Group items tagged

MOSCOW, June 27 (RIA Novosti) - Somalia hopes Russian companies will take part in the development of uranium deposits, and oil and natural gas production, the Somali ambassador to Russia said Friday. "Today we say: let's cooperate. Somalia is a very rich country, this is the main basin of oil and gas on the territory of the Horn of Africa," Mohamed Handule told a RIA Novosti press conference.

Although a dozen years have elapsed since any new nuclear power reactor has come online in the U.S., there are now stirrings of a nuclear renaissance. The incentives are certainly in place: the costs of natural gas and oil have skyrocketed; the public increasingly objects to the greenhouse gas emissions from burning fossil fuels; and the federal government has offered up to $8 billion in subsidies and insurance against delays in licensing (with new laws to streamline the process) and $18.5 billion in loan guarantees. What more could the moribund nuclear power industry possibly want?

"CPS Energy has a potentially difficult week ahead of it as it prepares to tackle rate hikes and the future of its controversial nuclear project. The utility has proposed a 7.5 percent rate increase for electricity and 8.5 percent for gas. The hikes, which would raise consumers' total power bills a little more than 4 percent, would bring in $99 million for the remainder of fiscal 2010 and $110 million next year. The money would help pay for the new Spruce 2 coal plant, two natural gas units and other programs. Residents will have a chance to weigh in at a public forum Monday evening. The utility's board is expected to vote on the rate increases Wednesday, and the City Council will vote Feb. 18. The increases would take effect March 1."

Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals to key administration posts: * Patricia A. Hoffman, Assistant Secretary for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Department of Energy * Mari Del Carmen Aponte, Ambassador to the Republic of El Salvador, Department of State * Donald E. Booth, Ambassador to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Department of State * Larry Persily, Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects President Obama said, "The depth of experience these individuals bring to their roles will be valuable to my administration as we work to bring about real change for the American people. I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead."

Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals to key administration posts: * Patricia A. Hoffman, Assistant Secretary for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Department of Energy * Mari Del Carmen Aponte, Ambassador to the Republic of El Salvador, Department of State * Donald E. Booth, Ambassador to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Department of State * Larry Persily, Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects President Obama said, "The depth of experience these individuals bring to their roles will be valuable to my administration as we work to bring about real change for the American people. I look forward to working with them in the months and years ahead."

Within the past year, estimates of the cost of nuclear power from a new generation of reactors have ranged from a low of 8.4 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) to a high of 30 cents. This paper tackles the debate over the cost of building new nuclear reactors, with the key findings as follows: * The initial cost projections put out early in today's so-called "nuclear renaissance" were about one-third of what one would have expected, based on the nuclear reactors completed in the 1990s. * The most recent cost projections for new nuclear reactors are, on average, over four times as high as the initial "nuclear renaissance" projections. * There are numerous options available to meet the need for electricity in a carbon-constrained environment that are superior to building nuclear reactors. Indeed, nuclear reactors are the worst option from the point of view of the consumer and society. * The low carbon sources that are less costly than nuclear include efficiency, cogeneration, biomass, geothermal, wind, solar thermal and natural gas. Solar photovoltaics that are presently more costly than nuclear reactors are projected to decline dramatically in price in the next decade. Fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage, which are not presently available, are projected to be somewhat more costly than nuclear reactors. * Numerous studies by Wall Street and independent energy analysts estimate efficiency and renewable costs at an average of 6 cents per kilowatt hour, while the cost of electricity from nuclear reactors is estimated in the range of 12 to 20 cents per kWh. * The additional cost of building 100 new nuclear reactors, instead of pursuing a least cost efficiency-renewable strategy, would be in the range of $1.9-$4.4 trillion over the life the reactors.

