processing of used nuclear fuel
Nuclear power in India and Pakistan
Nuclear power in China
Nuclear power in South Korea
Nuclear power in Germany
Advanced nuclear power reactors
Small nuclear power reactors
Generation IV reactors
Nuclear energy prospects in Australia
Nuclear energy prospects for NZ
Australian uranium mines (mines paper)
Aust U deposits & prospective mines (UIC mines paper)
Uranium exploration in Australia (UIC mines paper)


Published Uranium Prices


20 May US$ 29/lb U3O8, (US$ 75.35/kgU)

See also Ux Consulting graphs

World reactor changes
US: Indian Point 3 uprate by 45 MWe
Argentina: 1 @ 692 MWe to construction
Germany: Obrigheim 340 MWe closed


URANIUM INFORMATION CENTRE Ltd. A.B.N. 30 005 503 828

GPO Box 1649N, Melbourne 3001, Australia
phone (03) 9629 7744
fax (03) 9629 7207


ISSN 1326-4788
Return to newsletter index
Return to home page