DOCSLIB.ORG

EIA NPP Khmelnitsky 3&4 Procedure 2019

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EIA NPP Khmelnitsky 3&4 Procedure 2019 u ENVIRONMENT AGENCY AUSTRIA umweltbundesamt EIA NPP Khmelnitsky 3&4 Procedure 2019 Expert Statement EIA NPP KHMELNITSKY 3&4 PROCEDURE 2019 Expert Statement Oda Becker Gabriele Mraz Commissioned by Austrian Ministry of Sustainability and Tourism Directorate I/6 General Coordination of Nuclear Affairs GZ BMNT-UW.1.1.2/0019-I/6/2018 REPORT REP-0692 Vienna 2019 Project management Franz Meister (Umweltbundesamt) Authors Oda Becker, technical-scientific consultant (content project management, chapters 4, 5, 6, 7) Gabriele Mraz, pulswerk GmbH (project coordinator, chapters 1, 2, 3) Translations and English editing Patricia Lorenz Layout and typesetting Elisabeth Riss (Umweltbundesamt) Title photograph © iStockphoto.com/imagestock For further information about the publications of the Umweltbundesamt please go to: http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/ Imprint Owner and Editor: Umweltbundesamt GmbH Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna/Austria The Environment Agency Austria prints its publications on climate-friendly paper. © Umweltbundesamt GmbH, Vienna, 2019 All Rights reserved ISBN 978-3-99004-511-4 EIA Khmelnitsky 3&4 2019 – Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 5 ZUSAMMENFASSUNG ..................................................................................... 10 РЕЗЮМЕ ........................................................................................................... 16 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 23 2 OVERALL AND PROCEDURAL ASPECTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT (EIA) ............................ 24 2.1 Provided documents .......................................................................... 24 2.2 Treatment in the EIA documents ...................................................... 25 2.3 Discussion ........................................................................................... 26 2.4 Conclusions, questions and preliminary recommendations ............................................................................... 29 3 SPENT FUEL AND RADIOACTIVE WASTE ....................................... 31 3.1 Treatment in the EIA documents ...................................................... 31 3.2 Discussion ........................................................................................... 31 3.3 Conclusions, questions and preliminary recommendations ............................................................................... 32 4 REACTOR TYPE .................................................................................. 33 4.1 Treatment in the EIA documents ...................................................... 33 4.2 Discussion ........................................................................................... 38 4.3 Conclusions, questions and preliminary recommendations ............................................................................... 48 5 INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS WITHOUT INVOLVEMENT OF THIRD PARTIES ............................................................................ 52 5.1 Treatment in the EIA documents ...................................................... 52 5.2 Discussion ........................................................................................... 54 5.3 Conclusions, questions and preliminary recommendations ............................................................................... 60 6 INCIDENTS AND ACCIDENTS WITH INVOLVEMENT OF THIRD PARTIES .................................................................................. 64 6.1 Treatment in the EIA documents ...................................................... 64 6.2 Discussion ........................................................................................... 64 6.3 Conclusions, questions and preliminary recommendations ............................................................................... 67 7 TRANSBOUNDARY IMPACTS ........................................................... 69 7.1 Treatment in the EIA documents ...................................................... 69 7.2 Discussion ........................................................................................... 70 Umweltbundesamt REP-0692, Vienna 2019 3 EIA Khmelnitsky 3&4 2019 – List of tables 7.3 Conclusions, questions and preliminary recommendations ............................................................................... 