With construction of a demonstration facility under way in the High Desert, a Pasadena-based firm is moving forward in its quest to harness the sun's power with a new generation of solar thermal power plants.
The facility being built by eSolar will test what company officials extol as game-changing technology that uses a modular design and mass-manufactured components that can be scaled to fit specific power needs.
"By using modular mass-manufacturable design, we are able to reach economies of scale that allow us to reduce the total cost of a power plant," said Robert Rogan, eSolar's vice president of sales and marketing. "Instead of a small number of big things, we build a big number of small things."
The technology relies on mirrors — each about 1 square meter — that track and reflect sunlight to a tower-mounted receiver. The solar heat is harnessed and used to boil water, creating steam that powers electricity-generating turbines.
ESolar started construction in June on a demonstration plant on Avenue G, between Sierra Highway and Division Street in Lancaster, and expects the 7.5-megawatt operation to be up and running at the end of this year.
And it plans to apply soon to the California Energy Commission for permits to build a full-size plant at an undisclosed location in the Antelope Valley.
ESolar already has signed a contract to supply Southern California Edison with 245 megawatts — enough to supply about 200,000 households — in what would be the nation's first commercial effort using power-tower solar thermal technology.
The alternative-energy startup, founded in 2007, raised $130 million in April from Google.org, Google's philanthropic arm, and other investors and venture-capital firms.
"ESolar is a relatively new firm. We found their technology to be innovative, and (the) price to be competitive," said Stuart Hemphill, Edison's vice president of renewable and alternative power.
Solar power in the state is experiencing a surge after being dormant for nearly 20 years. Nine plants that are still operating were built in San Bernardino County from 1984 to 1990.
Companies are rushing to lay claim to federal land in California's Mojave Desert for future plants. Since 2006, the federal Bureau of Land Management has received 79 solar-plant applications encompassing more than 679,000 acres.
The city of Palmdale is among public and private applicants that have asked the California Energy Commission for certification of six large projects, and four of these projects are already under review. Others have announced plans to apply for two more large plants.
Up north, Pacific Gas and Electric has signed contracts with Oakland-based Brightsource Energy for up to 900 megawatts of solar power, and Palo Alto-based Ausra has a deal to supply PG&E with 177 megawatts from a solar plant proposed in San Luis Obispo County.
Emerging Energy Research, a consulting firm, expects $20 billion to be invested in solar power over the next five years and foresees the industry could potentially become a $45 billion market by 2020.
Alternative energy startups like eSolar are not the only ones getting in on the action. The city of Victorville is building a 563-megawatt hybrid plant - natural gas and solar power. And last month, Palmdale submitted its application to build a 570-megawatt hybrid plant.
The renewed interest in solar power is being driven by California's aggressive mandate that utilities produce 20 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2010.
In 2007, nearly 12 percent of the state's electricity came from renewable energy.
Solar power also has become more competitive because of advances in solar technology and because natural gas prices have increased, said Ryan Wiser, renewable-energy researcher at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
There's been a proliferation of different technologies — power towers, dish systems, linear reflectors — but it's not known whether any will be superior to the engineering of parabolic solar troughs that's been around for 20 years.
"To be brutally honest, no one knows which one will rise to the top or if we will have different technologies playing different roles," Wiser said.
The projects are encountering opposition from an unexpected quarter: environmentalists who say such plants will degrade pristine public desert lands, harm habitat for threatenened species like the desert tortoise, and use too much water.
"These big solar plants are extremely destructive," said Jim Harvey with the Alliance for Responsible Energy Policy in Joshua Tree. "It's a big lie that these projects are environmentally friendly."
Harvey and others say meeting renewable-energy targets can be accomplished by installing rooftop and micro-wind systems on homes and businesses.
Rogan said eSolar in general tries to find land that has been previously farmed or "disturbed" in some way.
"As consumption of electricity goes up, something has to feed that. It's better to do that using solar or renewable forms rather than create more fossil fuel-burning plants that pollute the atmosphere," Rogan said.
Boeing 787 More-Electric Architecture replaces pneumatics with bleedless pressurization, VFSG starter-generators, electric brakes, and heated wing anti-ice, leveraging APU, RAT, batteries, and airport ground power for efficient, redundant electrical power distribution.
Key Points
An integrated, bleedless electrical system powering start, pressurization, brakes, and anti-ice via VFSGs, APU and RAT.
✅ VFSGs start engines, then generate 235Vac variable-frequency power
✅ Bleedless pressurization, electric anti-ice improve fuel efficiency
✅ Electric brakes cut hydraulic weight and simplify maintenance
The 787 Dreamliner is different to most commercial aircraft flying the skies today. On the surface it may seem pretty similar to the likes of the 777 and A350, but get under the skin and it’s a whole different aircraft.
When Boeing designed the 787, in order to make it as fuel efficient as possible, it had to completely shake up the way some of the normal aircraft systems operated. Traditionally, systems such as the pressurization, engine start and wing anti-ice were powered by pneumatics. The wheel brakes were powered by the hydraulics. These essential systems required a lot of physical architecture and with that comes weight and maintenance. This got engineers thinking.
What if the brakes didn’t need the hydraulics? What if the engines could be started without the pneumatic system? What if the pressurisation system didn’t need bleed air from the engines? Imagine if all these systems could be powered electrically… so that’s what they did.
Power sources
The 787 uses a lot of electricity. Therefore, to keep up with the demand, it has a number of sources of power, much as grid operators track supply on the GB energy dashboard to balance loads. Depending on whether the aircraft is on the ground with its engines off or in the air with both engines running, different combinations of the power sources are used.
Engine starter/generators
The main source of power comes from four 235Vac variable frequency engine starter/generators (VFSGs). There are two of these in each engine. These function as electrically powered starter motors for the engine start, and once the engine is running, then act as engine driven generators.
The generators in the left engine are designated as L1 and L2, the two in the right engine are R1 and R2. They are connected to their respective engine gearbox to generate electrical power directly proportional to the engine speed. With the engines running, the generators provide electrical power to all the aircraft systems.
APU starter/generators
In the tail of most commercial aircraft sits a small engine, the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). While this does not provide any power for aircraft propulsion, it does provide electrics for when the engines are not running.
The APU of the 787 has the same generators as each of the engines — two 235Vac VFSGs, designated L and R. They act as starter motors to get the APU going and once running, then act as generators. The power generated is once again directly proportional to the APU speed.
The APU not only provides power to the aircraft on the ground when the engines are switched off, but it can also provide power in flight should there be a problem with one of the engine generators.
Battery power
The aircraft has one main battery and one APU battery. The latter is quite basic, providing power to start the APU and for some of the external aircraft lighting.
The main battery is there to power the aircraft up when everything has been switched off and also in cases of extreme electrical failure in flight, and in the grid context, alternatives such as gravity power storage are being explored for long-duration resilience. It provides power to start the APU, acts as a back-up for the brakes and also feeds the captain’s flight instruments until the Ram Air Turbine deploys.
Ram air turbine (RAT) generator
When you need this, you’re really not having a great day. The RAT is a small propeller which automatically drops out of the underside of the aircraft in the event of a double engine failure (or when all three hydraulics system pressures are low). It can also be deployed manually by pressing a switch in the flight deck.
Once deployed into the airflow, the RAT spins up and turns the RAT generator. This provides enough electrical power to operate the captain’s flight instruments and other essentials items for communication, navigation and flight controls.
External power
Using the APU on the ground for electrics is fine, but they do tend to be quite noisy. Not great for airports wishing to keep their noise footprint down. To enable aircraft to be powered without the APU, most big airports will have a ground power system drawing from national grids, including output from facilities such as Barakah Unit 1 as part of the mix. Large cables from the airport power supply connect 115Vac to the aircraft and allow pilots to shut down the APU. This not only keeps the noise down but also saves on the fuel which the APU would use.
