Skip to main content

Studies, Studies and Mo' Studies with Nuclear

Actually, there are only just three recent studies/reports I'd like to bring to your attention. The first comes from Ted Rockwell (pdf) at Learning About Energy.
Colleagues:
Attached is a list of purported facts about the use of nuclear energy for generating electricity, and purported facts about the principal, post-fossil alternatives: wind, solar and biofuels. There are no conclusions or recommendations here, just facts. Just real-world facts, no predictions or estimates or opinions. I don’t know of any other document that performs this function.
In it, there are some interesting safety stats on wind (p. 8) that I was unaware of and Mr. Rockwell includes some commentary on Amory Lovins' way of life that makes for some good reading. Definitely will be a useful document.

...

Next study to check out comes from the OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency. Earlier this week, NEA released a document on the perspective of nuclear energy and how it can address climate change (pdf).
Scenarios for future electricity supply prepared by the International Energy Agency, based on a reduction of CO2 emissions to around half of 2005 levels by 2050, show that nuclear power has a vital role to play, alongside improved energy end-use efficiency, a major expansion of renewable, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) from fossil fuel burning. These scenarios envisage a nuclear capacity of around 1,250 GWe by 2050, compared with 370 GWe today – an expansion of over 300%. This would require the completion of around 20 large nuclear plants (of 1.5 GWe each) per year during the 2020s, rising to 25 to 30 plants per year in the 2040s. In its Nuclear Energy Outlook (2008), the NEA found that nuclear capacity could reach 1,400 GWe by 2050 under its high scenario, through an even stronger expansion in the 2040s.
Oy, quite a task ahead.

...

And the last recommended study comes from the Energy Information Administration. On Monday, they released their preliminary numbers in their AEO 2010 on what the energy and electricity trends look like for the US out to 2035. There isn't too much love for nuclear, i.e. they only project 8,400 MW of new capacity will be built by 2030. But EIA does project that no nuclear plants will retire by 2035 (this assumes that 41 nuclear units (32,000 MW) will operate beyond 60 years). Below is a table we put together from EIA's data tables that shows what is projected to be built by each electric source and their different fuel shares based on existing laws and regulations:

Interesting how gas is projected to build the most capacity yet its fuel share remains practically the same...

Comments

D. Walters said…
8400 MWs in 20 years? Evidently they don't read Mandarin.
SteveK9 said…
They may be unaware of any other source of 'just the facts', but I would recommend to them David MacKay's superb 'Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air'. Just the facts is the whole point of this comprehensive treatise. Available for purchase or for free from the website

http://www.withouthotair.com/download.html
kb said…
@SteveK9: We reviewed MacKay's book here on NNN back in May.

http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2009/05/sustainable-energy-without-hot-air.html

Popular posts from this blog

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

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

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