74 8 QUESTIONS AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS ............... 75 8.1 Overall and Procedural Aspects of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) .................................................................. 75 8.2 Spent fuel and radioactive waste ...................................................... 75 8.3 Reactor type ........................................................................................ 76 8.4 Incidents and accidents without involvement of third parties .................................................................................................. 77 8.5 Incidents and accidents with involvement of third parties ............ 79 8.6 Transboundary impacts ..................................................................... 80 9 REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 81 10 GLOSSARY .......................................................................................... 86 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Measures for severe accident management of the VVER 1000/V320 at Kozloduy NPP (JPEE 2018) ............................................................................. 58 Table 2: The 2018 Nuclear Security Index for Ukraine (NTI 2018) ................................ 67 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Reactor building of unit 3 and 4 of KhNPP (ENERGOATOM 2017a, p.10) ........ 35 Figure 2: Schematic diagram of initial filling of the reactor shaft (ENERGOATOM 2017a, p. 16) ................................................................................................. 36 Figure 3: Deposition of caesium-137 from a hypothetical BDBA in KhNPP-2 (WENISCH et al. 1998). ................................................................................... 71 Figure 4: Average deposition of Cs--137 after a hypothetical BDBA in KhNPP-3 ........ 73 4 Umweltbundesamt REP-0692, Vienna 2019 EIA Khmelnitsky 3&4 2019 – Summary SUMMARY At the Khmelnitsky site in Ukraine, the state enterprise “National Nuclear Ener- gy Generating Company Energoatom” is preparing the completion of nuclear power plant units 3 and 4 (KhNPP-3&4). At the site, two units VVER-1000/V- 320 are already in operation. Construction of KhNPP-3&4 started in 1985/1986 and was halted due to the 1990 moratorium on the construction of nuclear power units in the former USSR. In 2005, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine decided to renew the construction. The reactor VVER-1000/V-392 (Atomstroyexport) was chosen and this decision became law in 2012. Due to the deteriorating relations between Ukraine and Russia this law ceased to be in force in 2015. Energoatom chose Škoda JS a.s. as the reactor supplier. An environmental impact assessment (EIA) under the Espoo Convention start- ed in 2010. Austria has participated in this procedure since 2011 and submitted 1 an expert statement (UMWELTBUNDESAMT 2013 ) in 2013; in August 2013 bilat- eral consultations with the Ukrainian side took place. The objective of the Aus- trian participation in the Espoo procedure is to give recommendations on mini- mising or even eliminating possible significant adverse impacts on Austria. Overall and procedural aspects Most of the EIA documents provided in 2013 have remained unchanged, with the exception of documents on the recently selected reactor type VVER 1000/V- 320. No new assessments of possible trans-boundary impacts have been pro- vided. According to the Espoo Convention a description and an assessment of rea- sonable alternatives and also the no-action alternative have to be included in the environmental impact assessment documentation. In this regard the infor- mation in the EIA documentation is not sufficient. Spent fuel and radioactive waste Important information on the management of the spent fuel and radioactive waste from KhNPP-3&4 is lacking in the EIA documents: The expected invento- ry of spent fuel from KhNPP-3&4 is not given. Information on the status of the central interim storage where the spent fuel from KhNPP-3&4 shall be stored is missing. No information was provided about the planned options for the back- end of the fuel chain (reprocessing, final disposal in Ukraine, international dis- posal?). Spent fuel and radioactive waste can cause adverse environmental im- pacts and therefore the EIA should assess the nuclear waste management. 