Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014 NuclearPlantJournal.com
39
for others”, partnering with co-generators
and bundling with other suppliers to
provide services to individual consumers,
commercial business and industrial
customer groups. New projects are
moving toward natural gas assets that
have a consistent and mature design
and are predictable in time-to-market
24 – 30 month schedules. An accelerated
investment to modernize customer
systems and smart technologies for
distribution and transmission systems
will change emphasis and incentive
programs for consumers.
All plants [regulated and unregulated]
have had regulatory requirements for
improvement in physical security, cyber
security, and post-Fukushima analysis
and readiness. In addition, nuclear plant
owners are implementing projects that
improve reliability and efficiency. Some of
these have been long-term challenges like
copper condenser, feedwater heaters and
steam generator replacements. Others are
tied to reduce human performance errors,
reliability improvements or Predictive
end-of-life replacements required within
the nuclear island and supporting safety
and control systems.
Even with the limping economy
[no foreseen up-tick on the near-term
horizon], regulations are continuing to
create burden for the electric generating
industry.
There are opportunities to include
nuclear owners in clean energy
incentives that would cost-share safety
improvements and license renewal costs
with the Fed (regulated and Merchants).
Also, local government incentives to
reduce tax burdens during extended
life operations [beyond initial licensing
period] could increase after-tax revenues
to keep plants open. This is not a new
thought as State economic development
tax deferrals were common during initial
start-up and the first 5 – 10 years of
operation. State economic development
initiatives should provide for tax
incentives for major improvements and
retrofit projects that will extend the life of
the existing fleet of plants and reduce the
job losses over the next decade.
Federal funding for at-risk assets that
are long-term investments in the country’s
energy security and provide energy for
the common good of U.S. citizens need to
be reviewed for emergency funding that
will enable sustainability. The alternative
is a market that is driven by short-term
thinking and puts the future mix of
energy at risk. A fair return on investment
can be worked out and cost-sharing for
regulatory-driven investment could be
worked out to improve implementation
of new standards and economic viability
of current plant operators.
The bigger issue is the plants
currently at risk. Research indicates six
single-units and four dual-unit sites have
some indications that they are at risk.
Some of these indicators are based upon
the merchant market and competition as
well as fixed higher cost to operate and the
political environment and public views
of the risk of nuclear power. Population
density is encroaching on some site and
this growth especially in the Northeastern
U.S. has increased by triple digits from
census data comparing Year 2000 to
2010. With views of nuclear power
remaining mixed among Americans,
the ones that may be most at risk are
those in densely populated areas of the
country. Those that have had an increase
in population with an economy fueled by
diverse business interests may be most
capable of sustaining a plant closure and
early decommissioning. Other local and
sustaining technical market sectors may
require skilled workers left unemployed
by such an event. Job availability and
workforce transition may be significant
challenges for areas of the country still
recovering from the recession of 2008
and population is in decline. Annual
local spending will shrink by millions
as payroll in a plant declines in the
closure/ decommissioning phase. The
decommissioning phase is financed by
funds that have been set aside for this
purpose. The local economy will be
impacted over time though unless the
geographic location can pick up and
absorb the loss in jobs.
Contact: John M. Mahoney, PMP,
High
Expectations
International,
telephone: (601) 591-5431, email:
Aires between Chinese president Xi
Jinping and Argentine president Cristina
Fernandez de Kirchner.
Nucleoeléctrica Argentina
and
CNNC signed two agreements in
February 2014 covering operations and
technology, as well as the use of Chinese
goods and services in Argentine exports.
Under the first of those agreements,
Nucleoeléctrica and CNNC will
cooperate on issues related to reactor
pressure tubes, including engineering,
fabrication, operation and maintenance.
It also covers the manufacture and
storage of nuclear fuel, licensing, life
extension and technological advances.
This agreement is aimed at both
operating and future nuclear power plant
projects. The second agreement calls for
the transfer of Chinese technology to
Argentina. Under the accord, Argentina
could act as a technology platform,
supplying third countries with nuclear
technology incorporating Chinese goods
and services.
Contact: Source:
World Nuclear
News
,
website:
-
nuclear-news.org/
Leningrad 2
Installation of the first of the four
steam generators at the Leningrad II
nuclear power plant in western Russia
will be completed within the next few
days, general designer of the new plant
Atomenergoproekt (AEP) said today.
Installation of the remaining three
steam generators - manufactured by
Atomenergomash
subsidiary
ZIO-
Podolsk - is scheduled to be completed
by the end of September 2014, AEP said.
Leningrad Phase II is a new nuclear
power plant adjacent to the existing
Leningrad nuclear plant site. Two AES-
2006 design nuclear units are being built
there, which should begin operation in
2016 and 2018 respectively. Two further
AES-2006 units are planned for the site.
Each AES-2006 unit will employ four
steam generators.
Contact: Source:
World Nuclear
News
,
website:
-
nuclear-news.org
New Energy...
