Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) today delivered to Congress the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Licensing Strategy Report which describes the licensing approach, the analytical tools, the research and development activities and the estimated resources required to license an advanced reactor design by 2017 and begin operation by 2021. The NGNP represents a new concept for nuclear energy utilization, in which a gas-cooled reactor provides process heat for any number of industrial applications including electricity production, hydrogen production, coal-to-liquids, shale oil recovery, fertilizer production, and others that meet significant industrial needs.

Bailout estimates for failed projects could range from hundreds of billions to more than a trillion The nuclear power industry is pressuring Congress to dramatically expand federal loan guarantees for building new plants, which would put taxpayers and ratepayers at significant financial risk, according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). Congress already has authorized $60 billion for loan guarantees in which the federal government would shield utilities and private investment firms from the risk of default on loans for building new electricity generation plants. The Department of Energy (DOE) has allocated $18.5 billion of that money for new nuclear plants over the next few years. Given the average projected cost of building one reactor is currently $9 billion, the industry is clamoring for considerably more. To date, the DOE has received $122 billion in applications for loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants.

The nuclear power industry is pressuring Congress to dramatically expand federal loan guarantees for building new plants, which would put taxpayers and ratepayers at significant financial risk, according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). view counter Congress already has authorized $60 billion for loan guarantees in which the federal government would shield utilities and private investment firms from the risk of default on loans for building new electricity generation plants. The Department of Energy (DOE) has allocated $18.5 billion of that money for new nuclear plants over the next few years. Given the average projected cost of building one reactor is currently $9 billion, the industry is clamoring for considerably more. To date, the DOE has received $122 billion in applications for loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants.

The political climate and external conditions for new nuclear power plants may be more favorable now than at any time in the past several decades, but problems with a plant now under construction and the global financial crisis could deal the industry a setback, University of Greenwich Professor Stephen Thomas said Wednesday. The current nuclear renaissance has much greater government backing than previous prospective nuclear revivals and the external factors, such as volatile fossil fuel prices, the need to act on climate change and the geopolitical situation are as favorable as they are likely to get [for new nuclear], Thomas said Wednesday in a paper released at a conference in Washington. But Thomas and co-author David Hall wrote that the Areva EPR reactor being built for Finland utility TVO remains "the marker for the industry."

Japan launched an organisation Thursday to help other countries promote nuclear power generation which is increasingly in demand in the age of global warming, officials said. The new body, the International Nuclear Energy Cooperation Council, comprises representatives from government branches, power utilities, nuclear power plant makers and research organisations, they said. It will help the makers' overseas expansion while there are requests from Asian and Middle East countries for Japan's help in the field, according to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry. "Nuclear power plants have been revalued from the viewpoints of ensuring energy sources and dealing with global warming," Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry Toshihiro Nikai told an inaugural meeting of the council. "Japan has a long track record in safe operation of nuclear power plants and it has become a model for peaceful use of nuclear power," he said.

"he Vermont Senate's vote today to close the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant underscores the folly of the Obama administration's plan to help the nuclear industry build new reactors throughout the country. As evidenced in Vermont, many things can go wrong with nuclear plants, particularly as they age. At Vermont Yankee, which is 38 years old, radioactive substances leaked underground, and a cooling tower collapsed in 2007. Expanding the federal nuclear loan guarantee program from $18.5 billion to $54 billion, as the Obama administration wants to do, is incredibly bad policy, not only because of the safety risk of nuclear plants, but because of the financial risk as well. The chances of a nuclear utility defaulting on a loan are more than 50 percent; even Wall Street thinks reactors are too risky to back. You could call taxpayer loan guarantees for the nuclear industry "the next big bailout.""

