The issues of climate change and energy security will play an increasingly important role in a German debate on whether to extend nuclear power beyond 2021, Vattenfall chief executive Lars Josefsson said on Wednesday.
At a news conference announcing the appointment of former International Energy Agency head Hans Blix to Vattenfall's nuclear safety council, Josefsson said the debate about nuclear power in other countries had advanced further than in Germany.
The chief executive of the Swedish parent company spoke in Germany where its Vattenfall Europe subsidiary provides power to northern and eastern parts of the country. He noted Poland and others plan to expand nuclear power use.
"The discussion in Germany will continue," Josefsson said. "There are two important components of the discussion: the climate change problem and, secondly, energy security. These two issues will push the discussion forward in Germany."
Nuclear supplies just under 30 percent of Germany's power needs with about half coming from coal and a small but growing share from renewable energy. So far the government is sticking to a 2001 law to phase out nuclear reactors by 2021.
Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats want to extend the use of nuclear power and have the backing of German industry, which is worried about future energy supplies. But the Social Democrat coalition partners oppose any change in the law.
"The issue of extending nuclear power use in Germany is a political question," Josefsson said.
He added: "In Germany it is not possible to build new nuclear power plants at the moment. Which energy sources Germany uses in the future is a question for the Germans to decide.
"As a company with international operations, we're seeing that many countries are putting together plans to build new nuclear power plants. Poland, for example, wants to build new nuclear power plants.
"We're saying 'we're ready and have the know-how," he said. "In the battle against climate change, we believe nuclear power is indispensable. If Germany comes to a different conclusion, that's okay for Vattenfall. We live in a dynamic world."
Josefsson said Vattenfall as a group aims to provide climate-neutral power by 2050 at the latest, up from about 50 percent CO2-free energy production currently.
He said the 2050 target will be met with three sources: renewables, carbon capture and storage (CCS) coal, and nuclear.
"Our goal is only achievable with all three," he said. The Nordic countries naturally have a large share of hydropower.
On Tuesday, Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Poland's top utility will oversee construction of up to two nuclear plants as part of a wider push for diversification.
Separately, Vattenfall Europe AG chief executive Tuomo Hatakka said he could not say how long Germany's Kruemmel and Brunsbuettel nuclear plants would remain offline.
Both have been grounded for repairs and checks since a fire in 2007, which triggered short circuits.
This has caused embarassment for Vattenfall but has also allowed the operator to wait out if Germany's anti-nuclear laws are reviewed should there be a change of government in 2010.
(Source: Reuters)
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
German E.ON, RWE team up to build UK nuclear plants
Rival German utilities RWE (RWEG.DE) and E.ON EONG.DE have joined forces to build new nuclear power stations in Britain.
E.ON UK and RWE npower said on Wednesday they wanted to build and operate at least six gigawatts of nuclear power stations in the UK as part of the British government's plan to replace ageing reactors.
"We welcome and support the UK's decision to expand its power generation by introducing a new generation of nuclear power stations," E.ON chief executive Wulf Bernotat said.
"We are pleased to be working with RWE, who we see as a skilled, experienced and reliable partner to develop new nuclear power in the UK."
E.ON and RWE own and operate nuclear power plants in Germany but have been looking abroad to build and operate new ones because the German government plans to close all the country's reactors by 2021 and has no plans to build new ones.
Germany's two biggest utilities, normally fierce competitors, said their combined financial strength would help pay for the expensive and lengthy contruction process.
"E.ON is the ideal partner for UK development given that our businesses have complementary strengths and capabilities, and a successful track record in nuclear power," Andrew Duff, Chief Executive of RWE npower, said.
"The UK power industry needs significant investment to replace ageing coal and nuclear plant and to drive the change to a lower carbon economy ... Large infrastructure projects can bring major benefits to the UK economy through jobs, direct investment and supply chain opportunities."
French nuclear energy giant EDF (EDF.PA) has led the push to replace Britain's atomic energy facilities and is buying British Energy (BGY.L), the owner of most of the existing plants, so it can build at least four new power stations at those sites. RWE npower got grid connection rights for a 3.6 gigawatt nuclear plant at Wylfa in north Wales last year and may buy farmland close to the existing power station to build it on, while E.ON has bought land at another site at Oldbury in Gloucestershire.
"Nuclear energy is a growing part of the global energy supply for the foreseeable future. It forms a key part of RWE's strategy to deliver growth and to reduce CO2," RWE's CEO Jurgen Grossmann said.
"This creates attractive business opportunities for RWE." E.ON picked Areva (CEPFi.PA) and Siemens (SIEGn.DE) as partners to build new reactors in Britain in April 2008 but the new joint venture could also use other reactor builders.
"The joint venture retains an open position on the reactor technology for individual sites it acquires and will make a selection based on a thorough assessment of the technical and commercial merits," E.ON and RWE said in a statement.
E.ON also said on Wednesday it was part of a new plan to build a nuclear power plant in Finland.
(Source: Reuters)
E.ON UK and RWE npower said on Wednesday they wanted to build and operate at least six gigawatts of nuclear power stations in the UK as part of the British government's plan to replace ageing reactors.
"We welcome and support the UK's decision to expand its power generation by introducing a new generation of nuclear power stations," E.ON chief executive Wulf Bernotat said.
"We are pleased to be working with RWE, who we see as a skilled, experienced and reliable partner to develop new nuclear power in the UK."
E.ON and RWE own and operate nuclear power plants in Germany but have been looking abroad to build and operate new ones because the German government plans to close all the country's reactors by 2021 and has no plans to build new ones.
Germany's two biggest utilities, normally fierce competitors, said their combined financial strength would help pay for the expensive and lengthy contruction process.
"E.ON is the ideal partner for UK development given that our businesses have complementary strengths and capabilities, and a successful track record in nuclear power," Andrew Duff, Chief Executive of RWE npower, said.
"The UK power industry needs significant investment to replace ageing coal and nuclear plant and to drive the change to a lower carbon economy ... Large infrastructure projects can bring major benefits to the UK economy through jobs, direct investment and supply chain opportunities."
French nuclear energy giant EDF (EDF.PA) has led the push to replace Britain's atomic energy facilities and is buying British Energy (BGY.L), the owner of most of the existing plants, so it can build at least four new power stations at those sites. RWE npower got grid connection rights for a 3.6 gigawatt nuclear plant at Wylfa in north Wales last year and may buy farmland close to the existing power station to build it on, while E.ON has bought land at another site at Oldbury in Gloucestershire.
"Nuclear energy is a growing part of the global energy supply for the foreseeable future. It forms a key part of RWE's strategy to deliver growth and to reduce CO2," RWE's CEO Jurgen Grossmann said.
"This creates attractive business opportunities for RWE." E.ON picked Areva (CEPFi.PA) and Siemens (SIEGn.DE) as partners to build new reactors in Britain in April 2008 but the new joint venture could also use other reactor builders.
"The joint venture retains an open position on the reactor technology for individual sites it acquires and will make a selection based on a thorough assessment of the technical and commercial merits," E.ON and RWE said in a statement.
E.ON also said on Wednesday it was part of a new plan to build a nuclear power plant in Finland.
(Source: Reuters)
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
PMBR exports first nuclear fuel particles for testing
http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/pmbr-exports-first-nuclear-fuel-particles-for-testing-2009-01-13
By: Esmarie Swanepoel
13th January 2009
Updated 2 hours 24 minutes agoTEXT SIZE Nuclear design company Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) has successfully manufactured coated fuel particles, which would form the basis of high temperature reactor fuel, containing 9,6% enriched uranium.
The fuel particles, which were created during December, have been shipped to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, in the US, where the particles would undergo irradiation testing at the Idaho National Laboratory, the PBMR said in a statement on Tuesday.
CEO Jaco Kriek noted that this achievement would give the PBMR huge credibility as a participant in the Next Generation Nuclear Plant project, in which it was partaking, and added that the manufacturing of fuel particles was a key driver of the company’s partnership in the Westinghouse-led consortium.
The fuel particles were developed at PMBR’s Fuel Development Laboratories, in collaboration and under the nuclear license of the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation. Kriek said that the successful manufacturing of the coated particles was the culmination of several years of intense development work at PBMR’s laboratories.
“We have conducted extensive development work and we are satisfied that the coated particles that were produced for testing will provide proof and assurance that the PBMR will perform to its predicted best-in-the-world safety capabilities, in the process heat and electricity markets, as well as cogeneration applications.”
The fuel was based on the design and manufacturing process employed in the latest, high-quality fuel, which was used in the German working-group research reactor, that was successfully operated for 21 years.
The fuel design consists of low-enriched uranium, triple coated isotropic particles contained on a moulded graphite sphere. A coated particle consists of a kernel of uranium dioxide, surrounded by four coating layers.
About 15 000 of these coated particles, which are about one millimetre in diameter, are mixed with graphite powder and a phenolic resin, and is pressed into a 50 mm diameter sphere. A further 5 mm of pure carbon is then added to for a nonfuel zone, and the resulting spheres are sintered and annealed to make them hard and durable.