The 787 has three external power inputs — two at the front and one at the rear. The forward system is used to power systems required for ground operations such as lighting, cargo door operation and some cabin systems. If only one forward power source is connected, only very limited functions will be available.
The aft external power is only used when the ground power is required for engine start.
Circuit breakers
Most flight decks you visit will have the back wall covered in circuit breakers — CBs. If there is a problem with a system, the circuit breaker may “pop” to preserve the aircraft electrical system. If a particular system is not working, part of the engineers procedure may require them to pull and “collar” a CB — placing a small ring around the CB to stop it from being pushed back in. However, on the 787 there are no physical circuit breakers. You’ve guessed it, they’re electric.
Within the Multi Function Display screen is the Circuit Breaker Indication and Control (CBIC). From here, engineers and pilots are able to access all the “CBs” which would normally be on the back wall of the flight deck. If an operational procedure requires it, engineers are able to electrically pull and collar a CB giving the same result as a conventional CB.
Not only does this mean that the there are no physical CBs which may need replacing, it also creates space behind the flight deck which can be utilised for the galley area and cabin.
A normal flight
While it’s useful to have all these systems, they are never all used at the same time, and, as the power sector’s COVID-19 mitigation strategies showed, resilience planning matters across operations. Depending on the stage of the flight, different power sources will be used, sometimes in conjunction with others, to supply the required power.
On the ground
When we arrive at the aircraft, more often than not the aircraft is plugged into the external power with the APU off. Electricity is the blood of the 787 and it doesn’t like to be without a good supply constantly pumping through its system, and, as seen in NYC electric rhythms during COVID-19, demand patterns can shift quickly. Ground staff will connect two forward external power sources, as this enables us to operate the maximum number of systems as we prepare the aircraft for departure.
Whilst connected to the external source, there is not enough power to run the air conditioning system. As a result, whilst the APU is off, air conditioning is provided by Preconditioned Air (PCA) units on the ground. These connect to the aircraft by a pipe and pump cool air into the cabin to keep the temperature at a comfortable level.
APU start
As we near departure time, we need to start making some changes to the configuration of the electrical system. Before we can push back , the external power needs to be disconnected — the airports don’t take too kindly to us taking their cables with us — and since that supply ultimately comes from the grid, projects like the Bruce Power upgrade increase available capacity during peaks, but we need to generate our own power before we start the engines so to do this, we use the APU.
The APU, like any engine, takes a little time to start up, around 90 seconds or so. If you remember from before, the external power only supplies 115Vac whereas the two VFSGs in the APU each provide 235Vac. As a result, as soon as the APU is running, it automatically takes over the running of the electrical systems. The ground staff are then clear to disconnect the ground power.
If you read my article on how the 787 is pressurised, you’ll know that it’s powered by the electrical system. As soon as the APU is supplying the electricity, there is enough power to run the aircraft air conditioning. The PCA can then be removed.
Engine start
Once all doors and hatches are closed, external cables and pipes have been removed and the APU is running, we’re ready to push back from the gate and start our engines. Both engines are normally started at the same time, unless the outside air temperature is below 5°C.
On other aircraft types, the engines require high pressure air from the APU to turn the starter in the engine. This requires a lot of power from the APU and is also quite noisy. On the 787, the engine start is entirely electrical.
Power is drawn from the APU and feeds the VFSGs in the engines. If you remember from earlier, these fist act as starter motors. The starter motor starts the turn the turbines in the middle of the engine. These in turn start to turn the forward stages of the engine. Once there is enough airflow through the engine, and the fuel is igniting, there is enough energy to continue running itself.
