Group items tagged

Seven German nuclear plants have failed to generate any electricity this month due to technical breakdowns. They have about half the production capacity of Germany's 17 nuclear reactors, but Germany did not suffer any power shortages. The plants have between them a 9,000 megawatt (MW) capacity, but Germany generates more electricity than it consumes, and has been exporting some of the surplus to France, which is heavily dependent on nuclear power. Early this month, three plants shut down automatically due to failures in their transformers. The other four have been out of service for months, and are undergoing expensive repairs. The breakdowns come at a time when the planned phasing out of nuclear power is under attack. In 2002, the coalition government of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Greens decided that all nuclear reactors would be phased out by 2021. At the same time, the government launched a massive investment programme in renewable energy, making Germany the leading country in Europe in use of the sun and wind as energy sources. According to official figures, Germany generates 15 percent of the electricity it consumes from renewable sources. A law passed in 2008 sets a target of generating at least 30 percent of electricity through renewables by 2020. Additionally, on Jul. 13, a group of large German companies announced a joint investment of 400 billion euros (560 billion dollars) in setting up solar thermal plants in the Sahara, to generate at least 15 percent of all electricity needed in Europe by the year 2020. But Chancellor Angela Merkel announced Jul. 1 that she would reverse the phasing out of nuclear power if her Christian Democratic Party wins the general election in September, and can form a coalition with the right-wing Liberal Democratic Party. Merkel presently rules in coalition with the SPD. "Nuclear power remains an indispensable component of the German energy mix," Merkel told the annual meeting of Atomforum, a group represe

Seven German nuclear plants have failed to generate any electricity this month due to technical breakdowns. They have about half the production capacity of Germany's 17 nuclear reactors, but Germany did not suffer any power shortages. The plants have between them a 9,000 megawatt (MW) capacity, but Germany generates more electricity than it consumes, and has been exporting some of the surplus to France, which is heavily dependent on nuclear power. Early this month, three plants shut down automatically due to failures in their transformers. The other four have been out of service for months, and are undergoing expensive repairs. The breakdowns come at a time when the planned phasing out of nuclear power is under attack. In 2002, the coalition government of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Greens decided that all nuclear reactors would be phased out by 2021. At the same time, the government launched a massive investment programme in renewable energy, making Germany the leading country in Europe in use of the sun and wind as energy sources. According to official figures, Germany generates 15 percent of the electricity it consumes from renewable sources. A law passed in 2008 sets a target of generating at least 30 percent of electricity through renewables by 2020. Additionally, on Jul. 13, a group of large German companies announced a joint investment of 400 billion euros (560 billion dollars) in setting up solar thermal plants in the Sahara, to generate at least 15 percent of all electricity needed in Europe by the year 2020. But Chancellor Angela Merkel announced Jul. 1 that she would reverse the phasing out of nuclear power if her Christian Democratic Party wins the general election in September, and can form a coalition with the right-wing Liberal Democratic Party. Merkel presently rules in coalition with the SPD. "Nuclear power remains an indispensable component of the German energy mix," Merkel told the annual meeting of Atomforum, a group represe

The cost of Pebble Bed Modular Reactor's (PBMR's) demonstration plant and pilot fuel plant had almost doubled to R31-billion as a result of inflation and higher materials costs, company chief executive Jaco Kriek said last week. Kriek said the demonstration reactor, which would generate 200 megawatts of heat and 80MW of electricity, was now expected to be commissioned by 2018 - four years later than previously expected. The plant has yet to receive environmental clearance.

The cost of Pebble Bed Modular Reactor's (PBMR's) demonstration plant and pilot fuel plant had almost doubled to R31-billion as a result of inflation and higher materials costs, company chief executive Jaco Kriek said last week. Kriek said the demonstration reactor, which would generate 200 megawatts of heat and 80MW of electricity, was now expected to be commissioned by 2018 - four years later than previously expected. The plant has yet to receive environmental clearance.

The cost of Pebble Bed Modular Reactor's (PBMR's) demonstration plant and pilot fuel plant had almost doubled to R31-billion as a result of inflation and higher materials costs, company chief executive Jaco Kriek said last week. Kriek said the demonstration reactor, which would generate 200 megawatts of heat and 80MW of electricity, was now expected to be commissioned by 2018 - four years later than previously expected. The plant has yet to receive environmental clearance.

