BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
We are suffering from a shortage of electricity (power, as it is popularly called) since about a decade but within the last few years it has taken a turn for the worse to such an extent that it is termed a "crisis" now, with no government able to do much in bringing about an improvement in the situation. This is mainly because the investments, necessary for fulfilling even our immediate needs for power, have reached astronomical proportions which countries like Bangladesh are unable to fund alone. The last government, the emergency one, floated the idea of establishing nuclear power plants but gave up on the idea considering all the complications, the costs and the time involved. The present AL government is also exploring the possibilities of nuclear power plants but before it decides on the matter, it ought to take into considerations some of the issues mentioned in this editorial.
Projections for costs for building a single nuclear power plant range from $5 billion to $12 billion (WSJ), with construction times estimated at between six and ten years. The lower-end estimate alone is almost double the cost and the construction time of building a coal or gas plant. The Nuclear Energy Institute says recent nuclear construction contracts were priced between $6 billion and $7 billion. A reactor's price is estimated at "overnight costs" (as if the reactor could be built tomorrow). Yet as construction stretches over several years to a decade, a number of things can unpredictably raise the price tag. For example, prices for necessary commodities-such as steel, copper, and concrete-have risen significantly in the past few years.
Another obstacle for getting new nuclear construction under way is the capacity to make ultra-large forging. Pressure vessels-at the core of a nuclear reactor-can be made in several pieces. However, most utilities now want vessels forged in a single piece. Welds can become brittle and leak radiation (older reactors slated for US license extensions have their welds rigorously checked before approval). No welds can decrease the time a reactor is shut down for safety inspections, saving the reactor money. Only one company in the world, Japan Steel Works, currently can forge reactor vessels this way (Bloomberg). The company can only do about four to five a year, though it hopes to expand to eight per year by 2010. The company's current order backlog is about three years. This requires utilities to place orders well in advance of construction, plunking down about $100 million just to get in the queue.
The entire nuclear fuel chain, from mining to milling, processing, enrichment, fuel fabrication, and fuel irradiation in reactors, generates radioactive waste. Nuclear reactors produce large amounts of long-lasting, deadly radioactive waste. This includes 20-30 tons of high-level radioactive waste per year per reactor, plus so-called "low" level radioactive waste streams, and much of the entire contaminated nuclear power plant site once closed.
There is currently no acceptable solution for either "storage" or "disposal" of this waste. New reactors would produce yet more radioactive waste which would be left on site, threatening the region, or transported across the country, increasing the odds of disaster on site and in transit. Long-term storage of nuclear waste has proven politically difficult in some cases because of environmental concerns. No long-term storage facility is operating anywhere in the world. The United States has about 45,000 tons of high-level spent fuel currently stored in various places around the country, usually inside the nuclear plant facility. "The waste issue isn't a red herring," says Jeremy Kranowitz, a senior associate for energy at The Keystone Center's Science and Public Policy program. "It's a real issue for the industry."
Another issue both for construction and operation of reactors is lack of trained personnel. In the United States, 35 percent of nuclear workers will reach retirement age within the next few years. Even in the USA, university majors and other educational programs supporting the industry have diminished in the past two decades, as has the number of students going into such programs.
All reactors release radiation into the air, water and soil and cannot be described as "emissions-free." Children are especially vulnerable and cannot be shielded from cancer-causing radiation in the environment. In fact, the US national radiation protection standards fall short of protecting those most vulnerable to the harmful effects of radiation, basing their evaluation on impacts to a "standard" healthy, young, white adult male.
Additionally, for countries like Bangladesh there are problems of procurement of uranium, the basic ingredient of a nuclear power plant. Uranium is produced by a limited number of countries and their sale is so strictly controlled by regulations that it would be next to impossible to get the material at less cost and fairly quickly, unless a guaranteed source of supply is available.
Under the circumstances, side by side with the idea of establishing nuclear power plants in Bangladesh, time and merit ought also to be devoted to other viable alternatives which are sustainable and within our resource-abilities such as solar and biofuel powered electricity producing plants.
editorial
Projections for costs for building a single nuclear power plant range from $5 billion to $12 billion (WSJ), with construction times estimated at between six and ten years. The lower-end estimate alone is almost double the cost and the construction time of building a coal or gas plant. The Nuclear Energy Institute says recent nuclear construction contracts were priced between $6 billion and $7 billion. A reactor's price is estimated at "overnight costs" (as if the reactor could be built tomorrow). Yet as construction stretches over several years to a decade, a number of things can unpredictably raise the price tag. For example, prices for necessary commodities-such as steel, copper, and concrete-have risen significantly in the past few years.
Another obstacle for getting new nuclear construction under way is the capacity to make ultra-large forging. Pressure vessels-at the core of a nuclear reactor-can be made in several pieces. However, most utilities now want vessels forged in a single piece. Welds can become brittle and leak radiation (older reactors slated for US license extensions have their welds rigorously checked before approval). No welds can decrease the time a reactor is shut down for safety inspections, saving the reactor money. Only one company in the world, Japan Steel Works, currently can forge reactor vessels this way (Bloomberg). The company can only do about four to five a year, though it hopes to expand to eight per year by 2010. The company's current order backlog is about three years. This requires utilities to place orders well in advance of construction, plunking down about $100 million just to get in the queue.
The entire nuclear fuel chain, from mining to milling, processing, enrichment, fuel fabrication, and fuel irradiation in reactors, generates radioactive waste. Nuclear reactors produce large amounts of long-lasting, deadly radioactive waste. This includes 20-30 tons of high-level radioactive waste per year per reactor, plus so-called "low" level radioactive waste streams, and much of the entire contaminated nuclear power plant site once closed.
There is currently no acceptable solution for either "storage" or "disposal" of this waste. New reactors would produce yet more radioactive waste which would be left on site, threatening the region, or transported across the country, increasing the odds of disaster on site and in transit. Long-term storage of nuclear waste has proven politically difficult in some cases because of environmental concerns. No long-term storage facility is operating anywhere in the world. The United States has about 45,000 tons of high-level spent fuel currently stored in various places around the country, usually inside the nuclear plant facility. "The waste issue isn't a red herring," says Jeremy Kranowitz, a senior associate for energy at The Keystone Center's Science and Public Policy program. "It's a real issue for the industry."
Another issue both for construction and operation of reactors is lack of trained personnel. In the United States, 35 percent of nuclear workers will reach retirement age within the next few years. Even in the USA, university majors and other educational programs supporting the industry have diminished in the past two decades, as has the number of students going into such programs.
All reactors release radiation into the air, water and soil and cannot be described as "emissions-free." Children are especially vulnerable and cannot be shielded from cancer-causing radiation in the environment. In fact, the US national radiation protection standards fall short of protecting those most vulnerable to the harmful effects of radiation, basing their evaluation on impacts to a "standard" healthy, young, white adult male.
Additionally, for countries like Bangladesh there are problems of procurement of uranium, the basic ingredient of a nuclear power plant. Uranium is produced by a limited number of countries and their sale is so strictly controlled by regulations that it would be next to impossible to get the material at less cost and fairly quickly, unless a guaranteed source of supply is available.
Under the circumstances, side by side with the idea of establishing nuclear power plants in Bangladesh, time and merit ought also to be devoted to other viable alternatives which are sustainable and within our resource-abilities such as solar and biofuel powered electricity producing plants.
editorial
