Skip to main content

GNEP Announcement Coming Later Today

By Eric McErlain
Just got the following media advisory from the Department of Energy:
Today, Thursday, August 3, 2006, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon will host a press conference call to discuss Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) announcements. GNEP, part of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative, was announced by Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman and Energy Deputy Secretary Clay Sell earlier this year, and seeks to develop worldwide consensus on enabling expanded use of economical, carbon-free nuclear energy to meet growing electricity demand.
Stay tuned. I'll be listening to the call at 2:00 p.m. U.S. EDT.

UPDATE: Press release from Energy just crossed my desk:
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced $20 million to conduct detailed siting studies for public or commercial entities interested in hosting DOE’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) facilities. Entities could qualify to receive up to $5 million per site. DOE also announced that it is seeking expressions of interest to obtain input from U.S. and international nuclear industry on the feasibility of accelerating development and deployment of advanced recycling technologies by proceeding with commercial scale demonstration facilities, specifically a Consolidated Fuel Treatment Facility and an Advanced Burner Reactor.

“The siting studies and expressions of interest enable public and commercial entities to provide useful input to the Department’s decision-making process for siting and building GNEP facilities in the U.S.,” DOE Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon said. “These are important steps forward for the GNEP initiative.”

[...]

The Department is considering a two-track approach to demonstrate technologies under GNEP. The first track involves deployment of commercial scale facilities for which advanced technologies are available now or in the near future. The second track would focus on further research and development on transmutation fuels (containing plutonium and minor actinides) technologies.

Under the first track, DOE is currently considering two commercial scale facilities: a Consolidated Fuel Treatment Center, capable of separating used fuel into its usable and waste components; and an Advanced Burner Reactor which would convert transuranics into shorter-lived radioisotopes while producing electricity.

Under the second track, an Advanced Fuel Cycle Facility announced earlier this year to support development of technologies to separate and fabricate the transmutation fuels for the Advanced Burner Reactor would be designed and directed through DOE’s national laboratories and therefore, is not part of the siting studies or the industry-requested expressions of interest.
Call starts in 20 minutes. I'll be listening.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
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...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
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...
6 comments
Read more