"Nuclear power accounted for nearly 20 percent of the electricity generated in the United States in 2008. Oklahoman graphics illustration Multimedia Photoview all photos More Info By the numbers Nuclear power statistics * 19.6: Percentage of U.S. electric generation derived from nuclear reactors in 2008 * 14: Percentage of electricity generated by nuclear power worldwide in 2008 * 31: States with operational nuclear reactors * 6: States that derive the largest percentage of their electricity from nuclear power * 104: Number of operational nuclear reactors in the U.S. * 1982: Year Public Service Co. of Oklahoma canceled plans to build a nuclear plant near Inola Source: Nuclear Energy Institute, Oklahoman archives Advocates such as the Nuclear Energy Institute claim it is the country's "largest source of clean-air, carbon-free electricity, producing no greenhouse gases or air pollutants." Nuclear also has the lowest operations and maintenance costs of any fuel source, NEI spokesman Mitch Singer said. But none of that matters to Oklahoma's two largest power companies. "We have no plans to build or explore a nuclear option," Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co. spokesman Brian Alford said. "It's cost prohibitive for utilities of our size.""

There's still nowhere to put that toxic waste Nuclear electricity is affordable and emission free People opposed to nuclear energy applications point to the high initial price tag of enormous nuclear generating facilities that can … read more provide enough reliable electricity for several million people; they often overlook the resulting low cost per unit of power when spread over that large market. There are 104 nuclear plants operating in the US today. Many of us who are old enough to remember the controversies surrounding their construction can remember how many times we were told that nuclear power plants are frighteningly expensive and that they always cost more than predicted. We even remember that electrical power prices often increased immediately after the plants went into operation due to the effect of adding those big, expensive plants into the utility rate base. What many people who consider "news" media to be their only information sources rarely understand, however, is that the 104 plants currently operating provide the US with 20% of its electric power at an average production cost of about 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour. They also do not understand that after a few decades of operation and revenue production, the initial mortgages on those plants are largely paid off. The best information of all, which is not really "news" and does not get regularly published on the front page, is that the plants still have at least 20 years of life remaining during which they can produce emission free, low cost power. The companies that own the plants and their stock holders understand the economics pretty well; that is why 18 applications for 25 new plants have been turned into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission already with more in the pipeline. All of the used fuel - what some people call waste - is being carefully stored in a tiny corner of the existing sites, just waiting to be recycled into new fuel. It still contains 95% of its initial potential energy, but

There's still nowhere to put that toxic waste Nuclear electricity is affordable and emission free People opposed to nuclear energy applications point to the high initial price tag of enormous nuclear generating facilities that can … read more provide enough reliable electricity for several million people; they often overlook the resulting low cost per unit of power when spread over that large market. There are 104 nuclear plants operating in the US today. Many of us who are old enough to remember the controversies surrounding their construction can remember how many times we were told that nuclear power plants are frighteningly expensive and that they always cost more than predicted. We even remember that electrical power prices often increased immediately after the plants went into operation due to the effect of adding those big, expensive plants into the utility rate base. What many people who consider "news" media to be their only information sources rarely understand, however, is that the 104 plants currently operating provide the US with 20% of its electric power at an average production cost of about 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour. They also do not understand that after a few decades of operation and revenue production, the initial mortgages on those plants are largely paid off. The best information of all, which is not really "news" and does not get regularly published on the front page, is that the plants still have at least 20 years of life remaining during which they can produce emission free, low cost power. The companies that own the plants and their stock holders understand the economics pretty well; that is why 18 applications for 25 new plants have been turned into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission already with more in the pipeline. All of the used fuel - what some people call waste - is being carefully stored in a tiny corner of the existing sites, just waiting to be recycled into new fuel. It still contains 95% of its initial potential energy, but

