Energy security: LNG, nuclear

[WendyBG]

This is a very good interview of historian Daniel Yergin, who has written about energy issues … basically forever.

Yergin compares today to the oil shocks of 1973 due to very low spare capacity. For those who didn’t experience 1973-74, the oil crisis caused very high energy prices, high inflation and a serious bear market for stocks.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/21/business/energy-environme…

**At Davos, a Sense of ‘High Urgency’ About Energy Security**

**The invasion of Ukraine is an “epochal moment” that will end Russia’s status as an energy superpower — and increase risks for other nations, says the historian Daniel Yergin.**

**By Stanley Reed, The New York Times, May 21, 2022**

**...huge snip ...**

**I think it is has also really changed thinking about natural gas and LNG [liquefied natural gas, transported on ships]. The Biden administration has embraced LNG as a potential element in energy security. LNG has become a key part of Europe’s energy security. That would not have been articulated at all before this crisis. There is now the recognition that the U.S. is going to be the largest exporter of LNG in the world, and its exports are going to be redirected to Europe....**

**The International Energy Agency said half the commercial technologies that are needed do not exist. The direction is clear, but it really does come down to technology, and the scale is enormous. The world still runs basically 80 percent on hydrocarbons....**

**In France, when President Emmanuel Macron first came in, he wanted to roll back. Now he is talking about six new nuclear reactors, possibly another eight. Even the English energy security document has nuclear in it.**

**I was struck, at the Davos conference, that chief executives of industrial companies are almost assuming we will have small nuclear reactors by the end of the decade....** [end quote]

A major trend for countries to move to LNG may open investment opportunities.

https://marine-digital.com/article_10biggest_lng_shipping_co…
ENI. …
EQUINOR. …
CONOCOPHILLIPS. …
GAZPROM GROUP. …[scratch that one, it’s Russian]
TOTAL. …
CHINA NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION. …
ROYAL DUTCH SHELL. …
EXXONMOBIL.

https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/market-sectors/e…
Cheniere
Shell
Total Energies

These are worth looking into since the world will see a Macro trend change from oil, accelerated by the need to cut Russia out of the world’s energy supply.

Wendy

[flyerboys]

Yergin has been horrifically correct.

We are ever more rapidly heading into GCC disaster time. Potential solutions are being implemented with too much dithering and half heartedness. Why? Well, until recently from the power of oilgas wealth “free speech”, whether Exxon or Saudi style. But we have now crossed a threshold where the crux disaster is neither weather nor water temperatures etc, but rather a break down in all too human world systems. The world wide failure to actually arrest GCC has led to a collapse of cooperation and mutual benefit across

– trade (no more reliance on foreign lowest cost producer let alone “just in time” algorithms),
– war and peace, and the once powerful
– vision of an ever more peaceful, cooperative, and prosperous world.

We have entered an ugly era of Devil take the hindmost, with Putin showing his brand of leadership by throwing perceived weak sledmates off the back of the sled to delay the pursuing wolves.

Nations could have chosen to embark on an extremely rapid and expensive burst of transformations to tame rapidly accelerating GCC, BUT that time has probably already passed, as doing so is becoming a highly questionable policy as multiple nations are clearly (quietly) preparing themselves for an impending all too likely “war of all against all” on a planet with an ecosphere moving to chaotic and unpredictable changes, and within a human culture losing its ethical and moral bearings.

I am supporting politicians and movements fighting hydrocarbon stupidity, but putting ever more of my private efforts and funds into saving what I can (e.g. my local ecology and my good but poor neighbors) from the disasters I now see as almost inevitably coming.

I do pray to the gods of high tech that fusion power and advanced materials such as graphenes save our idiot selves, but I ain’t betting on it.

david fb

[desertdaveataol]

We have entered an ugly era of Devil take the hindmost, with Putin showing his brand of leadership by throwing perceived weak sledmates off the back of the sled to delay the pursuing wolves.

That’s an apt description of the man.

[tim443]

Thank you for recommending this post to our Best of feature.

…

We are ever more rapidly heading into GCC disaster time. Potential solutions are being implemented with too much dithering and half heartedness. Why? …

…

We have entered an ugly era of Devil take the hindmost, …

Nations could have chosen to embark on an extremely rapid and expensive burst of transformations to tame rapidly accelerating GCC, BUT that time has probably already passed,

…

I do pray to the gods of high tech that fusion power and advanced materials such as graphenes save our idiot selves, but I ain’t betting on it.

david fb

Perhaps not completely hopeless … yet?

