- Email: [email protected]
00457 Organising for the management of nuclear liabilities
05
Nuclear fuels (economics, policy, supplies, forecasts)
Economics,
Policy, Supplies, Forecasts Achlrvlng
comprtltivo
excellencband
other
Payne, J. and Zacha, N. Nuclear News, Aug. 1994,37, (lo), 64-67,73-74. A report on the 1994 American Nuclear Society Annual Meeting held 1923 June in New Orleans, La. The stated theme of the meeting was ‘Achieving Competitive Excellence’, but other issues also dominated the discussion and sessions. The meeting’s embedded topical focused on the Technology of Fusion Energy. 95/00449 Spain
Draft Ieglslatlon: Five reactora to be abandoned -
96/00456 The nuclear review Hawley, R. Energy & Environment, 1994, 5, (3), 181-186. In 1989 the UK Government withdrew the nuclear power stations from the electricity privatisation process. The principal reason for this was that private investors were reluctant to take on board the risks associated with the unfunded liabilities for decommissining and waste management that arose from the previous 30 years of operation under the Central Electricity Generatron Board. At the same time, the Government placed a moratonum on further power station construction beyond Sizewell B - Britain’s first pressurized water reactor - then in the early stages of construction - pending a Review of the prospects for UK nuclear power in 1994. Out of this chaos Nuclear Electric was born - a public limited company with the Govemment as its sole shareholder.
Nuclear News, Sep. 1994, 37, (ll), 88-89. Reports that new draft legislation for the Spanish electricity industry, which was finally approved by the government council of ministers in June 1994, and is due to be debated by the parliament before the end of the year, intends to make the lo-year moratorium on the completion of five nuclear reactors permanent. It is suggested that the investment made in the five plants will be paid off over 25 years through a levy on electricity sales.
95/00457 Ilabllltles
95ttM450
95/00455 Privatlslng nuclear power: Evidence for the review of future prospects for nuclear power Robinson, C. ‘Surrey Energy Economics Centre, Dept. of Economics,
European update - While the west marks tlme, the east uparades Moore,‘c Atom, Aug.-Sep. 1994, (435), 16-28. The author reports that while many European countries still outrank much of the world in their reliance on nuclear power, according to the IAEA, the only four countries which rely on nuclear for over 50% of their electricity needs are all European. Until these countries’ armies of nuclear power stations begin to reach old age and retire, much of Europe is marking time as far as significant new capacity is concerned, although a scattering of new units did come on stream recently. Whilst in Western Europe there is a dearth of new reactor orders, it is preoccupied with waste and reprocessing issues, and is looking east for business. 95loo451
Forocastlna nuclear vower supply . . _ with Bayrslan autoregression Beck, R. and Solow, J. L. Energy Economics, Jul. 1994,16, (3), 185-192. The authors explore the possibility of forecasting the quarterly US generation of electricity from nuclear power using a Bayesian autoregression model. In terms of forecasting accuracy, this approach compares favourably with both the Department of Energy’s current forecastig methodology and their more recent efforts using ARIMA models, and it is extremely easy and inexpensive to implement.
95100452 Four argumenta In favour of nuclear power Pearce, D. Energy & Environmenr, 1994, 5, (3), 187-193. All energy production results in environmental impacts: air and water ollution, accident risk, global impacts and local nuisance. Nothing is Pree. Choices have to be made. But many countries have limited freedom to choose. They may lack the resources and managerial capacity to manage nuclear power plants: they may not possess indigenous fossil fuel reserves; renewable energy resource may be attractive in principle, but expensive in practice. In the UK there is still time to choose. Not only does the UK have its own energy resources, it is rich enough to buy energy on the world market (the UK has the 16th highest national income per capita in the world), although importing energy poses potential risks of security of supply. 95100453 German nuclear Industry welts on the polltlclana Schutt, C. Atom, Aug.-Sep. 1994, (435), 21-22. Discusses the situation in the German nuclear industry which is paralysed by an on-going energy policy debate. 95/00454 A new deal for nuclear? Dettmer, R. IEE Review, Seo. 1994. 40. (51. 213-216. Faced with the prospect .of a’slow hecbne’mto insignificance, the UK nuclear industry IS looking to the government for a new lease of life. The author tries to read the omens for its future. Nuclear power and global warming: A first cost95loo455 benefit calculation Hope, C. Energy h Environment, 1994, 5, (3), 195-205. The paper investigates the costs and benefits of a modest nuclear power rogramme in the European Union to combat the threat of global warming. $ he nuclear oroaramme is found to bring a double benefit. The first and more obvio& b&efit is that the economi: impacts of global warming are reduced. The second benefit is counter-intuitive; most people would expect it to be a cost. It comes from the stimulus to the economy from the construction of the nuclear plant, which, with the recycling of carbon tax revenues, offsets its construction and operating costs, and may even cause consumers’ expenditure to rise. Calculations in this aper show that over the period to 2100 the mean net present value of the rrst benefit is 6 billion European Currency Units (ECU; 1 ECU is about Sl), while the second benefit has a mean net present value of 158 billion ECU.
f
26
Fuel and Energy Abstracts January 1995
Organlslng
VKAEA~Govewnent
for the
management
of nuclear
Div., Didcot, UK, 1994, 28 pp.
Describes the background, responsibilities and structure of the UKABA Government Division, which was set up in April 1994, to manage the UKAEA’s nuclear liabilities, and operation of plant and property.
University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GV2 SXH, UK f21.00, Nov. 1994, 39 PP.
The paper examines whether there are positive ways forward for the British nuclear industry so that is can build on recent improvements in operating performance. In general, the paper argues that the industry should be privatised and its future determined by market forces, 95/00459 Prospecta and strategler for nuclear power: Global boon or darnerour dlvuston? Beck, P. The &yal Institute of InternationalAffairs, London, f12.95, 118 PP.
The book discusses the long running nuclear debate, and looks at the current world-wide position of nuclear power and its future prospects.
95/09450 Pushing for prlvatlsatlon Lyons, C. Atom, Aug.-Sep. 1994, (435), 14-15. The author reports that appeals for privatisation have dominated the submissions to the Government’s Nuclear Review by key players Scottish Nuclear and Nuclear Electric. The review has been set up to examine the economic and commercial viability of new nuclear stations in the UK. The review will investigate the possible options for introducing private sector finance into the nuclear industry. 95lOo45 1 The Scottish nuclear family Bindon, J. L. Energy World, Oct. 1994, (222), p, 18. Discusses the situation of Nuclear power in the UK and especially Scottish nuclear power. 95109452 Second MIT Intrrnatlonal Conference on the Next Generatlon of Nuclear Power Technology Program for Advanced Nuclear Power Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Nuclear Engng., Cambridge, h&4.02139-4307, USA, $20.00.
Proceedings of a conference held 26-27 October 1993 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The conference discussed topics and uestions pertinent to the future of nuclear power, including problems of pu?I.hc trust and axiety over nuclear weapons that could prevent any future for nuclear power. Also discussed was the concern of nuclear waste disposal. 95/00453 Securing our energy future: The government’s revlsw of the prospects for nuclear power. A Summary Lazard Brothers & Co.Ltd & Scottish Nuclear Ltd., East Kilbride, Scotland, 1994, 8 pp.
Provides a short summary on future prospects of privatization of nuclear power in the UK 95lOo454 U.K. Industry report: Speaking with one voice NuclearNews,Aug. 1994, 37, (lo), 40-42. A report on the U.K. nuclear industry. 95190455 U.S. dlplomatlc tslks make progress. Corruption charges flied on Wolrong contracts Nuclear News, Sep. 1994, 37, (ll), p. 89. Reports on the situation in North Korea with U.S. diplomatic talks. The second report is on the corruption charges filed on the former president of the Korea Electric Power Company (Kepco) of South Korea.
Nuclear fuels (economics, policy, supplies, forecasts)
Economics,
Policy, Supplies, Forecasts Achlrvlng
comprtltivo
excellencband
other
Payne, J. and Zacha, N. Nuclear News, Aug. 1994,37, (lo), 64-67,73-74. A report on the 1994 American Nuclear Society Annual Meeting held 1923 June in New Orleans, La. The stated theme of the meeting was ‘Achieving Competitive Excellence’, but other issues also dominated the discussion and sessions. The meeting’s embedded topical focused on the Technology of Fusion Energy. 95/00449 Spain
Draft Ieglslatlon: Five reactora to be abandoned -
96/00456 The nuclear review Hawley, R. Energy & Environment, 1994, 5, (3), 181-186. In 1989 the UK Government withdrew the nuclear power stations from the electricity privatisation process. The principal reason for this was that private investors were reluctant to take on board the risks associated with the unfunded liabilities for decommissining and waste management that arose from the previous 30 years of operation under the Central Electricity Generatron Board. At the same time, the Government placed a moratonum on further power station construction beyond Sizewell B - Britain’s first pressurized water reactor - then in the early stages of construction - pending a Review of the prospects for UK nuclear power in 1994. Out of this chaos Nuclear Electric was born - a public limited company with the Govemment as its sole shareholder.
Nuclear News, Sep. 1994, 37, (ll), 88-89. Reports that new draft legislation for the Spanish electricity industry, which was finally approved by the government council of ministers in June 1994, and is due to be debated by the parliament before the end of the year, intends to make the lo-year moratorium on the completion of five nuclear reactors permanent. It is suggested that the investment made in the five plants will be paid off over 25 years through a levy on electricity sales.
95/00457 Ilabllltles
95ttM450
95/00455 Privatlslng nuclear power: Evidence for the review of future prospects for nuclear power Robinson, C. ‘Surrey Energy Economics Centre, Dept. of Economics,
European update - While the west marks tlme, the east uparades Moore,‘c Atom, Aug.-Sep. 1994, (435), 16-28. The author reports that while many European countries still outrank much of the world in their reliance on nuclear power, according to the IAEA, the only four countries which rely on nuclear for over 50% of their electricity needs are all European. Until these countries’ armies of nuclear power stations begin to reach old age and retire, much of Europe is marking time as far as significant new capacity is concerned, although a scattering of new units did come on stream recently. Whilst in Western Europe there is a dearth of new reactor orders, it is preoccupied with waste and reprocessing issues, and is looking east for business. 95loo451
Forocastlna nuclear vower supply . . _ with Bayrslan autoregression Beck, R. and Solow, J. L. Energy Economics, Jul. 1994,16, (3), 185-192. The authors explore the possibility of forecasting the quarterly US generation of electricity from nuclear power using a Bayesian autoregression model. In terms of forecasting accuracy, this approach compares favourably with both the Department of Energy’s current forecastig methodology and their more recent efforts using ARIMA models, and it is extremely easy and inexpensive to implement.
95100452 Four argumenta In favour of nuclear power Pearce, D. Energy & Environmenr, 1994, 5, (3), 187-193. All energy production results in environmental impacts: air and water ollution, accident risk, global impacts and local nuisance. Nothing is Pree. Choices have to be made. But many countries have limited freedom to choose. They may lack the resources and managerial capacity to manage nuclear power plants: they may not possess indigenous fossil fuel reserves; renewable energy resource may be attractive in principle, but expensive in practice. In the UK there is still time to choose. Not only does the UK have its own energy resources, it is rich enough to buy energy on the world market (the UK has the 16th highest national income per capita in the world), although importing energy poses potential risks of security of supply. 95100453 German nuclear Industry welts on the polltlclana Schutt, C. Atom, Aug.-Sep. 1994, (435), 21-22. Discusses the situation in the German nuclear industry which is paralysed by an on-going energy policy debate. 95/00454 A new deal for nuclear? Dettmer, R. IEE Review, Seo. 1994. 40. (51. 213-216. Faced with the prospect .of a’slow hecbne’mto insignificance, the UK nuclear industry IS looking to the government for a new lease of life. The author tries to read the omens for its future. Nuclear power and global warming: A first cost95loo455 benefit calculation Hope, C. Energy h Environment, 1994, 5, (3), 195-205. The paper investigates the costs and benefits of a modest nuclear power rogramme in the European Union to combat the threat of global warming. $ he nuclear oroaramme is found to bring a double benefit. The first and more obvio& b&efit is that the economi: impacts of global warming are reduced. The second benefit is counter-intuitive; most people would expect it to be a cost. It comes from the stimulus to the economy from the construction of the nuclear plant, which, with the recycling of carbon tax revenues, offsets its construction and operating costs, and may even cause consumers’ expenditure to rise. Calculations in this aper show that over the period to 2100 the mean net present value of the rrst benefit is 6 billion European Currency Units (ECU; 1 ECU is about Sl), while the second benefit has a mean net present value of 158 billion ECU.
f
26
Fuel and Energy Abstracts January 1995
Organlslng
VKAEA~Govewnent
for the
management
of nuclear
Div., Didcot, UK, 1994, 28 pp.
Describes the background, responsibilities and structure of the UKABA Government Division, which was set up in April 1994, to manage the UKAEA’s nuclear liabilities, and operation of plant and property.
University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GV2 SXH, UK f21.00, Nov. 1994, 39 PP.
The paper examines whether there are positive ways forward for the British nuclear industry so that is can build on recent improvements in operating performance. In general, the paper argues that the industry should be privatised and its future determined by market forces, 95/00459 Prospecta and strategler for nuclear power: Global boon or darnerour dlvuston? Beck, P. The &yal Institute of InternationalAffairs, London, f12.95, 118 PP.
The book discusses the long running nuclear debate, and looks at the current world-wide position of nuclear power and its future prospects.
95/09450 Pushing for prlvatlsatlon Lyons, C. Atom, Aug.-Sep. 1994, (435), 14-15. The author reports that appeals for privatisation have dominated the submissions to the Government’s Nuclear Review by key players Scottish Nuclear and Nuclear Electric. The review has been set up to examine the economic and commercial viability of new nuclear stations in the UK. The review will investigate the possible options for introducing private sector finance into the nuclear industry. 95lOo45 1 The Scottish nuclear family Bindon, J. L. Energy World, Oct. 1994, (222), p, 18. Discusses the situation of Nuclear power in the UK and especially Scottish nuclear power. 95109452 Second MIT Intrrnatlonal Conference on the Next Generatlon of Nuclear Power Technology Program for Advanced Nuclear Power Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Nuclear Engng., Cambridge, h&4.02139-4307, USA, $20.00.
Proceedings of a conference held 26-27 October 1993 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The conference discussed topics and uestions pertinent to the future of nuclear power, including problems of pu?I.hc trust and axiety over nuclear weapons that could prevent any future for nuclear power. Also discussed was the concern of nuclear waste disposal. 95/00453 Securing our energy future: The government’s revlsw of the prospects for nuclear power. A Summary Lazard Brothers & Co.Ltd & Scottish Nuclear Ltd., East Kilbride, Scotland, 1994, 8 pp.
Provides a short summary on future prospects of privatization of nuclear power in the UK 95lOo454 U.K. Industry report: Speaking with one voice NuclearNews,Aug. 1994, 37, (lo), 40-42. A report on the U.K. nuclear industry. 95190455 U.S. dlplomatlc tslks make progress. Corruption charges flied on Wolrong contracts Nuclear News, Sep. 1994, 37, (ll), p. 89. Reports on the situation in North Korea with U.S. diplomatic talks. The second report is on the corruption charges filed on the former president of the Korea Electric Power Company (Kepco) of South Korea.