Skip to main content

In Idaho, Japan and Finland

INLA little story appearing in the Spokane (Wash.) Spokesman-Review:

Gov. Butch Otter today signed an executive order creating the “Idaho Leadership in Nuclear Energy Commission,” or LINE Commission, to identify “opportunities and challenges associated with hosting the Idaho National Laboratory,” the nuclear facility in eastern Idaho. “Idaho clearly has been a recognized leader in nuclear energy research, development and demonstration for over 60 years,” Otter said. “We’ve also borne environmental burdens, but significant progress has been made in cleanup that enables us to focus more attention on the long-term viability and mission relevance of the INL.”

I wasn’t sure what this meant, exactly – the name of the commission suggests that the goal is to promote INL as a notable state entity, but the text is a little more nuanced. Maybe that’s just how Gov. Otter goes about things:

Otter's executive order on Wednesday reinforces his support of the industry's presence in eastern Idaho - even amid concern that a French company, Areva, could abandon plans to build a $3 billion uranium enrichment facility west of Idaho Falls.

So there is a plus as well as a minus value – I have no special knowledge of AREVA’s plans – but if Otter aims to promote the viability of Idaho for nuclear energy-related projects due to INL’s presence, well, he’s in the right state to do that.


Japan’s efforts to gain a consensus that will allow it to turn its nuclear facilities back on appears to be showing results:

Japanese governor Tokihiro Nakamura believes nuclear power is vital for the resource-poor land, but even he says the central government must put safety pledges in writing before he'll agree to restart off-line reactors -- a sign of the tough battle ahead to repair tattered public trust after the Fukushima crisis.

I guess you could call that the opening bid. Nakamura wants more, too:

"It is the central government that must take ultimate responsibility, so at the very least, the trade and industry minister should come to the prefecture and discuss this with me openly," Nakamura, whose Ehime prefecture in western Japan hosts Shikoku Electric Power Co.'s Ikata nuclear power plant.

None of that sounds unreasonable, though some ministers will be doing a lot of travelling as more of the governors decide what will help them decide about the facilities in their localities.It’s worth doing, even if there’s a fair amount of it to do.

At least Nakamura is disinclined to be a dope about this:

Nakamura, a 52-year-old former member of parliament, said electricity supply in the summer, when annual demand usually peaks, was likely to be tight in his region if no reactors came back on line.

"In this situation, I think they will have to be restarted at some point," he said.

Hopefully, after Nakamura receives his visitors and gets the signed safety documents, Ikata can start up again.


I’m not an expert on financial stuff, so I generally have to take news like this at face value:

The restoration of some nuclear plants helped Finnish utility Fortum's power generation business turn more profitable in the fourth-quarter, the company said on Wednesday.

The power generation unit's comparable operating profit, which excludes hedging, rose 4.5 percent from a year earlier to 351 million euros ($459 million), beating forecasts.

Good for Fortum.

"Utilization rate at Fortum's nuclear power plants in Sweden was good," said Nordea analyst Pasi Vaisanen.

Even better. This part I get, as one tends to forget that nuclear power plants, while expensive to build, are quite inexpensive to run. That’s good for the bottom line. The story has more on the financial situation if that interests you.

Idaho National Labs. Looks lonely out there.


Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.


The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.

What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…