Congress’s Nuclear Addiction

BY KARL GROSSMAN

 JUNE 26, 2024
Facebook

TwitterRedditEmail

Image by Lukáš Lehotský.

The “ADVANCE Act,” a bill to promote nuclear power, was passed 88-to-2 by the U.S. Senate last week. The ADVANCE stands for “Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy.” The only senators voting against it were Edward Markey of Massachusetts and Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

It was approved in the House of Representatives in May, also by a lopsided margin: 393-13. And it now has gone to President Joe Biden,

Among the many points in the bill are the speeding up of the federal licensing process for new nuclear power plants notably those described as “advanced,” reducing licensing fees, allow ownership of nuclear facilities in the U.S. by foreign nations, and establishing in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission an Office of International Programs “to carry out the international nuclear export and innovation activities.”

The action by Congress comes amid what Kevin Kamps of the organization Beyond Nuclear says is “the biggest push for nuclear power that I’ve experienced in 32 years of anti-nuclear power activities.”

The nuclear industry, he says, is “trying to use the climate crisis” by claiming nuclear energy is carbon-free. “It’s not true. It’s not carbon-free by any means,” he says, and “not even low carbon when you compare it to genuinely low carbon sources of electricity, renewables like wind and solar.” But the nuclear industry is involved in a “propaganda campaign” attempting to validate itself by citing climate change, he says, and many in government having “fallen for this ploy.”

Diane D’Arrigo of the group Nuclear Information and Resource Service commented: “Nuclear power makes climate worse—stealing resources from climate solutions and districting us from real solutions—and this bill is putting our already threatened democracy at even greater risk.”

“Clearly, the U.S. Congress doesn’t understand or care about the dangers of radiation that will result,” said D’Arrigo in an interview. “The nuclear Advance Act, passed by nearly the whole U.S. House and Senate, hitched a ride on a must-pass bill fire-fighting bill as wildfire season is taking off during an election year.” The act of more than 90 pages was inserted into a three-page Fire Grants and Safety measure.

“The nuclear industry,” she said, “has been investing in Congress to get massive subsidies for operating and proposed new nuclear power reactors and those huge investments paid off billions in the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure laws, possibly more for nuclear and carbon capture than renewables and efficiency. Now the 118^th Congress is again attempting to kickstart nuclear by bending the already-skewed rules making it harder for impacted communities to protect themselves.”

“Possibly most dangerous,” said D’Arrigo, “is the boost to a plutonium economy with accompanying police state. The ‘advanced’ fuel encouraged in this bill is nearly bomb-grade uranium and the bill provides for exporting it to other countries as well as using it in reactors all over this country. It’s a dismal moment in environmental, economic and human history. But one we must continue to challenge.”

Applauding the Senate’s passage of the ADVANCED Act was John Starkey, director of public policy at the American Nuclear Society. “It’s monumental,” said Starkey in an article on HuffPost. His society describes itself as “the premier organization for those that embrace the nuclear sciences and technologies.” Starkey further said: “This has been a long time coming.”

The HuffPost piece by Alexander C. Kaufman on passage of the ADVANCE Act says Biden “is all but certain to sign it into law.” However, his article adds: “Yet it’s only a first step.”

“The full legislation depends on Congress increasing funding to the NRC” and “help the agency staff up for an expected influx of applications” for new nuclear power plants, it says.

The HuffPost article was headlined: “Congress Just Passed The Biggest Clean-Energy Bill Since Biden’s Climate Law. It’s all on nuclear.”

Edwin Lyman, nuclear power safety director of the Union of Concerned Scientists, declared: “Make no mistake. This is not about making the reactor licensing process more efficient, but about weakening safety and security oversight across the board, a longstanding industry goal. The change to the NRC’s mission effectively directs the agency to enforce only the bare minimum level of regulation at every facility it oversees across the United States.”

“Passage of this legislation will only increase the danger to people already living downwind of nuclear facilities from a severe accident or terrorist attack,” said Lyman, “and it will make it even more difficult for communities to prevent risky, experimental reactors from being sited in their midst.”

