More on the French Nuclear "Solution"

Nifty tidbits from our conservative friends in Canada. A real laundry list of carpet hidden problems.

French Power Myths - National Post - 21 May 08

"The ambassador’s general claims conveniently confuse electricity and energy. While nuclear energy provides 78% of France’s electricity, this corresponds to only 18% of the total energy that consumers use. In other words, France’s nuclear program does not come close to 'ensuring its energy independence.'"

"'France is the world’s largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation'? France in 2007 exported 83 terawatt-hours and imported 27.5 TWh, indeed a large net export. What the ambassador does not say is that France cheaply exports baseload power and imports very expensive, essentially fossil fuel peak-load power to use in madly wasteful heating systems in the winter. Net power imports from nuclear phase-out country Germany alone averaged about 8 TWh over the last few years. The CO2 emissions linked to these imports are, of course, attributed to the exporting country and not to France."

This in response to this Letter to the Editor by the French ambassador to Canada.

France Leads on Carbon Dioxide - National Post - 15 May 08

"France is a leader in the fight against climate change, thanks in part to its nuclear energy policy. Nuclear energy does not emit any greenhouse gases. (A simple inspection of the fuel cycle emissions tells us that's false.)

And this original posting by columnist Lawrence Solomon.

McCain's French Kiss - National Post - 13 May 08

"McCain thinks he is asking a simple rhetorical question. ['If France can produce 80% of its electricity with nuclear power, why can’t we?'] As it turns out, he is not. His question is technical, with an answer that will surprise him and most Americans. Nuclear reactors cannot possibly meet 80% of America’s power needs — or those of any country whose power market dominates its region — because of limitations in nuclear technology. McCain needs to find another miracle energy solution, or abandon his vow to drastically cut back carbon dioxide emissions."

"If a country produces more nuclear power than it needs in the dead of night, it must export that low-value, off-peak power. This is what France does. It sells its nuclear surplus to its European Union neighbours, a market of 700 million people. That large market — more than 10 times France’s population — is able to soak up most of France’s surplus off-peak power.

The U.S. is not surrounded, as is France, by far more populous neighbours. Just the opposite: The U.S. dominates the North American market. If 80% of U.S. needs were met by nuclear reactors, as Senator McCain desires, America’s off-peak surplus would have no market, even if the power were given away. Countries highly reliant on nuclear power, in effect, are in turn reliant on having large non-nuclear-reliant countries as neighbours.

If France’s neighbours had power systems dominated by nuclear power, they too would be trying to export off-peak power and France would have no one to whom it could offload its surplus power. In fact, even with the mammoth EU market to tap into, France must shut down some of its reactors some weekends because no one can use its surplus. In effect, France can’t even give the stuff away."

More on the French Nuclear "Solution"

Nifty tidbits from our conservative friends in Canada. A real laundry list of carpet hidden problems.

French Power Myths - National Post - 21 May 08

"The ambassador’s general claims conveniently confuse electricity and energy. While nuclear energy provides 78% of France’s electricity, this corresponds to only 18% of the total energy that consumers use. In other words, France’s nuclear program does not come close to 'ensuring its energy independence.'"

"'France is the world’s largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation'? France in 2007 exported 83 terawatt-hours and imported 27.5 TWh, indeed a large net export. What the ambassador does not say is that France cheaply exports baseload power and imports very expensive, essentially fossil fuel peak-load power to use in madly wasteful heating systems in the winter. Net power imports from nuclear phase-out country Germany alone averaged about 8 TWh over the last few years. The CO2 emissions linked to these imports are, of course, attributed to the exporting country and not to France."

This in response to this Letter to the Editor by the French ambassador to Canada.

France Leads on Carbon Dioxide - National Post - 15 May 08

"France is a leader in the fight against climate change, thanks in part to its nuclear energy policy. Nuclear energy does not emit any greenhouse gases. (A simple inspection of the fuel cycle emissions tells us that's false.)

And this original posting by columnist Lawrence Solomon.

McCain's French Kiss - National Post - 13 May 08

"McCain thinks he is asking a simple rhetorical question. ['If France can produce 80% of its electricity with nuclear power, why can’t we?'] As it turns out, he is not. His question is technical, with an answer that will surprise him and most Americans. Nuclear reactors cannot possibly meet 80% of America’s power needs — or those of any country whose power market dominates its region — because of limitations in nuclear technology. McCain needs to find another miracle energy solution, or abandon his vow to drastically cut back carbon dioxide emissions."