The fuel would ultimately be used in the PBMR, which is a high temperature, gas-cooled reactor, with a closed-cycle, gas turbine power conversion system.
Edited by: Esmarie Swanepoel
By: Esmarie Swanepoel
13th January 2009
Updated 2 hours 24 minutes agoTEXT SIZE Nuclear design company Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) has successfully manufactured coated fuel particles, which would form the basis of high temperature reactor fuel, containing 9,6% enriched uranium.
The fuel particles, which were created during December, have been shipped to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, in the US, where the particles would undergo irradiation testing at the Idaho National Laboratory, the PBMR said in a statement on Tuesday.
CEO Jaco Kriek noted that this achievement would give the PBMR huge credibility as a participant in the Next Generation Nuclear Plant project, in which it was partaking, and added that the manufacturing of fuel particles was a key driver of the company’s partnership in the Westinghouse-led consortium.
The fuel particles were developed at PMBR’s Fuel Development Laboratories, in collaboration and under the nuclear license of the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation. Kriek said that the successful manufacturing of the coated particles was the culmination of several years of intense development work at PBMR’s laboratories.
“We have conducted extensive development work and we are satisfied that the coated particles that were produced for testing will provide proof and assurance that the PBMR will perform to its predicted best-in-the-world safety capabilities, in the process heat and electricity markets, as well as cogeneration applications.”
The fuel was based on the design and manufacturing process employed in the latest, high-quality fuel, which was used in the German working-group research reactor, that was successfully operated for 21 years.
The fuel design consists of low-enriched uranium, triple coated isotropic particles contained on a moulded graphite sphere. A coated particle consists of a kernel of uranium dioxide, surrounded by four coating layers.
About 15 000 of these coated particles, which are about one millimetre in diameter, are mixed with graphite powder and a phenolic resin, and is pressed into a 50 mm diameter sphere. A further 5 mm of pure carbon is then added to for a nonfuel zone, and the resulting spheres are sintered and annealed to make them hard and durable.
The fuel would ultimately be used in the PBMR, which is a high temperature, gas-cooled reactor, with a closed-cycle, gas turbine power conversion system.
Edited by: Esmarie Swanepoel
SA's next nuclear power plant to come on stream by 2019
http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=4790497&fSectionId=552&fSetId=662
January 13, 2009
By Agnieszka Flak
Johannesburg - South Africa expects its next nuclear power plant to come on stream by 2019, two years later than initially planned by Eskom, which has dropped plans to build the facility due to financial woes.
While Eskom was hoping nuclear energy would supply one quarter or 20 000 megawatts of South Africa's expanded generating capacity by 2025, the government says a target of 6 000MW in the same period is more feasible.
South Africa will have to keep reverting to more coal to supply its growing demand in the meantime.
Nelisiwe Magubane, the deputy director-general at the minerals and energy department, said: "We appreciate what Eskom had as a plan, but we need to be practical and see what can be done in that time: 6 000MW seems much more feasible."
South Africa's power utility operates Africa's sole nuclear power plant, Koeberg, with a total capacity of 1 800MW. Magubane added that an additional 3 200MW of the planned 6 000MW was due in 2019.
The government, which took over after Eskom bowed out, said that the two-year delay was needed to properly initiate the process.
Some experts said the government could have helped Eskom raise funding for the nuclear project through debt guarantees.
But Magubane said the government wanted to launch a process that differed from the utility's one-time proposal to ensure it could build up the fleet over time.
South Africa would approach various countries that have made nuclear part of their energy mix to copy their models. These countries include France, Britain, the US, South Korea and Russia.
Nuclear is a major part of South Africa's energy diversification plan to cut its reliance on coal, which now supplies the lion's share of electricity.
Magubane said the government would revise its nuclear plans, taking into account the economic slowdown.
"In the next 20 years we need to decommission quite a number of coal-fired power plants, so we need to have a plan on what it would be that would replace that ageing fleet," she said. "So it's not a question of whether we can afford it or not ... It's a fact that we will be needing that."
But the cost, coupled with the long lead time of between seven and 10 years to build a new nuclear plant, means South Africa will have to pump up its coal production in the meantime, even though that will harm the country's ambition of drastically reducing its carbon footprint.
South Africa's progress on renewable energy has also been slow, hindered by financial constraints, as well as the limited amount of energy that they produce.
January 13, 2009
By Agnieszka Flak
Johannesburg - South Africa expects its next nuclear power plant to come on stream by 2019, two years later than initially planned by Eskom, which has dropped plans to build the facility due to financial woes.
While Eskom was hoping nuclear energy would supply one quarter or 20 000 megawatts of South Africa's expanded generating capacity by 2025, the government says a target of 6 000MW in the same period is more feasible.