Lyman, co-author of the book Fukushima: The Story of a Nuclear Disaster, also spoke about it being “extremely disappointing that without any meaningful debate” Congress was “changing the NRC’s mission to not only protect public health and safety but also to protect the financial health of the industry and its investors. Just as lax regulations by the FAA [Federal Aviation Administration]—an agency already burdened by conflicts of interests—can lead to a catastrophic failure of an aircraft, a compromised NRC could lead to a catastrophic reactor meltdown impacting an entire region for a generation.”

Harvey Wasserman, author of the book Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth and co-author of Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America’s Experience with Atomic Radiation, said:

“The ADVANCE Act is another death rattle for history’s most expensive techno-failure.”

In contrast to nuclear power, “Solar-generated electricity is now ‘too cheap to meter’ in California,” he said. And “every day now California goes 100% renewable for hours at a time.” In Texas, he noted, wind turbines are now producing so much electricity that it’s being distributed “for free” at night.

“Of the four big U.S. reactors ordered in the 21st century, two are stillborn in South Carolina at $9 billion,” said Wasserman in an interview. And the two new Vogtle nuclear power plants built in Georgia “are a $35 billion fiasco.”

“For the first time since 1954, zero big new U.S. nukes are under construction,” said Wasserman. As for what the nuclear industry calls “small modular reactors” that it is promoting, the “small mythological reactors are already soaring in price and crashing in production schedules, light years behind renewables in time and price.”

“The attempt to revive shut-down reactors will never work,” he said.

Also, he says the electricity generated by the two Diablo Canyon nuclear plants in California, slated for closure but now scheduled to keep running, “would $8-12 billion over market” price for electricity through 2030.

“The ADVANCE act aims to bail out a boat whose bottom has fallen out,” said Wasserman. And, “Solartopia’s day has dawned.”

Indeed, the current The Economist magazine on its cover heralds “Dawn Of The Solar Age” The accompanying article in this “special issue” is headlined: “The solar age. The exponential growth of solar power will change the world.” It states: “To grasp that this is not some environmental fever dream, consider solar economics.” The magazine, considered conservative, speaks of “the resources” needed for solar power being “abundant.” Further, “As for demand, it is both huge and electric…The result is that, in contrast to earlier energy sources, solar power has routinely become cheaper and will continue to do so.”

But Senator Shelley Capito, a West Virginia Republican and a lead sponsor of the ADVANCE Act, said after the Senate vote on June 18^th, that “we sent the ADVANCE Act to the president’s desk because Congress worked together to recognize the importance of nuclear energy to America’s future and got the job done.” She is the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Its chairman, Delaware Democrat Tom Carper, said: “In a major victory for our climate and American energy security, the U.S. Senate has passed the ADVANCE Act with overwhelming bipartisan support.”

As the website “Power,” which describes itself as “at the forefront of the global power market,” summarizes the ADVANCE Act in an article titled “The ADVANCE Act—Legislation Crucial for a U.S. Nuclear Renaissance—Clears Congress. Here’s a Detailed Breakdown,” it says it is “sweeping legislation that seeks to promote U.S. nuclear leadership, accelerate advanced nuclear technology development while preserving existing nuclear generation, bolster national security measures, and enhance regulatory efficiency to support new nuclear deployment.”

The act is “likely to be enacted” with signing by Biden and “is a significant endorsement of nuclear energy” says the piece by senior editor Sonal Patel.

“The bill’s passage in Congress, notably, follows a suite of new measures unveiled by the White House on May 30, aimed at slashing risks associated with new nuclear reactor development and construction,” it says. “The White House highlighted recent efforts by the Department of Energy (DOE) to revive and revitalize existing nuclear plants, support advanced reactor demonstrations, and facilitate siting and financing. But it also acknowledged key risks and long-standing barriers that have hindered an expansion of the 70-year-old industry, shining a light on necessary licensing reforms, supply chain and workforce gaps, and high capital costs.”

