International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management

Sustainable Energy Updates
A Newsletter for the Participants in the 2009 AREVA Site Visits

Or as we say in Hawai'i, aloha kakou. We've published this newsletter to keep y'all abreast of events, developments, legislative proposals, technology and other things that are somehow connected to the energy programs we learned about in France. We also hope this newsletter will help solidify that community that was established on those long train rides through La Belle France, and those perambulations through those energy facilities in various stages of completion.

Please consider this an invitation to tell us what you've been doing in the way of energy, environment, climate, workforce development, and economic development. Just send me an e-mail and I'll include your news in the newsletter.

June 16-17, 2009 Workshop on Intellectual Property and Cultural Resources Management. Who owns tribal stories?  Who owns the traditional knowledge of native peoples?  What information can a tribe post to its website?  Can our genes be patented?  Does the tribe have bootlegged or pirated copies of software on its computers?  Do the reading materials for courses in the tribal college and high school violate any laws?  What is the tribe's liability for copyright violations?  The intellectual property issues confronting tribal decision-makers are more varied and more complex than for most businesses.  On one hand tribes need to protect their stories, knowledge, and symbols but on the other, indigenous peoples are generally opposed to the notion of calling these parts of their heritage property.  Recent developments, nationally and internationally, are challenging tribal efforts to manage their cultural resources.  The Navajo Nation wants to protect the San Francisco Peaks by having it designated a World Heritage Site.  Some tribes have responded to these challenges by enacting cultural resources management codes and building up their language and cultural preservation programs.  Other tribes are looking to international forums such as UNESCO for assistance.

On June 16-17, 2009, the International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management is conducting a Workshop on Intellectual Property and Cultural Resource Management. This workshop, intended for tribal council members, tribal attorneys, cultural resource managers, economic development staff, school administrators and information technicians who are already aware of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, answers these questions, introduces traditional concepts of intellectual property, and outlines alternative approaches to protect tribal cultural resources.

The workshop faculty includes IPR and CRM experts from Australia and the Pacific Northwest who will participate via telepresence technologies. The workshop agenda and registration materials can be accessed here.

June 30, 2009 Workshop on American Indian Tribes and Canadian First Nations and the Production of Uranium. This workshop builds on the Institute's April 2008 Workshop: Towards a Tribal Definition of “Sustainable” Uranium Production and is intended to suggest means by which tribal/industry/government communication, consultation, and collaboration can be improved. The workshop will include discussions on, among other subjects, sacred sites and landscapes; corporate social responsibility; and uranium mine reclamation and reuse. The workshop agenda and registration materials can be accessed here.

We're pleased that representatives from AREVA will be speaking on the uranium mine reclamation at Herault and on the benefits sharing efforts taking place with First Nations in Saskatchewan. Representatives of the Navajo Nation, Spokane Indian Tribe, Pueblo of Laguna, Oglala Sioux Tribe and other tribes are expected to attend.

Here's some news from the Georges Besse II plant in the south of France. François Fillon, French Prime Minister, and Anne Lauvergeon, CEO of AREVA, inaugurated the first centrifuge cascade of the Georges Besse II uranium enrichment plant, where production is set to commence this year. As y'all might recall, the reason for the tour of the Georges Besse II plant is that a similar plant is being built in Idaho.

The plant, built on the Tricastin nuclear site in Southern France began construction less than three years ago. It will comprise two enrichment units and will produce 7.5 million SWUs (separative work units) by the time it reaches full capacity in 2016.

This project will enhance AREVA's position as a major player on the world's enrichment market, on which it has almost a 25% share.

The centrifuge enrichment process applied on the site is a major technological accomplishment as it uses 50 times less electricity than gaseous diffusion used until now in France.

With a price tag of three billion euros, the George Besse II plant is one of the largest industrial investment projects currently underway in France. The worksite has been a source of major employment in France and in particular in the regions near the site (Rhône-Alpes, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur and Languedoc-Roussillon).

The George Besse II plant demonstrates AREVA's capacity to carry out a highly complex project with maximal safety and security conditions while respecting the works' timetable. Up to 1,500 people will be involved in building the two units over a ten-year period.

Speaking at the end of the ceremony, Anne Lauvergeon described the Georges Besse II enrichment plant as “a symbol of AREVA's determination to strengthen its position as world leader on the nuclear energy market and offer its customers the best solutions,” adding that "the group is continuing to invest, develop and recruit, bringing the entire industrial activity with it."

We received this moderately disturbing article from a recent edition of Energy & Environment Daily from a colleague. I say moderately disturbing because it reveals the extent of the incoherence of the U.S. energy policy.

In the article by reporters Noelle Straub and Peter Behr, the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said that no new nuclear or coal plants may ever be needed in the United States.

"We may not need any, ever," Jon Wellinghoff told reporters at a U.S. Energy Association forum.

The FERC chairman's comments go beyond those of other Obama administration officials, who have strongly endorsed greater efficiency and renewables deployment but also say nuclear and fossil energies will continue playing a major role.

Wellinghoff's view also goes beyond the consensus outlook in the electric power industry about future sources of electricity. The industry has assumed that more baseload generation would provide part of an increasing demand for power, along with a rapid deployment of renewable generation, smart grid technologies and demand reduction strategies.