South Africa will have to keep reverting to more coal to supply its growing demand in the meantime.
Nelisiwe Magubane, the deputy director-general at the minerals and energy department, said: "We appreciate what Eskom had as a plan, but we need to be practical and see what can be done in that time: 6 000MW seems much more feasible."
South Africa's power utility operates Africa's sole nuclear power plant, Koeberg, with a total capacity of 1 800MW. Magubane added that an additional 3 200MW of the planned 6 000MW was due in 2019.
The government, which took over after Eskom bowed out, said that the two-year delay was needed to properly initiate the process.
Some experts said the government could have helped Eskom raise funding for the nuclear project through debt guarantees.
But Magubane said the government wanted to launch a process that differed from the utility's one-time proposal to ensure it could build up the fleet over time.
South Africa would approach various countries that have made nuclear part of their energy mix to copy their models. These countries include France, Britain, the US, South Korea and Russia.
Nuclear is a major part of South Africa's energy diversification plan to cut its reliance on coal, which now supplies the lion's share of electricity.
Magubane said the government would revise its nuclear plans, taking into account the economic slowdown.
"In the next 20 years we need to decommission quite a number of coal-fired power plants, so we need to have a plan on what it would be that would replace that ageing fleet," she said. "So it's not a question of whether we can afford it or not ... It's a fact that we will be needing that."
But the cost, coupled with the long lead time of between seven and 10 years to build a new nuclear plant, means South Africa will have to pump up its coal production in the meantime, even though that will harm the country's ambition of drastically reducing its carbon footprint.
South Africa's progress on renewable energy has also been slow, hindered by financial constraints, as well as the limited amount of energy that they produce.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Gas crisis, a PR coup for French nuclear industry
France's vast nuclear power network has largely shielded it from the Russian gas crisis, handing the country's atomic energy sector an unexpected public relations coup.
With 80 percent of its electricity generated by nuclear power stations, the highest proportion in the world, France was able to reassure nervous households and industry after the Russia-Ukraine dispute cut off gas supplies to Europe.
The gas crisis coincided with exceptionally cold weather in France, testing its power system to the limit as households turned up their heaters to maximum.
"The French must be delighted that the country didn't bet only on gas when we see what is happening with the gas (crisis)," EDF's Chief Executive Pierre Gadonneix said on French radio last week.
France has been a staunch advocate of nuclear power since the 1970s oil crisis which led it to build up Europe's largest network of 58 reactors.
State-owned electricity giant EDF is now marketing this savoir-faire (expertise) worldwide, as demonstrated by high-profile moves into Britain and the United States over the past few months.
France hopes to lead a global renaissance of atomic power as countries seek to fight global warming -- nuclear is virtually carbon dioxide free -- and aim to boost their energy independence.
China, South Africa and Italy are the next targets for EDF, which has said it wants to finance, build and operate European-designed new-generation reactors across the globe.
STRONG SELLING POINT
"The Russian-Ukraine gas crisis is a strong new selling point for the French nuclear industry," said Jean-Marie Chevalier, head of the geopolitical energy centre at Paris Dauphine University.
"The crisis will allow the French nuclear sector to alert countries such as Germany or Italy, which are highly dependent on gas, of an energy landscape full of uncertainty," he said.
German decision makers, who are faithful energy partners with Russia, are now likely to present more independent scenarios, including a review of plans to shut nuclear reactors.
"When you see upcoming European projects, 58 percent of them are fossil fuel-based power plants, including 40 percent which are gas-fired plant projects," said Colette Lewiner, head of utilities at French consultancy firm Capgemini.
"This will only increase Europe's dependency on Russian gas," she said, adding that Europe should on the contrary be raising its share of nuclear.
MORE GAS NEEDS AT HOME
While its neighbours may be forced to study ways of cutting their dependency on Russian gas, France must prepare to increase its imports, as it builds new fossil fuel-fired power plants to better cope with demand during peak times.
But France imports just 15 percent of its gas needs from Russia, and thanks to its diverse supply sources, this low level of exposure should be maintained.
French energy demand broke new records last week as domestic heating demand soared, testing national peak supply capacity to the limit.
EDF, which last week warned power cuts might occur in remote parts of the grid, created new peakload capacity of 3,100 megawatts over the last three years and says a further 1,900 MW is needed by 2012, equivalent to two nuclear reactors.
The insufficient slack in the French power system meant last week's surge in demand required heavy imports of electricity from Germany's gas and coal-fired plant network.
"The current energy trend is for diversification and I tend to believe that France is too dependent on nuclear energy," Chevalier added.
"For peak needs, nuclear is not a solution because it's not economical to use atomic power for just a few days per year," Capgemini's Lewiner said.
(Source: Guardian)
With 80 percent of its electricity generated by nuclear power stations, the highest proportion in the world, France was able to reassure nervous households and industry after the Russia-Ukraine dispute cut off gas supplies to Europe.
The gas crisis coincided with exceptionally cold weather in France, testing its power system to the limit as households turned up their heaters to maximum.
"The French must be delighted that the country didn't bet only on gas when we see what is happening with the gas (crisis)," EDF's Chief Executive Pierre Gadonneix said on French radio last week.
France has been a staunch advocate of nuclear power since the 1970s oil crisis which led it to build up Europe's largest network of 58 reactors.
State-owned electricity giant EDF is now marketing this savoir-faire (expertise) worldwide, as demonstrated by high-profile moves into Britain and the United States over the past few months.
France hopes to lead a global renaissance of atomic power as countries seek to fight global warming -- nuclear is virtually carbon dioxide free -- and aim to boost their energy independence.
China, South Africa and Italy are the next targets for EDF, which has said it wants to finance, build and operate European-designed new-generation reactors across the globe.
STRONG SELLING POINT
"The Russian-Ukraine gas crisis is a strong new selling point for the French nuclear industry," said Jean-Marie Chevalier, head of the geopolitical energy centre at Paris Dauphine University.
"The crisis will allow the French nuclear sector to alert countries such as Germany or Italy, which are highly dependent on gas, of an energy landscape full of uncertainty," he said.
German decision makers, who are faithful energy partners with Russia, are now likely to present more independent scenarios, including a review of plans to shut nuclear reactors.
"When you see upcoming European projects, 58 percent of them are fossil fuel-based power plants, including 40 percent which are gas-fired plant projects," said Colette Lewiner, head of utilities at French consultancy firm Capgemini.
"This will only increase Europe's dependency on Russian gas," she said, adding that Europe should on the contrary be raising its share of nuclear.
MORE GAS NEEDS AT HOME
While its neighbours may be forced to study ways of cutting their dependency on Russian gas, France must prepare to increase its imports, as it builds new fossil fuel-fired power plants to better cope with demand during peak times.
But France imports just 15 percent of its gas needs from Russia, and thanks to its diverse supply sources, this low level of exposure should be maintained.
French energy demand broke new records last week as domestic heating demand soared, testing national peak supply capacity to the limit.
EDF, which last week warned power cuts might occur in remote parts of the grid, created new peakload capacity of 3,100 megawatts over the last three years and says a further 1,900 MW is needed by 2012, equivalent to two nuclear reactors.
The insufficient slack in the French power system meant last week's surge in demand required heavy imports of electricity from Germany's gas and coal-fired plant network.
"The current energy trend is for diversification and I tend to believe that France is too dependent on nuclear energy," Chevalier added.
"For peak needs, nuclear is not a solution because it's not economical to use atomic power for just a few days per year," Capgemini's Lewiner said.
(Source: Guardian)
Slovakia to restart nuclear power plant
Slovakia is going to restart a nuclear power plant it shut down in late 2008 so that it can cope with cuts in Russian gas supplies. The country closed the plant to comply with its European Union accession agreement. Prime Minister Robert Fico said the gas cuts have made this necessary. He said the country was facing a collapse of its power grid. The government declared a state of emergency on Tuesday.
(Source: Radio Netherlands)
Here is the first sign of a tendency I mentioned in the previous post. There will be more of that soon, I am sure.
(Source: Radio Netherlands)
Here is the first sign of a tendency I mentioned in the previous post. There will be more of that soon, I am sure.
Friday, January 9, 2009
A thought watching the news about the gas shortages in Europe
The gas scandal between Russia and Ukraine, and, as a result of that, supply stop to several EU countries, is on top of the news since the new year, and I would like to comment a bit on that.
I remember myself several years ago when similar situation happened in Belarus. Russia just cut off gas supply for us for 3 days. That was winter time, cold as usual. And we had our neighbors from upstairs asking to boil them some water. We happened to be the only family in the house of 36 apartments that had an electric stove.
Russian gas is getting more and more expensive, and its delivery troublesome (the current situation with transit is not just an occasion - it is a tendency when a country uses gas supply as a political instrument). Building more gas pipelines for Western Europe will mean more dependence on Russian gas.
Nowadays, I sit in Sweden in my warm apartment and cook on an electric stove. I did not see any gas stoves here, heating is supplied from burning wood pellets and household garbage. The only gas equipment is camping gas (for a forest occasion).
I was thinking why not constructing a few more NPPS in those EU countries that are now so dependent on Russian gas, and slowly replacing gas equipment by electric, instead of investing into new expensive pipelines on the sea bottom in order to continue buying expensive gas?
I remember myself several years ago when similar situation happened in Belarus. Russia just cut off gas supply for us for 3 days. That was winter time, cold as usual. And we had our neighbors from upstairs asking to boil them some water. We happened to be the only family in the house of 36 apartments that had an electric stove.
Russian gas is getting more and more expensive, and its delivery troublesome (the current situation with transit is not just an occasion - it is a tendency when a country uses gas supply as a political instrument). Building more gas pipelines for Western Europe will mean more dependence on Russian gas.
Nowadays, I sit in Sweden in my warm apartment and cook on an electric stove. I did not see any gas stoves here, heating is supplied from burning wood pellets and household garbage. The only gas equipment is camping gas (for a forest occasion).
I was thinking why not constructing a few more NPPS in those EU countries that are now so dependent on Russian gas, and slowly replacing gas equipment by electric, instead of investing into new expensive pipelines on the sea bottom in order to continue buying expensive gas?
Japan nuclear plant usage rises to 4-month high
The average nuclear power plant
utilisation rate at Japan's 10 nuclear power companies rose to a
four-month high of 62.5 percent in December, government data
showed on Friday, amid signs that utilities coordinated their
operations to meet rising demand in the peak winter season.
The average run rate for calendar 2008 was 58.0 percent, the
lowest since 57.4 percent in 2003, an official with the Ministry
of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) said.
Japan's nuclear usage has remained relatively low after Tokyo
Electric Power Co (TEPCO) (9501.T), Japan's top utility, shut
down its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, the world's
biggest, after a major earthquake in July 2007.
Higher nuclear usage helps curb consumption of costly thermal
power energy, such as oil, coal and liquefied natural gas (LNG).
The December run rate compared with 58.9 percent a year
earlier and was the highest since 71.4 percent in August 2008.
The run rate for calendar 2007 was 64.4 percent.
Nine Japanese utilities and an electricity wholesaler, Japan
Atomic Power Co, have 55 nuclear power generators for commercial
use, with a total generating capacity of 49,315 megawatts, the
world's third highest.
The following is a list of nuclear power generators and the
nuclear power plant utilisation rate for December, the three
months ended in December, and calendar 2008, based on the METI
data.
December2008
Company Run rate (%)
Hokkaido Electric Power Co (9509.T) 74.6
Tohoku Electric Power Co (9506.T) 59.1
Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T) 42.8
Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T) 46.4
Hokuriku Electric Power Co (9505.T) 69.1
Kansai Electric Power Co (9503.T) 91.9
Chugoku Electric Power Co (9504.T) 36.7
Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) 102.0
Kyushu Electric Power Co (9508.T) 85.4
Japan Atomic Power Co 43.2
October-December 2008
Company Run rate (%)
Hokkaido Electric Power Co (9509.T) 59.1
Tohoku Electric Power Co (9506.T) 74.9
Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T) 42.2
Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T) 46.3
Hokuriku Electric Power Co (9505.T) 69.1
Kansai Electric Power Co (9503.T) 75.1
Chugoku Electric Power Co (9504.T) 36.6
Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) 81.8
Kyushu Electric Power Co (9508.T) 86.2
Japan Atomic Power Co 48.4
January-December 2008
Company Run rate (%)
Hokkaido Electric Power Co (9509.T) 63.6
Tohoku Electric Power Co (9506.T) 71.4
Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T) 43.2
Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T) 57.6
Hokuriku Electric Power Co (9505.T) 41.8
Kansai Electric Power Co (9503.T) 66.9
Chugoku Electric Power Co (9504.T) 69.0
Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) 84.2
Kyushu Electric Power Co (9508.T) 81.0
Japan Atomic Power Co 44.2
(Source: Reuters)
utilisation rate at Japan's 10 nuclear power companies rose to a
four-month high of 62.5 percent in December, government data
showed on Friday, amid signs that utilities coordinated their
operations to meet rising demand in the peak winter season.
The average run rate for calendar 2008 was 58.0 percent, the
lowest since 57.4 percent in 2003, an official with the Ministry
of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) said.
Japan's nuclear usage has remained relatively low after Tokyo
Electric Power Co (TEPCO) (9501.T), Japan's top utility, shut
down its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, the world's
biggest, after a major earthquake in July 2007.
Higher nuclear usage helps curb consumption of costly thermal
power energy, such as oil, coal and liquefied natural gas (LNG).