"If a country produces more nuclear power than it needs in the dead of night, it must export that low-value, off-peak power. This is what France does. It sells its nuclear surplus to its European Union neighbours, a market of 700 million people. That large market — more than 10 times France’s population — is able to soak up most of France’s surplus off-peak power.

The U.S. is not surrounded, as is France, by far more populous neighbours. Just the opposite: The U.S. dominates the North American market. If 80% of U.S. needs were met by nuclear reactors, as Senator McCain desires, America’s off-peak surplus would have no market, even if the power were given away. Countries highly reliant on nuclear power, in effect, are in turn reliant on having large non-nuclear-reliant countries as neighbours.

If France’s neighbours had power systems dominated by nuclear power, they too would be trying to export off-peak power and France would have no one to whom it could offload its surplus power. In fact, even with the mammoth EU market to tap into, France must shut down some of its reactors some weekends because no one can use its surplus. In effect, France can’t even give the stuff away."

France Halts Nuke Construction

"It can't be happening, therefore, it isn't." - Chomsky

Construction Stopped on French "Flagship" Nuclear Reactor - Greenpeace UK - 27 May 08

"We've learned that the French nuclear safety agency has ordered a halt to the construction of the new EPR reactor in Flamanville, France. Only six months after work first began. The EPR is the same type of reactor that is proposed to be built in the UK. The move by the agency, ASN, follows the discovery of chronic problems affecting the quality of construction work since building work commenced on Flamanville 3 in December 2007.

Its decision follows a series of letters from the agency to Flamanville's construction manager. In the letters, ASN inspectors highlighted a range of problems including non-conformities in the pinning of the steel framework of the concrete base slab, incorrectly positioned reinforcements, and inadequacy of technical inspections by both the construction company Areva and Electricité de France (EdF)."

"Inspectors also uncovered inconsistencies between the blueprint for reinforcement work and the plan for its practical implementation. The incorrect composition of concrete had been used, which could lead to cracks and rapid deterioration. Cracks have already been observed at part of the base slab beneath the reactor building. The supplier of the steel containment liner reportedly lacks the necessary qualifications. Fabrication of the liner was continuing despite quality failures demonstrating the lack of competence of the supplier. As a result, one-quarter of the welds of the steel liner of the reactor containment building were deficient.

It seems the construction has run into the same kinds of problems that have bedeviled the building of the world's only other EPR, at Olkiluoto in Finland. The Olkiluoto reactor has been under construction for three years but the schedule for completion has been put back by more than two years and costs have nearly doubled to over 5 billion euros."

France Halts Nuke Construction

"It can't be happening, therefore, it isn't." - Chomsky

Construction Stopped on French "Flagship" Nuclear Reactor - Greenpeace UK - 27 May 08

"We've learned that the French nuclear safety agency has ordered a halt to the construction of the new EPR reactor in Flamanville, France. Only six months after work first began. The EPR is the same type of reactor that is proposed to be built in the UK. The move by the agency, ASN, follows the discovery of chronic problems affecting the quality of construction work since building work commenced on Flamanville 3 in December 2007.

Its decision follows a series of letters from the agency to Flamanville's construction manager. In the letters, ASN inspectors highlighted a range of problems including non-conformities in the pinning of the steel framework of the concrete base slab, incorrectly positioned reinforcements, and inadequacy of technical inspections by both the construction company Areva and Electricité de France (EdF)."

"Inspectors also uncovered inconsistencies between the blueprint for reinforcement work and the plan for its practical implementation. The incorrect composition of concrete had been used, which could lead to cracks and rapid deterioration. Cracks have already been observed at part of the base slab beneath the reactor building. The supplier of the steel containment liner reportedly lacks the necessary qualifications. Fabrication of the liner was continuing despite quality failures demonstrating the lack of competence of the supplier. As a result, one-quarter of the welds of the steel liner of the reactor containment building were deficient.

It seems the construction has run into the same kinds of problems that have bedeviled the building of the world's only other EPR, at Olkiluoto in Finland. The Olkiluoto reactor has been under construction for three years but the schedule for completion has been put back by more than two years and costs have nearly doubled to over 5 billion euros."