China Nuclear Update

Chinese fast reactor nuclear power plant will likely supply electricity for Chinese electricity market 30 years later, said Wang Naiyan, the academician of Chinese Academy of Sciences and director of China Institute of Atomic Energy, on June 7th in Beijing.

China will strive hard to make commercial use of its fast reactor nuclear system in around 2035 and make it the main source of nuclear power after 2050, according to the Mr. Wang's academic report delivered at the 13th China Science Institute Academic Conference.

Meanwhile, the world waits for China's decision on which foreign company will win a contract to build a new generation of nuclear reactors. But what really caught my attention in the Forbes story was this passage:

'Pebble-bed' technology is considered likely to form the core of China's next generation of nuclear plants.

It will be the first radical new reactor designed globally in decades and will put China at the forefront in nuclear energy research that offers a 'meltdown-proof' alternative to conventional nuclear power stations, reports said.

In a briefing here at NEI a couple of weeks ago, Dr. Kelvin Klemm, currently working as a consultant in South Africa on the PBMR project, had mentioned that China was very interested in the design. More confirmation that China will build PBMR's, here.

The National Development and Reform Commission also announced that construction will begin on the Hongyanhe Nuclear Power Plant in Liaoning province next year.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Electricity, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, China, PBMR, South Africa

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