After start
Once the engine is running, the VFSGs stop acting as starter motors and revert to acting as generators. As these generators are the preferred power source, they automatically take over the running of the electrical systems from the APU, which can then be switched off. The aircraft is now in the desired configuration for flight, with the 4 VFSGs in both engines providing all the power the aircraft needs.
As the aircraft moves away towards the runway, another electrically powered system is used — the brakes. On other aircraft types, the brakes are powered by the hydraulics system. This requires extra pipe work and the associated weight that goes with that. Hydraulically powered brake units can also be time consuming to replace.
By having electric brakes, the 787 is able to reduce the weight of the hydraulics system and it also makes it easier to change brake units. “Plug in and play” brakes are far quicker to change, keeping maintenance costs down and reducing flight delays.
In-flight
Another system which is powered electrically on the 787 is the anti-ice system. As aircraft fly though clouds in cold temperatures, ice can build up along the leading edge of the wing. As this reduces the efficiency of the the wing, we need to get rid of this.
Other aircraft types use hot air from the engines to melt it. On the 787, we have electrically powered pads along the leading edge which heat up to melt the ice.
Not only does this keep more power in the engines, but it also reduces the drag created as the hot air leaves the structure of the wing. A double win for fuel savings.
Once on the ground at the destination, it’s time to start thinking about the electrical configuration again. As we make our way to the gate, we start the APU in preparation for the engine shut down. However, because the engine generators have a high priority than the APU generators, the APU does not automatically take over. Instead, an indication on the EICAS shows APU RUNNING, to inform us that the APU is ready to take the electrical load.
Shutdown
With the park brake set, it’s time to shut the engines down. A final check that the APU is indeed running is made before moving the engine control switches to shut off. Plunging the cabin into darkness isn’t a smooth move. As the engines are shut down, the APU automatically takes over the power supply for the aircraft. Once the ground staff have connected the external power, we then have the option to also shut down the APU.
However, before doing this, we consider the cabin environment. If there is no PCA available and it’s hot outside, without the APU the cabin temperature will rise pretty quickly. In situations like this we’ll wait until all the passengers are off the aircraft until we shut down the APU.
Once on external power, the full flight cycle is complete. The aircraft can now be cleaned and catered, ready for the next crew to take over.
Bottom line
Electricity is a fundamental part of operating the 787. Even when there are no passengers on board, some power is required to keep the systems running, ready for the arrival of the next crew. As we prepare the aircraft for departure and start the engines, various methods of powering the aircraft are used.
The aircraft has six electrical generators, of which only four are used in normal flights. Should one fail, there are back-ups available. Should these back-ups fail, there are back-ups for the back-ups in the form of the battery. Should this back-up fail, there is yet another layer of contingency in the form of the RAT. A highly unlikely event.
The 787 was built around improving efficiency and lowering carbon emissions whilst ensuring unrivalled levels safety, and, in the wider energy landscape, perspectives like nuclear beyond electricity highlight complementary paths to decarbonization — a mission it’s able to achieve on hundreds of flights every single day.
Hydro-Qubec Electricity Theft Ring exposed after a utility investigation into identity theft, rental property fraud, and conspiracies using stolen customer data; arrests, charges, and a tip line highlight ongoing enforcement.
Key Points
A five-year identity-theft scheme defrauding Hydro-Qubec through utility accounts leading to arrests and fraud charges.
✅ Five arrests; 25 counts: fraud, conspiracy, identity theft
✅ Losses up to $300,000 in electricity, 2014-2019
✅ Tip line: 1-877-816-1212 for suspected Hydro-Qubec fraud
Five people have been arrested in connection with an electricity theft ring alleged to have operated for five years, a pattern seen in India electricity theft arrests as well.
The thefts were allegedly committed by the owners of rental properties who used stolen personal information to create accounts with Hydro-Québec, which also recently dealt with a manhole fire outage affecting thousands.