The December run rate compared with 58.9 percent a year
earlier and was the highest since 71.4 percent in August 2008.
The run rate for calendar 2007 was 64.4 percent.
Nine Japanese utilities and an electricity wholesaler, Japan
Atomic Power Co, have 55 nuclear power generators for commercial
use, with a total generating capacity of 49,315 megawatts, the
world's third highest.
The following is a list of nuclear power generators and the
nuclear power plant utilisation rate for December, the three
months ended in December, and calendar 2008, based on the METI
data.
December2008
Company Run rate (%)
Hokkaido Electric Power Co (9509.T) 74.6
Tohoku Electric Power Co (9506.T) 59.1
Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T) 42.8
Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T) 46.4
Hokuriku Electric Power Co (9505.T) 69.1
Kansai Electric Power Co (9503.T) 91.9
Chugoku Electric Power Co (9504.T) 36.7
Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) 102.0
Kyushu Electric Power Co (9508.T) 85.4
Japan Atomic Power Co 43.2
October-December 2008
Company Run rate (%)
Hokkaido Electric Power Co (9509.T) 59.1
Tohoku Electric Power Co (9506.T) 74.9
Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T) 42.2
Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T) 46.3
Hokuriku Electric Power Co (9505.T) 69.1
Kansai Electric Power Co (9503.T) 75.1
Chugoku Electric Power Co (9504.T) 36.6
Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) 81.8
Kyushu Electric Power Co (9508.T) 86.2
Japan Atomic Power Co 48.4
January-December 2008
Company Run rate (%)
Hokkaido Electric Power Co (9509.T) 63.6
Tohoku Electric Power Co (9506.T) 71.4
Tokyo Electric Power Co (9501.T) 43.2
Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T) 57.6
Hokuriku Electric Power Co (9505.T) 41.8
Kansai Electric Power Co (9503.T) 66.9
Chugoku Electric Power Co (9504.T) 69.0
Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) 84.2
Kyushu Electric Power Co (9508.T) 81.0
Japan Atomic Power Co 44.2
(Source: Reuters)
Serbian energy minister recommends expert discussion on nuclear power
Even though there is a ban on the construction of nuclear plants in Serbia until 2015, there is no ban on scientific institutions addressing the question and evaluating whether Serbia needs a nuclear power plant, Minister of Energy Petar Skundric told Novosti. He said that construction of nuclear power plants should not be taboo, that the question should be regarded as any other in the energy sector.
Even though the moratorium has been imposed on the construction of nuclear power plants until 2015, scientists believe that Serbia should start by defining its energy policy. In the next few years, we must decide how much energy we will produce and consume in the future.
Discussion on the construction of nuclear power plants brings Serbia to its feet. Opponents as well as supporters stand up; the public recalls the Chernobyl disaster. Another problem is storage, as the storage of nuclear waste is a problem for many countries.
Yet scientists say that we should not shun nuclear power, that there are four plants within a 600-kilometre radius from Belgrade. The last public uproar was when Croatia announced that a nuclear power plant could be built near Erdut, very close to the Serbian border.
"Serbia must know that it is just the same if a nuclear power plant is raised on the left or right side of the Danube, and we should say that Albania plans to build four nuclear power plants," said Skundric. However, there must be agreement and consensus between states, as stipulated by the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context.
Skundric said it was necessary to discuss all this, but that we could not do so on our own. "We cannot do this without international know-how, but there is still scientific potential among our experts in Vinca," said Skundric.
Scientists say it is necessary to renew staff urgently, that Serbia is short on people who work in atomic physics. In any case, a nuclear power plant will not be built in Serbia in the next 12 years: That is how long it takes from decision-making to construction.
By the way: Everyone Building, No Questions Asked
After France, Britain, Italy, and the Czech Republic, Slovenia is seriously considering the construction of a new nuclear reactor, and Bulgaria is building one. In the EU, 35 per cent of power is supplied from nuclear power plants from 150 reactors, most of them in France - 59.
Recently, China announced the construction of 32 nuclear power plants in the next 15 years, and Russia plans to build a floating nuclear reactor. More than 100 of the world's 443 reactors are in the United States.
Source: Electric Light and Power
Even though the moratorium has been imposed on the construction of nuclear power plants until 2015, scientists believe that Serbia should start by defining its energy policy. In the next few years, we must decide how much energy we will produce and consume in the future.
Discussion on the construction of nuclear power plants brings Serbia to its feet. Opponents as well as supporters stand up; the public recalls the Chernobyl disaster. Another problem is storage, as the storage of nuclear waste is a problem for many countries.
