NEI's Energy Markets Report - January 21-January 25, 2008

Here's a summary of what went on in the energy markets last week:

Electricity peak prices decreased $3-7/MWh at the ERCOT and Palo Verde hubs. The other four hubs increased $2-12/MWh. Colder temperatures at the NEPOOL and PJM West hubs elevated prices by more than $10/MWh (Platts, see pages 1 and 3).

Gas prices at the Henry Hub decreased $0.13 to $8.14/MMBtu. The holiday week and above average gas supplies contributed to the spot price declines. During the first 76 days of the heating season (began November), a net volume of 964 Bcf of natural gas was withdrawn from underground storage which was significantly higher than for the same period last year. If withdrawals for the remainder of the heating season equal the drawdown for the comparable period of last winter, storage would be about 16 percent below the previous end-of-March stocks (EIA, see pages 1 and 3).

Estimated nuclear plant availability advanced to 95 percent last week. Seabrook automatically shut down due to a turbine trip. Summer manually tripped after failure of a feedwater flow control valve (NRC, see pages 2 and 4).

Crude oil prices fell $3.93 from the previous week to $90.83/barrel. Since November, crude oil prices have averaged almost $35 per barrel higher than the year before (EIA, see pages 1 and 3). The spot price of uranium fell to $78 and $82/lb U3O8 according to UxConsulting and TradeTech. TradeTech stated that political uncertainty is playing a pivotal role in the uranium market. Some market participants view this week’s announced delay in the signing of the proposed amendment to the Russian Suspension Agreement as a bellwether of potential supply uncertainty, while others view the announcement as a natural part of the negotiation process. Some buyers view the current price drop as an anomaly and are considering purchases, although others continue to “bargain hunt” (see pages 1 and 3).

For the report click here. It is also located on NEI's Financial Center webpage.

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