1 It can be downloaded at: http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/umweltsituation/uvpsup/espooverfahren/espoo_ukraine/kkwkhme lnitsky34/ Umweltbundesamt REP-0692, Vienna 2019 5 EIA Khmelnitsky 3&4 2019 – Summary Reactor Type For the completion of KhNPP-3&4, it is planned to use the buildings and struc- tures already built in the 1980s. Information about the conditions of the existing buildings, structures and equipment are not provided in the EIA documents. An over 10-year-old survey performed between 2005 and 2009 concluded that the existing buildings and structures are in an operable condition – no refer- ence to a more recent survey is made in the EIA documents. In this year an in- spection confirming the durability and reliability of the building
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Ukrainian Weekly 1999, No.36
    www.ukrweekly.com INSIDE:• Forced/slave labor compensation negotiations — page 2. •A look at student life in the capital of Ukraine — page 4. • Canada’s professionals/businesspersons convene — pages 10-13. Published by the Ukrainian National Association Inc., a fraternal non-profit association Vol. LXVII HE No.KRAINIAN 36 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1999 EEKLY$1.25/$2 in Ukraine U.S.T continues aidU to Kharkiv region W Pustovoitenko meets in Moscow with $16.5 million medical shipment by Roman Woronowycz the region and improve the life of Kharkiv’s withby RomanRussia’s Woronowycz new increasingprime Ukrainian minister debt for Russian oil Kyiv Press Bureau residents, which until now had produced Kyiv Press Bureau and gas. The disagreements have cen- few tangible results. tered on the method of payment and the KYIV – The United States government “This is the first real investment in terms KYIV – Ukraine’s Prime Minister amount. continued to expand its involvement in the of money,” said Olha Myrtsal, an informa- Valerii Pustovoitenko flew to Moscow on Ukraine has stated that it owes $1 bil- Kharkiv region of Ukraine on August 25 tion officer at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. August 27 to meet with the latest Russian lion, while Russia claims that the costs when it delivered $16.5 million in medical Sponsored by the Department of State, the prime minister, Vladimir Putin, and to should include money owed by private equipment and medicines to the area’s hos- humanitarian assistance program called discuss current relations and, more Ukrainian enterprises, which raises the pitals and clinics.
    [Show full text]
  • Ukraine Nuclear Fuel Cycle Chronology
    Ukraine Nuclear Fuel Cycle Chronology Last update: April 2005 This annotated chronology is based on the data sources that follow each entry. Public sources often provide conflicting information on classified military programs. In some cases we are unable to resolve these discrepancies, in others we have deliberately refrained from doing so to highlight the potential influence of false or misleading information as it appeared over time. In many cases, we are unable to independently verify claims. Hence in reviewing this chronology, readers should take into account the credibility of the sources employed here. Inclusion in this chronology does not necessarily indicate that a particular development is of direct or indirect proliferation significance. Some entries provide international or domestic context for technological development and national policymaking. Moreover, some entries may refer to developments with positive consequences for nonproliferation. 2003-1993 1 August 2003 KRASNOYARSK ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT ALLOW IMPORT OF UKRAINE'S SPENT FUEL UNTIL DEBT PAID On 1 August 2003, UNIAN reported that, according to Yuriy Lebedev, head of Russia's International Fuel and Energy Company, which is managing the import of spent nuclear fuel to Krasnoyarsk Kray for storage, the Krasnoyarsk administration will not allow new shipments of spent fuel from Ukraine for storage until Ukraine pays its $11.76 million debt for 2002 deliveries. —"Krasnoyarskiy kray otkazhetsya prinimat otrabotannoye yadernoye toplivo iz Ukrainy v sluchaye nepogasheniya 11.76 mln. dollarov dolga," UNIAN, 1 August 2003; in Integrum Techno, www.integrum.com. 28 February 2002 RUSSIAN REACTOR FUEL DELIVERIES TO COST $246 MILLION IN 2002 Yadernyye materialy reported on 28 February 2002 that Russian Minister of Atomic Energy Aleksandr Rumyantsev and Ukrainian Minister of Fuel and Energy Vitaliy Gayduk signed an agreement under which Ukraine will buy reactor fuel worth $246 million from Russia in 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • 4Th International
    4th International September 9-10, 2014 Sponsored by U.S. Department of Energy | Office of Fossil Energy | National Energy Technology Laboratory 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Synopsis .................................................................................................................3 Technology Summary .............................................................................................3 Organizing Committee ............................................................................................3 Agenda-At-A-Glance ...............................................................................................4 Sheraton Station Square Floor Plan .........................................................................5 Detailed Program for Monday, September 8, 2014 ..................................................6 Detailed Program for Tuesday, September 9, 2014 ..................................................6 Detailed Program for Wednesday, September 10, 2014 ...........................................9 Speaker/Presenter Biographies .............................................................................13 2 SYNOPSIS The 4th International Supercritical CO2 Power Cycles Symposium is a technical meeting organized and designed by industry, academia, and government agencies to advance the development of power cycles with supercritical carbon dioxide (CO2) as the working fluid. Every two to three years, researchers, industry, and end users meet to learn about advancements in the field, discuss priorities, and establish
    [Show full text]
  • Npr 2.3: an Assessment of Iran's Nuclear Facilities
    Report Report: AN ASSESSMENT OF IRAN’S NUCLEAR FACILITIES by Greg J. Gerardi and Maryam Aharinejad Greg J. Gerardi is a Senior Research Associate of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS) at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. Maryam Aharinejad was a Research Associate at CNS; she is currently an intern at the United Nations’ Centre for Disarmament Affairs. uch press has been given to the perceived threat was no contract for a centrifuge, Yeltsin later conceded posed by Iran’s nuclear developments. In par- this point of the deal stating that: Mticular, Russia’s agreement to complete Unit ...the contract indeed has elements of both One of the nuclear complex at Bushehr, begun by the peaceful and military power engineering. Now Germans in the late 1970s, and reports of China’s assis- we have agreed to separate them, and what tance in the building of additional power reactors have bears on the military part, the possibility of strained relations between the United States and these creating, say, nuclear-weapons-grade fuel or two countries. The protocol for the completion of the other matters—the centrifuge, the building of Bushehr plant, signed by Russian nuclear energy minis- mines—we decided to exclude these matters ter Viktor Mikhailov and the President of the Atomic from the contract....2 Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Reza Amrollahi on U.S. concern about the transfer of any nuclear January 8, 1995, also calls on the two signatory organi- technology to Iran is based on the belief that zations to draft and sign: Iran has a clandestine nuclear weapon develop- ...within a six month period of time, a con- ment program.
    [Show full text]
  • (C) 2010 JETRO. All Rights Reserved. 水力
    別添 発電所案件のEPC, コントラクター等の動向 （注）情報収集が可能であった発電所のみ記載。また、各発電所について記載してある内容は全体の一部であり、全ての関連企業を掲載したものではありません。何卒ご了承下さい。 設備容量 ボイラー、タービン、ジェネレーター プラント ファイナンス (融資銀行含む) コンサルタント（詳細設計、F/S業務含む） EPC 土木工事、機器据付、システム設計 など (MW) メーカー 水力 Agribank, Vietnam-Thailand JV Bank, An Binh JSCl A Luoi 170 CAVICO, CTTE, LILAMA PECC3(Design) Bank, Rubber Financing Company Licogi, Construction corp No.4, Lung Lo Construction corp, Central Construction corp, Vietcombank, Agribank, BIDV, Incombank,Citicorp, Power Machine Group(Russia), A Vuong 210 PECC2 National research institute of mechanical engineering, LILAMA, AF-Colenco(Design), BNP Paribas, ABN Amro Mitsubishi Sika(PVC Bar) An Khe #2 80 Dongfang Song Da, Dat Phuong JSC PECC4(Construction supervision), CONSTREXIM, HUBEI HONGCHENG GENERAL An Khe Kanak 177 BIDV,Agribank, Vietcombank, Incombank MACHINERY CO., LTD., Sichuan Dongfang electric equipment corp. Ba Thuoc 1,2 120 BIDV(60%), Hoang Anh Gia Lai(40%) Agribank(56%), BIDV, Vietcombank, Global Petro Ban Chat 220 Electric Construction Consultancy 1 Licogi, CAVICO Commercial Joint Stock Bank. Ban Ve 300 Song Da, Cavico, Licogi Vietcombank, Agribank, BIDV, Incombank,Citicorp, Buon Kuop 280 Vinaconex, Cavico, CONSTREXIM, Construction Corporation No.1, Sika(PVC Bar) BNP Paribas, ABN Amro Buon Tua Srah 86 Dongfang PECC4(F/S) Lilama, CONSTREXIM, PECC4(Design, Appraisal bid documents), Sika(PVC Bar) Can Don 77.5 Incombank, BIDV, International JSC Bank Power Machine Group, UETM(Russia) Ukrhydroproject, Song Da, Lilama Cua Dat 99 VINACONEX, BNP Paribas Vinaconex, China National
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 – 2018
    Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 – 2018 Part 3B: Russia - Surface Ships & Non-propulsion Marine Nuclear Applications Peter Lobner July 2018 1 Foreword In 2015, I compiled the first edition of this resource document to support a presentation I made in August 2015 to The Lyncean Group of San Diego (www.lynceans.org) commemorating the 60th anniversary of the world’s first “underway on nuclear power” by USS Nautilus on 17 January 1955. That presentation to the Lyncean Group, “60 years of Marine Nuclear Power: 1955 – 2015,” was my attempt to tell a complex story, starting from the early origins of the US Navy’s interest in marine nuclear propulsion in 1939, resetting the clock on 17 January 1955 with USS Nautilus’ historic first voyage, and then tracing the development and exploitation of marine nuclear power over the next 60 years in a remarkable variety of military and civilian vessels created by eight nations. In July 2018, I finished a complete update of the resource document and changed the title to, “Marine Nuclear Power: 1939 – 2018.” What you have here is Part 3B: Russia - Surface Ships & Non-propulsion Marine Nuclear Applications. The other parts are: Part 1: Introduction Part 2A: United States - Submarines Part 2B: United States - Surface Ships Part 3A: Russia - Submarines Part 4: Europe & Canada Part 5: China, India, Japan and Other Nations Part 6: Arctic Operations 2 Foreword This resource document was compiled from unclassified, open sources in the public domain. I acknowledge the great amount of work done by others who have published material in print or posted information on the internet pertaining to international marine nuclear propulsion programs, naval and civilian nuclear powered vessels, naval weapons systems, and other marine nuclear applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Npr 6.3: Us-Ukrainian Nuclear Cooperation: Is Kyiv Ready For
    Victor Zaborsky US-UKRAINIAN NUCLEAR COOPERATION: IS KYIV READY FOR IT? by Victor Zaborsky Victor Zaborsky is a Senior Research Associate at the University of Georgia’s Center for International Trade and Security. He wrote this report as part of a project supported by the W. Alton Jones Foundation and the Ploughshares Fund. ooperation between Ukraine and the United projects caused by corruption and economic uncertainty. States for nonproliferation has recently intensi- In addition, Russia, the other major competitor in the Cfied. After Ukraine agreed in April 1998 to Ukrainian nuclear technology market, has been more forego participation in the Russian-led project to build flexible than the United States in negotiating deals with the Bushehr nuclear power station in Iran, on May 6, Kyiv. As a result, the incentives for long-term Ukrai- 1998, US Ambassador to Ukraine Steven Pifer and nian nonproliferation cooperation with the United States Ukrainian Foreign Minister Boris Tarasyuk signed an are not nearly as strong as the signing of the recent agree- Agreement for Cooperation between the United States ments would indicate. Additional steps will need to be of America and Ukraine Concerning Peaceful Uses of taken by both countries if this cooperation is to be placed Nuclear Energy. Under this agreement, the US govern- on a more solid footing. ment will provide Ukraine with about $30 million to This report begins by outlining the current status of help the country to modernize its nuclear fuel sector. the Ukrainian nuclear sector. It then traces the history of Furthermore, the agreement creates a framework that past and current US nuclear and nonproliferation assis- allows US private companies to conclude more deals tance to Ukraine, and provides a more detailed assess- with the Ukrainian nuclear sector in areas such as man- ment of the prospects for increasing bilateral cooperation aging nuclear fuel supply, building a uranium enrich- in the nuclear sector.
    [Show full text]
  • Snapshot of Ukraine's Energy
    SNAPSHOT OF UKRAINE’S ENERGY SECTOR: ENERGY UKRAINE’S OF SNAPSHOT SNAPSHOT OF UKRAINE’S ENERGY SECTOR INSTITUTIONS, GOVERNANCE AND POLICY FRAMEWORK This report provides an overview of Ukraine’s energy sector. It presents the structure of the sector, Snapshot of Ukraine’s identifying the main state and corporate actors, and clarifying roles and responsibilities, as well as reporting mechanisms. It also elucidates the relationships among actors, including government bodies, regulators, state-owned enterprises and other stakeholders. It looks at the mechanisms in Energy Sector: place for licencing and for monitoring the energy strategy. Institutions, Governance The report describes how the reforms now underway are changing the architecture of the electricity sector, in particular, and presents the architecture in place since the launch of the and Policy Framework wholesale electricity market and the corporatisation of Ukrenergo in July 2019. It encompasses both quantitative and qualitative elements, looking at Ukraine’s energy mix, sector governance, and policy and regulatory frameworks. It also provides a case study of Ukraine’s electricity market. INSTITUTIONS, GOVERNANCE AND POLICY AND GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS, The report establishes the basis for upcoming OECD analytical work in the context of the project Supporting Energy Sector Reform in Ukraine, funded by the Government of Norway. oe.cd/energy-sector-reform-ukraine FRAMEWORK TLE Snapshot of Ukraine’s Energy Sector Institutions, Governance and Policy Framework 2 Foreword Since 1991, the OECD and Ukraine have been working hand in hand to improve governance and economic development. A Memorandum of Understanding for Strengthening Co-operation (MoU) was signed between the OECD and the Government of Ukraine in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Conducting Business in Ukraine
    CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN UKRAINE 2018 All of the information included in this document is for informational purposes only, and may not reflect the most current legal developments, judgments, or settlements. This information is not offered as legal or any other advice on any particular matter. The Firm and the contributing authors expressly disclaim all liability to any person in respect of anything, and in respect of the consequences of anything, done or omitted to be done wholly or partly in reliance upon the whole or any part of the contents of Baker McKenzie’s Conducting Business in Ukraine brochure. No client or other reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any matter contained in this document without first seeking the appropriate legal or other professional advice on the particular facts and circumstances. CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN UKRAINE 2018 Baker McKenzie Renaissance Business Center 24 Bulvarno-Kudriavska St. Kyiv 01601, Ukraine Tel.: +380 44 590 0101 Fax: +380 44 590 0110 [email protected] www.bakermckenzie.com\ukraine CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN UKRAINE Table of Content 1. Ukraine — An Overview ...................................................... 11 1.1 Geography, Topography and Population ........................................ 11 1.2 Government and Political and Legal Systems .............................. 12 1.3 Regional Structure ............................................................................... 15 1.4 Economy ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Iran
    Chapter 5 Iran “While there is currently consensus across the political spectrum with re- spect to the necessity of sustaining a nuclear research program, no such agree- ment is evident on the issue of actually crossing the nuclear weapons threshold.”– Ray Takeyh1 5.1 Introduction In the previous chapter, I discussed US counterproliferation policy toward the DPRK. I found that economic and military threats were only useful in a limited set of circumstances (only in the short term, and if credible), while social benefits were productive in a wider set (both in the short and long term). However, the conditions under which social strategies worked were also circumscribed. Due to repeated social snubs, the North Koreans had inverted their patterns of response to US strategies by the end of 2002, and subsequently took significant strides towards a nuclear capability. In this chapter, I test a similar set of hypotheses with respect to the Islamic Republic of Iran (hereafter Iran). Relative to the US strategy toward the DPRK, the US strategy toward Iran over three administrations has been relatively constant. Moreover, much of the US strategy has been indirect, attempting to convince other countries not to cooperate with Iran rather than negotiating directly with the Iranians. These attempts can be evaluated and 1Takeyh 2003. 153 154 CHAPTER 5. IRAN compared with what is known about Iran’s clandestine programs to determine the overall effects of US strategy on Iran’s nuclear program. Next to North Korea, during the post-Cold War period, Iran has probably come the closest to developing nuclear weapons, although (as I argue in this chapter) they are still some distance away from achieving success.
    [Show full text]
  • Uxw 33-35, September 2, 2019
    02 | SEP | 2019 VOL 33 | NO 35 A WEEKLY PUBLICATION OF UXC.COM ® THE LEADING SOURCE FOR TIMELY MARKET INFORMATION UxC Interview with Mr. Tim Gitzel, President and CEO of Cameco Corporation UxC President, Jonathan Hinze, recently had the oppor- tunity to interview Mr. Tim Gitzel, President and Chief Exec- Ux Price Indicators utive Officer (CEO) of Cameco Corporation. Mr. Gitzel gra- ® Weekly Ux U3O8 Price (9/2/19) $25.30 (Unch.) ciously shared with UxC the latest status and plans of his Ux 3-Yr U3O8 Price $28.25 Ux 5-Yr U3O8 Price $32.00 company and his views on the global nuclear markets. Month-end (8/26/19) *Calculated values Jonathan Hinze: Thank you very much for the opportunity to discuss Cameco’s current situation and your views about Spot $25.30 NA Spot $20.00 the future of your company and the nuclear industry. Can you Spot MAP* $25.26 NA Term $16.50 8 O please provide us a brief history of your years at the helm of 3 3-Yr Forward $28.25 EU Spot $19.75 U Cameco and what have been some of the biggest changes at 5-Yr Forward $32.00 Conversion EU Term $16.50 Cameco over this time? Long-Term $32.00 Spot $45.00 Tim Gitzel: NA Price $86.00 SWU Long-Term $47.00 Spot It is a pleasure NA Value* $86.11 NA Spot* $1,160 6 to speak with EUP UF EU Value* $85.86 NA Term* $1,316 you Jonathan. Gitzel: You know, I started in this business in 1979 when I As you know, I was 17 years old.
    [Show full text]
  • Janub 760 MW Combined-Cycle Power Plant Project
    Environmental Assessment Report Summary Environmental Impact Assessment Project Number: 43406 September 2009 AZE: Janub 760 MW Combined-Cycle Power Plant Project Prepared by Cleaner Production & Energy Efficiency Center on behalf of Azerenerji Joint Stock Company of the Republic of Azerbaijan for the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The summary environmental impact assessment is a document of the borrower. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of ADB’s Board of Directors, Management, or staff, and may be preliminary in nature. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (as of 28 September 2009) Currency Unit – Azerbaijan new manta/s (AZN) AZN1.00 = $1.242 $1.00 = AZN0.804 ABBREVIATIONS ADB – Asian Development Bank CO – carbon monoxide CO2 – carbon dioxide DCS – digital control system EU – European Union GE – General Electric HRSG – heat recovery steam generator NOx – nitrogen oxides SO2 – sulphur dioxide S/S – substation WEIGHTS AND MEASURES C – Celsius (centigrade) ha – hectare(s) kg – kilogram(s) kJ – kilo Joule(s) kWh – Kilowatt-hour kV – kilo Volt(s) mg – milligram(s) mm – millimeter(s) MW – mega Watt(s) MVA – mega Volt-Ampere(s) s – second(s) t – ton (metric) – 1,000 kg NOTE In this report, "$" refers to US dollars. In preparing any country program or strategy, financing any project, or by making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area in this document, the Asian Development Bank does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. CONTENTS Page MAP I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. STATUS OF SHIRVAN THERMAL POWER PLANT 2 III. CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT 6 A.
    [Show full text]