Global nuclear lobby anxiously watches China, as China’s nuclear development in doubt
Public opinion could also pose an obstacle. In a poll carried out by research agency Ipsos MORI after Fukushima, 42% of those surveyed in China were supportive of nuclear power – but that 48% were opposed. It
is also reported that public opposition and environmental concerns have led to the delay in construction of three inland nuclear power sites.
China’s nuclear developments probably matter more to the rest of the world than they do to China.
Chinese nuclear goes global? China dialogue Antony Froggatt June 06, 2012 From Parisian boardrooms to Kazakh uranium mines, the nuclear industry anxiously awaits news from Beijing. …….
“…… the Fukushima crisis in Japan has had a significant – and under reported – impact on Chinese nuclear developments, triggering a freeze on the start of new construction, a re-consideration of the safety standards of domestic designs and unprecedentedly visible opposition to the building of new, inland nuclear plants. While
observers have said they expect the industry to restart new
construction later this year, the events of the last 15 months will
still result in a failure to meet China’s current five-year plan on
nuclear development and, depending on how things develop, its 2020
objectives as well.
The global clout of China’s nuclear sector is such that the impacts of
its decisions stretch far beyond the nation’s borders. From France to
Namibia, from reactor designers to uranium mining firms, the industry
will be waiting anxiously for news from China……
As a result [of the Fukushima nuclear disaster] , a new China
National Plan for Nuclear Safety with short-, medium- and long-term
actions was ordered, and the construction of new plants was suspended
pending its approval.
As of June 2012, these safety plans were yet to be approved. The delay
is suggested to be partly due to uncertainty over the strategic
direction for future reactor designs and in particular, whether future
construction would be dominated by the China’s second-generation CPR
1000 design or move towards greater deployment of third-generation
designs from overseas.
China has not yet fully developed its own third-generation design and
would have to rely initially on the European Pressurized Water Reactor
(EPR) or the American AP1000 reactor. The potential move towards much
greater, or even total, dependence on the most modern design is
affected by conflicting concerns: the higher costs of the
international design and greater confidence in the safety standard.
Tange Zede, a member of China’s State Nuclear Power Technology
Corporation (SNPTC), was reported in Nuclear Intelligence Weekly as
saying the domestically designed CPR-1000 could not even meet the
national safety standards issued in 2004, let alone the most
up-to-date international standards. Zede stated that “unless the
constructed second generation reactors are renovated, they should not
be allowed to load fuel and start operation.”
Historically, international nuclear vendors have sought to construct
their latest models in China. Russia’s reactor-exporting company
Atomstroyexport provided its latest design, the AES-91, and equipment
for units one and two at Jiangsu province’s Tianwan power plant, which
was completed in 2007. It is said that two further reactors will be
commissioned, but no date has been set for construction.
Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL) built two of its heavy-water
reactors at the Qinshan phase-three plant in Zhejiang, on China’s east
coast, but despite the fact these were completed in 2002 and 2003
respectively, no further orders have been placed….
Today, the world’s major international reactor vendors, notably AREVA
and Westinghouse, are building their most advanced designs in China.
In the case of Westinghouse, the AP1000 is the company’s flagship
third-generation design, and China is its only sale. The contract,
worth around US$5.3 billion (34 billion yuan), is for construction of
four reactors, including transfer of not only reactor technology, but
also back-end services, particularly waste management.
Construction of these four units, two at Sanmen in Zhejiang province
and two at Haiyang, further north in Shandong province, is underway,
though delays of six to 12 months are reported. For the first unit at
Sanmen, the slippage is said to be due to design changes
post-Fukushima. For the remaining three units, supply-chain issues
relating to the increased use of local components are blamed. If
reports are accurate, use of domestic parts across the series of the
four reactors will increase from 30% to 70%, and any future reactors
will be built with Chinese components alone.
The estimated construction costs of the AP1000 are also quoted as
rising. In 2009, it was said they would cost US$1,940 per kilowatt
(12,400 yuan), but the latest figures range from US$2,300 to US$2,600
per kilowatt. While this is far below the estimated costs of any other
third-generation project, globally it is higher than the reported
costs for China’s CPR 1000 at US$1800 per kilowatt.
In November 2007, AREVA announced the signing of an €8 billion
(US$11.6 billion) contract with China Guangdong Nuclear (CGN) for the
construction of two EPRs in Taishan, in south China’s Guangdong
province, and said it would provide all the materials and services
required to operate them. The Taishan project is owned by Guangdong
Taishan Nuclear Power Joint Venture Company Limited, a hook-up between
EDF (30%) and CGN. First concrete was poured in October 2009, and unit
one was expected to begin operating in 2013, followed by a second unit
in 2014.
Two other EPR reactors are being built in Europe, one in Finland and
one in France, but are both running at least 100% over budget and four
to five years behind schedule. The delays are such that the Chinese
reactors may now be operational before those being built in Europe.
Completing the EPRs in China to time and budget will be a vital test
for AREVA, which the company will hope can offset its bad experience
in Europe. Troubles closer to home are said to be contributing to its
lack of sales in other parts of the world, such as the United Arab
Emirates. ……
Public opinion could also pose an obstacle. In a poll carried out by research agency Ipsos MORI after Fukushima, 42% of those surveyed in China were supportive of nuclear power – but that 48% were opposed. It
is also reported that public opposition and environmental concerns have led to the delay in construction of three inland nuclear power sites. In March this year, opposition to the proposed Pengze power
plant in Jiangxi erupted into the public sphere on a scale not
previously seen, when local authority documents critical of the
project were posted on the internet…..
Fukushima has already had a significant impact on the Chinese nuclear
sector and over 15 months since the accident, the moratorium on new
construction starts remains in place….. China’s nuclear developments probably matter more to the rest of the world than they do to China. http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4957
No comments yet.
Antinuclear 
Leave a Reply