The future of electricity production is being questioned as advances in nuclear power technology are being more widely researched. While the ability to produce electricity cleanly and inexpensively is becoming difficult, alternatives to traditional electricity production are being examined. Currently coal is Utah's most used resource for electricity generation. As of 2005, the U.S. Department of Energy stated that 93 percent of Utah's electricity comes from coal. At a recent conference local scientists constructed a strong case for using nuclear power to meet Utah and the country's future electricity needs. The following advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power were discussed:

Critics of Weapons-Grade "MOX" Fuel Say It's Too Volatile and Generates High Amounts of Radioactive Waste (AP) Japan used weapons-grade plutonium to fuel a nuclear power plant Thursday for the first time as part of efforts to boost its atomic energy program. Kyushu Electric Power Co. said workers fired up the No. 3 reactor at its Genkai plant in the southern prefecture of Saga using MOX fuel - a mixture of plutonium oxide and uranium oxide. The reactor is scheduled to start generating electricity Monday for a monthlong test run, and then begin full-fledged operations after a final government inspection and approval in early December, company official Futoshi Kai said. The Genkai plant marks the beginning of Japan's use of MOX fuel for so-called "pluthermal" power generation, approved by the Cabinet more than a decade ago.

Critics of Weapons-Grade "MOX" Fuel Say It's Too Volatile and Generates High Amounts of Radioactive Waste (AP) Japan used weapons-grade plutonium to fuel a nuclear power plant Thursday for the first time as part of efforts to boost its atomic energy program. Kyushu Electric Power Co. said workers fired up the No. 3 reactor at its Genkai plant in the southern prefecture of Saga using MOX fuel - a mixture of plutonium oxide and uranium oxide. The reactor is scheduled to start generating electricity Monday for a monthlong test run, and then begin full-fledged operations after a final government inspection and approval in early December, company official Futoshi Kai said. The Genkai plant marks the beginning of Japan's use of MOX fuel for so-called "pluthermal" power generation, approved by the Cabinet more than a decade ago.

Materials that directly convert radiation into electricity could produce a new era of spacecraft and even Earth-based vehicles powered by high-powered nuclear batteries, say US researchers. Electricity is usually made using nuclear power by heating steam to rotate turbines that generate electricity. But beginning in the 1960s, the US and Soviet Union used thermoelectric materials that convert heat into electricity to power spacecraft using nuclear fission or decaying radioactive material. The Pioneer missions were among those using the latter, "nuclear battery" approach.

The Indiana lawmakers are considering legislation that would define "clean coal" and nuclear-generated electricity as renewable energy. They're also mulling bills that would define John "Cougar" Mellencamp as a jazz musician and categorize the pork tenderloin sandwich as a vegetable. Seriously, the energy change, being debated as part of a set of changes to the state's electricity laws, would allow nuclear and clean coal electricity to qualify for state renewable energy funding incentives. And it would let them count toward a renewable electricity standard -also under consideration in the statehouse-that would require Indiana utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025.

Nuclear power plants use the forces within the nucleus of an atom to generate electricity. The first nuclear reactor was built by Enrico Fermi below the stands of Stagg Field in Chicago in 1942. The first commercial reactor went into operation in Shippingport, Pa., in December, 1957. In its early years, nuclear power seemed the wave of the future, a clean source of potentially limitless cheap electricity. But progress was slowed by the high, unpredictable cost of building plants, uneven growth in electric demand, the fluctuating cost of competing fuels like oil and safety concerns.

Nuclear power plants use the forces within the nucleus of an atom to generate electricity. The first nuclear reactor was built by Enrico Fermi below the stands of Stagg Field in Chicago in 1942. The first commercial reactor went into operation in Shippingport, Pa., in December, 1957. In its early years, nuclear power seemed the wave of the future, a clean source of potentially limitless cheap electricity. But progress was slowed by the high, unpredictable cost of building plants, uneven growth in electric demand, the fluctuating cost of competing fuels like oil and safety concerns.