It quotes Ted Nordhaus, founder and executive director of the archly pro-nuclear Breakthrough Institute, as saying “the NRC has tried to regulate to make risk from nuclear energy as close to zero as possible, but has failed to consider the cost to the environment, public health, energy security, or prosperity of not building and operating nuclear energy plants. This reduces rather than improves public health and safety….But with passage of the ADVANCE bill, Congress is telling the regulators that public benefits are and have always been part of their mission.”

In speaking against the ADVANCE Act on the floor of the Senate, Senator Markey, chair of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air, Climate, and Nuclear Safety, said it “includes language that would require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to rewrite its mission to state that its regulation and oversight should ‘not unnecessarily limit’ civilian nuclear activity, regardless of whether it is beneficial or detrimental to public safety and national security. The NRC shouldn’t be the Nuclear Retail Commission. The Commission’s duty is to regulate, not facilitate.”

“This legislation is not wise,” said Markey.

“And while some of the bill’s supporters argue we need new nuclear technologies to combat the climate crisis, I have an arched eyebrow as to why this bill focuses solely on nuclear energy,” he said. He said technologies “such as wind and solar and geothermal…is what

our country should be promoting around the rest of the world.”

Markey continued: “It’s also shortsighted to me to make such a herculean effort to promote new nuclear technologies when we’re yet to solve the longstanding problems resulting from our existing nuclear fleet. To this day, the Navajo nation is dealing with the legacy of uranium contamination, including more than 500 abandoned uranium mines and homes and water sources polluted with elevated levels of radiation.”

Michel Lee, chair of the Council on Intelligent Energy & Conservation Policy, calls “the passage of the ADVANCE Act the legislative equivalent of detonation of a nuclear weapon in our regulatory system.”

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service had extensively campaigned against the ADVANCE Act asking people, as a communication it sent out declared, “Please Ask Your Senators to Vote NO on the Nuclear Advance Act.”

It said: “The nuclear ADVANCE Act, a 93-page bill to promote expensive, dangerous, dirty, environmentally unjust nuclear power that could accelerate nuclear exports and weapons proliferation and allow foreign ownership/control of U.S. nuclear facilities, is hitching a ride …on the short Fire Grants and Safety.” It “shifts the mission of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to boosting more than regulating.”

As for “new nuclear power,” it said that “from mining to long-term waste management it violates environmental justice and relies on carbon at every step, is radioactively and chemically dirty, dangerous, expensive, slow, takes resources from true climate solutions and leaves intense, long-lasting radioactive waste that technically cannot be isolated for the eons it remains dangerous.”

Also campaigning against the act has been Beyond Nuclear which says: “The ADVANCE Act will significantly increase the risks of nuclear power by changing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s mandate from safety mandate from safety regulation to industry promotion…It would also promote new atomic reactors, and much more highly enriched nuclear fuel, both in the U.S. as well as overseas. This will worsen the hazards, harms and environmental injustices at each and every stage of the uranium fuel chain, from mining to highly radioactive waste dumping. The ADVANCE Act’s allowing of foreign ownership of nuclear facilities in the U.S., and its promotion of High Assay Low-Enriched Uranium fuel, both domestically and overseas, will also significantly increase nuclear weapons proliferation .”

The Sierra Club has opposed the act. In a letter to Senator Majority Leader Charles Schumer, it has declared: “Nuclear power is not a solution to the climate crisis. Spending precious federal resources on nuclear power only takes away from the desperately needed development of a clean, affordable and more equitable energy system powered by renewable energy. Passage of the ADVANCE Act…will lock in the use of dirty, dangerous and expensive nuclear power for a generation.”

“As a result of this legislation ,” the letter continued, “we would expect to see the production of vast amounts of uranium mining and mill tailings waste, even hotter high level radioactive waste, for which there is no final plan for isolation, and depleted uranium that becomes more radioactive over one million years. Additionally, the expansion of nuclear power will result in more so-called “low-level” radioactive waste going into unlined trenches and the release of radioactive liquids and gasses into the air, water and environment from every reactor around the country and around the world.”

Also opposing the act has been Food and Water Watch whose executive director, Wenonah Hauter, has said: “Senator Schumer’s apparent embrace of new nuclear energy development represents a stark betrayal of the clean, safe renewable energy options like wind and solar that he claims to champion. The Senate and President Biden must quickly come to their senses and reject the dangerous and unaffordable false promises of toxic nuclear energy.”

Among many other groups opposing the ADVANCE Act have been:  Climate Justice Alliance, Environment America, Friends of the Earth, Institute for Policy Studies, Indigenous Environmental Network, Science and Environmental Health Network, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Waterspirit, 350 New Orleans, Earth Action, Inc., Endangered Species Coalition, Long Island Progressive Coalition and Methane Action.

In regard to the “follow the money,” that element of Congressional support of the ADVANCE Act was certainly also a factor. Politico in 2011 ran an article headlined: “Nuclear lobbyists clout felt on Hill.”

“Facing its biggest crisis in 25 years, the U.S. nuclear power industry can count on plenty of Democratic and Republican friends in both high and low places,” began the piece by Darren Samuelsohn. “During the past election cycle alone, the Nuclear Energy Institute and more than a dozen companies with big nuclear portfolios have spent tens of millions of dollars on lobbying and campaign contributions to lawmakers in key leadership slots and across influential state delegations.”

The Nuclear Energy Institute, “the industry’s biggest voice in Washington, for example, spent $3.76 million to lobby the federal government and an additional $323,000 through its political action committee on a bipartisan congressional slate, inclu2ding 134 House and 30 Senate candidates…”

“Nearly all of the investor-owned power companies that operate U.S. nuclear reactors play in the donation game,” said the article.

That was last decade, but times on this issue don’t change.

Karl Grossman, professor of journalism at State University of New York/College at Old Westbury, and is the author of the book, The Wrong Stuff: The Space’s Program’s Nuclear Threat to Our Planet, and the Beyond Nuclear handbook, The U.S. Space Force and the dangers of nuclear power and nuclear war in space. Grossman is an associate of the media watch group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR). He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion.

GLOBAL NUKE NEWZ

Grossi praises Brazil's contributions to nuclear development

25 June 2024

International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi has highlighted the importance of Brazil for the global nuclear sector. During a trip to the country last week, he signed an agreement formalising the designation of Brazil's Institute for Energy and Nuclear Research as an IAEA Collaborating Centre.

The signing of the agreement by Grossi (left) and Rondinelli (right), formalising IPEN-CNEN's designation as an IAEA Collaborating Centre (Image: Douglas Troufa/CNEN)

"As we face the challenge of climate change, the key role of nuclear energy is set to grow and Brazil is uniquely situated to take full advantage of this," Grossi said in an address to the Chamber of Deputies, the lower house of the National Congress. "A global energy debate without Brazil makes no sense. A global nuclear debate without Brazil makes no sense."

Speaking with Minister of Mines and Energy Alexandre Silveira, Grossi said: "The IAEA encourages the continuous development of the fuel cycle in Brazil, given its potential to become a key actor in the nuclear sector production chain. These developments are crucial for strategic growth and energy security in the country."

He also addressed the Brazilian Nuclear Programme Development Committee, highlighting the critical role of nuclear energy for Brazil's economic growth and future decarbonisation plans.

During his visit, Grossi also highlighted the first-of-its-kind collaboration of the IAEA with the G20 on nuclear power. This new cooperation started this year when the Brazilian Presidency invited the IAEA to participate in the G20's Energy Transitions Working Group. The IAEA is presenting a series of briefings and reports to inform G20 members on the key role that nuclear energy can play in the energy mix and emphasising the need to accelerate financing in order to reach net zero targets.

In Rio de Janeiro, he visited the Nuclear Medicine Service at António Pedro University Hospital, where doctors explained how the IAEA's support, providing advanced equipment and training, has greatly improved early cancer detection and treatment quality.

The IAEA is also supporting the Brazilian Navy in its goals to increase medical services for remote communities located in the Amazon River delta. Two mammography machines have been installed on the ships Soares de Meirelles and Carlos Chagas, allowing these communities to have access to breast cancer diagnostic services for the first time.

Grossi also signed an agreement with Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation Luciana Santos to use nuclear science to study harmful algal blooms, microplastics, ocean acidification and more in Antarctica.

He also met with Admiral Marcos Olsen and discussions included Brazil's plans to develop naval nuclear propulsion. "The IAEA and Brazil are committed to working together for highest non-proliferation standards as Brazil advances naval nuclear propulsion plans," Grossi said.

Grossi also visited the headquarters of the Brazilian-Argentine Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials (ABACC). "ABACC has played a key role in regional stability and its importance will only grow as Brazil embarks on naval nuclear propulsion. I am looking forward to continuing the strong cooperation between the IAEA, ABACC, Brazil and Argentina," he said.

IAEA Collaborating Centre

The IAEA's first Collaborating Centre on Nuclear Security in Latin America - the National Nuclear Energy Commission's (CNEN's) Instituto de Pesquisas Energéticas e Nucleares (IPEN-CNEN) - was also established during the trip. IPEN-CNEN, CNEN's technical-scientific unit in São Paulo, expressed interest in joining this scheme and, on 7 June, the IAEA approved the proposal for its designation.

An agreement was signed on 21 June by Grossi and CNEN President Francisco Rondinelli, formalising the designation. As an IAEA Collaborating Centre, IPEN-CNEN will assist the IAEA in activities in the areas of computer security, radiation detection and physical protection for nuclear security, for a period of four years.

"All the activities we have, of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in Brazil, need to have the indispensable cooperation of CNEN," Grossi said. "We recognise this crucial role of CNEN in the development of nuclear technology in the country. We are very grateful for this cooperation, which will continue and increase more and more."

Brazil currently has two operating nuclear power reactors and a third under construction. The country's 2050 national energy plan indicates that it could add 10 GW of nuclear in the next 30 years, which is enough to provide power for about 10 million people, with a possibility to include small modular reactors in its energy mix after 2030.

Ohi units cleared for another 10 years' operation

26 June 2024

Japan's nuclear regulator has approved Kansai Electric Power Company's long-term reactor management plan for units 3 and 4 of its Ohi nuclear power plant in Fukui prefecture, allowing the units to operate beyond 30 years. They become the first reactors to be permitted to operate up to 40 years under new legislation.

The Ohi plant, with units 3 and 4 in the foreground and the shut down units 1 and 2 behind (Image: Kansai)

Under regulations which came into force in July 2013, Japanese reactors had a nominal operating period of 40 years. One extension to this - limited to a maximum of 20 years - could be granted, requiring amongst other things, a special inspection to verify the integrity of reactor pressure vessels and containment vessels after 35 years of operation.

However, in December 2022, the NRA approved a draft of a new rule that would allow reactors to be operated for more than the current limit of 60 years. Under the amendment, the operators of reactors in use for 30 years or longer must formulate a long-term reactor management plan and gain approval from the regulator at least once every 10 years if they are to continue to operate. The new policy effectively extends the period reactors can remain in operation beyond 60 years by excluding the time they spent offline for inspections from the total service life.

The legislation was approved by Japan's Cabinet in February last year and enacted in May 2023. It comes into full effect in June next year.

The Ohi 3 and 4 reactors gained permission for operation extensions to 40 years under the old regulatory system in November 2021 and August 2022, respectively.

Kansai submitted an application to the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) on 21 December to operate the units for over 60 years. The two 1180 MWe pressurised water reactors were connected to the grid in June 1991 and June 1992, respectively.

With the NRA's approval, Ohi 3 can now operate until 17 December 2031, while Ohi 4 can operate until 1 February 2033.