Within the past year, estimates of the cost of nuclear power from a new generation of reactors have ranged from a low of 8.4 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) to a high of 30 cents. This paper tackles the debate over the cost of building new nuclear reactors, with the key findings as follows: * The initial cost projections put out early in today's so-called "nuclear renaissance" were about one-third of what one would have expected, based on the nuclear reactors completed in the 1990s. * The most recent cost projections for new nuclear reactors are, on average, over four times as high as the initial "nuclear renaissance" projections. * There are numerous options available to meet the need for electricity in a carbon-constrained environment that are superior to building nuclear reactors. Indeed, nuclear reactors are the worst option from the point of view of the consumer and society. * The low carbon sources that are less costly than nuclear include efficiency, cogeneration, biomass, geothermal, wind, solar thermal and natural gas. Solar photovoltaics that are presently more costly than nuclear reactors are projected to decline dramatically in price in the next decade. Fossil fuels with carbon capture and storage, which are not presently available, are projected to be somewhat more costly than nuclear reactors. * Numerous studies by Wall Street and independent energy analysts estimate efficiency and renewable costs at an average of 6 cents per kilowatt hour, while the cost of electricity from nuclear reactors is estimated in the range of 12 to 20 cents per kWh. * The additional cost of building 100 new nuclear reactors, instead of pursuing a least cost efficiency-renewable strategy, would be in the range of $1.9-$4.4 trillion over the life the reactors.

Namibian environmentalists warn expansion of uranium mining could devastate spectacular natural landscape The hidden cost of Britain's new generation of nuclear power could be the destruction of the Kalahari desert in Namibia and millions of tonnes of extra greenhouse gas emissions a year, the Observer has discovered. The desert, with its towering sand dunes and spectacular lunar-like landscapes, is at the centre of an international uranium rush led by Rössing Uranium, a subsidiary of the British mining giant Rio Tinto, and the French state-owned company, Areva, which part-manages the nuclear complex at Sellafield and wants to build others in Britain.

Namibian environmentalists warn expansion of uranium mining could devastate spectacular natural landscape The hidden cost of Britain's new generation of nuclear power could be the destruction of the Kalahari desert in Namibia and millions of tonnes of extra greenhouse gas emissions a year, the Observer has discovered. The desert, with its towering sand dunes and spectacular lunar-like landscapes, is at the centre of an international uranium rush led by Rössing Uranium, a subsidiary of the British mining giant Rio Tinto, and the French state-owned company, Areva, which part-manages the nuclear complex at Sellafield and wants to build others in Britain.

Since 2007, there have been applications to license 26 new nuclear reactors in the US. Nine have been canceled or suspended indefinitely in the last 10 months, and 10 have been delayed 1-5 years. Why? Because, as almost always happens with nuclear plants, they end up being much more expensive than original plans project. In these cases, costs over-runs were triple that of estimates, while the price for natural gas declined, making them even less attractive. And, importantly, energy efficiency programs combined with reduced energy demand because of the recession dramatically reduced the need for new power supplies. Nuclear looks good to lots of people - and Republicans are demanding strong incentives for it in the Senate Climate Bill - but the history of nuclear is frought with significant cost over-runs, multiple delays and cancellations. It's a fact that energy efficiency combined with renewable energy sources such as solar and wind are much faster to ramp up and much cheaper.

Since 2007, there have been applications to license 26 new nuclear reactors in the US. Nine have been canceled or suspended indefinitely in the last 10 months, and 10 have been delayed 1-5 years. Why? Because, as almost always happens with nuclear plants, they end up being much more expensive than original plans project. In these cases, costs over-runs were triple that of estimates, while the price for natural gas declined, making them even less attractive. And, importantly, energy efficiency programs combined with reduced energy demand because of the recession dramatically reduced the need for new power supplies. Nuclear looks good to lots of people - and Republicans are demanding strong incentives for it in the Senate Climate Bill - but the history of nuclear is frought with significant cost over-runs, multiple delays and cancellations. It's a fact that energy efficiency combined with renewable energy sources such as solar and wind are much faster to ramp up and much cheaper.

The United Arab Emirates, which plans to award the Persian Gulf's first nuclear power contracts this year, may start a regional arms race as its neighbors seek similar technology, according to a Chatham House report. "Risks from nuclear proliferation cannot be eliminated entirely" from the U.A.E.'s program, Ian Jackson wrote in "Nuclear Energy and Proliferation Risks: Myths and Realities in the Persian Gulf," published today. "It is possible that the genuine desire of Gulf states to engage in civil peaceful nuclear power could possibly tip the region into a nuclear arms race, especially if state intentions are misunderstood." The U.A.E., the fourth-biggest OPEC producer, is turning to nuclear power because it doesn't produce enough natural gas to meet demand. The government has an atomic-energy agreement with the U.S., a necessary step to awarding construction contracts, and will prohibit the enrichment of uranium on U.A.E. soil. A French group including Areva SA and Electricite de France SA is competing for U.A.E. power-plant contracts against groups led by General Electric Co. and Korea Electric Power Corp.

