Skip to main content

The Enemy of My Enemy

One of the odder bits of news involves "Europe's last dictator," Alexander Lukashenko of Balarus, is pursuing a pact with Iran to build a nuclear power plant - odd, because it seems unlikely to occur.

David Marples, a Belarus expert at the University of Alberta, doubts that Iran could afford to finance a project that is likely to run much higher than, perhaps even double the amount of, the officially projected $4-5 billion. “It would be an enormous commitment from Iran,” he said and pointed to Russia as the more likely nuclear partner.

Likely an announcement meant to spark a bit of amusement in diplomatic circles or perhaps stir up some mischief for Washington, the net effect is nil. Doubtful that a saber will even be unsheathed much less rattled.

Comments

gunter said…
... in part because of the tremendous ongoing remediation costs from Chernobyl fallout.

Dr. David Marples is an recognized expert on the economic fallout in Belarus and Ukraine from the 1986 catastrophe.
Anonymous said…
Gunter,

How many times do you have to be told that a Chernobyl event can never occur at any Western light water reactor?

Why do you keep bringing up the failure of a mad socialist design?
Anonymous said…
At current world oil prices, Iran's government has a daily income of a bit more that $250 million.

Building a 1000 MWe nuclear plant offers the potential of freeing up another 40,000 barrels of oil per day worth about $4 million per day on the open market. (Iran DOES burn oil for electrical power, unlike the US.)

Why would it be difficult for them to finance a new nuclear power plant? If they choose the right partner, the total cost for the plant might be far less than the same plant in the western world simply because protests and lawsuits against government decisions are not tolerated. (Not that I favor such dictatorial decision making, but it does have advantages.)

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 …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …