Megatons to Megawatts Reaches Milestone

Our friend Charles Yulish at USEC sent us a note this week to remind us of a very important milestone achieved this week by "Megatons to Megawatts":

Megatons to Megawatts (M2M) program—elimination of the 10,000th nuclear warhead—the half way mark in this program.

250 metric tons of HEU from Russian warheads has been diluted and recycled into fuel for American power reactors -- 10 percent of America’s electricity is produced using M2M fuel.

Nuclear power plants are helping to make the world safer by using this fuel, which is derived from warhead material that is diluted in Russia and shipped to America for use in the nation’s nuclear power reactors.

The fuel is no longer bomb-grade, and can’t be used as a weapon. It is identical to the low enriched fuel produced in U.S. and other facilities and safely transported globally for more than half a century.

USEC Inc. is the U.S. executive agent operating this program, at no cost to American taxpayers.

The program will continue through 2013, when 500 metric tons of Russian warhead material, equal to 20,000 nuclear warheads, will have been eliminated by the Megatons to Megawatts process.

Click here for our original piece on the program earlier this year. And congratulations to everyone at USEC for a job well done.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Electricity, USEC, Nonproliferation

Comments

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog