Australia Nuclear Update

Global mining concern BHP Billiton announced on Friday that it had completed purchase of more than 90 percent of the outstanding shares of WMC Resources -- an event that triggers an option for BHP to purchase all of the remaining shares and take control of the company. As we've noted before, WMC is the owner of Australia's Olympic Dam mine, home of one of the largest reserves of uranium in the world.

Last week, The Age (Melbourne) opined on the resurgence of the nuclear energy issue in Australia. Meanwhile, in Newcastle City, local residents pledged to turn off their electricity for one hour in a protest against coal-fired power:

Environmentalists say coal-fired power plants, a major source of greenhouse gases in Australia, are one of the biggest contributors towards climate change.

If 300 consumers switch off power for just an hour, green groups calculate they will reduce the output of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere by around 600 cubic kilograms.

Today's protest follows NSW Premier Bob Carr's controversial call for nuclear power to act as a bridge between fossil-fuel use and a new era of renewable energy, which green groups have dismissed as a distraction from further planned coal-fired power plants.

Prominent federal and NSW Labor politicians, Peter Garrett and Anthony Albanese, have spoken out against nuclear power, while Queensland Premier Beattie has come out in support of clean coal technology.

As others have noted, Carr's position has caused a split in the labor party, most recently in the Northern Territory, home to the Ranger mine. The Labor government there has taken a position against expansion of uranium mining at Ranger, opposite to Carr, and against the publicly stated plans of Australia's federal government.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics

Comments

Engineer-Poet said…

600 cubic kilograms?

Is that one of these New-age units like the "kilowatts per hour" people keep talking about? For some reason, none of them have ever been scientists or engineers.

June 22, 2005 at 1:11 AM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog