Sentences with phrase «for nuclear power capacity»

With Europe facing its own problems in reaching emissions targets and Japan strapped by costs associated with making up for nuclear power capacity that was lost in the disaster at the Fukushima power plant in 2011, Ladislaw said, «It's really about the United States and China trying to show — and actually define — what leadership is on this issue.»

Not exact matches

Targets for nuclear power range from 35 % of generating capacity down to zero — a total nuclear phaseout — although those close to the deliberations believe the government will settle on 15 % when it finalizes the policy this summer.

Those figures, say the authors of the report, an update on a similar report in 2003, mean that «even if all the announced plans for new nuclear power plant construction are realized, the total will be well behind that needed for reaching a thousand gigawatts of new capacity worldwide by 2050.»

The Qinshan addition is one of 20 new nuclear power plants undergoing construction or approved for construction in China today, part of a bid to increase the nuclear share of China's electricity - generating capacity from less than 2 percent to 5 percent.

RE # 27, Paul — to repeat, it still seems to be that if you have $ 4 billion to spend on non-CO2 producing energy sources, the better investment would be to build 40 solar - cell manufacturing facilities at $ 100 million apiece; for example see Honda Solar Factory; this would result in some 1,100 megawatts of solar cell capacity being produced per year, in comparison to a single nuclear power plant (typical power level: 600-1200 MW) being built.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is currently involved in pre-licensing vendor design reviews - an optional service to assess of a nuclear power plant design based on a vendor's reactor technology - for ten small reactors with capacities in the range of 3 - 3Nuclear Safety Commission is currently involved in pre-licensing vendor design reviews - an optional service to assess of a nuclear power plant design based on a vendor's reactor technology - for ten small reactors with capacities in the range of 3 - 3nuclear power plant design based on a vendor's reactor technology - for ten small reactors with capacities in the range of 3 - 300 MWe.

That argument bolsters Prime Minister Modi's commitment to double coal production by 2020, for example, even as India also (at a much, much smaller scale) expands solar capacity and nuclear power.

And yes central power will be another piece (nuclear is great for baseload power... it operates at 90 % capacity factors even if the price of building a new plant has risen by 130 % since 2000) Centralized wind and solar will mature but then there's the transmission issue...

Cheap natural gas, stagnant power demand, and power prices that have fallen significantly since 2008 have jeopardized the economics of about two - thirds of the nation's 100 - GW nuclear capacity, according to a working paper from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.

Faced with the on - going nuclear crisis in Japan — the costs of which could make the March earthquake and subsequent tsnuami the most expensive natural disaster the world has ever seen — nearby China may be moving to double its target for solar photovoltaic (PV) power capacity over the next five years.

Between 2004 and 2009, wind energy capacity in the United States grew by 423 %, while solar energy capacity expanded by 150 %.30 Yet over the same time frame, nuclear energy managed to increase by only 1 percent.31 By 2020, wind energy will grow by another 82 %, while nuclear power is only on track to expand by 10 %.32 A clean energy standard would help lift the dormant U.S. nuclear industry off the mat while also ensuring that the market for traditional renewables, like wind and solar, continues to grow through aggressive state mandates.

Nuclear power requires less expensive transmission (shorter distances and smaller transmission capacity in total because the capacity needs to be sufficient for maximum output but intermittent renewables average around 10 % to 40 % capacity factor whereas nuclear averages around 80 % toNuclear power requires less expensive transmission (shorter distances and smaller transmission capacity in total because the capacity needs to be sufficient for maximum output but intermittent renewables average around 10 % to 40 % capacity factor whereas nuclear averages around 80 % tonuclear averages around 80 % to 90 %).

The share of nuclear power, the other non-fossil energy source, remained constant at about 6 %, for many years, with nuclear capacity increasing in line with increasing global energy consumption.

More shocking, even in the wake of Fukushima, the Dutch are talking of approving their first new nuclear power plant in 40 years, because they can no longer afford to pay exorbitant fees for minimal amounts of renewable electricity (that is well below theoretically «rated» or «capacity» output).

For example, nighttime energy demand is much lower than during the day, and yet we waste a great deal of energy from coal and nuclear power plants, which are difficult to power up quickly, and are thus left running at high capacity even when demand is low.

The capacity market approach pays utilities and other operators billions of pounds to commit to keep their coal, gas, nuclear and hydro power plants open, for up to four years ahead, regardless of whether they were planning to do this anyway, and regardless of whether they generate any electricity.

I suggest, there is no need for ramping - capable nuclear power plants until nuclear capacity is sufficient to supply most of baseload — as is the case in France.

Capacity additions involving hydro, wind and solar PV have totalled 33.8 million kW so far this year, while capacity powered by fossil fuels amounts to 27.0 million kW and by nuclear is just 2.2 million kW - or 29.2 million kW for fossil fuels plus Capacity additions involving hydro, wind and solar PV have totalled 33.8 million kW so far this year, while capacity powered by fossil fuels amounts to 27.0 million kW and by nuclear is just 2.2 million kW - or 29.2 million kW for fossil fuels plus capacity powered by fossil fuels amounts to 27.0 million kW and by nuclear is just 2.2 million kW - or 29.2 million kW for fossil fuels plus nuclear.

Whereas non-fossil fuel capacity additions totalled 31 million kW in 2012, these renewable and nuclear power stations have totalled 36 million kW so far this year - and could be projected to be 43 or 44 million kW for the whole year.

Thus, for the month, renewables provided more than seven times the amount of new capacity as that from fossil fuels and nuclear power.

As of 2012, nuclear accounted for 26 percent of the total generating capacity, according to energy ministry data, though it typically accounts for about a third of power generation, while only making up about 3 - 4 percent of energy costs.

This reflects both seasonal growth and added renewable generation capacity, as well as maintenance and refueling schedules for nuclear power plants, which normally undergo maintenance during spring and fall months, when overall electricity demand is lower.

Indeed, as the European Union actually saw net reductions in coal and nuclear generating capacity in 2009, wind accounted for close to 40 percent of all newly installed capacity, making it the region's number one new power source for the second straight year.

That is because there may not be enough stream flow for hydroelectric stations, and coal and nuclear power plant may not be able to get enough water through the cooling systems to keep generating at peak capacity, especially in the summer months.

-- expand drilling / fracking to extract as much domestic energy as possible, — use clean natural gas, where possible, to replace dirtier coal and for heavy transportation vehicles; — support basic research efforts aimed at finding economically viable green energy technologies; — at the same time, install new nuclear power generation capacity in place of new coal plants, wherever this makes economic sense.

Promote nuclear power as the climate - neutral and politically - bipartisan energy resource that it is, incentivize the U.S. nuclear industry to expand America's nuclear capacity, and stimulate U.S. research and development in advanced nuclear reactor designs for implementation at home and abroad 5.

The 2015 and 2016 new grid connections are in line with WNA's Harmony goal for nuclear power to generate 25 % of electricity with 1000 GWe of new capacity in 2050.

Current generation land - based nuclear reactors cost $ 10,000,000 per megawatt capacity or about $ 5 billion for the power plant not counting the cost of the equipment to convert electricity to fuel.

Solar can't produce electricity at night, but as we've seen in Germany and Australia it doesn't take a lot of solar capacity to start pushing down electricty prices during the day and that is very bad for the economics of nuclear power as it's a high capital cost, low fuel cost source of energy and reducing output during periods of low demand doesn't do much to reduce costs.

Solar power pushing down the price of electricity during the day is very bad for the economics of nuclear power and it doesn't take a lot of solar capacity for this to occur, as we've seen here in Australia.

The Energy Information Administration (EIA) in its analysis of EPA's Clean Power Plan had to consider new nuclear capacity as a separate case analysis because construction of new nuclear capacity other than what is currently under construction or at risk for retirement is not a major compliance option based on EPA's proposed rule despite nuclear power's zero carbon dioxide emissPower Plan had to consider new nuclear capacity as a separate case analysis because construction of new nuclear capacity other than what is currently under construction or at risk for retirement is not a major compliance option based on EPA's proposed rule despite nuclear power's zero carbon dioxide emisspower's zero carbon dioxide emissions.

In terms of the outlook for increased nuclear generating capacity he stressed the need to increase «safety culture» in Russia as well as the power and resources of the Russian nuclear safety regulator.

The fact is that over the last five years, wind power has added more new electric generating capacity in the USA than coal and nuclear combined — in spite of the fact that both coal and nuclear have enjoyed large, and permanent public subsidies, while subsidies for wind have been small, short - term and therefore unreliable.

With all due respect, Rod, I see the ongoing transition to clean renewable energy sources through paying very close attention to what is actually going on in the real world, including for example the fact that for the last two years, in both the United States and Europe, more renewable power capacity was added than coal, gas and nuclear combined.

For example, I believe that we've got to be willing to do what some other nations - such as France - have already done, and increase our capacity of safe and clean nuclear - generated power.

For instance, the bulk of the 580 billion yuan ($ 85 billion) to be invested in expanding the country's slowed energy industry in 2009 will go towards coal - fired generation, with nuclear and wind - powered generating capacity making up a smaller percentage.

For years the utilities have depended on rising capacity factors of nuclear and coal plants and power uprates for nuclear plants to keep up with the baseload demaFor years the utilities have depended on rising capacity factors of nuclear and coal plants and power uprates for nuclear plants to keep up with the baseload demafor nuclear plants to keep up with the baseload demand.

The total global generating capacity for nuclear power is 345 gigawatts (GW).

The San Onofre nuclear power plant has the capacity to provide power for approximately 2.1 million households.