China to build 2 new reactors for Pakistan & Italy to select site for new reactors in 2011

[Statistical]

Italy Nuclear Plant Sites to Be Selected Next Year, Conti Says

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- Enel SpA Chief Executive Officer Fulvio Conti said that sites for the construction of at least four nuclear reactors in Italy will be selected next year.

“In a year’s time we will probably be able to give indications about site proposals,” Conti said on the sidelines of a conference in Rome. It’s “premature” to indicate locations today, he said.

Conti said Enel would build at least four reactors in Italy, and each would employ as many as 700 people.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-29/italy-nuclear-plant-sites-to-be-selected-next-year-conti-says.html

Italy is an important case as Italy is THE ONLY country to end a nuclear energy program once started. Only a single country in the world (of 26 nations with nuclear energy). Italy decision to end nuclear energy in 1990 has been called "a terrible mistake". Today Italy has the dubious distinction of being the largest importer of electrical energy in the world. most of it comes from nuclear reactors in France. The shutdown alone cost about $80 billion and since then Italy has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on energy imports each year.


On to Pakistan:

China has agreed to build two civilian nuclear reactors in Pakistan, the Financial Times reported, citing Chinese companies and unnamed government officials in Beijing and Islamabad.

The Chinese government gave approval for the construction of at least two 650-megawatt reactors in Chashma in Punjab province, according to the report. The FT didn’t say the agreement was for which phase of construction.

China’s accord to build the reactors in Pakistan heightened concerns about the safety of nuclear equipment in the South Asian nation, which is battling Taliban militants in the northwest. U.S. President Barack Obama won commitments from 46 nations, including China and Pakistan, to lock down nuclear material and keep it out of the hands of terrorists after a two- day summit in Washington ended April 14.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-29/china-to-build-two-nuclear-reactors-in-pakistan-ft-reports.html

Pakistan currently has 3 reactors under construction (and all operating civilian reactors under IAEA safeguards). This is a substantial ramp up in the rate of nuclear power construction.

Man it sees every week more and more countries haven't got the memo that "nuclear power is dead".

[ellenfl]

1. crap! i hope we don't get our nuclear plants from china.

they haven't sent us much that wasn't tainted or defective.

ellen fl

[Kolesar]

2. If they have lead in them, it may actually be a good thing.

hard to top your comment!

[ellenfl]

5. lol, thery'll probably short us on lead this time! eom

[diane in sf]

3. They aren't dead under authoritarian regimes or where people want materials for bombs

People don't build them where they have choice over what kind of power plants they build or where the free market decides.

[Statistical]

4. Yeah the "free market" decides coal. It has for 30+ years.

Also is Finland, Italy, France, Japan, USA, and Canada "authoritarian regimes"? :rofl:

Is Finland trying to build a bomb?
Despite having nuclear power for 30 years they haven't made even slightest attempt towards weapons programs.

[kristopher]

6. Nuclear power just perptutates the current energy industry power structure

Nuclear power is the fallback plan for those who own coal and petroleum.

Over the next 50 years, unless patterns change dramatically, energy production and use will contribute to global warming through large-scale greenhouse gas emissions — hundreds of billions of tonnes of carbon in the form of carbon dioxide. Nuclear power could be one option for reducing carbon emissions. At present, however, this is unlikely: nuclear power faces stagnation and decline.

This study analyzes what would be required to retain nuclear power as a significant option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and meeting growing needs for electricity supply. Our analysis is guided by a global growth scenario that would expand current worldwide nuclear generating capacity almost threefold, to 1000 billion watts,by the year 2050.Such a deployment would avoid 1.8 billion tonnes of carbon emissions annually from coal plants, about 25% of the increment in carbon emissions otherwise expected in a business-as-usual scenario. This study also recommends changes in government policy and industrial practice needed in the relatively near term to retain an option for such an outcome. (Want to guess what these are? - K)

We did not analyze other options for reducing carbon emissions — renewable energy sources, carbon sequestration,and increased energy efficiency — and therefore reach no conclusions about priorities among these efforts and nuclear power. In our judgment, it would be a mistake to exclude any of these four options at this time.

STUDY FINDINGS
For a large expansion of nuclear power to succeed,four critical problems must be overcome:

Cost. In deregulated markets, nuclear power is not now cost competitive with coal and natural gas.However,plausible reductions by industry in capital cost,operation and maintenance costs, and construction time could reduce the gap. Carbon emission credits, if enacted by government, can give nuclear power a cost advantage.

Safety.
Modern reactor designs can achieve a very low risk of serious accidents, but “best practices”in construction and operation are essential.We know little about the safety of the overall fuel cycle,beyond reactor operation.

Waste.
Geological disposal is technically feasible but execution is yet to be demonstrated or certain. A convincing case has not been made that the long-term waste management benefits of advanced, closed fuel cycles involving reprocessing of spent fuel are outweighed by the short-term risks and costs. Improvement in the open,once through fuel cycle may offer waste management benefits as large as those claimed for the more expensive closed fuel cycles.

Proliferation.
The current international safeguards regime is inadequate to meet the security challenges of the expanded nuclear deployment contemplated in the global growth scenario. The reprocessing system now used in Europe, Japan, and Russia that involves separation and recycling of plutonium presents unwarranted proliferation risks.