The WNU will not be new campus, but a network for co-ordinating and supporting established institutions and boosting their endeavours and profiles.
The WNU network spans some 25 nations and will be coordinated from a small headquarters in London. It comprises highly-regarded universities and research centres with strong programs in nuclear science and engineering.
The WNU's main function will be to foster cooperation among its participating institutions - seeking synergies and mutual benefit while setting and enforcing high academic standards. A key role will be to facilitate distance-learning techniques that make courses at any WNU university available to students throughout the network.
Within each country, a lead institution or consortium will "pilot" that country's participation, and will encourage and facilitate involvement by other institutions in the WNU partnership.
"As nations struggle to find that will, our role in the nuclear industry must be twofold. First, we must prepare substantially - with skilled people and advanced technology. Second, through our performance - and strong efforts in public persuasion - we must do all possible to build the political will needed for a clean-energy transformation. The World Nuclear University can help on both counts."
Ritch went on to point out that the political will to support a shift to clean energy would be encouraged by the WNU's partnership of wealthiest and most populous nations in developing both skilled people and advanced nuclear technology, and thus inspiring a young generation of nuclear students in countries around the world. This "will send a message that cannot be denied."
Prominent environmentalist James Lovelock supported the WNU and the role of nuclear energy despite well-nurtured "false fears" about it. He said that "the truly dangerous thing we do is burn fossil fuels". Renewables could only provide a "meagre supply" of energy relative to today's needs.
Nuclear power remains the one proven technology able to produce clean energy on a large scale. Both electricity and direct thermal applications for hydrogen production, desalination, and other industrial uses are in mind for the WNU, together with expanding other applications of nuclear science and technology in food, sustainable agriculture, medicine, nutrition, industrial development, management of fresh water resources and environmental protection.
The scope of studies will be from fuel and isotope supply to decommissioning and waste management, and even the management of the legacies of early weapons and power programs.
With major countries expanding nuclear energy's role and new countries poised to introduce it, the key issue is not whether the use of nuclear technology will grow worldwide but whether it will grow fast enough to make a decisive contribution to the global imperative of sustainable development.
A corollary question is whether the world's institutional support for nuclear power and other nuclear applications will be configured so as to realise the full environmental and developmental value of this technology while managing all associated risks.
The World Nuclear University is supported by IAEA and NEA, representing the inter-governmental nuclear community, and by WANO and WNA, representing the global nuclear fuel cycle and utility industry. It will provide a strong basis for positive answers to these questions.
Overall, the WNU is expected to be an inspiration and a bulwark - advancing the many benefits of nuclear energy while fortifying institutional and technological barriers against misuse.
At the launch, the new Chancellor, Dr Hans Blix, said that the WNU would be "a thoroughly modern university network of mature institutions" with cross-fertilisation and critical thinking being at the top of its agenda.
Sig Berg, Managing Director of WANO, observed that the average age of the nuclear professionals bringing China's Qinshan phase 2 reactors into commission this year was 26, compared with twice that for US nuclear professionals. In recognition that nuclear science and technology are pervasive in advanced and in modernising economies, the WNU will seek to attract and support students from both developed and developing nations.
Assembling a highly experienced core faculty will, as an ancillary benefit, provide a prestigious team that can be used selectively to educate and advise influential non-experts, including policymakers, environmentalists, international development officials and media professionals.
In operation, the WNU's philosophy will be one of exploration, as its academic, industry and governmental supporters and participants collaborate. The WNU's initial agenda will include promoting student exchange internationally, building scholarship support, involvement of WANO to fortify safety culture, and promoting innovative reactor design and fuel cycles.
The foundation of the WNU commemorates the jubilee of President Eisenhower's Atoms for Peace initiative. In the 21st century, Atoms-for-Peace means Atoms-for-Sustainable-Development. The WNU will be funded through a foundation, will seek programmatic support from the IAEA and national governments, and will be led by two notable nuclear statesmen:
Argentina: Balseiro Institute - Atomic Energy Commission
Australia: Australian Nuclear Science & Technology Organisation (ANSTO)
Austria: Atomic Institute of the Austrian Universities
Belgium: Belgian Nuclear Research Centre (SCK*CEN)
Brazil: Brazilian Nuclear Energy Commission (CNEN)
Bulgaria: University of Sofia and Technical University of Sofia
Canada: University Network of Excellence in Nuclear Engineering (UNENE)
China: Institute of Nuclear Energy Technology of Tsinghua University (Beijing)
Czech Republic: Czech Technical Univ. in Prague, & Nuclear Research Institute (REZ)
Finland: Helsinki University of Technology (HUT), & University of Lappeenranta (LUT)
France: Institut National des Sciences et Techniques Nucleaires (INSTN)
Germany: Technical University Muenchen, & Network of Competence in Nuclear Technology
India: Bhabha Atomic Research Centre Training School
Israel: Shalhaveth Freier Center for Peace, Science and Technology
Italy: IUSS-University of Pavia & CIRTEN Consortium
Japan: Tokyo University & Tokyo Institute of Technology
Republic of Korea: Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) &
Korean Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST)
Mexico: National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)
Pakistan: Pakistan Institute for Engineering & Applied Applications
Russia: Kurchatov Institute and Moscow Engineering Physics Institute (MEPhI)
South Africa: University of Potchefstroom
Spain: Polytechnique University of Madrid
Sweden: Swedish Centre for Nuclear Technology
United Kingdom: Nuclear Academics Industrial Liaison Seminar (NAILS) and University of Manchester/UMIST
USA: Texas A&M (leader of Southwest Consortium), Oregon State Univ. (leader of the Western Nuclear Science Alliance) & Argonne National Lab (coordinator for US DOE labs)
also: Europe-wide: European Nuclear Engineering Network (ENEN) (17-countries)
www.world-nuclear-university.org
AmerGen represented a bold initiative in 1997, scooping up for some $53 million three undervalued power plants and bringing them under more rational and productive management. In 1999 AmerGen won the "Boldest Successful Investment Decision" award from the Financial Times in New York. Its action was cited as "a bold investment which has created new confidence in the US nuclear industry". The truth of that was borne out by the rapid and more than tenfold increase in price of older US nuclear plants as other ownership consolidation took place in the following two years.
Platts 11/9/03, NucNet business news # 52/03, cf WNA/UIC paper US Nuclear power industry.
Further management rationalisation
The utility Entergy Nuclear has signed an agreement to take over management of Nebraska's Cooper nuclear power plant, an 800 MWe boiling water reactor with a poor operating record. Entergy will be paid a fee and will be eligible for up to 50% more in incentive payments for improved safety and regulatory performance. It will be reimbursed for all employee-related expenses. Nebraska Public Power District will retain ownership, be the sole operator and licensee and will take all power produced. Entergy, the second largest US nuclear operator, sees such arrangements as a potential growth area. It will also seek further nuclear plant acquisitions, having made five purchases 1999-2002.
Nucleonics Week 18/9/03, NucNet business news # 54.1/03.
The 103 US reactors last year maintained their position as lowest-cost producers of electricity, at 1.71 c/kWh for fuel, operation and maintenance. This includes 0.45c fuel cost, of which about 0.1 cent would be the ex-mine uranium before manufacture into fuel. Coal came in at 1.85 c/kWh (1.36c of this for fuel), and gas was 4.06 c/kWh (3.44c of this being fuel). The implications of increased fossil fuel costs stand out. Reactor capacity factors reached an average of 91.5% - a record.
NEI Nuclear Energy Overview 25/8/03.
A two-year interdisciplinary study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has examined the prospects of nuclear energy, primarily in the USA, to 2050. It sets out to analyse what would be required to retain nuclear energy as a significant option for electricity supplies while reducing greenhouse gas emissions as a high priority. It is guided by a threefold growth scenario, taking world nuclear capacity to 1000 GWe. For this, capital costs must be contained, wastes must be credibly disposed, and safety and non-proliferation assurance given. The report disagrees with any moves to increase reprocessing of spent fuel, both on cost/resources grounds and in relation to proliferation resistance.
Particular recommendations for the USA include:
...and Dept of Energy opts for more research
The MIT report is in stark contrast to a US Department of Energy report to Congress in January on Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative - the future path for advanced spent fuel treatment and transmutation research. While essentially scientific, and fairly inconclusive politically, it pointed the way to advanced reprocessing and plutonium-burning technologies on the back end of the present fuel cycle, and - longer term - new fuel cycles tied to Generation IV reactor technology, notably fast reactors.
The Future of Nuclear Power, MIT, July 2003; DOE Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, Jan 2003.
The US Department of Energy has released a draft strategic plan with a 25 year perspective. It sets out 7 long-term goals, including "developing technologies that foster a diverse supply of reliable, affordable and environmentally-sound energy", and getting the Yucca Mountain waste repository into operation by 2010. Advanced nuclear energy technologies "can play an increasingly important role", "America's ageing electricity (grid) infrastructure" will be upgraded, hydrogen production and infrastructure developed, and fusion research pursued.
DOE 6/8/03.
North American blackout well timed for US policy
The blackout on 14 August affecting 50 million people in the USA and Canada occurred as US Congress negotiators prepared to assemble composite legislation from House and Senate energy bills passed recently. Whatever initiated the situation in Ohio, it is clear that profound deficiencies in the "Third World" US grid system was the broader cause of the problem. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission attempted to address this 14 years ago, the President flagged it in his May 2001 energy policy, and it has been widely acknowledged elsewhere. Congestion has been increasing rapidly. However, with a patchwork of fairly independent states - some with deregulated power markets and some not - opposition to reform has prevailed in every quarter - utilities, regulators, state politicians, property owners, etc. The likely cost of upgrading the physical assets - perhaps $55 billion - is also a disincentive, given politically-imposed constraints on recovering it from consumers.
However, the prospect of establishing large regional transmission authorities controlling dramatically-upgraded grid systems which are independent of generators now seems closer, if eminent domain powers can be invoked and local control relinquished without ending up in a legal morass or falling victim to state politics. Power costs will also need to increase to fund upgrades, but the US Energy Secretary estimates that at present electrical transmission and distribution failures cost some $199 billion per year - nearly four times the estimated cost of fixing the physical assets.
The report of a 12-month Electric Power Research Institute study was released soon after the blackout and provided support for market and regulatory reform. It highlighted underinvestment in the electricity sector - during the 1990s capital investment averaged 12% of revenue, less than half of historic minimums. It called for unleashing technological innovation by developing new energy technologies including advanced nuclear, clean coal and renewables to ensure energy security. The report notes that US nuclear plants have now reached levels of productivity which make them the "workhorses" of many utilities. (see: www.epri.com)
During the crisis, some 62,000 MWe of load was lost in a cascade effect and nine US nuclear power reactors in four states and 12 other US plants shut down in 3 minutes, also 12 Ontario reactors either shut down or reduced to 60% power and eight of these experienced complications in reconnecting promptly.
FT 16, 18 & 22/8/03, IHT 18/8/03, NucNet news # 253/03, Nucleonics Week 21/8/03, Nuclear Energy Overview 1/9/03.
After many years negotiation, the USA and China have signed an agreement which will protect US vendors' rights to nuclear technology and services sold to China, and would specifically preclude any transfer to other countries such as Pakistan, or any use for other than peaceful purposes. The agreement opens the way for greater participation by the US nuclear industry in China's growing nuclear power program. Reciprocal assurances will enable collaboration on a modular high-temperature gas-cooled pebble bed reactor.
Platts 16/9/03, Nucleonics Week 18/9/03.
To expedite passage of the energy legislation, the US Senate abandoned the energy bill it had been debating and passed 84-14 their version of last year's energy bill (passed then 88-11) as the basis of the legislation. They agreed that it would be subject to additional provisions in the House-Senate conference which is now working on assembling a final version. While R&D, production and energy diversity provisions from the original Senate bill are likely to be added, the government loan guarantee provision for building six new reactors may not. Other incentives however are likely.
NEI Nuclear Energy Overview 4/8/03, Nucleonics Week 7/8/03.
France's Environment Minister relaxed the cooling water outlet limit for seven nuclear sites (24 reactors) and four fossil fuel power plant sites until the end of September in order to allow the plants to continue operating. The limit was one degree higher for most of these and three degrees for Tricastin, which supplies power to the Eurodif enrichment plant, and three others (10 reactors). The Eurodif plant dumps its adiabatic heat through cooling towers, as do a few French reactors, but this is less efficient in hot weather so may constrain plant outputs also. (In the event only four nuclear plants and one coal-fired plant utilised the exemptions.) The Doel plant in Belgium was permitted to discharge water at 33°C. German nuclear plants were allowed a two degree increment for two weeks, and coal-fired plants were running at much reduced output. No French or Belgian plants had to shut down due to heat, though a planned outage was brought forward two weeks for Obrigheim in Germany. UK's operating reactors are all on the coast, so were unaffected. No safety issues were involved at nuclear sites.
While fossil fuel and nuclear stations share precisely the same problem, in practice nuclear plants (supplying 75% of French electricity) were hit harder because often there is often a much higher concentration of generating capacity at a single site. Meanwhile electricity demand soared due to air conditioning loads, and the usual high level of French power exports to UK and Italy dropped. Hydro reservoirs were too low to help, and wind turbines were practically idle in Germany and not much better in UK. Threatened rolling brownouts in France were averted due to the advent of cooler weather.
Later in August Romania's Cernavoda nuclear power plant closed down for three weeks due to low water levels in the Danube - the lowest for 160 years and with the flow one third of that normal in August.
NucNet news # 247, 249 & 259/03, Nucleonics Week 14 & 21/8/, 4/9/03, Times 15/8/03.
Several newspaper articles have suggested that BNFL's £1.8 billion oxide reprocessing plant (Thorp) at Sellafield will close about 2010 because the plant's commercial order book does not go past that date. BNFL has responded that Thorp's future depends on its customers' requirements and on the policies of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which assumes ownership in 2005. Last year BNFL passed a milestone when it completed the reprocessing of 50,000 tonnes of spent fuel at Sellafield, over 50 years. Thorp has operated since 1994, but at only two thirds of its 850 t/yr capacity and renegotiation of contracts with British Energy will have eroded profit margins on reprocessing their (AGR) fuel.
NucNet news # 262/03, Platts 26/8/03, BNFL 26/8/03.
French electricity cost study looks to 2015
A new French government cost study, the latest in a long series, assesses the relative costs of different means of electricity generation starting operation in 2015, in 2003 Euros. In terms of overnight capital costs, the European Pressurised Water reactor (EPR) could be built for EUR 1043 /kW. But taking into account interest (8% discount rate), project management etc and also decommissioning, the cost is EUR 1663 /kW. This compares with only EUR 569 /kW for gas - CCGT, and EUR 1400 or 1276 /kW for coal. Actual power costs (8% discount rate, 8000 hrs per year) are 3.04 c/kWh for the EPR, 3.50 c/kWh for CCGT and 3.37 or 3.2 c/kWh for coal. If externalities (external costs) are included, these become 3.30 c/kWh for EPR, 4.24 c/kWh for CCGT and 4.95 or 4.81 c/kWh for coal. The study assumes that a series of ten EPRs would be built - if only four, then the unit capital cost would increase by 6%.
Framatome ANP has said that it will consider applying to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission for certification of the EPR once it has a European order for it - expected to be from Finland and/or France. Meanwhile it has another reactor design at NRC pre-certification stage.
Nucleonics Week 11/9/03, http://ww.industrie.gouv.fr/energie/electric/se_ele_a10.htm
German energy debate hots up
Disagreement in Germany's coalition government about the levels of subsidies provided for wind generation has provoked wider discussion. A bill to increase subsidies for power generation from wind to about EUR 2.5 billion per year has prompted calls from several quarters to abandon the country's nuclear phase-out plans, though it will be some years before these begin to affect supply. An Economy Ministry study shows that 40% of the electricity price charged by utilities to households is simply to cover subsidies on wind power and coal production (for business the subsidy proportion is 33%). Coal (including lignite) provides about half of the country's electricity, and nuclear 30% (without any subsidy). Significant investment in new base-load generating plant is likely to be required by the end of the decade.
Nucleonics Week 11/9/03.
The European Commission's Research Directorate has published a new report on the ExternE project, which quantifies socio-environmental damage from energy uses, in this case electricity generation and transport. This is to enable policy actions to be "taken to tax the most damaging fuels and technologies (like oil and coal) or to encourage those with lower socio-environmental cost (such as renewables or nuclear). The internalisation of external costs will also give impetus to the emergence of clean technologies."
Compared with electricity cost of about EUR 4 cents/kWh, the additional external costs for coal mostly range 3-8 cents, gas 1-3 cents, nuclear 0.2-0.5 cents and wind up to 0.25 cents.
EC 2003, External Costs - Research results on socio-environmental damages due to electricity and transport, also www.externe.info.
The Ukrainian government has announced that it will no longer pursue western loans to finish building its Khmelnitski-2 and Rovno-4 nuclear reactors. The European Bank of Reconstruction and Development had offered US$ 215 million, but with unacceptable conditions. Western funding was promised in 1995 as part of a deal to shut down Chernobyl. Ukraine is determined to have the reactors operating late 2004, and says that they will be completed to the same international standard as envisaged with western participation. Funding will now be from a US$ 44 million Russian credit facility, plus US$ 94 million in bonds issued by utility Energoatom.
Nucleonics Week 25/9/03.
Romania plans further Cernavoda reactors
Cernavoda unit 2 - a Candu-6 type reactor - is now about 50% complete, with grid connection expected in 2006. At the WNA symposium it was confirmed that unit 3 is now expected to be built and operational about 2011 on a build-operate-transfer contract, with units 4 & 5 following to 2020 so that nuclear provides 20% of power. Romanian nuclear power costs at USD 2.3 c/kWh are significantly lower than those for its fossil fuel-based power (2.54 - 5.81 c/kWh). Nuclear fuel is made in Romania.
Russia boosts nuclear exports
Russia's Minatom expects to increase its exports by 16% to over US$ 3 billion this year, mostly of nuclear fuel cycle services, where it claims a 40% share of world exports. It is also involved with building five VVER-1000 reactors abroad - in Iran, India and China. A second unit for Iran is planned.
NucNet business news # 51.2/03.
Soon after, the Guangdong Nuclear Power Group announced that preliminary work for the first two of six units of the 8 GWe Yangjiang nuclear power plant had begun and official approval from the National Reform & Development Commission was expected next year. It expects construction of the first two 1300 MWe units (type and source unspecified) to start in 2004, and operation in 2011. Electricity demand has risen 18% in 7 months of 2003, and is set to continue rising. The project has been under active consideration since 1994 and local authorities have set aside 47 hectares on the coast for it, 500 km west of Hong Kong.
Nucleonics Week 21/8/03, NucNet news # 245 & 255/03, Dow Jones 8/8/03, China Daily 4/9/03.
A new report from the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) calls for Japan to hold firm to its nuclear energy policy which promotes fast reactors and the use of plutonium in mixed oxide (MOX) fuel. The AEC working group which compiled the report had heard from a cross-section of society, including the media. It says that Japan is about to embark upon a new stage of its nuclear development with the advent of commercial reprocessing domestically and use of MOX fuel. However, the plutonium should be managed with greater transparency at the level of utilities and fuel cycle companies, not simply at the national level.
NucNet news # 243/03.
The board of the International Atomic Energy Agency has given Iran until the end of October to resolve outstanding questions about nuclear facilities and materials. Issues mainly relate to Iran's centrifuge enrichment program, including the presence of traces of high-enriched uranium. Failing resolution, it will be reported to the UN Security Council as being in breach of its safeguards obligations and would then face international sanctions.
Earlier, the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran announced that a second 1000 MWe unit is to be built at Bushehr alongside the one almost completed by Atomstroyexport, part of Russia's Minatom. Contracts are being drawn up, and feasibility studies on a further 5000 MWe have been ordered. Iran is also developing a 40 MW heavy water-moderated "research" reactor fuelled by natural uranium, very similar to those used by India and Israel to make plutonium for nuclear weapons, though apparently this will be under IAEA safeguards.
Nucleonics Week 11 & 18/9/03, NucNet news # 252 & 273/03.
Canada funds new reactor development
Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) has received C$ 46 million above its normal C$ 133 million budget for 2003-04 to progress development and licensing of the ACR-700 reactor design. In answer to critics, the Natural Resources minister referred to the "huge potential for the Advanced Candu Reactor" and pointed out that wind energy had received C$ 250 million from the taxpayer.
Ottawa Citizen 24/9/03.
Australian uranium production
Australian uranium production for the six months to 30 June was 4415 tonnes U3O8 (3744 tU), reflecting depressed output from Olympic Dam, and including 322 t from Beverley. The year's total production to June was 9149 tonnes (7758 tU) with exports of 9592 tonnes U3O8.
In Brazil, the Electrobras utility is seeking a private partner to provide US$ 1.8 billion to complete the 1245 MWe Angra-3 reactor, a PWR and twin of Angra-2. All the main components were supplied by Siemens KWU in the early 1980s but little construction has been done and five years will be needed for completion.
Nucleonics Week 25/9/03, Ux Weekly 22/9/03, NEW 1-2/2001.
