EU study: clean energy costs no more in long run

EU study: clean energy costs no more in long run
By DON MELVIN
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS December 15, 2011


BRUSSELS


A report issued Thursday says the European Union can cut its emissions of greenhouse gases dramatically by 2050 without spending any more money -- and even, perhaps, saving a bit.


That estimate is based on an assessment that the new plants and equipment needed to switch to the generation of clean energy would cost more than continued reliance on fossil fuels, but that the clean energy itself would cost less.



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



"Only a new energy model will make our system secure, competitive and sustainable in the long run," said EU Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger. The report, called "Energy Roadmap 2050," was produced by the European Commission, the executive branch of the 27-country European Union.


The EU has committed itself to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, which contribute to changing the earth's climate, to 80-90 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2050.


"The energy sector produces the lion's share of man-made greenhouse emissions," the report said, adding that reducing emissions would therefore "put particular pressure on energy systems."


The report analyzed various scenarios, including dramatically increasing energy efficiency with new requirements on appliances and buildings, strong support for renewable sources of energy, and carbon capture and storage. It concluded that the various clean energy scenarios would cost no more -- and perhaps a bit less -- than continuing to generate electricity as is done now.


And the report concluded that the time for change is now. In this decade, it said, "a new investment cycle is taking place, as infrastructure built 30-40 years ago needs to be replaced."


Investing in different ways of generating energy would be cheaper now than later, and would also avoid locking the EU into current methods, the report said.


The EU's current policies would reduce greenhouse gas emissions about 40 percent by 2050, it said.


The report was welcomed by environmentalist groups.


"The Energy Roadmap is an important step forward in helping the EU create a decarbonized economy," said Arne Mogren, of the European Climate Foundation.


The reaction of Greenpeace, too, was generally favorable.


"The roadmap shows that getting clean energy from renewables will cost taxpayers no more than getting dirty and dangerous energy from coal or nuclear power," said Fraule Thies, Greenpeace's EU energy policy director.

Korea Government sponsored research institute recommends move away from nuclear energy

Government sponsored research institute recommends move away from nuclear energy
The report refutes a renewed push by the Lee administration to expand nuclear power following a series of nuclear accidents
The Hankyoreh 
By Nam Jong-young
Dec.15, 2011 


A policy research institute has issued a report recommending the end of both current lifetime extensions for existing nuclear power plants and plans to build new plants, in order to promote sustainable development for future generations.


“It is desirable for future generations that we only use nuclear plants currently in operation until the end of their original limits of use and that we do not build any more new plants,” said Gang Gwang-gyu, head of the Korea Environment Institute’s Environmental Appraisal Center. 


“Instead of reconsidering policies to supply more energy using nuclear plants, we should change to an energy policy that makes managing demand, including the promotion of energy saving, a priority.”



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree 
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



The report is expected to cause controversy because it comes in contrast to the Lee Myung-bak administration’s policy of planning to build more nuclear plants despite the accident that occurred at Fukushima in Japan in March this year.


Before the report came out, unease had been growing regarding the safety of nuclear plants and the balancing of supply of and demand for electricity this winter, due to a series of problems where nuclear plants broke down. 


At around 8:36 a.m. on Dec. 14, the 950,000kW No.3 reactor at Gori Nuclear Power Site in Busan came to a standstill and stopped generating electricity. 


Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co. Lt. stated, “Excessive voltage in the turbine generator caused a protective relay to come into operation, ceasing electricity generation. We are investigating the exact cause of the accident.”


This incident took place just over 12 hours after the 1,000,000kW No. 1 reactor at a nuclear plant in Uljin was stopped at around 8 p.m. the previous day. This brings the number of reactors stopped for maintenance or because of breaking down to five out South Korea’s total of 21.

Japan Nuclear power generation costs surge ¥8.9 per kilowatt hour

Thursday, Dec. 15, 2011


Government report says post-Fukushima price rose to 'minimum' of ¥8.9 per kilowatt hour
Nuclear power generation costs surge
The Japan Times


Kyodo
A government panel says in a draft report that nuclear power generation costs ¥8.9 per kilowatt hour when including expenses associated with nuclear accidents, higher than a 2004 projection of ¥5.9 per kwh.


The new estimate, calculated by considering the result of the catastrophe at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant, shows that nuclear power is still one of the cheapest energy sources, the panel said. 


But its draft report, released Tuesday, notes that ¥8.9 is the "minimum" cost of nuclear power as the total financial damages from a severe nuclear accident are still unclear.


According to the draft report, coal-powered thermal plants generate electricity at ¥9.5 per kwh, while the rate for liquefied natural gas-powered thermal plants is ¥10.7 per kwh.



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree 
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



In the 2004 projection, the cost of electricity from coal-fed plants was pegged at ¥5.7 per kwh, and from LNG-fired plants at ¥6.2 per kwh.


Among renewable energy sources, costs of wind power generation on land are estimated at between ¥9.9 and ¥17.3 per kwh, and of household solar power at ¥33.4 to ¥38.3 per kwh.


Looking forward to 2030, thermal power costs are expected to increase, while the cost of wind and solar power are projected to drop to as low as ¥8.8 and ¥9.9 per kwh amid expected market expansion. The cost of nuclear power is estimated to stay at ¥8.9 per kwh.


The calculation is part of the review of energy policy in light of the Fukushima crisis.


Under the national energy plan endorsed in June 2010, reliance on nuclear energy was projected to increase to 53 percent of the total power supply by 2030, from about 30 percent before the Fukushima accident.


Based on the panel's final report, to be issued later this month, the government is expected to come up with what is known as the "energy best mix."


The latest estimates are different from the 2004 figures because of what the panel calls social expenses, in addition to capital, fuel and operation and maintenance costs. 


Social expenses are included in costs for nuclear power in the form of accident risk, and for thermal power in the form of costs to deal with carbon dioxide emissions.


Nuclear accident risk costs are estimated at ¥0.5 per kwh, according to the draft report, which notes that expense could increase further depending on damages caused by a severe nuclear accident.


So far, the panel estimates damages costs to be at least ¥5.8 trillion, drawing on the Fukushima accident. But that figure doesn't include all factors, such as expenses related to cleaning radiation-contaminated land around the plant.