Report: Australia Could Lose Billions in Export Income Without Nuclear Industry

That was the conclusion of a report prepared by Silex Systems at the behest of Prime Minister John Howard's government:

The Age has obtained a submission to Mr Howard's inquiry by technology firm Silex Systems that argues Australia would lose export income of $US2 billion to $3 billion ($A2.6 billion-$3.9 billion) per year by 2015 if it failed to enrich its substantial supplies of uranium.

"If Australia is to fully capitalise on the value of its precious uranium resources, then it should develop a nuclear fuel industry which includes uranium conversion, uranium enrichment and fuel fabrication services," Silex puts to the Prime Minister's uranium taskforce, chaired by former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski. The company also issues a blunt warning that no corporation will invest in Australia until the country achieves bipartisan support and lowers the political temperature around the nuclear cycle.

"Against the backdrop of a deeply divided political landscape, it appears inconceivable that private industry would contemplate investing in an Australian nuclear fuel industry," Silex says. "Investment will not happen as long as there is the threat that a billion-dollar project could be shut down or even stalled after a future federal election."

With a considerable chunk of the world's uranium reserves, Austrlia is in a unique position as the nuclear industry continues to revive globally.

For more on current happenings in Austrlia on the nuclear issue, go see Robert Merkel.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Electricity, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Australia, Uranium

Comments

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