The utility alleges that between 2014 and 2019, Mario Brousseau, Simon Brousseau-Ouellette and their accomplices defrauded Hydro-Québec of up to $300,000 worth of electricity, highlighting concerns about consumption trends as residential electricity use rose during the pandemic. It was impossible for Hydro-Québec’s customer service section to detect the fraud because the information on the accounts, while stolen, was also genuine, even as the utility reported pandemic-related losses later on.
The suspects are expected to face 25 counts of fraud, conspiracy and identity theft, issues that Ontario utilities warn about regularly.
Hydro-Québec noted the thefts were detected through an investigation by the utility into 10 fraud cases, a process that can lead to retroactive charges for affected accounts.
Anyone concerned that a fraud is being committed against Hydro-Québec, or wary of scammers threatening shutoffs, is urged to call 1-877-816-1212.
EDP Takeover Bid Rejection signals pushback on China Three Gorges' acquisition bid, as investors, shareholders, and analysts cite low premium, valuation concerns, and strategic renewables assets across Portugal, the US, Brazil, and Europe utilities.
Key Points
EDP's board views China Three Gorges' 3.26 euro per share offer as too low, citing valuation and renewables exposure.
✅ Bid premium 4.8% above close seen as inadequate.
EDP-Energias de Portugal SA is poised to reject a 9.1 billion euro ($10.9 billion) takeover offer from China Three Gorges Corp. on the grounds that it undervalues Portugal’s biggest energy company, according to people with knowledge of the matter.
The board of EDP, which may meet as early as this week, views the current bid of 3.26 euros a share as too low as it indicates a premium of 4.8 percent over Friday’s close, said the people, asking not to be identified because the discussions are private. EDP is also working with advisers including UBS Group AG and Morgan Stanley on the potential deal, they said.
Representatives for EDP, UBS and Morgan Stanley declined to comment. Representatives for Three Gorges didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
#google#
Shares of EDP surged the most in a decade to above the bid level on Monday, signaling that investors expect the Chinese utility, which is its biggest investor, to sweeten the offer to gain full control. For Three Gorges, which spent two decades building a hydro-power plant spanning China’s Yangtze River, the deal would bolster its efforts to expand abroad and give it deeper access to markets in Europe, the U.S. and Brazil.
China’s biggest renewable-energy developer already is the largest shareholder of EDP with a 23 percent stake and now is seeking more than 50 percent. While the government in Lisbon has indicated it’s comfortable with the Chinese offer, EDF electricity price deal illustrates policy dynamics in the region and it holds out little incentive for shareholders to tender their stock.
Stock Jumps
Shares of EDP rose 9.3 percent to 3.40 euros in Lisbon on Monday, even as rolling back European electricity prices remains challenging, after earlier jumping by the most since October 2008.
“We believe the price offered is too low for China Three Gorges to achieve full control of a vehicle that provides, among other things, a strategic footprint into U.S. renewables,” Javier Garrido, an analyst at JPMorgan Chase & Co., said in a note. “We expect management and minorities to claim a higher price.”
The offer adds to a wave of investments China has made overseas, both to earn a yield on its cash and to gain expertise in industries ranging from energy to telecommunications and transport. Concern about those deals has been mounting in the U.S. regulatory arena recently. European Union governments have been divided in their response, with Portugal among those most supportive of inward investment.
“China Three Gorges is an ambitious company, with expansion already in international hydro, Chinese onshore wind and floating solar, and European offshore wind,” said Angus McCrone, a senior analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance in London. “It may have to do better on bid price than the 5 percent premium so far offered for EDP.”
Fortum’s Troubles
The low premium offered by Three Gorges echoes the struggle Fortum Oyj had in winning over investors in its bid for Uniper SE last year, while North American deals such as Hydro One’s Avista bid faced customer backlash as well, highlighting parallels. The Finnish utility offered 8 billion euros to buy out the remainder of Uniper in September, immediately sending shares of the German power generator above the offer prices. At least for now, Fortum has settled for a 47 percent stake it bought in Uniper from EON SE, and most other shareholders decided to keep their stake.
