Nuclear plants closure bill to reach $100bn

[bananas]

Source: Financial Times

The bill for closing down and cleaning up the world’s ageing nuclear reactors will exceed $100bn over the next 25 years alone, the leading energy watchdog has said, warning that governments risk underestimating the cost. With almost 200 reactors due ...

<snip>

Read more: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/925030a2-68fb-11e4-9eeb-00144feabdc0.html

---

The rest of the article is paywalled, here's one that isn't:

http://www.nucnet.org/all-the-news/2014/11/12/world-energy-outlook-warns-nuclear-industry-on-decommissioning-and-disposal

World Energy Outlook Warns Nuclear Industry On Decommissioning And Disposal

12 Nov (NucNet): The nuclear energy industry needs to be ready to manage “an unprecedented rate” of decommissioning with almost 200 of the 434 reactors that were operating commercially at the end of 2013 to be retired by 2040, a report by the International Energy Agency says.

World Energy Outlook 2014 (WEO), released today in London, says “the vast majority” of these reactor retirements will be in the European Union, the US, Russia and Japan.

The industry will need to manage this unprecedented rate of decommissioning, while also building substantial new capacity for those reactors that are replaced, WEO says.

The IEA estimates the cost of decommissioning plants that are retired to be more than $100 billion.

But WEO warns that “considerable uncertainties” remain about these costs, reflecting the relatively limited experience to date in dismantling and decontaminating reactors and restoring sites for other uses.

<snip>

[bananas]

1. It's going to cost a lot more than that. nt

[djean111]

2. Yes, we sure do need more of those things, don't we!

[bananas]

3. Fukushima alone will cost that much

http://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/japan-s-nuclear-cleanup-stymied-by-water-woes-1.313764

Japan's nuclear cleanup stymied by water woes
By MARI YAMAGUCHI
The Associated Press
Published: November 12, 2014

TOKYO — More than three years into Japan's massive cleanup of the tsunami-damaged nuclear plant, only a tiny fraction of the workers are focused on the key tasks of dismantling the broken reactors and removing radioactive fuel rods.

Instead, nearly all the workers are devoted to a single, enormously distracting problem: coping with the vast amount of water that becomes contaminated after it is pumped into the reactors to keep the melted radioactive fuel inside from overheating.

The numbers tell the story.

<snip>

An estimated 2 trillion yen ($18 billion) will be needed just for decontamination and other mitigation of the water problem. Altogether, the entire decommissioning process, including compensation for area residents, reportedly will cost about 10 trillion yen, or about $90 billion.

All this for a plant that will never produce a kilowatt of energy again.

<snip>

[djean111]

4. Yes. It will. Were we not supposed to notice that? Just keep building more and more..... n/t

[cstanleytech]

7. The estimate isnt about the cleanup for Fukushima though but for the reactors overall.

Frankly I am still stumped as to why so may governments decided that it would be a good idea to rely on nuclear power so much when its not safe and the potential dangers from an accident are so high.

[enough]

5. Which is probably contributing the the NRC's current path of extending licenses

on aged reactors for another 20 years beyond their original extent.

http://breakingenergy.com/2014/11/10/nrc-resumes-nuclear-power-plant-license-renewals/

[FBaggins]

11. Not really

Remember that US reactors are required over their operating lifetimes to build reserves that will be used to pay for their decommissioning. That's already built into the price of the electricity they sell.

Gaps can appear if they shut down well before their expected retirement date... not on-schedule or decades later.

[mtasselin]

6. why

Why is the American public having to pay for this, we insure them in case of catastrophe they make the money and then we have to pay for the clean up this is bullshit. What happened to this big government that they don't want and what about all this socialism they we hear about, they don't want any of this until they do.

[rootProbiscus]

8. So far have decommisioned 2 - Chernobyl and Fukushima

Just what is the half life of humanity when they start decommissioning others the same - about 6 months by my reckoning?!

[FBaggins]

12. Seriously?

You think they've only decommissioned two of them?

[Javaman]

9. Hey but it's so affordable!

[FBaggins]

13. Yep

$100 Billion for 200 reactors is actually surprisingly cheap. I would have expected a much higher figure.

An AP1000 could produce $30=$40 Billion worth of electricity over it's operating lifetime (even if rates never rise over those 60-80 years - which is highly unlikely). $500 million (or, more likely, closer to $1billion) to decommission it decades later is quite cheap by comparison. The only caveat is that the funds must be set aside as the plant operates.

[L0oniX]

10. I hear there is a harmless dumping area for the waste ...just off the coast of Japan.

I'm sure the studies on the harmlessness of Fukushima in the Pacific will prevail.

[damyank913]

14. That's what I think too.

There's an old phrase in the nuclear community: "dilution is the solution". Japan may let the world think that they're "processing" all that contaminated water. In reality the western Pacific is going to "process" it. Godzilla's real name=Fukushima.