Tim

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2022/01/18/canada-an…

ENERGY
How The U.S. And Canada Share Nuclear Advances In Areas Like Thorium Reactors

James Conca

…

Jan 18, 2022,08:00am EST

The United States and Canada have a lot to collaborate on in the nuclear energy field, and they seem to be doing a good job of it. Each country is considering each other’s reactor designs and each has funded or chosen to review some of those from both countries.

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) recently selected U.S.-based GE Hitachi’s BWRX-300 small modular reactor (SMR) as Canada’s first commercial, grid-scale, SMR for their Darlington nuclear site.

And recently, the U.S. Department of Energy gave a $3 million grant to Canada-based Terrestrial Energy to support licensing and commercialization of its Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSR), a Generation IV nuclear power plant.

…

The University of Illinois has partnered with Canada’s Chalk River site to demonstrate a Generation IV SMR, the MMR, from Ultra Safe Nuclear.

In 2020, the Canadian government also invested $15 million of federal funds to accelerate development of Terrestrial Energy’s IMSR power plant.

Terrestrial Energy seeks to topple the myth that nuclear plants must be the traditional water-moderated-water-cooled reactors. Their Generation IV IMSR operates at 700°C, 375°C hotter than conventional nuclear reactors, and drives net thermal efficiency to 44%.

[flyerboys]

Tim

Glad to hear of blooming sanity in USA nuclear generation policy.

If only the USA had been less arrogant and stupid and careless in its design, construction, and management of Nuclear Energy, even (gasp!) making use of CANDU designs that have proven superior over time, world history might have been different.

Yes, we might still dodge the catastrophic scenario I see as most probable, and we should do all we can to accomplish that. Safe nuclear designs combined with sane discussion and action on nuclear waste management is still possible, and nuclear could make an immense difference in how quickly we turn away from chaos in both world ecology and human political cultures.

Tick tick tick tick goes the clock…

david fb
(planting three more trees this week, cleaning a gorgeous older tree of its epiphytic parasites, and leading an intensive tutorial on curl, div, and LaPlacians for my brightest young students to help them ace their year end exams and be ready for heavy duty complex analysis next year)(they are a lot like my treasured saplings)

[waterfell]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2022/01/18/canada-an…

Ontario Power Generation (OPG) recently selected U.S.-based GE Hitachi’s BWRX-300 small modular reactor (SMR) as Canada’s first commercial, grid-scale, SMR for their Darlington nuclear site.

There are a few small issues associated with the GE-H BWRX-300 to be used in Canada. First of all, those plants will require enriched uranium. Canadian nuclear engineers are usually proud of the fact they do not need enriched uranium in their plants, rather they rely on heavy water for moderating the natural U fuel. The BWRX-300 is a standard LWR, with no heavy water, and therefore will need ~5% enriched fuel. Secondly, the fuel is of a configuration used throughout the world, but not in Canada. Not only will OPG need to purchase U enrichment services in the US or Europe, but will need to have the fuel manufactured elsewhere. None of these problems are large, and I am sure they have already been considered prior to making the choice. But the issues do introduce a different way of doing things that CANDU operators are usually not accustomed to.

====================

Also from the Forbes article…
In 2020, the Canadian government also invested $15 million of federal funds to accelerate development of Terrestrial Energy’s IMSR power plant.
Terrestrial Energy seeks to topple the myth that nuclear plants must be the traditional water-moderated-water-cooled reactors. Their Generation IV IMSR operates at 700°C, 375°C hotter than conventional nuclear reactors, and drives net thermal efficiency to 44%.

First of all, $15 million is not a very large amount, compared to all of the R&D that still needs to be done.

There is a lot of excitement among some engineers about the molten salt reactors. I can certainly see the advantages of some of the aspects of these new plants, and I wish the developers success. However, there are still a lot of engineering issues that need to be worked out before molten salt plants can be built on a large scale. The biggest issue right now, from what I understand, is material corrosion from the molten salt coolant/fuel. The fluoride salts usually considered are extremely corrosive to most materials, and qualifying all of the materials which will come into contact with the salt will need to be done. Secondly, these molten fuel concepts usually involve some kind of on-line reprocessing to remove fission products from the fuel (especially fission product gases such as Xenon). This is something today’s nuclear plants do not require, and the reprocessing systems will need to be well-thought-out and engineered.

