Skip to main content

Around Europe and Asia

pt10_art_olympics Marketwatch takes a look at the resurgence of nuclear energy in Europe and elsewhere. Here’s the gist of it:

Overall, the NEA, a division of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, has forecast the number of reactors worldwide growing to between 600 and 1,400 by 2050, from 430 today. That represents necessary investment of between $680 billion and $3.9 trillion, at roughly $4 billion per reactor.

That’s a lot of economic activity. When one talks about the cost of building an energy plant, it’s easy to forget how many people and how many allied industries benefit from the project.

The article has little in it you haven’t seen before, though we like writer Aude Lagorce’s taste for tidbits:

Several European countries are currently building reactors, including Hungary, Finland and Poland. Others are proposing legislation to extend the lifespan of current reactors (Germany) or selecting sites for new reactors (U.K.).

Do read and email it to your nuclear reluctant friends. It’s a great primer.

---

Marketwatch seems to be on a roll, as Myra Saefong takes a similar look at Asia and finds – much the same result.

Exploding populations and rapid industrial growth combined with competition for dwindling oil and gas supplies have put energy at the top of government agendas in the region. And while countries are pushing hard to maximize their oil, gas and coal supplies, regional leaders understand that nuclear is likely to be an essential part of the mix when it comes to meeting their future energy needs.

Yes, quite likely indeed. Interestingly, Asian nuclear advocates see their European and American counterparts as sorely lagging.

The rapid expansion in Asia stands in contrast to slower growth in Europe and the U.S. Viewed from Asia, the Western countries "appear to underestimate the importance of this sector and have been following a policy of disengagement in, or even outright phasing out of nuclear energy," he [Martin Hennecke, an associate director at Tyche Group Ltd. in Hong Kong] said.

We don’t think Hennecke is right, but we’ll give it to him if he keeps saying things like this:

"The Asian nuclear-power industry is on a very rapid expansionary course and ... will develop into a hugely significant market over the next decades -- most likely of an importance far beyond the much less efficient, more expensive yet much more hyped other alternative energies of solar, wind, ethanol or biomass."

It may be a bit like a pinwheel of optimism, but we encourage Hennecke to keep it up.

---

On the other hand, maybe Hennecke has some viable evidence on his side. We found this article by longtime Nuclear Notes friend Rod Adams about China’s nuclear ambitions very interesting in this regard:

Just a few years ago, the goal in China was to increase nuclear plant capacity from about 9 GWe to 40 GWe by 2020. The current plan will achieve that goal within the next five years and could hit a number closer to 80-120 GWe by 2020. The reactor construction and manufacturing enterprise will not suddenly stop at that level. As the construction continues, China could be operating 300-400 GWe of nuclear plant capacity by 2030. If history is any guide, that capacity should be operating at a capacity factor of 75-90%, displacing a tremendous quantity of fossil fuel consumption.

We’re not sure history is any guide here, but if China genuinely brings this to pass, the choking pollution found there during the 2008 Summer Olympics will become a thing of the past and worries about China and its carbon emissions will likewise fade away. Now that’s a pinwheel of optimism we’re not willing to set atwirl just yet, but dreaming big if one must dream should never be discouraged.

Building an Olympic stadium in a thick haze of smog.

Comments

BGiardini said…
Can someone give me a timeline on how far we are along in nuclear power adn where it is heading in the future?
Anonymous said…
"Several European countries are currently building reactors, including Hungary, Finland and Poland." Huh? Hungary and Poland are still in exploratory stages, like the Czech Republic. Building is taking place in Finland and France. Two equals several?

--E. Michael Blake
David Bradish said…
Can someone give me a timeline on how far we are along in nuclear power adn where it is heading in the future?

The Energy Information Administration's International Energy Outlook just released today shows almost a doubling in world nuclear generation over the next 25 years. Here's the nuclear section:

Electricity generation from nuclear power increases from about 2.6 trillion kilowatthours in 2007 to a projected 3.6 trillion kilowatthours in 2020 and then to 4.5 trillion kilowatthours in 2035. Higher future prices for fossil fuels make nuclear power economically competitive with generation from coal, natural gas, and liquid fuels, despite the relatively high capital costs of nuclear power plants. Moreover, higher capacity utilization rates have been reported for many existing nuclear facilities, and the projection anticipates that most of the older nuclear power plants in the OECD countries and non-OECD Eurasia will be granted extensions to their operating lives.

Around the world, nuclear generation is attracting new interest as countries seek to increase the diversity of their energy supplies, improve energy security, and provide a low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. Still, there is considerable uncertainty associated with nuclear power projections. Issues that could slow the expansion of nuclear power in the future include plant safety, radioactive waste disposal, rising construction costs and investment risk, and nuclear material proliferation concerns. Those issues continue to raise public concern in many countries and may hinder the development of new nuclear power reactors. Nevertheless, the IEO2010 Reference case incorporates improved prospects for world nuclear power. The projection for nuclear electricity generation in 2030 is 9 percent higher than the projection published in last year’s IEO.

On a regional basis, the Reference case projects the strongest growth in nuclear power for the countries of non-OECD Asia, where nuclear power generation is projected to grow at an average rate of 7.7 percent per year from 2007 to 2035, including projected increases averaging 8.4 percent per year in China and 9.5 percent per year in India. Outside Asia, the largest projected increase in installed nuclear capacity is in Central and South America, with increases in nuclear power generation averaging 4.3 percent per year. Prospects for nuclear generation in OECD Europe have undergone a significant revision from last year’s outlook, because a number of countries in the region are reversing policies that require the retirement of nuclear power plants and moratoria on new construction. In the IEO2010 Reference case, nuclear generation in OECD Europe increases on average by 0.8 percent per year, as compared with the small decline projected in IEO2009.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…