The EDP transaction would advance a wave of consolidation among Europe’s leading utilities, which are acquiring assets and development skills in renewables as governments across the region crack down on pollution. EDP is one of Europe’s leading developers of renewable energy, building mainly wind farms and hydro plants, and has expanded in markets including Brazil and the U.S. electrification market.
Irving Oil hydrogen electrolyzer expands green hydrogen capacity at the Saint John refinery with Plug Power technology, cutting carbon emissions, enabling clean fuel for buses, and supporting Atlantic Canada decarbonization and renewable grid integration.
Key Points
A 5 MW Plug Power unit at Irving's Saint John refinery producing low-carbon hydrogen via electrolysis.
✅ Produces 2 tonnes/day, enough to fuel about 60 hydrogen buses
✅ Uses grid power; targets cleaner supply via renewables and nuclear
✅ First Canadian refinery investing in electrolyzer technology
Irving Oil is expanding hydrogen capacity at its Saint John, N.B., refinery in a bid to lower carbon emissions and offer clean energy to customers.
The family-owned company said Tuesday it has a deal with New York-based Plug Power Inc. to buy a five-megawatt hydrogen electrolyzer that will produce two tonnes of hydrogen a day — equivalent to fuelling 60 buses with hydrogen — using electricity from the local grid and drawing on examples such as reduced electricity rates proposed in Ontario to grow the hydrogen economy.
Hydrogen is an important part of the refining process as it's used to lower the sulphur content of petroleum products like diesel fuel, but most refineries produce hydrogen using natural gas, which creates carbon dioxide emissions and raises questions explored in hydrogen's future for power companies in the energy sector.
"Investing in a hydrogen electrolyzer allows us to produce hydrogen in a very different way," Irving director of energy transition Andy Carson said in an interview.
"Instead of using natural gas, we're actually using water molecules and electricity through the electrolysis process to produce ... a clean hydrogen."
Irving plans to continue to work with others in the province to decarbonize the grid amid pressures like Ontario's push into energy storage as electricity supply tightens and ensure the electricity being used to power its hydrogen electrolyzer is as clean as possible, he said.
N.B. Power's electrical system includes 14 generating stations powered by hydro, coal, oil, wind, nuclear and diesel. The utility has committed to increasing its renewable energy sources and exploring innovations such as EV-to-grid integration piloted in Nova Scotia.
Irving said it will be the first oil refinery in Canada to invest in electrolyzer technology, as Ontario's Hydrogen Innovation Fund supports broader deployment nationwide.
The company said its goal is to offer hydrogen fuelling infrastructure in Atlantic Canada, complementing N.L.'s fast-charging network for EV drivers in the region.
"This kind of investment allows us to not just move to a cleaner form of hydrogen in the refinery. It also allows us to store and make hydrogen available to the marketplace," Carson said.
Federal watchdog warns Canada's 2030 emissions target may not be achievable The hydrogen technology will help Irving "unlock pent up demand for hydrogen as an energy transition fuel for logistics organizations," he said.
Those plans lean on the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology that aims to trap the emissions created when producing hydrogen from natural gas.
Bangladesh Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant advances nuclear energy with IAEA support and ROSATOM construction, boosting energy security, baseload capacity, and grid reliability; 2400 MW units aid development, regulatory compliance, and newcomer infrastructure milestones.
Key Points
A 2400 MW nuclear project in Rooppur, built with IAEA guidance and ROSATOM, to boost Bangladesh's reliable power.
✅ Two units totaling 2400 MW for stable baseload supply
✅ IAEA Milestones and INIR reviews guide safe deployment
✅ ROSATOM builds; national regulator strengthens oversight
The beginning of construction at Bangladesh’s first nuclear power reactor on 30 November 2017 marked a significant milestone in the decade-long process to bring the benefits of nuclear energy to the world’s eighth most populous country. The IAEA has been supporting Bangladesh on its way to becoming the third ‘newcomer’ country to nuclear power in 30 years, following the United Arab Emirates in 2012 and Belarus in 2013.
