I wondered if the use of nuclear power might pose some threat to the future of coal!
After doing some research into the question of cost, I found a few surprises. According to one article which appeared to be authoritative, the operating costs of coal vs nuclear power plants are about the same. Certainly the fuel portion of the operating cost comparison favors nuclear power. However, with nuclear power plants, the maintenance, insurance, disposal of nuclear waste, security, training, and cost of decommissioning are all much higher than they are with coal powered plants. Collectively over the long run, a nuclear power plant and a coal power plant cost roughly the same to operate year after year. The operation cost comparison does not include interest paid on the debt which is an enormous differentiator.
As for construction costs. The two nuclear reactors being constructed in Florida will cost $14B to construct. In total these two units will produce power at the rate of 2.2 GW. That is a construction cost of $6.4B per GWatt of power. Contrast that to a modern conventional coal or natural gas power plant which cost between $1B and $1.5B per GWt. The difference in the construction cost of a 1 GWt. coal power plant vs 1 Gwt. nuclear power plant - ($6.4B-$1.5B) = $4.9B. If the interest rate paid on that is only 6%, over a 40 year period, the annual payments on the debt per 1 Gwt of nuclear power would be $135M/yr. This interest is of such significance, that the residence of Fla. will need to pay an extra $15/month from now until these plants become operational in 2016, just to cover the interest on the construction cost. That is money being paid, even though ZERO new power will be generated for the next 7 years. One estimate that I reviewed estimated the cost of electricity from nuclear in the future to be $0.25 to $0.30/kwh. That is three times the current average cost of a coal powered plant which is in the 9-11 cent/kwh range. In addition, these units will require 20 million gallons of fresh water every day to cool the reactors.
Some surprising information came out of my research .......
1. The U.S. currently has - by far - the most nuclear reactors with 103 operational. Second is France with (59) followed by Japan (53), Russia (31), So Korea (20) etc......
2. Developed Europe is currently constructing only 2 new nuclear power plants - one in France and one in Denmark. The U.S. is also constructing (2), China (11), India (6), Russia (8). However, in the next ten years, Germany and the U.K. will decommission 20 nuclear reactors. By 2020, Europe will actually have 18 fewer nuclear reactors than today.
4. The minimum lead time to build nuclear power plants in the US and Europe is 6 - 10 years depending on the amount of resistance encountered with the local politics.
5. China, the most aggressive future builder of nuclear power plants, plans to provide only 4% of all of its electric power via nuclear by 2030.
6. During the next 10 years, at most, nuclear power plants will provide only a minimal increase in new world wide production of electricity, with a world wide increase of only 23 including the 20 scheduled to be decommissioned. During this same period of time, China and India will build roughly 1,000 coal powered plants - 550 to be constructed in the next five years.
The need for Nuclear energy is a question which has issues that different very much from Continent to continent. In Africa or South America the only country planning on building a new Nuclear Power Plant is Argentina, and that is a relatively small 692 MW plant. In the Middle East, only Iran is building a nuclear power plant, which, I doubt will ever supply any electricity. Given that Europe imports 90% of its fossil fuels (petroleum, nat gas, coal) now, one would think that there would be dozens of new Nuclear plants being planned. However the sentiment against nuclear energy is very strong now, and only Finland and France now have nuclear plants under construction. In Asia, plants currently under construction in Japan (1) and South Korea (5). Both Japan and South Korea import almost 100% of all of their fossil fuels. Japan still imports 200 M tons a year of coal, so it does not appear as though that will change much. Russia is building (8). If you loved Chernobyl, wait till you see the sequel. And China (11) and India (6). After China completes the 11 reactors now under construction, they will have 22 in operation which will provide 20 GW of power by 2015 - according to the EIA, by 2015, nuclear power plants will provide less than 2% of China's electricity. More than half of the nuclear power plants now in operation in the world were built prior to 1990 (250); and 100 of these became operational in 1980 or earlier. Between 2030 and 2040, at least 200 nuclear power plants will be taken off line.
In summary, believing that nuclear power will replace coal to any extent is but a fantasy. The facts are clear, future nuclear power production will not pose any challenge to the use of coal for electric power production for at least the next decade .... and likely never.
messages.finance.yahoo.com |
