Nuclear News: The Dilemma of Aging Nuclear Plants
| Share |
|
Today's big stories from the nuclear industry:
The Dilemma of Aging Nuclear Plants
’PARIS - From the time the world's first commercial nuclear power plants were switched on in the late 1950s, installed generating capacity rose rapidly over two decades. It leveled off in the 1980s as new building programs were scrapped in the wake of the accident at Three Mile Island, among other factors. Contractors generally designed plants to last for 40 years – a standard enshrined in the United States in the adoption by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or N.R.C., of a 40-year licensing regime. A large part of the world's installed nuclear power capacity is now coming to the end of that designed life span. Caught between approaching retirement deadlines and public opposition to new plants, industry operators are pushing to extend the life of their plants to 60 or even 80 years - and this despite problems of premature aging of major components that have already obliged many to replace their plants' steam generators at heavy capital expense. Running plants longer is one way to recoup the extra cost and raise returns on investment over the full life of the plant. But it has safety implications. The 40-year life span was a design specification, said Guillaume Wack, director for nuclear plants at the Autorité de Sûreté Nucléaire, or A.S.N., the French nuclear regulator.’
CEZ to switch to Russian nuclear fuel in 2010
’PRAGUE, Oct 19 - Czech power group CEZ
Greenpeace takes action over Spanish nuclear panel
’MADRID (Reuters) - Environmental group Greenpeace says it took legal action on Friday against the government and the nuclear regulator for alleged delays in setting up a panel on nuclear safety with public participation. A Greenpeace statement said legislation provided for the Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee to be constituted by August 2008 in order to issue non-binding recommendations to the Nuclear Safety Council (CSN) watchdog. Some 20 people are due to sit on the committee, including representatives from central and local government, utilities, unions, environmental groups and technical experts. "By stalling over the creation of the Advisory Committee, the industry minister and president of the CSN have in fact prevented environmental groups from getting relevant first-hand information on safety problems," Greenpeace spokesman Carlos Bravo said. Greenpeace want more information over a CSN ruling in June, which favored allowing the aging Garona nuclear plant to run for another 10 years. The environmentalists say Garona had failed to implement some of the CSN's prior recommendations.’
Date of completion for Olkiluoto III nuclear plant still anybody's guess
’Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO), a Finnish electricity generating public company owning and operating two nuclear power plant units in Olkiluoto on the west coast of Finland, reported on Thursday of last week on yet another delay in the construction of the third nuclear facility in the Olkiluoto site. This latest announcement moves once again the completion date for the Olkiluoto III project to the unforeseen future. At the moment no-one dares to start speculating when the OL3 might actually be finished, but it may well be that the construction site launched in 2004 gets to celebrate its tenth birthday before Finland's fifth commercial nuclear reactor eventually goes on stream. Through the Thursday announcement TVO project manager Jouni Silvennoinen communicated that the completion of the OL3 "may be pushed back further than June 2012, which is the current deadline confirmed by the equipment manufacturer". A new considerable uncertainty factor is automation. Its planning has been delayed, which may prove critical from the point of view of the overall timetable.’
Nuclear swap - Should the West provide Iran with reactor fuel in exchange for its uranium stockpile?
’FOR NOW, at least, nuclear negotiations between Iran and the West have narrowed to an issue that was not even on the agenda a month ago: Iran's possible export of most of its existing stockpile of enriched uranium to Russia and France, which would turn it into fuel for an Iranian research reactor. This is both a bad and a good development. It is bad because it diverts attention from Iran's continuing refusal to comply with U.N. resolutions ordering it to cease uranium enrichment and from its failure to accept Western proposals even for a temporary freeze. But if Iran goes through with the agreement in principle announced by the Obama administration on Oct. 1, the tangible good would be the removal from Iran of most of the known raw material it could use to make a bomb -- and a probable delay of one to two years in the West's estimates of how quickly it could produce one. It's still unclear whether Tehran will go through with the deal in a timely fashion. According to International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohammed ElBaradei, talks on the arrangement in Vienna got off to a "good start" Monday; other reports were less positive. The discussions are supposed to cover technical matters and conclude in a couple of days. But some reports from Iran suggest that Tehran will back away from exporting its stockpile -- a measure creatively proposed by the Obama administration after Iran asked to purchase fuel for the research reactor.’
Iran Drops Plan to Buy Uranium in France
’Iran offered contradictory positions on its nuclear stance on Monday, using domestic media to appear to back away from a prior promise, even as it sat down for talks at the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran had agreed to ship much of its stock of low-enriched uranium abroad, a move that should temporarily curb its ability to build a nuclear weapon. On Monday, Iran's official news agency said France would be excluded from countries that could sell enriched uranium to Iran because Tehran said France hadn't kept a promise to deliver 50 tons of UF6 gas, and could no longer be trusted. It was unclear whether the Iranian position was a negotiating tactic, or a real threat. "The Iranian delegation has a very clear mission in Vienna and it's to hammer out the details of transporting fuel to Iran. Even if there are side meetings, they will be about this matter and nothing else," a member of Iran's delegation told ISNA, a semi-official news agency.’
Foreign investment in Niger
’Oct 19 (Reuters) - Niger will go to the polls in legislative elections on Tuesday, a vote that is expected to tighten President Mamadou Tandja's authority. Tandja says he needs greater control of the country in order to oversee investment and infrastructure projects. Below are details of companies with mining, oil and industrial projects in Niger, which produces around 7.5 percent of the world's uranium. French state-owned nuclear energy group Areva is developing the Imouraren uranium mine in the north of Niger. Due to begin producing in 2012 after initial investment of 1.2 billion euros, Imouraren is expected to be the biggest uranium mine in Africa with eventual production of 5,000 tonnes per year for 35 years. Areva has operated Niger's two existing uranium mines, Cominak and Somair, since the 1970s.’
