The Cradle-to-Grave of the Energy World

Or at least that's the hope of Adelaide University professor Ian Plimer:

"I think it is an absolute no-brainer that we should look at a cradle-to-grave uranium industry," Professor Plimer said at a uranium conference in Adelaide yesterday.

"Where we mine it, we convert it into yellowcake, we create the fuel rods, we lease these fuel rods to the major Western countries that are wanting to use nuclear power.

"We take the fuel rods back, we clean them up and we dispose of the waste.

"That would make South Australia the Saudi Arabia of the energy world."

Although this is coming from an academic, expect a good deal of clamoring for position in the near future as the nuclear renaissance really gets going. But does South Australia really want to be the new Saudi Arabia... ?

Comments

Matthew66 said…

While it makes a lot of sense for South Australia to pursue nuclear energy given that it has negligible supplies of coal and natural gas, and an abundance of land that has already been contaminated (British/Australian nuclear tests in the 1950s), such a scenario is unlikely until there is consensus in South Australia and Australia more widely that nuclear power is a good thing. As long as the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union has the influence it does, there will be no consensus on utilizing uranium for energy within Australia. The CFMEU doesn't mind its metal ores miners digging up uranium, they just don't want their coal miners put out of work. Jobs for the boys don't you know.

March 18, 2008 at 6:39 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...

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...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog