Editor,
The Toronto Star
Not yet printed in T.S. as of date of posting this blog.
Re: Nuclear Power is Clean, Flexible, Aug 15, 2010
Dear sir,
How is it possible to build CANDU nuclear power plants in China in less than five years, as suggested by Donald Jones (Letters, Aug 15, 2010)?
The most important factor is the authoritarian nature of the Chinese government. If our government acted in a similar manner, it would give Donald Jones a week’s notice plus (say) $10,000 to find new accommodation before sending bulldozers into Mississauga. Neither public meetings nor environmental assessments would be needed.
China boasts about tough standards. However, we do learn about some of their disasters: melamine in infant formula, lead paint on childrens’ toys, collapsed schools and public buildings after earthquakes, chemical spills in major rivers, toxic algae invading once-beautiful lakes, the smog which miraculously vanished during the IOC visit to assess Beijing’s suitability as an Olympic venue, the death of 10 coal miners every day of the year.
These happen because Chinese citizens are not free to complain about pollution, shoddy construction, workplace safety, or over zealous land developers. The Chinese media seldom criticise government projects and their judiciary leans heavily towards government. I suspect a new CANDU power plant could be built on time and to budget – if we invited the Chinese to build it here . . .
However, where a free press reports to a democracy, things are different. Consider the experience of Areva, the French nuclear power giant. Okiluoto 3, is their project to build a nuclear power plant in Finland. Originally estimated at €2.5 billion, when construction began in 2004 this was “inflation adjusted” to €3.2 billion. By December 2006 the cost became €3.7 billion, €5 billion by March 2008, and by August 2010, €5.7 billion. Meanwhile, Finland’s power authority has sued Areva for lost revenue because the plant is not producing electricity. Construction was originally expected to take 4.5 years with completion scheduled for spring 2009. The latest projection is for start-up by spring, 2013 . . .
Of course, Okiluotu 3 was Areva’s first try at a new design. Problems were bound to occur. They are building another power plant to the same design in Flamanville, France. Mr Jones will be disappointed to hear that the original estimate of €3.7 billion (autumn 2007) rose to €5 billion by March 2009. The fact that Flamanville was two years behind schedule after three years of construction speaks volumes for Areva’s learning curve! Expect further “adjustments”.
Financial professionals like Moody’s Investor Services and Standard & Poor’s reckon that nuclear power plants in America would cost 3 times as much as coal-fired generators. That would bring the cost of nuclear electricity to $0.18 – $0.30 per kilowatt-hour, by which standard wind power looks like a bargain!
Our experience refurbishing old “nukes” is also sobering. Nuclear power unit #1 at Pickering A was refurbished 5 years ago. In August 1999, the cost was estimated at $213 million and the work was to be complete by January 2002. In the end, the work was completed in November 2005, for $1016 million – three times as long as expected and five times more costly!
So why are we paying $0.03-$0.04 per kilowatt-hour for electricity from our current “fleet” of nuclear power plants? There are two reasons for this. First, these power plants were built 2-3 decades ago during which time inflation worked its magic. New generating plant, of whatever type, will be built with today/s dollars! Second, Mike Harris’ government transferred the debt incurred during construction from the books of Ontario Hydro to the new Ontario Electricity Financial Corporation. We are paying down this debt – very slowly – with an extra charge on all electricity consumption in Ontario (check your bill).
When we think of new electricity supply for Ontario, we need to realise that $0.05 per kilowatt-hour is history. New electricity will cost us well over $0.10, regardless of its source, and nuclear is the most costly of all. All Ontarians need to understand this and to cope by embracing energy conservation.
Sincerely,
Peter Bursztyn