"We will continue to actively incorporate the latest knowledge from Japan and abroad and reflect it in plant design and equipment maintenance, thereby striving to improve the safety and reliability of nuclear power plants," Kansai said.

Kyushu Electric Power Company submitted its long-term reactor management plan to the NRA on 24 June for units 1 and 2 of its Sendai nuclear power plant in Kagoshima Prefecture.

 

SMR power plant planned for Swedish site

26 June 2024

Small modular reactor project development company Kärnfull Next has announced the municipality of Valdemarsvik in Östergötland county in southeastern Sweden as a new candidate site to host up to six reactors.

The proposed site (Image: Latona Group)

The company has entered into an exclusive partnership agreement with landowner Latona Group for the exploration rights for nuclear power on the site. "The ongoing study, expected to be finalised after the summer, has shown promising preliminary results leading the companies to jointly inform the municipality, site neighbours and now the general public about the plans for an SMR Campus," Kärnfull Next said.

The company noted that the property includes areas that were identified as suitable for nuclear power in studies going back as far back as the 1970s. With more than 1300 hectares in total, it said the site was appealing for co-location with 2030s energy-intensive industries, such as AI data centres. The large coastal site in Östergötland would be part of Kärnfull Next's Re:Firm South SMR programme, aiming to expand carbon-free and dispatchable energy production across southern Sweden.

"Location, topography and cooling conditions in a forward-looking municipality with extensive rural areas are examples of early indications of a positive outcome from the current stage," it said. "The project in Valdemarsvik offers significant opportunities for local job creation - a single SMR is estimated to create around 500 direct and indirect jobs per year for 70 years."

Illustration of a multi-unit SMR campus (Image: Instance/MIT)

The SMR campus in Valdemarsvik is initially planned to host between four and six small light water reactors, adding between 10-15 TWh of electricity generation per year.

"We are very enthusiastic about the indications from our preliminary study in Valdemarsvik," said Kärnfull Next CEO Christian Sjölander. "This site has potential to become a key component in our programme to supply large amounts of stable and sustainable energy to regions with significant capacity needs, and create substantial economic and social benefits for the local communities."

Gustav Carp, owner of Latona Group, added: "We are very pleased to collaborate with Kärnfull Next on this exciting project. The property is likely to offer uniquely favourable conditions for nuclear power, and we look forward to being part of the development of fossil-free energy production in the region. This initiative can create significant value for Valdemarsvik and its residents."

In March 2022, Kärnfull Next signed a memorandum of understanding with GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy on the deployment of the BWRX-300 in Sweden.

Kärnfull Next has been conducting site selection and feasibility studies in several municipalities in Sweden since 2022. By establishing multiple SMR parks as part of the same programme, the company expects to achieve economies of scale in terms of technology selection, construction partners, power purchase agreements and financing partners.

In August 2023, Nyköping was announced as another candidate site within the programme. Kärnfull Next said further feasibility studies are expected "to reach sufficient maturity levels to be announced later this year".

GEN energija lists JEK2 studies to be published ahead of referendum

25 June 2024

Slovenia's GEN energija has published an analysis concluding that the proposed JEK2 new nuclear project location is suitable from a seismic activity point of view - and also outlined a series of studies it aims to publish before a referendum is held on nuclear energy later this year.

How JEK2 could look (Image: GEN energija)

In its latest update on the state of the JEK2 project for two new nuclear units near the existing Krško nuclear power plant, GEN said "several analyses were carried out, which investigated the geology of the Krška basin and the proximity of possible JEK2 locations. They showed that the area [of the existing plant and earmarked for the proposed plant] ... is suitable for these facilities from the point of view of seismic activity. The Krška basin is considered to be the most geologically, geotechnically and seismologically researched area in Slovenia and beyond. The results of the research so far show that the design seismic loads (displacements, velocities and accelerations of the ground) allow the safe operation of the nuclear power plant and the safe design, construction and operation of JEK2, in accordance with international nuclear standards".