The unfolding disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant follows decades of falsified safety reports, fatal accidents and underestimated earthquake risk in Japan's atomic power industry. The destruction caused by last week's 9.0 earthquake and tsunami comes less than four years after a 6.8 quake shut the world's biggest atomic plant, also run by Tokyo Electric Power Co. In 2002 and 2007, revelations the utility had faked repair records forced the resignation of the company's chairman and president, and a three-week shutdown of all 17 of its reactors. With almost no oil or gas reserves of its own, nuclear power has been a national priority for Japan since the end of World War II, a conflict the country fought partly to secure oil supplies. Japan has 54 operating nuclear reactors -- more than any other country except the U.S. and France -- to power its industries, pitting economic demands against safety concerns in the world's most earthquake-prone country.

"Not only the pressure vessels, but the containment vessels of the Nos. 1 to 3 reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant were probably damaged within 24 hours of the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, according to Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s analysis of the nuclear crisis. In a report on the analysis, the utility said it carried out minute calculations on internal pressure and other measurements in the nuclear reactors after the earthquake. The report was submitted to the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency on Monday night. TEPCO said it found that an isolation condenser, a type of emergency cooling device, did not work properly at the No. 1 reactor. This caused the core meltdown to progress until it damaged the bottom of the pressure vessel about 15 hours after the earthquake. Along with the meltdown, the temperature inside the steel containment vessel, which contains the pressure vessel, rose until it reached 300 C in 18 hours after the quake, much higher than 138 C the vessel was designed for. It is believed the internal temperature continued to rise after that. Containment vessels are designed for a much lower temperature and pressure than pressure vessels, which can be exposed to temperatures close to 300 C and pressure reaching 70 bars when a reactor is in operation."

Nuclear Power Industry is Perfect Illustration of Why Taxpayers Are Saying "No More Bailouts!" - Billions for Plant Vogtle Reactors Impossible to Justify in Terms of Rising Financial Risks, Reduced Demand for Power, Cheaper Renewables and Huge Potential of Energy Efficiency ATLANTA, Dec. 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- First it was insurance companies, then it was banks and that was followed by auto companies. Now, the federal government is putting U.S. taxpayers and utility customers at new risk under a controversial U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) loan guarantee program that is slated to award $18.5 billion, with Atlanta-based Southern Company predicted to be first on the list for program funds to build two new nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle in Waynesboro, Georgia. Ironically, the DOE's "top choice" for the nuclear reactor loan guarantees, which are backed by U.S. taxpayers in the event of defaults, is the very same Plant Vogtle that helped to kill the previous nuclear power boom in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s. Huge cost overruns at the original Plant Vogtle - which escalated from $660 million for four reactors to a whopping $8.87 billion for two - likely played a role in putting the brakes on nuclear expansion plans pursued decades ago in the United States.

Nuclear Power Industry is Perfect Illustration of Why Taxpayers Are Saying "No More Bailouts!" - Billions for Plant Vogtle Reactors Impossible to Justify in Terms of Rising Financial Risks, Reduced Demand for Power, Cheaper Renewables and Huge Potential of Energy Efficiency ATLANTA, Dec. 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- First it was insurance companies, then it was banks and that was followed by auto companies. Now, the federal government is putting U.S. taxpayers and utility customers at new risk under a controversial U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) loan guarantee program that is slated to award $18.5 billion, with Atlanta-based Southern Company predicted to be first on the list for program funds to build two new nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle in Waynesboro, Georgia. Ironically, the DOE's "top choice" for the nuclear reactor loan guarantees, which are backed by U.S. taxpayers in the event of defaults, is the very same Plant Vogtle that helped to kill the previous nuclear power boom in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s. Huge cost overruns at the original Plant Vogtle - which escalated from $660 million for four reactors to a whopping $8.87 billion for two - likely played a role in putting the brakes on nuclear expansion plans pursued decades ago in the United States.

The industry is poised to get billions in federal help, but some say that's a bad idea. NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Whatever happened to all those new nuclear power plants the country was supposed to build? Last year, with energy prices soaring and global warming making headlines, talk of a so-called "nuclear renaissance" was rampant. Energy experts, utility heads, even presidential candidates called for the construction of dozens of new plants. Billions were going to be spent. Investing magazines ran stories on how to get in on the action.

