Minerals Council of Australia’s Post

When I think about the decision to add nuclear power to Australia's energy supply mix, in a climate (pun intended) where the feasibility, cost, and desire for renewables is so much better than it has ever been, I wonder why it is being considered at all. This article misses one tremendously huge cost (at least I didn't see it there). High level nuclear waste. Safely storing and managing this waste is a task that will span multitudes of generations.  A storage site might be in operation for 100 years, and require to be monitored and maintained for a further 200-300 years. Nuclear waste can remain hazardous for thousands of years. Our nation is only 123 years old. Systems of government, let alone governance of a multi-hundred year problem that we know about up front, is something humans don't have a great track record of. Can we confidently say we can manage such a facility effectively over such a period? This is another "cost". Yes, a solar panel or wind turbine today might have a lifespan of 20-30 years and without refurbishment, be a waste/recycling problem which we haven't quite figured out economically today. I say no to dealing with deadly radiation hazards for hundreds of years. https://lnkd.in/eFpJi9m8

A very informative article by the Chairman and CEO of my company American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), Christopher Wiernicki. The potential benefits of nuclear energy cannot be ignored, however, of course the standards of utmost safety in all aspects cannot be compromised. There's a lot of work ahead to make sure all the questions and hurdles are addressed. "Nuclear energy can link energy demands across the electric, industrial and shipping transportation sectors to optimise energy generation and use, provide reliable power and support the decarbonisation of shipping and industry. Imagine a new generation of floating production, storage and offloading vessels powered by advanced reactors that are generating hydrogen or other hydrogen-derived fuels, desalinating water, or producing key industrial commodities offshore." #nuclearenergy #shipping #maritimeindustry #transportation #innovation

Deeper dive into an important global sector...

Is there a role for nuclear in Australia’s energy transition? - ANU Policy Brief Renewables are cheaper than any form of new-build energy, even accounting for the storage and transmission needed to ensure reliable supply. But if there’s even a small chance that nuclear power could fill the reliability gap in a 100 per cent clean energy system, a technology-neutral approach requires that all options compete on a level playing field, Ken Baldwin writes. https://lnkd.in/gFhP7rHR

We should have never stopped building nuclear power plants in the United States. Any time a coal plant is decommissioned it should immediately or previously have been replaced by a nuclear power plant unless we build solid production capacity into the base we will always be plagued by the variability and insecurity inherent in renewable energy sources, like wind and solar.

Germany successfully completed its nuclear phase-out in April 2023. One year later, the country has seen a significant increase in renewable energy production and a decrease in reliance on fossil fuels, without the predicted rise in energy prices. While there is debate about the long-term viability of this approach, Germany's experience so far challenges the assumption that nuclear power is essential for a clean energy transition. https://lnkd.in/dW3va7TM

https://lnkd.in/eDXk_XMw I, along with many others, celebrated Georgia Power’s Vogtle Unit 4 start of commercial operation. According to the EIA there are now no nuclear reactors under construction in the United States. Compare that to the growth in China, what can the US learn from the Chinese? As we balance the desire to decarbonize the grid and support a tech heavy economy, all generation solutions should be explored. What is the right balance of renewables, base load generation, and grid based storage? Looking forward to the conversations and debates this week at IEEE PES T&D Conference.

The nation’s top science agency has found the cost of large scale nuclear plants backed by the federal Coalition cannot compete on price with renewables. The final report by the government’s chief scientific research arm and Australia’s energy market regulator AEMO on Australia’s future electricity costs found a nuclear plant could not be operational before 2040, which means the technology could not be used to help meet Australia’s international climate change commitments which requires it to cut emissions 43 per cent by 2030. #nuclearplants #renewables

Potential Nuclear Restart in Eastern Japan!! Based on a recent report from Bloomberg, the world's largest nuclear power plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company's Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant, is scheduled to restart operations in October. This plant, which has been inactive for over a decade, loaded fuel for the first time since its shutdown earlier this year. This indicates that preparations are underway for the plant to become operational again, with a high likelihood of restarting within the year. If it does restart, it will be the first nuclear power plant in eastern Japan (50kHz area) to become operational since the shutdown of the Hokkaido Electric Power Company's Tomari Nuclear Power Plant in May 2012, potentially having a significant price impact. Let's delve into how the restart of this plant might affect JEPX spot prices. The unit scheduled to restart is the No. 7 reactor, which has a generation capacity of 1,356 MW. This is equivalent to approximately 4.5% of Tokyo Electric Power’s average supply capacity in October, which is approximately 30 GW. Considering that nuclear power plants undergo annual inspections where all fuel rods are replaced regardless of their remaining life, fuel costs do not impact the marginal cost. Therefore, we can assume the marginal cost of generation for a nuclear power unit to be zero. Similarly, solar power also has a marginal cost of zero and significant daily fluctuations in output, making it a good model case for estimating the impact of nuclear power on spot prices. We examined the price differences in October 2023 between days with similar total demand levels but a difference of about 1,300 MW in solar power generation. The results showed that the JEPX spot price was about 1 yen lower in 30-minute slots with 1,300 MW more solar power generation. While this is a rough estimate ignoring various conditions, it provides an indicator for measuring the potential price impact of a 1,300 MW zero-cost offer. Intuitively, however it seems unlikely that the price will drop by as much as 1 yen...Incidentally, this calculation was performed using ChatGPT-4o, which handled the complex aggregation of data and conditions instantly, proving to be a powerful partner in data analysis. #JapanPowerMarket #JapanNuclearRestart #JEPX

The global nuclear power generation is forecast to grow by almost 3% annually to 2026, reaching a new record high by 2025.