Bangladesh is in the process of implementing an ambitious, multifaceted development programme to become a middle-income country by 2021 and a developed country by 2041. Vastly increased electricity production, with the goal of connecting 2.7 million more homes to the grid by 2021, is a cornerstone of this push for development, and nuclear energy will play a key role in this area, said Mohammad Shawkat Akbar, Managing Director of Nuclear Power Plant Company Bangladesh Limited. Bangladesh is also working to diversify its energy supply to enhance energy security, reduce its dependence on imports and on its limited domestic resources, he added.
#google# In the region, India's nuclear program is taking steps to get back on track, underscoring broader momentum.
“Bangladesh is introducing nuclear energy as a safe, environmentally friendly and economically viable source of electricity generation,” said Akbar. The plant in Rooppur, 160 kilometres north-west of Dhaka, will consist of two units, with a combined power capacity of 2400 MW(e). It is being built by a subsidiary of Russia’s State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM. The first unit is scheduled to come online in 2023 and the second in 2024, reflecting progress similar to the UK's latest nuclear power station developments. “This project will enhance the development of the social, economic, scientific and technological potential of the country,” Akbar said.
The country’s goal of increased electricity production via nuclear energy will soon be a reality, Akbar said. “For 60 years, Bangladesh has had a dream of building its own nuclear power plant. The Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant will provide not only a stable baseload of electricity, but it will enhance our knowledge and allow us to increase our economic efficiency.
Milestones for nuclear
Bangladesh is among around 30 countries that are considering, planning or starting the introduction of nuclear power, with milestones at nuclear projects worldwide offering context for this progress. The IAEA assists them in developing their programmes through the Milestones Approach — a methodology that provides guidance on working towards the establishment of nuclear power in a newcomer country, including the associated infrastructure. It focuses on pointing out gaps, if any, in countries’ progress towards the introduction of nuclear power.
The IAEA has been supporting Bangladesh in developing its nuclear power infrastructure, including in establishing a regulatory framework and developing a radioactive waste-management system. This support has been delivered under the IAEA technical cooperation programme and is partially funded through the Peaceful Uses Initiative.
Nuclear infrastructure is multifaceted, containing governmental, legal, regulatory and managerial components, in addition to the physical infrastructure. The Milestones Approach consists of three phases, with a milestone to be reached at the end of each.
The first phase involves considerations before a decision is taken to start a nuclear power programme and concludes with the official commitment to the programme. The second phase entails preparatory work for the contracting and construction of a nuclear power plant, as seen in Bulgaria's nuclear project planning, ending with the commencement of bids or contract negotiations for the construction. The final phase includes activities to implement the nuclear power plant, such as the final investment decision, contracting and construction. The duration of these phases varies by country, but they typically take between 10 and 15 years.
“The IAEA Milestones Approach is a guiding document and the Integrated Work Plan (IWP) is the important means of bringing all of the stakeholders in Bangladesh together to ensure the fulfilment of all safety, security, and safeguards requirements of the Rooppur NPP project,” said Akbar. “This IWP enabled Bangladesh to develop a holistic approach to implementing IAEA guidance as well as cooperating with national stakeholders and other bilateral partners towards the development of a national nuclear power programme.”
When completed, the two units of the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant will have a combined power capacity of 2400 MW(e). (Photo: Arkady Sukhonin/Rosatom)
INIR Mission
The Integrated Nuclear Infrastructure Review (INIR) is a holistic peer review to assist Member States in assessing the status of their national infrastructure for introducing nuclear power. The IAEA completed its first INIR mission to Bangladesh in November 2011, making recommendations on how to develop a plan to establish the nuclear infrastructure. Nearly five years later, in May 2016, a follow-up mission was conducted, which noted the progress made — Bangladesh had established a nuclear regulatory body, had chosen a site for the power plant and had completed site characterization and environmental impact assessment.