The industry is poised to get billions in federal help, but some say that's a bad idea. NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Whatever happened to all those new nuclear power plants the country was supposed to build? Last year, with energy prices soaring and global warming making headlines, talk of a so-called "nuclear renaissance" was rampant. Energy experts, utility heads, even presidential candidates called for the construction of dozens of new plants. Billions were going to be spent. Investing magazines ran stories on how to get in on the action.

As a Thursday vote on two new nuclear reactors looms, cities around the state that purchase power from San Antonio's municipal utility, City Public Services (CPS), are balking at the prospect of buying pricey nuclear power from the reactors. Three problems exist with the planned expansion at the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) facility. First, nuclear power creates dangerous radioactive waste that no one has figured out how to dispose of safely. Second, nuclear power is expensive - the nuclear industry requires taxpayer subsidies to prop it up. Third, no one knows for certain just how much the construction of the two reactors will cost ratepayers.

As a Thursday vote on two new nuclear reactors looms, cities around the state that purchase power from San Antonio's municipal utility, City Public Services (CPS), are balking at the prospect of buying pricey nuclear power from the reactors. Three problems exist with the planned expansion at the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) facility. First, nuclear power creates dangerous radioactive waste that no one has figured out how to dispose of safely. Second, nuclear power is expensive - the nuclear industry requires taxpayer subsidies to prop it up. Third, no one knows for certain just how much the construction of the two reactors will cost ratepayers.

U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced the selection of Clemson University to receive up to $45 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for a wind energy test facility that will enhance the performance, durability, and reliability of utility-scale wind turbines. This investment will support jobs and strengthen American leadership in wind energy technology by supporting the testing of next-generation wind turbine designs. "Wind power holds tremendous potential to help create new jobs and reduce carbon pollution," said Secretary Chu. "We are at the beginning of a new Industrial Revolution when it comes to clean energy and projects like these will help us get there faster."

U.S. Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu today announced the selection of Clemson University to receive up to $45 million under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for a wind energy test facility that will enhance the performance, durability, and reliability of utility-scale wind turbines. This investment will support jobs and strengthen American leadership in wind energy technology by supporting the testing of next-generation wind turbine designs. "Wind power holds tremendous potential to help create new jobs and reduce carbon pollution," said Secretary Chu. "We are at the beginning of a new Industrial Revolution when it comes to clean energy and projects like these will help us get there faster."

"While our government is demanding that BP pay up for the oil disaster in the Gulf, it is offering up billions of Americans' hard earned money to another high risk energy player - the wealthy nuclear power industry to build costly new nuclear reactors. Will this be another disaster waiting to happen? Today the utility giant Southern Company agreed to the terms of its portion of the $8.3 billion conditional loan guarantee awarded by the Obama Administration back in February for the proposed two new reactors it wants to build along with its utility partners at Plant Vogtle in Georgia. So now U.S. taxpayers are officially on the hook if the project goes belly up. Which given the nuclear industry's past track record, is a likely scenario. Many of the problems with these nuclear loan guarantees are in the aptly titled report, "

The post-World War II Atoms for Peace program failed to convince the electric utilities to invest in nuclear power. Insurance companies would only cover $250 million of potential damages from an accident. The government brought the utilities cooperation with the Price-Anderson Act requiring each atomic plant to buy the maximum commercial insurance and provided a second level of coverage from a pool funded by a potential assessment of up to $10 million against each plant. Under the protection of this act about 109 nuclear plants were built, and licensed for 30 years. The act limited the industries liability to $10 billion with the public to absorb anything over that amount.

Hokuriku Electric Power Co. will continue operating a nuclear reactor in central Japan after winning an appeal against a suit brought by a group of citizens concerned about safety in the event of an earthquake. The Nagoya High Court today reversed a ruling ordering the utility to shut the No. 2 reactor at the Shika plant in Ishikawa prefecture, it said in a statement. The Kanazawa district court ordered the 1,206-megawatt unit halted in March 2006. Today's ruling comes as Japan's nuclear power industry tries to win back public support after an earthquake in July 2007 triggered a fire and radiation leaks at the world's biggest atomic plant and a series of cases involving falsification of safety data came to light. The government and two other regional utilities are now contesting similar court cases in one of the world's most earthquake-prone countries.

The viability of a new generation of small nuclear power reactors, hailed by industry and several political leaders Wednesday, could be postponed by the realities of budgets and economics. Federal regulators say they are in no position to start reviewing plans for a new, smaller nuclear reactor like the one rolled out Wednesday by Babcock & Wilcox, a global company with facilities in Euclid and Barberton. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission even recently told the company to wait, as the agency confirmed to The Plain Dealer on Wednesday. The NRC simply lacks the money and staff to start reviewing prospective plans, especially when it has proposals for larger reactors that utility companies have committed to installing. Babcock & Wilcox's proposed "mPower" reactor, which could bring jobs to Ohio, has no committed user or site.

Japan's power industry utilities' association said on Friday it has delayed a target of having 16-18 nuclear reactors using mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel by five years to March 2016, denting the resource-poor nation's goal of a "closed" nuclear fuel cycle. Japan is aiming to move towards a closed cycle where it recycles its own spent fuel and then burns recovered uranium and plutonium as MOX fuel. The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan, made up of 10 utilities, said it would do its best to achieve the target by the year starting in April 2015, when a nuclear reprocessing plant in northern Japan is scheduled to start operations. MOX plutonium-uranium enriched fuel is controversial because critics fear it could be used to build nuclear weapons. Currently, no commercial reactors in Japan use the fuel, but Chubu Electric Power Co (9502.T), Shikoku Electric Power Co (9507.T) and Kyushu Electric Power (9508.T) last month imported MOX fuel from France. (Reporting by Osamu Tsukimori; Editing by Hugh Lawson)

U.S. lawmakers pushing to include greater recognition for existing nuclear power in a national renewable energy standard failed to win new breaks for the industry when a U.S. congressional panel on Wednesday voted down an amendment to a controversial climate change bill. The sweeping bill, which seeks to cap greenhouse gas emissions, includes a renewable energy mandate that would require utilities to generate 15 percent of electricity from renewable sources such as wind and solar by 2020. Under the legislation sponsored by Democratic Representatives Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, utilities' renewable mandate would be reduced in proportion to the portion of any electricity sales from new nuclear plants, but not existing nuclear plants.

The white papers issued by the Japan Atomic Energy Commission (JAEC) and the Japan Nuclear Safety Commission (JNSC) highlight the difficult situation faced by Japan's nuclear power industry. The JAEC's 2008 white paper says that facility utilization rates at Japan's nuclear power plants dropped to a mere 60.7 percent in fiscal 2007 - in a sharp contrast to an increase of the rates in the last 10 years in the United States, Russia and France. If Japan's utilization rates had been higher, they would have reduced the nation's greenhouse gas emissions. Under the Kyoto Protocol, Japan is required to cut its emissions in the 2008-2012 period by 6 percent from the 1990 level. But its emissions in fiscal 2007 were 8.7 percent higher than the 1990 level.

"President Obama has big plans for the future of commercial nuclear energy but the industry still has to deal with the waste it's generated over the past 50 years. The administration has pulled the plug on the Yucca Mountain repository so, today, half a century of radioactive waste remains at power plants. That's costing taxpayers and ratepayers billions of dollars a year. Living on Earth's Bruce Gellerman investigates the flow of federal funds and nuclear waste in the second story in our series. YOUNG: You might call it a money meltdown. For decades the federal government promised to permanently bury that high-level nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada. And utility consumers paid the government billions of dollars to do that. But the Obama administration wants to pull the plug on Yucca Mountain - while at the same time promising 54 billion dollars in federal loan guarantees to build new reactors. That means nuclear utility companies have to continue to store the spent fuel rods on site - often in pools of water and increasingly in special dry casks."