Toshiba Corp., Japan's largest supplier of reactors, will spend 10 billion yen ($103 million) buying a nuclear-fuel manufacturer to help compete with global rivals such as Areva SA for new atomic power plants. Toshiba subsidiary Westinghouse Electric Co. agreed to buy a 52 percent stake in Nuclear Fuel Industries Ltd. from Sumitomo Electric Industries Ltd. and Furukawa Electric Co., Toshiba said in a statement to the Tokyo Stock Exchange today. It plans to complete the purchase in May, it said. Better access to fuel may help Toshiba win orders as competition with France's Areva and an alliance between Hitachi Ltd. and General Electric Co. intensifies. Nuclear power generation is set to increase as developing countries led by China and India build more reactors to meet demand and cut carbon emissions blamed for global warming.

On May 26, 1958, President Eisenhower waved a wand with a little light bulb on the end of it in front of an electric eye, starting up the first commercial reactor, located three hundred miles away at Shippingport, Pennsylvania. That was as close to it as he wanted to be. We are told that nuclear power is being used to generate electricity. That is not correct. Nuclear power is being used to boil water, and the resulting steam is being used to generate electricity in variants of the same way it has always been generated. What the enormously expensive nuclear plants do is generate heat in the most dangerous way imaginable, with waste products that are, so far, unmanageable. Conversion of the energy of nuclear fission or fusion directly into usable power would be a new and different kind of process. Perhaps it can be done; maybe people are working on it; but the present system is not it. The present system is a fancy steam engine.

Ex-official said to have sought jobs from firms while on panel A former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission violated government ethics rules by directly contacting potential employers with business before the NRC before the end of his term in mid-2007, according to a report by the commission's inspector general. Jeffrey S. Merrifield twice cast votes on matters involving companies he had contacted about job prospects, the report says. The firms -- the Shaw Group, Toshiba's Westinghouse Electric and General Electric -- "could potentially have benefited financially from his votes . . . during the specific timeframes in which Merrifield was negotiating with the three companies," the report concludes.

Ex-official said to have sought jobs from firms while on panel A former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission violated government ethics rules by directly contacting potential employers with business before the NRC before the end of his term in mid-2007, according to a report by the commission's inspector general. Jeffrey S. Merrifield twice cast votes on matters involving companies he had contacted about job prospects, the report says. The firms -- the Shaw Group, Toshiba's Westinghouse Electric and General Electric -- "could potentially have benefited financially from his votes . . . during the specific timeframes in which Merrifield was negotiating with the three companies," the report concludes.

Residents and businesses in the Tampa Bay area soon will be paying a lot more for electricity. Customers of Tampa Electric Co. and Progress Energy will see a double-digit percentage increase in their electric bills beginning next year under plans approved this week by state regulators. The utilities say the increases are needed to cover higher costs for oil, natural gas and coal, which are used to generate electricity. For TECO customers, bills will rise about 12 percent. The cost of 1,000 kilowatt hours will jump from $114.38 now to $128.44 in January.

Sunday's Sun editorial claims the Constellation Energy Group-Electricite de France deal will help ratepayers, in part because EDF might construct a new nuclear reactor that will increase Maryland's supply of electricity ("PSC's power play," Sept. 20). The cost of a new nuclear reactor is in the billions, and the electricity generated by the reactor may not be available for a decade. The problem is that ratepayers are suffering high energy costs now. The best and most immediate solution to our high energy costs is investment in energy efficiency. Instead of investing billions into nuclear, we should invest heavily in weatherizing and retrofitting our homes and businesses. By doing so, we will decrease the amount of electricity needed to turn on our lights and keep us warm in the winter. In fact, studies demonstrate that we can reduce Maryland's electricity use by 15 percent by the year 2015 through basic energy efficiency projects. We owe it to ratepayers to start lowering utility rates today, not in a decade. Fielding Huseth, Baltimore

