Re[2]: Nuclear downsizing here; upsizing there

[BRZGV@ccmail.ceco.com]

     Things will get a little interesting when we start to have to come up 
     with lots of replacement power.  A majority of the existing units 
     probably came on line during a fifteen or so year period, which means 
     they will all go out within that same period (license renewal?).  
     We're talking about having to replace a lot of capacity in a 
     relatively short time in "utility-years".
     
     On another note, I really wonder whether or not the new advanced 
     reactors with their small MW outputs (lower power density for 
     increased safety?) will be able to be economically competive in the 
     $/Mw-hr race.  I know they'll need less people because their design is 
     more efficient, but 1200 MW would be much better than the existing 600 
     or so.  It would be interesting to see the economic analysis.
     
     Any thoughts?
     
     Glen Vickers


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Nuclear downsizing here; upsizing there
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at INTERNET
Date:    6/26/96 4:30 PM


At 10:09 AM 6/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>The post by Sandy Perle regarding his "downsizing" brings to mind the 
>April 26th editorial in Science magazine.  The editorial pointed out 
>that no new power reactors have been authorized in the US in the past 
>ten years.  The number of university nuclear engineering departments 
>in the US has decrease from 80 in 1978 to 35 today.
>
>In the meantime, Japan plans to "upsize" its 49 power reactors by 40 
>more.  South Korea has 19 under construction to add to its 11 
>operating reactors.  Taiwan, Indonesia, and China are also have 
>additional power reactors in the planning stages.  The reactors are 
>being built in 5 years or less and, in the case of Korea, are 
>achieving over 85% average capacity factor.
>
>When these additional reactors are up and running, the generated 
>electricity will not be used solely to power hair dryers and TVs. 
>The effect on energy-dependent jobs in the U.S. might be summed up 
>in one phrase - "NIMBY".
>
>Rick
>
>
>|~~~~\  /~\  |~~~~\ |~|  /~\  |~\_|~||~~~~~| Richard G. Strickert, Ph.D.
>| [> / / _ \ |  D  || | / _ \ | \ \ ||     | POBox 201088, Austin, TX 78720 
>|_||_\/_| |_\|____/ |_|/_| |_\|_|\__||     | (512)310-5259  FAX (512)244-0160 
>-------------------------------------| LLC | Internet:rick_strickert@radian.com
>I  N  T  E  R  N  A  T  I  O  N  A  L|_____|   ---> "All written IMHO." <---
>
>
     
A recent article titled "Nuclear Power Browning Out" appeared in the 
May/June issue of The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists which paints a much 
less optimistic picture of nuclear power abroad.  Following are some summary 
points from the article:
     
The nuclear power programs in Japan and South Korea have become less 
ambitious due to public opposition which has slowed the pace of construction 
over the past decade.  In January 1996 the local government of S. Korea 
decided to revoke building permits for additional reactors at the Yonggwang 
station.  Due to local opposition, the Japanese government only approving 
two sights for nuclear development since 1979, and Japans goal of doubling 
their nuclear capacity is widely viewed as unrealistic.
     
In China, leaders have announced plans to build 15 plants by 2010, but 
judging from the current pace of development and construction, this is 
unlikely to come to fruition.
     
Taiwan has six reactors in operation, but none under construction since the 
abandonment of plans for another two reactors in 1995.
     
The Philippines abandoned its nuclear program after building a single 
inoperable reactor.
     
Indonesia and Thailand have considered their options, but not gone down the 
path do date.
     
Mexico stopped building plants in 1994.
     
In Africa and the Middle East, only two power reactors are operating - both 
in South Africa - and only one is under construction in Iran.
     
France gets 75% of it power from the atom, but it is building only four more 
reactors, and all four are due to be finished by 1998.  Elsewhere in Western 
Europe, Sweden completed its last plant in 1985, Spain in 1988, Germany in 
1989, and Britain in 1995.
     
I'm sorry - and as a dyed-in-the-wool atom head it gives me great pain to 
say it -  I don't share in your optimism Rick.
     
L.E. Fiske
Shepherd Miller, Inc.