GEN says that about 80 - 20% - of the world's nuclear power plants are located and operate safely in areas of moderate or high seismic risk, with Slovenia located in a "moderate" area and has referenced there has been on-going safety research dating back decades.

The company has also listed a series of studies and documents which, at the request of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Environment, Space and Energy, will be published by October, to "enable citizens to make an informed decision in the autumn referendum".

As well as the seismic study, there will also be ones on flood safety, how the new units will be integrated within the national electricity grid, an economic analysis including the "related and indirect investment costs", the financial and security risks relating to the import of nuclear fuel and the planned handling of waste from the new plant.

GEN energija is also conducting an information roadshow across the country to present information and answer questions about the proposed project. There is also a dedicated jek2.si website.

The JEK2 project

Slovenia's plan is to build the new nuclear power plant, with up to 2400 MW capacity, next to its existing nuclear power plant, Krško, a 696 MWe pressurised water reactor which generates about one-third of the country's electricity and which is co-owned by neighbouring Croatia. Prime Minister Robert Golob has committed to holding a referendum on the project before it goes ahead, and has suggested it could be held later in 2024.

The current timetable for the project is for a final investment decision to be taken in 2028, with construction beginning in 2032. In October, GEN Energy CEO Dejan Paravan said there were three technology providers being considered for the project - Westinghouse, EDF and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power - who all had strengths and "the decision will not be easy".

Construction of WIPP ventilation system complete

24 June 2024

Now that construction of the new large-scale ventilation system at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is complete, the US Department of Environmental Management is aiming for it to be fully operational in 2026.

Finishing off construction of the final large ductwork at the SSCVS (Image: DOE Office of Environmental Management)

WIPP, in New Mexico, is the USA's only repository for the disposal of transuranic, or TRU, waste which includes clothing, tools, rags, residues, debris, soil and other items contaminated with small amounts of plutonium and other man-made radioactive elements from the US military programme. The repository is excavated out of a natural rock salt layer 650 metres below ground, and has been operational since 1999.

The new Safety Significant Confinement Ventilation System (SSCVS) is being built in tandem with a new utility shaft. The SSCVS will pull air through the repository, pre-filter it to remove salt and can also, when required, send the air through a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration system before releasing it to the environment. When it is fully operational, the new system will increase underground airflow from 170,000 cubic feet (4814 cubic metres) per minute up to 540,000 cubic feet per minute. The increased airflow will mean that activities to emplace sealed waste drums in the repository can take place at the same time as facility mining and maintenance operations.

WIPP's management and operations contractor, Salado Isolation Mining Contractors (SIMCO), was able to begin commissioning phase work of initial portions of the SSCVS facility and systems in October 2023. "Completing SSCVS construction allows us to pivot our focus to testing and commissioning the remaining SSCVS systems," said Ken Harrawood, SIMCO's president and programme manager at WIPP.

Testing and commissioning includes testing systems, integration, developing operational procedures and guidelines, training and qualifying staff, after which the facility will be handed over to trained WIPP operations personnel to bring it online. The SSCVS commissioning phase is currently 85% complete, the Office of Environmental Management said.

Construction of the SSCVS began in 2018 with completion originally envisaged for 2021, but progress was impacted when WIPP, like most of the office's field sites, focused on essential mission-critical operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. The office has identified completing the commissioning of the SSCVS, and initiating the readiness review process, as one of its top priorities for 2024.

Committee to evaluate nuclear power option for Norway

24 June 2024

The Norwegian government has appointed a committee to conduct a broad review and assessment of various aspects of a possible future establishment of nuclear power in the country. It must deliver its report by 1 April 2026.

Energy Minister Terje Aasland (left) and Kristin Halvorsen, who heads the new committee (Image: Arvid Samland, Energidepartementet)

"The need for emission-free and stable energy sources that can help deal with the natural and climate crisis and meet an increasing need for power, technological development, as well as plans for the establishment of nuclear power production by private actors in collaboration with municipalities, have contributed to the question of nuclear power being brought up to date again," said Energy Minister Terje Aasland. "Nuclear power is a complex energy source that affects a number of areas of society. There is therefore a need to obtain an updated and solid knowledge base on nuclear power as a possible energy source in the Norwegian power system."