The United Arab Emirates, which plans to award the Persian Gulf's first nuclear power contracts this year, may start a regional arms race as its neighbors seek similar technology, according to a Chatham House report. "Risks from nuclear proliferation cannot be eliminated entirely" from the U.A.E.'s program, Ian Jackson wrote in "Nuclear Energy and Proliferation Risks: Myths and Realities in the Persian Gulf," published today. "It is possible that the genuine desire of Gulf states to engage in civil peaceful nuclear power could possibly tip the region into a nuclear arms race, especially if state intentions are misunderstood." The U.A.E., the fourth-biggest OPEC producer, is turning to nuclear power because it doesn't produce enough natural gas to meet demand. The government has an atomic-energy agreement with the U.S., a necessary step to awarding construction contracts, and will prohibit the enrichment of uranium on U.A.E. soil. A French group including Areva SA and Electricite de France SA is competing for U.A.E. power-plant contracts against groups led by General Electric Co. and Korea Electric Power Corp.

"US Department of Energy officials on Tuesday voiced their support for a wide range of energy-related bills in the Senate, but were at a loss to explain why a bill that would give the agency authority to sell uranium is needed. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee considered six bills that would encourage solar panel use (S. 3460), increase natural-gas-turbine research and development (S. 2900), improve energy efficiency at federal buildings (S. 3251), expand best practices for supply-chain efficiency (S. 3396), increase research and development of heavy-duty plug-in-hybrid trucks (S. 679) and a measure introduced by Wyoming Republican Senator John Barrasso (S. 3233) that would give authority to DOE to barter, sell or transfer surplus uranium. But Shane Johnson, the chief operating officer of DOE's office of nuclear energy said that the agency already has such authority and he does not believe the legislation is necessary. "

"China and Kazakhstan agreed on Saturday to build and finance a gas pipeline and deepen atomic energy ties, extending Beijing's influence in a region where it has used its financial might to access natural resources. Chinese President Hu Jintao and Kazakh leader Nursultan Nazarbayev presided over the deals between state companies that give Beijing greater access to resources and allow Kazakhstan, Central Asia's biggest economy, to diversify its energy exports. "

Germany's planned phase-out of nuclear power generation will raise the country's natural gas demand between 12.6% and 23% by about 2023, according to a statement on energy security policy submitted to the EU summit in Prague on Friday by the co-ruling Christian Democrats. The statement, which the party said is based on government projections, also will be submitted to the EU Energy Summit scheduled for this weekend in Sofia, Bulgaria.

"Just once, it would be nice if a president would level with Americans on energy. Barack Obama isn't that president. His speech the other night was about political damage control -- his own. It was full of misinformation and mythology. Obama held out a gleaming vision of an America that would convert to the "clean" energy of, presumably, wind, solar and biomass. It isn't going to happen for many, many decades, if ever. For starters, we won't soon end our "addiction to fossil fuels." Oil, coal and natural gas supply about 85 percent of America's energy needs. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects energy consumption to grow only an average of 0.5 percent annually from 2008 to 2035, but that's still a 14 percent cumulative increase. Fossil fuel usage would increase slightly in 2035 and its share would still account for 78 percent of the total. "

"If we take seriously the protection of human health, we have to phase out coal- and nuclear-powered electricity. Coal kills hundreds of Ontarians and triggers more than 100,000 illnesses (e.g., asthma attacks) annually. It is also the most climate-destructive fuel around, emitting twice as much carbon as natural gas does. Whether the issue is respiratory disease or global warming, coal is a catastrophe. But nuclear is extremely unhealthy as well. A scientific review by the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment found all functioning reactors release radioactive materials on a routine basis. A 2008 German government study showed children (younger than five) living within five kilometres of a nuclear plant are at elevated risk for leukemia. And Scientific American recently reported nukes harm the climate: "Nuclear power results in up to 25 times more carbon emissions than wind energy, when reactor construction and uranium refining and transport are considered.""