There is probably a path to success where these issues are ultimately solved. But they are not trivial problems, and will require a significant amount of R&D. That said, development of these molten salt reactors will be about 10,000 times easier than trying to develop fusion power plants, which some people are still hoping can be done.

• Pete

[tim443]

There is probably a path to success where these issues are ultimately solved. But they are not trivial problems, and will require a significant amount of R&D. That said, development of these molten salt reactors will be about 10,000 times easier than trying to develop fusion power plants, which some people are still hoping can be done.

- Pete

Agree Pete, fortunately our current clean power sources from Hydro and Nuclear as well as a lot of wind in some areas not including parliament will hopefully buy us that time?

Nova Scotia's growth in renewable electricity has been largely through the development of wind power. There are now more than 300 commercial wind turbines generating electricity in Nova Scotia, making our province a national leader in wind energy as a percentage of total generation capacity.

Tim

Heard at our annual (first one in three years where owners were invited to attend in person due to COVID) Wednesday condo meeting that the province has mentioned potentially subsidizing EV chargers in our underground parking … very few details. Some people want to put in heat pumps in their units but the plumbing stacks were badly located to drain them.

Again few details.

[JLC]

Glad to hear of blooming sanity in USA nuclear generation policy.

I’m not so optimistic. I’ve lost track as to how delayed this nuclear plant is, could be decades, but if we can’t build ONE nuclear plant, how the heck are we going to build out infrastructure?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-17/southern-…

JLC

[tim443]

I’m not so optimistic. I’ve lost track as to how delayed this nuclear plant is, could be decades, but if we can’t build ONE nuclear plant, how the heck are we going to build out infrastructure?

/southern-…

JLC

Meanwhile Bruce Power is in the process of re-furbishing all eight of their reactors in a Life-Extension Program including Major Component Replacement (MCR).

https://www.brucepower.com/life-extension-program-mcr-projec…

Life-Extension Program & MCR Project

In December 2015, Bruce Power reached an agreement with the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) to advance a long-term investment program which would refurbish its nuclear fleet and secure the site’s operation until 2064.

The Life-Extension Program started on January 1, 2016 and involves the gradual replacement of older systems in the company’s eight reactor units during regularly scheduled maintenance outages.

Confession: My largest and longest held position in the stock market (TRP.to) owns a significant position in Bruce Power.

Tim

Bruce Power is a Canadian-owned partnership of TC Energy, Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement Systems (OMERS), the Power Workers' Union and The Society of United Professionals. A majority of our employees are also owners of the business.

[PSUEngineer]

In December 2015, Bruce Power reached an agreement with the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) to advance a long-term investment program which would refurbish its nuclear fleet and secure the site’s operation until 2064.

Just the other day, JAAK was saying Duke’s plan to operate their nuclear fleet in the Carolinas to 2050 was without merit.

PSU

[JLC]

The Life-Extension Program started on January 1, 2016 and involves the gradual replacement of older systems in the company’s eight reactor units during regularly scheduled maintenance outages.

I wonder why Michigan didn’t follow suit. Seems short sighted but then again politicians can only see as far as the next election.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/palisades-nuclear-power-pl…

JLC

[PSUEngineer]

I wonder why Michigan didn’t follow suit. Seems short sighted but then again politicians can only see as far as the next election.

May have made a difference if they put a carbon-reduction plan in place. Here in NC, Duke is required to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 70% over 2005 emissions and carbon neutrality by 2050. Duke has 10,773 MW of electricity from nuclear. They have stated they can’t reach their goal without nuclear. Actually, in two of their proposed portfolios, they plan to add nuclear.

PSU

[tim443]

I wonder why Michigan didn’t follow suit. Seems short sighted but then again politicians can only see as far as the next election.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/palisades-nuclear-power-pl……

JLC

If I had to guess, I think there was only one reactor? Generally many of our nuclear plants were built with four reactors which allows them to share common facilities such as fire services, training facilities, cooling ponds and the like thereby reducing costs?

Tim <not a nuclear engineer … nor to I play one on METaR>

[syke6]

I wonder why Michigan didn’t follow suit. Seems short sighted but then again politicians can only see as far as the next election.

The article said that politicians were in favor of keeping it open. I suspect in this case it was the operator that wanted to shut it down. The recently passed Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included generous subsidies to keep existing nuclear plants open, but the operator never applied for the money.

[waterfell]

Here in NC, Duke is required to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 70% over 2005 emissions and carbon neutrality by 2050.
PSU

I understand Duke isn’t the only electric utility in the state. There is also Dominion, plus a bunch of smaller cooperatives. But looking at North Carolina as a whole, it looks like the 70% reduction is doable. Since 2005, NC has already reduced coal from 60% of total generation to about 15%. By looking at some quick numbers, if they can shut down the remaining coal plants, and replace that generation with half natural gas and the other half clean energy (nuclear, renewables, hydro, etc.), then the 70% goal can be achieved.

“Carbon neutrality by 2050” is a whole other question. It doesn’t seem possible, because you need dispatchable, reliable back up generators to maintain the grid. Intermittent renewables will not do the job. All of these dreams about batteries at the scale that will be needed are not serious. It would simply be way too expensive, given the cost of batteries.

• Pete

[PSUEngineer]

I understand Duke isn’t the only electric utility in the state. There is also Dominion, plus a bunch of smaller cooperatives. But looking at North Carolina as a whole, it looks like the 70% reduction is doable. Since 2005, NC has already reduced coal from 60% of total generation to about 15%. By looking at some quick numbers, if they can shut down the remaining coal plants, and replace that generation with half natural gas and the other half clean energy (nuclear, renewables, hydro, etc.), then the 70% goal can be achieved.

I left off the date. It is a 70% reduction by 2030. Dominion is also in the state but only in the northeastern lightly populated part of the state. The state is not deregulated here where you can pick your provider. You get whoever is serving the area.
https://www.carolinacountry.com/images/downloads/guide-to-nc…

“Carbon neutrality by 2050” is a whole other question. It doesn’t seem possible, because you need dispatchable, reliable back up generators to maintain the grid. Intermittent renewables will not do the job. All of these dreams about batteries at the scale that will be needed are not serious. It would simply be way too expensive, given the cost of batteries.

I’m not sure how they’ll get there. There’s not much detail in the plan for 2050.

[jaagu]

Just the other day, JAAK was saying Duke’s plan to operate their nuclear fleet in the Carolinas to 2050 was without merit.

PSU

====================================

Because of economics and NRC backtracking on 80 year licenses.

Jaak

[tim443]

I wonder why Michigan didn’t follow suit. Seems short sighted but then again politicians can only see as far as the next election.

Since you mention it. I suppose with a lot of hydro power off line in Californian due to shortage of water … might refocus on what is working that isn’t a fossil fuel?

Tim

https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Californian-supp…

Californian support grows for Diablo Canyon: poll

20 May 2022

There is strong local and statewide support for extending the operations of California’s only operating nuclear power plant - and the state’s largest source of carbon-free generation - a newly released poll has found.

The study, commissioned by Carbon Free California, with input and support from progressive think tank and polling firm Data for Progress, and carried out by FM3 Research, found that 58% of voters across the state support continued operation of the plant, with 32% opposing it. In San Luis Obispo County - where the plant is situated - 74% of voters expressed support for continued operation of Diablo Canyon, with 56% of respondents “strongly” supporting it.

“We found that Californians broadly support the continued use of Diablo Canyon Power Plant to generate electricity,”

https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/01/1048726/droughts…

CLIMATE CHANGE

Droughts are cutting into California’s hydropower. Here’s what that means for clean energy.
Greenhouse-gas emissions increase when natural gas replaces hydropower during water shortages.

By Casey Crownhart

April 1, 2022

[syke6]

Californian support grows for Diablo Canyon: poll

The public wants to keep it open and the governor wants to keep it open. The sticky wicket is the owner doesn’t want to keep it open. Similar to the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan we talked about yesterday, political and public support isn’t enough. Without buy-in from the owner there is not much anyone can do.

There are federal grants available to extend the life of existing nuclear facility. Similar to the Palisades plant, the operator has not applied for any of those funds. It seems the owner is pretty serious about shutting it down.

[flyerboys]

The possibility of a nasty earthquake caused disruption at Diablo has to weigh heavily on PGE. The very nearby and significant “Shoreline Fault” is only 300 meters from the plant, but only was discovered after Diablo had been designed, built, and certified. IF Diablo was built fully to specifications it ought to survive.

“Ought” in this case may not be enough.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_Canyon_earthquake_vulne…

david fb
(I am mostly for keeping reactors going, but on this one I am not convinced.)
(One of my favorite from childhood surf spots is nearby, and the father of one of my surfing buddies, a superb engineer and an ethical man, was instrumental in overseeing the construction. His son thinks his Dad would have been quite worried… but that is less than anecdotal evidence)