The South African utility Eskom is planning a safety upgrade of its two reactors at Koeberg in line with those undertaken by EdF in France, since these are the same type as EdF's fleet of 34 900 MWe reactors. Having been relatively high-cost producers until the m id 1990s, shorter outages and greater efficiency - now approaching 85% load factor - has brought the operating cost down to that of Eskom's coal-fired plants, and to less than half that of US plants - USD 0.8 c/kWh in 2002. Fuel burn-up is being pushed towards 60,000 MWd/t - about the highest in the world, which will require 4.9% enriched fuel (now 4.4%) and special licensing.
Eskom is also planning to build the 125 MWe demonstration Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PMBR) at Koeberg.
Nucleonics Week 4/9/03.
Speakers at the 9th International Conference on Environmental Remediation & Radioactive Waste Management (ICEM'03) contrasted US and UK approaches to legacy issues and reflected on evolving approaches to waste disposal and remediation. The US task and associated costs seem to be about four times larger than the UK ones (aside from the funded nuclear waste disposal and decommissioning arising from the current civil program). UK Nirex put the view that legitimacy in waste disposal required not only transparency, technical efficiency and cost-effectiveness, but also a perception of fairness, which could properly include compensation for communities willing to host waste facilities.
ARIUS 24/9/03.
The death toll in China's coal mines has increased 25% this year and includes serious accidents in the larger state-owned mines, formerly the safest. In the first eight months of 2003, 2452 coal mine accidents claimed 4150 lives, 70% of these being in small, unlicensed operations. Three quarters of China's electricity comes from coal, though much coal is also used domestically.
China Daily 19/9/03.
Over 1982-84, some 1700 apartments were built using reinforcing steel which was contaminated with cobalt-60. From 1992, the contamination was progressively discovered and the last of 1600 residents receiving more than 5 mSv/yr were removed in 2003. The Atomic Energy Commission made very detailed measurements and calculated doses for some 10,000 exposed residents. For the 1100 residents of heavily-contaminated apartments (receiving >15 mSv/yr in 1994), the mean annual dose to individuals in 1983 was estimated to have been 525 mSv/yr and the mean total dose to an individual (1983-2003) was estimated to be 4000 mSv. For the medium contamination group of 900 people (5-15 mSv/yr in 1994) these figures were 60 mSv/yr and 420 mSv respectively. Medical attention was available for all those exposed to more than 1 mSv/yr. Those most heavily exposed received careful medical examination, including chromosomal aberration analyses, but only reduced incidence of ill effects were found.
The Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model of radiation exposure would predict some 70 excess cancer deaths among the 10,000 people due to the chronic exposure over 20 years (on top of 217 normal cancer deaths). Instead, there were only 7 cancer deaths in total. Thus the cancer rate was only 3.24% of the Taiwan norm. The prevalence of hereditary defects in their offspring was also reduced, in this case to 6.5% of normal. The 14 authors of a study reporting these results suggested that it showed that chronic whole-body radiation "is always beneficial to human health, and shows particular promise in the promotion of immunity to cancers and hereditary diseases in relative higher doses in a manner similar to a vaccine." However, they said, acute exposure at similar levels would be expected to cause cancers, and in some cases radiation sickness.
Chen, W.L. et al, 2003, The beneficial health effects of chronic radiation experienced in the incident of Co-60 contaminated apartments in Taiwan. HPS paper.
Reactor table
Advanced reactors
Small nuclear power reactors
Generation IV reactors
Nuclear power in UK (new)
US nuclear power industry
Nuclear power in Russia
Nuclear power in Ukraine
Nuclear power in China
Nuclear power in India and China
India and Pakistan
Early Soviet reactors and EU accession
Australia's uranium & who buys it
Economics of nuclear power
Research reactors
Thorium
Renewable energy & electricity
Accelerator-driven nuclear energy
Decommissioning nuclear facilities
Australia's uranium mines (UIC mines paper)
Jabiluka background (UIC mines paper)
See also Ux Consulting graphs
World reactor changes
Canada: Pickering 4 @ 515 MWe restarted from being laid-up.
China: add 4 planned @950 MWe (Lingdong & Sanmen)
Iran: add 1 planned @ 950 MWe
Pakistan: add 1 planned @ 300 MWe
China: add 2 proposed @ 1300 MWe (Yangjiang)
Romania: add 3 x 655 MWe proposed
Iran: add 3 x 950 MWe proposed
S.Africa: add 1 x 125 MWe proposed
GPO Box 1649N, Melbourne 3001, Australia
phone (03) 9629 7744
e-mail: uic@mpx.com.au
fax (03) 9629 7207