The 12-person committee will be headed by Kristin Halvorsen, director of the Centre for International Climate and Environmental Research - Oslo (Cicero).

The Ministry of Energy said it has drawn up the mandate for the committee in consultation with several other ministries. The mandate "calls for a broad assessment of complex questions, and the selection is therefore put together by people with expertise and experience from various fields," the government said.

"An important topic the committee should shed light on is nuclear power's suitability for the Norwegian power system, research and technology development within various concepts for nuclear power (including fusion), costs and other significant consequences for authorities (including the municipal sector) and private actors, area and environmental effects, waste issues, nuclear safety, safeguarding and non-proliferation, preparedness and competence," the government said. "The committee shall discuss advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power, describe the current regulations and point out the need for regulatory development and other prerequisites that must be in place for any future establishment of commercial and industry-driven nuclear power.

"The committee shall provide an updated knowledge base on various types of nuclear power technology, technological maturity, assumed time perspective for scale-up and commercial availability, and costs. An account must also be given of relevant investment factors and requirements for infrastructure, including the need for network connection and what requirements must be made for a suitable location."

The Ministry of Energy has been given the authority to make small changes to the committee's mandate and to appoint a secretariat for the committee. "It is not realistic for the committee to possess all the necessary knowledge within the various areas of the themes," it said. "A resource group must therefore be established, consisting of professionals, who can assist and give input to the committee in important subject areas, and ensure the involvement of central specialist communities. The committee can engage external expertise if necessary."

Between 1951 and 2019, Norway operated four research reactors at the Kjeller and Halden sites, but these were not for power production. "As a starting point, Norway therefore has no experience with development, commercial operation, regulation and licence processing of this form of power production," the government said.

However, the government noted that nuclear power "has become part of the energy debate and plans for its development are being promoted".

In November 2023, the Ministry of Energy received notification of proposals for a study programme from Norsk Kjernekraft. This is the initial step in the licensing process, and triggers administrative law requirements for a proper case management. Norsk Kjernekraft wants to construct a nuclear power plant consisting of small modular reactors (SMRs) with a total output of 1500 MW in Taftøy Næringspark in Aure and Heim municipalities. The company has also announced ongoing work with several similar projects. In addition, several other municipalities and county councils have expressed an interest in nuclear power.

Kozloduy used fuel storage licence updated

26 June 2024

Bulgaria's Nuclear Regulatory Agency has issued a fresh non-time-limited licence to operate the used fuel storage facility at the Kozloduy nuclear power plant.

Tsanko Bachiiski, NRA chairman, right, handed over the new licence to Kozloduy NPP executive director Valentin Nikolov (Image: NRA)

The amended licence follows the amendments introducted in March this year to the country's Law on the Safe Use of Nuclear Energy. Instead of the licence being limited by time - notably for 10 years - it is open-ended but with a condition within the licence to carry out a safety review at least every 10 years.

The Agency said "the results of this review should justify the safe operation of the facility and are a prerequisite for the chairman of the NRA to issue an order for their approval and determine the period for carrying out the next periodic safety review".

The Kozloduy plant is in the northwest of Bulgaria on the Danube River and provides about 34% of the country's electricity. It features two Russian-designed VVER-1000 units currently in operation, which have both been through refurbishment and life extension programmes to enable operation for 60 years.

According to World Nuclear Association's Information Paper on Nuclear Power in Bulgaria, used fuel at Kozloduy is initially stored in a pool at the site which was built in 1990 and upgraded and given a new licence by the Bulgarian Nuclear Regulatory Agency in 2001. A dry used fuel storage facility was built near this at Kozloduy and opened in May 2011 with a capacity of 5200 fuel assemblies in 72 casks for storage for up to 50 years.

Researched and written by World Nuclear News