The South Texas Project wants to build a new unit on its site and has found strong support from the San Antonio Express News:
CPS customers pay rates that are routinely among the lowest of any major utility in the country. That's a key element in the Alamo City's affordability, lowering the cost of living for individuals and the cost of production for businesses.
Keeping those rates low and steady is essential for the city's continued economic prosperity. For the foreseeable future, the best way to do so is for CPS to invest in a sensible expansion of nuclear generation at the South Texas Project in Bay City while aggressively pursuing efficiency and sustainability and positioning itself to take advantage of advances in green energy technology.
Talk about Getting It. Capital G, Capital I. But don’t these units cost a lot? Oh, yes:
[San Antonio] Mayor Julián Castro has proposed reducing CPS' ownership in the expansion from a planned 40 percent down to the 20-25 percent range. Along with other CPS generation and efficiency projects, that share would still provide the electricity that a growing San Antonio needs. But it will also significantly reduce the utility's exposure to risk while freeing up billions of dollars over the next decade to invest in sustainability and emerging clean technologies.
Castro's proposal deserves the support of the CPS board of directors and the San Antonio City Council, which must move swiftly to authorize the utility's sale of an additional $400 million in bonds to finance the project.
In other words, with some ingenuity, STP gets what it needs, CPS likewise, the city too. Win win win.
And to top this sundae with a cherry:
Nuclear power remains the best method of large-scale, low-cost power generation to minimize dependence on fossil fuels.
So there you go.
---
When it comes to nuclear energy, what does Russia have to offer the world?
Russia is a member of an elite nuclear club which offers huge future benefits. First, few countries in the world know the secrets of building state-of-the-art and reliable power plants. Second, few countries possess uranium enrichment technology. And finally, the countries producing fuel for nuclear power plants can be counted on the fingers of one hand.
Russian companies are ready to provide the entire cycle of production, from uranium mining to NPP construction. Today, Russia accounts for 40[%] of the world’s uranium enrichment facilities, 17[%] of the international fuel market, 28[%] of NPP building capacity and 8[%] of uranium mining.
Well, that uranium number is pretty low, but you get the idea – a one stop shop for all your nuclear needs. And Russia’s working on those uranium numbers, too.
Another way [to enhance uranium supply after buying it from Australia and South Africa] is to deepen co-operation with uranium-rich nations in the first place, for example Central Asian republics and Mongolia. Neighboring Kazakhstan has the world’s third largest reserves of uranium, after the US and South Africa. Mongolia is next, occupying fourth place, but its prospective reserves (1.3m tons) could make it one of the world’s largest uranium suppliers.
So how are things going for the Russians?
Russian nuclear reactors successfully operate in 10 countries, and there are construction projects running in three others. Another 17 nations, from Brazil and Egypt to Ukraine and the Czech Republic, are in talks with Rosatom on new projects. Russia is ready to build another four power generating units for India’s Kudankulam nuclear power plant. Rosatom also has certain interests in Turkey, Southeast Asia, North Africa and Latin America.
We offer all this without comment. A roundup of French or American ambition and capability would differ in detail only, after all, and all three countries find exporting their know-how a great way to make money and enhance their countries’ standings. Call it the Russian corner of the way of the nuclear world.
This comes from the Telegraph – we’ve de-Britishized it a bit.
---
Even though it has generated a lot of good press, not everyone loves NEI’s sponsorship of the Washington Capitals hockey team:
Environmental groups like Greenpeace are crying foul. Nuclear policy analyst Jim Riccio says the Washington-based group doesn't want sports teams being used to greenwash nuclear power, which it believes isn't a solution to global warming.
“Doesn’t want?” And you thought bad sportsmanship was limited to the world of sports.
The Murmansk nuclear plant. One of these days, we’ll come up with a nice shot of a Russian nuclear plant. The Russians just don’t seem to do that.
0 comments:
Post a Comment