“The IAEA and other bodies, including those from experienced countries, can and do provide support, but the responsibility for safety and security will lie with the Government,” said Dohee Hahn, Director of the IAEA’s Division of Nuclear Power, at the ceremony for the pouring of the first nuclear safety-related concrete at Rooppur on 30 November 2017. “The IAEA stands ready to continue supporting Bangladesh in developing a safe, secure, peaceful and sustainable nuclear power programme.”
Supporting Infrastructure for Introducing a Nuclear Power Plant in Bangladesh: the IAEA Assists with the Review of Regulatory Guidance on Site Evaluation
How the IAEA Assists Newcomer Countries in Building Their Way to Sustainable Energy
"Exciting times for nuclear power," IAEA Director General Says
Duke Energy Clean Energy Strategy targets smart grid upgrades, wind and solar expansion, efficient gas, and high-reliability nuclear, cutting CO2, boosting decarbonization, and advancing energy efficiency and reliability for the Carolinas.
Key Points
A plan investing in smart grids, renewables, gas, and nuclear to cut CO2 and enhance reliability and efficiency by 2030.
✅ US$25bn smart grid upgrades; US$11bn renewables and gas
✅ 40% CO2 reduction and >80% low-/zero-carbon generation by 2030
The US power group Duke Energy plans to invest US$25bn on grid modernization over the 2017-2026 period, including the implementation of smart grid technologies to cope with the development of renewable energies, along with US$11bn on the expansion of renewable (wind and solar) and gas-fired power generation capacities.
The company will modernize its fleet and expects more than 80% of its power generation mix to come from zero and lower CO2 emitting sources, aligning with nuclear and net-zero goals, by 2030. Its current strategy focuses on cutting down CO2 emissions by 40% by 2030. Duke Energy will also promote energy efficiency and expects cumulative energy savings - based on the expansion of existing programmes - to grow to 22 TWh by 2030, i.e. the equivalent to the annual usage of 1.8 million households.
#google#
Duke Energy’s 11 nuclear generating units posted strong operating performance in 2017, as U.S. nuclear costs hit a ten-year low, providing the Carolinas with nearly 90 billion kilowatt-hours of carbon-free electricity – enough to power more than 7 million homes.
Globally, China's nuclear program remains on a steady development track, underscoring broader industry momentum.
“Much of our 2017 success is due to our focus on safety and work efficiencies identified by our nuclear employees, along with ongoing emphasis on planning and executing refueling outages to increase our fleet’s availability for producing electricity,” said Preston Gillespie, Duke Energy chief nuclear officer.
Some of the nuclear fleet’s 2017 accomplishments include, as a new U.S. reactor comes online nationally:
The 11 units achieved a combined capacity factor of 95.64 percent, second only to the fleet’s 2016 record of 95.72 percent, marking the 19th consecutive year of attaining a 90-plus percent capacity factor (a measure of reliability).
The two units at Catawba Nuclear Station produced more than 19 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, and the single unit at Harris Nuclear Plant generated more than 8 billion kilowatt-hours, both setting 12-month records.
Brunswick Nuclear Plant unit 2 achieved a record operating run.
Both McGuire Nuclear Station units completed their shortest refueling outages ever and unit 1 recorded its longest operating run.
Oconee Nuclear Station unit 2 achieved a fleet record operating run.
The Robinson Nuclear Plant team completed the station’s 30th refueling outage, which included a main generator stator replacement and other life-extension activities, well ahead of schedule.
“Our nuclear employees are committed to providing reliable, clean electricity every day for our Carolinas customers,” added Gillespie. “We are very proud of our team’s 2017 accomplishments and continue to look for additional opportunities to further enhance operations.”