Yet scientists say that we should not shun nuclear power, that there are four plants within a 600-kilometre radius from Belgrade. The last public uproar was when Croatia announced that a nuclear power plant could be built near Erdut, very close to the Serbian border.
"Serbia must know that it is just the same if a nuclear power plant is raised on the left or right side of the Danube, and we should say that Albania plans to build four nuclear power plants," said Skundric. However, there must be agreement and consensus between states, as stipulated by the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context.
Skundric said it was necessary to discuss all this, but that we could not do so on our own. "We cannot do this without international know-how, but there is still scientific potential among our experts in Vinca," said Skundric.
Scientists say it is necessary to renew staff urgently, that Serbia is short on people who work in atomic physics. In any case, a nuclear power plant will not be built in Serbia in the next 12 years: That is how long it takes from decision-making to construction.
By the way: Everyone Building, No Questions Asked
After France, Britain, Italy, and the Czech Republic, Slovenia is seriously considering the construction of a new nuclear reactor, and Bulgaria is building one. In the EU, 35 per cent of power is supplied from nuclear power plants from 150 reactors, most of them in France - 59.
Recently, China announced the construction of 32 nuclear power plants in the next 15 years, and Russia plans to build a floating nuclear reactor. More than 100 of the world's 443 reactors are in the United States.
Source: Electric Light and Power
US nuclear trade team to visit India next week
A US trade mission, which will include representatives of General Electric, Westinghouse and USEC Inc, will visit India this week to hold talks with the government on how to leverage spinoffs from the Indo-US civil nuclear agreement, Shyam Saran, the prime minister’s special envoy on the Indo-US nuclear deal, has said.
Although the signing of the Indo-US deal on October 10, 2008, will remove the technology-denial regimes for nuclear material as well as dual-use technologies and open a plethora of opportunities for private players, it is too early to comment if foreign companies can set up nuclear power plants, according to Saran.
He added the government was cautious in this regard since India’s civilian and nuclear programmes were enmeshed. Under the separation plan that is part of the Indo-US nuclear deal, the separation will be completed by 2014.
However, in the interim, the private sector can participate in collaborative ventures with Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL). However, the government did not have a “closed mind” on private sector participation, he added.
Saran, speaking at the Fifth Indo-US Economic Summit in New Delhi, said with the path being cleared for India to freely access the international nuclear market, it could scale up nuclear power production to 20,000 Mw by 2020 and can reach 60,000 Mw by 2030.
Currently, nuclear power comprises less than 4 per cent of India’s total power output. The nuclear deal will also help the Department of Atomic Energy shift gears by procuring adequate uranium from nuclear supplies and operationalise its three-stage nuclear programme from the current uranium-based reactors to thorium- and plutonium-based reactors.
Saran said India and foreign companies would now be in the position to strengthen manufacturing capabilities for certain components in nuclear and allied industries.
India’s lack of access to dual-use technologies had affected it in many civilian and non-military areas, especially in the private sector, said Saran. On liability and insurance, he said the matter would be considered by the Union Cabinet.
India has to sign the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage for US firms to do business in India, according to Eric Anthony Jones, first secretary (economic affairs), US Embassy.
(Source: Business Standard)
Although the signing of the Indo-US deal on October 10, 2008, will remove the technology-denial regimes for nuclear material as well as dual-use technologies and open a plethora of opportunities for private players, it is too early to comment if foreign companies can set up nuclear power plants, according to Saran.
He added the government was cautious in this regard since India’s civilian and nuclear programmes were enmeshed. Under the separation plan that is part of the Indo-US nuclear deal, the separation will be completed by 2014.
However, in the interim, the private sector can participate in collaborative ventures with Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL). However, the government did not have a “closed mind” on private sector participation, he added.
Saran, speaking at the Fifth Indo-US Economic Summit in New Delhi, said with the path being cleared for India to freely access the international nuclear market, it could scale up nuclear power production to 20,000 Mw by 2020 and can reach 60,000 Mw by 2030.
Currently, nuclear power comprises less than 4 per cent of India’s total power output. The nuclear deal will also help the Department of Atomic Energy shift gears by procuring adequate uranium from nuclear supplies and operationalise its three-stage nuclear programme from the current uranium-based reactors to thorium- and plutonium-based reactors.
Saran said India and foreign companies would now be in the position to strengthen manufacturing capabilities for certain components in nuclear and allied industries.
India’s lack of access to dual-use technologies had affected it in many civilian and non-military areas, especially in the private sector, said Saran. On liability and insurance, he said the matter would be considered by the Union Cabinet.
India has to sign the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage for US firms to do business in India, according to Eric Anthony Jones, first secretary (economic affairs), US Embassy.
(Source: Business Standard)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