"Approval of the design for the Westinghouse AP 1000 reactor is slowly moving forward at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, as are financial arrangements for building the nation's first one, near Augusta, Ga. Yet the argument about whether its design is safer than past models is advancing, too. On June 18, the Southern Company, the utility holding company that is building it, and the Department of Energy announced that they had come to final terms on a federal loan guarantee that would allow the project to go forward. The guarantee is for 70 percent of the company's costs, not to exceed $3.4 billion. (Georgia Power, the Southern subsidiary building the plant, owns 45.7 percent of it; other partners also got loan guarantees.) Lots of details have yet to be agreed upon, though. One is that the reactor is surrounded by a shield building meant to protect it from hazards like crashing airplanes, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is not convinced that the shield building would survive earthquakes and other natural hazards. Westinghouse, a subsidiary of Toshiba, is doing new analytical work to try to convince the commission staff of its safety."

Nuclear facilities have a checkered past in Oklahoma, from Karen Silkwood's mysterious death to environmental issues at a closed plant near Gore to a proposed power plant project near Inola that eventually was abandoned. Oklahoma, long a producer of fossil fuels, traditionally has relied mostly on natural gas and coal - and in recent years wind - to produce power. But more than a quarter-century after the failed Black Fox project near Inola, state legislators including House Speaker Chris Benge are openly discussing the potential use of nuclear power in Oklahoma. This time, nuclear-energy proponents think their ideas will gain some traction as Oklahomans recall last summer's soaring energy prices, which has led to more of a focus on alternative energy sources.

A new report on nuclear energy costs may buzz-kill Colorado Republicans' push for the controversial power plants as an alternative to nonrenewable, carbon-laden oil, natural gas and coal. New nuclear power costs are triple current U.S. electricity rates, according to Business Risks and Costs of New Nuclear Power. Those high costs are compounded by concerns that new plants could join the ranks of troubled assets and become enormous credit risks for energy firms, investors and government loan guarantors. The report, authored by leading power plant expert Craig A. Severance, is described as "one of the most detailed cost analyses publicly available" delivered by the sober realism of a certified public accountant:

Washington » A 137-year-old exemption that allows companies to extract hard-rock minerals from public lands without paying royalties could cost the nation $1.6 billion during the next decade, says a new report by the Pew Campaign for Responsible Mining. To reverse that exemption, House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall, D-W.Va., introduced legislation Tuesday that would treat the mineral-extraction companies the same as coal, oil and gas industries, which pay a percentage royalty for using public lands. "Given our current economic crisis and the empty state of our national treasury, it is ludicrous to be allowing this outmoded law to continue to exempt these lucrative mining activities from paying a fair return to the American people," Rahall said in a statement.

Landowners near the site of a 1969 underground nuclear blast are suing to force a hearing on plans to drill natural gas in the area. Two environmental groups and two couples have filed a lawsuit seeking a hearing on the state's approval of drilling permits within three miles of the blast site near Rulison in western Colorado.

Turkey needs a huge amount of energy investment to sustain its fast growing economy. Where this money come from is a big question. But the rising oil prices and dependency on foreign natural gas and oil has inflated the import numbers. In 2006, Turkey has paid 26 billion USDs for imported energy sources. In 2007, this number is expected to increase at least %5, around 1 billion USD. So with basic math, one can easily deduct that in 5 years time, this money adds up to 5 billion dollars, which is more than enough to finance the cost of a 4500 MWs of nuclear plant construction. But the finance side of the problem is not that easy…

Bharatbook.com is proud to announce the new report 'US Nuclear Energy Outlook' from its vast collection of informative market research reports. (http://www.bharatbook.com/detail.asp?id=84504) Nuclear power plays a major role in the US energy industry as the country, after coal and natural gas, produces its maximum amount of electricity from nuclear power plants. Oil and hydropower are the next biggest sources of energy. But the US heavily depends on imported uranium for its nuclear power industry. And with China, India and Russia planning for massive deployments in nuclear power, the country may have tough times ahead in procuring raw material (uranium) for its nuclear reactors, says "US Nuclear Energy Outlook", our recent research report.