A majority of energy regulators agree that reducing greenhouse gas emissions will increase the costs of electricity, but that the public is willing to pay as much as 5 percent more for green energy, according to a survey from the Deloitte Center for Energy Solutions. The survey, which was completed by 60 state regulators in March and April 2009, found that 70 percent of surveyed regulators believe that the cost of electricity is likely to increase next year -- with 50 percent identifying environmental compliance as the strongest contributing factor to these increased electricity costs. In addition, more than 80 percent of surveyed regulators believe that the Obama administration's proposed cap and trade system for carbon dioxide emissions will result in higher electricity costs in their states. "For the second year in a row, our survey demonstrates that state utility regulators, while concerned about climate change, also understand the cost implications and viabilities of the various policy options," said Branko Terzic, Energy & Resources regulatory policy leader for Deloitte. Terzic is a former state regulator, a former commissioner with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and a former utility executive. He went on to point out that surveyed regulators showed a continued belief in the green benefits of nuclear power: 55.2 percent of them claimed that nuclear power is "extremely effective" in reducing greenhouse gases associated with power generation in their state. The survey also revealed that more than two-thirds (71.7 percent) of responding state regulators believe that the U.S. should continue to develop Yucca Mountain, despite recent decisions by the administration to look for alternatives.

"I am increasingly convinced that in order for us to survive the 21st century, we (individually and collectively) must accept two principles of living: 1) We are all connected to each other and to our environment. 2) All energy for our homes, firms, factories and farms must be clean and renewable. We probably have less than two generations to transition. Right now things are not looking good. We stand at a crossroads concerning how we fuel our vehicles and power our homes. Electric vehicles (EVs) are a good replacement for carbon-fueled cars, but only if we charge them with renewable energy (geothermal, wind, solar, tidal, even biomass). Any other approach will require greater demand for increasingly limited electricity. In fact, if every household in America suddenly bought an electric car averaging 5 kilowatt-hours to top off each day, household electric demand would increase about 20 percent (adding perhaps 10 percent more demand to an already overloaded grid nationally). "

Not much stands out in a drive across the piney flatlands of rural eastern Georgia, just below Augusta, this side of South Carolina. A few cows graze in an open field. A trailer home or two and a small house sit back from nearly empty roads. Then, just before the Savannah River, they appear: the twin cooling towers of the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, each one 548 feet tall, billowing puffy clouds of water vapor, like steam from a cup of hot coffee. Nearby, though much less visible, are the two nuclear reactors that actually produce the plant's electricity.

Not much stands out in a drive across the piney flatlands of rural eastern Georgia, just below Augusta, this side of South Carolina. A few cows graze in an open field. A trailer home or two and a small house sit back from nearly empty roads. Then, just before the Savannah River, they appear: the twin cooling towers of the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, each one 548 feet tall, billowing puffy clouds of water vapor, like steam from a cup of hot coffee. Nearby, though much less visible, are the two nuclear reactors that actually produce the plant's electricity.

The likely cost of electricity for a new generation of nuclear reactors would be 12-20 cents per kilowatt hour (KWh), considerably more expensive than the average cost of increased use of energy efficiency and renewable energies at 6 cents per kilowatt hour, according to a major new study by economist Mark Cooper, Ph.D., a senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewables.

The likely cost of electricity for a new generation of nuclear reactors would be 12-20 cents per kilowatt hour (KWh), considerably more expensive than the average cost of increased use of energy efficiency and renewable energies at 6 cents per kilowatt hour, according to a major new study by economist Mark Cooper, Ph.D., a senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewables.

The inaugural units of Tarapur Atomic Power Station (TAPS), India's first nuclear power plant, will complete 40 years of successful generation of electricity from nuclear energy power on Wednesday. It was on April 1, 1969, that the two reactors of 160 MW each built by US power major General Electric (GE) on a turn-key basis at Tarapur, 120 km from here, were synchronised to the grid. The Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL), a public sector undertaking of the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) will be felicitating those engineers who were responsible for synchronising the plants to the grid at a function in Tarapur tomorrow, TAPS officials said. The station has generated more than 77 billion units of electricity so far, and is supplying it to Maharashtra and Gujarat at a tariff of 94 paise per unit.

Having generated electricity as a plant operator, plant manager and vice president in three mid-sized electric power companies for a long career, I wish to express a few facts about using biomass (wood) as a fuel for large boilers ("Trees better alternative to coal" Hattiesburg American, Jan. 6). Advertisement There are several mid-sized boilers in service using biomass fuels. However, the low heat content of such fuels limit the electric output of such units. This causes the cost of such generation to go above the available cost per megawatt, thereby reducing use. The second factor is cost of processing wood into a useable fuel including the disturbing presence of a multitude of trucks on the local highways.