Jay Apt, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University's Electricity Industry Center, expressed skepticism about the feasibility of relying so heavily on renewable energy. "I don't think we're where Chairman Wellinghoff would like us to be," Apt said. "You need firm power to fill in when the wind doesn't blow. There is just no getting around that."

Some combination of more gas- or coal-fired generation, or nuclear power, will be needed, he said. "Demand response can provide a significant buffering of the power fluctuations coming from wind. Interacting widely scattered wind farms cannot provide smooth power."

Wellinghoff said renewables like wind, solar and biomass will provide enough energy to meet baseload capacity and future energy demands. Nuclear and coal plants are too expensive, he added.

"I think baseload capacity is going to become an anachronism," he said. "Baseload capacity really used to only mean in an economic dispatch, which you dispatch first, what would be the cheapest thing to do. Well, ultimately wind's going to be the cheapest thing to do, so you'll dispatch that first."

He added, "People talk about, 'Oh, we need baseload.' It's like people saying we need more computing power, we need mainframes. We don't need mainframes, we have distributed computing."

The technology for renewable energies has come far enough to allow his vision to move forward, he said. For instance, there are systems now available for concentrated solar plants that can provide 15 hours of storage.

"What you have to do, is you have to be able to shape it," he added. "And if you can shape wind and you can effectively get capacity available for you for all your loads.

"So if you can shape your renewables, you don't need fossil fuel or nuclear plants to run all the time. And, in fact, most plants running all the time in your system are an impediment because they're very inflexible. You can't ramp up and ramp down a nuclear plant. And if you have instead the ability to ramp up and ramp down loads in ways that can shape the entire system, then the old concept of baseload becomes an anachronism."

'A lot that is still not understood'

Asked whether his ideas need detailed studies, given the complexity of the grid, Wellinghoff said the technology is already moving that way.

"I think it's being settled by the digital grid moving forward," he said. "We are going to have to go to a smart grid to get to this point I'm talking about. But if we don't go to that digital grid, we're not going to be able to move these renewables, anyway. So it's all going to be an integral part of operating that grid efficiently."

The North American Electric Reliability Corp. reported last week on challenges in integrating a twentyfold expansion of renewable power into the nation's electricity networks but did not specifically address whether additional baseload generation would be needed. A spokesperson for NERC did not have an immediate response to Wellinghoff's comments today.

Revis James, who directs energy technology assessment for the Electric Power Research Institute, said recently that it is not clear how fast renewable energy can be added without creating reliability issues. "No one knows what the magic number is," he said. "Are we moving too fast? On the policymakers' side, there's a lot that is not still understood about the implications of a large share of renewables."

Impact on nuclear power

Wellinghoff's statement -- if it reflects Obama administration policy -- would be a huge blow to the U.S. nuclear power industry, which has been hoping for a nuclear "renaissance" based on the capacity of nuclear reactors to generate power without greenhouse gas emissions.

Congress created significant financial incentives to encourage the construction of perhaps a half-dozen nuclear plants with innovative designs, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu has promised Congress to accelerate awards of federal loan guarantees for some of these proposals.

But a major expansion in U.S. nuclear energy would require a high effective tax on carbon emissions from coal plants, or an extended loan guarantee and tax incentive policy, according to the Congressional Research Service and outside consultants. The leading energy bills before Congress do not provide more loan guarantees.

"If expansion of nuclear plants is the nation's policy, then Congress has to recognize that the U.S. energy companies cannot afford to do this alone," said Paul Genoa, policy director for the Nuclear Energy Institute, in a recent interview.

"The president needs to show his cards on nuclear energy," said energy consultant Joseph Stanislaw, a Duke University professor. "He cannot keep this industry, which must make investments with a 50-year or longer horizon, in limbo for much longer."

"I think [new nuclear expansion] is kind of a theoretical question, because I don't see anybody building these things, I don't see anybody having one under construction," Wellington said.

Building nuclear plants is cost-prohibitive, he said, adding that the last price he saw was more than $7,000 a kilowatt -- more expensive than solar energy. "Until costs get to some reasonable cost, I don't think anybody's going to [talk] that seriously," he said. "Coal plants are sort of in the same boat, they're not quite as expensive."

Can renewables meet demand?

There's enough renewable energy to meet energy demand, Wellinghoff said. "There's 500 to 700 gigawatts of developable wind throughout the Midwest, all the way to Texas. There's probably another 200 to 300 gigawatts in Montana and Wyoming that can go West."

He also cited tremendous solar power in the Southwest and hydrokinetic and biomass energy, and said the United States can reduce energy usage by 50 percent. "You combine all those things together ... I think we have great resources in this country, and we just need to start using them," he said.

Problems with unsteady power generation from wind will be overcome, he said.

"That's exactly what all the load response will do, the load response will provide that leveling ability, number one," he said. "Number two, if you have wide interconnections across the entire interconnect, you're going to have a lot of diversity with that wind. Not all the wind is going to stop at once. You'll have some of it stop, some of it start, and all of that diversity is going to help you, as well."

Push for grid modifications

But planning for modifying the grid to integrate renewables must take place in the next three to five years, he said.

"If we don't do that, then we miss the boat,"Wellinghoff said. "That planning has to take place so you don't strand a lot of assets, a lot of supply assets."

Unlike coal and nuclear, natural gas will continue to play a role in generating electricity, he said.

"Natural gas is going to be there for a while, because it's going to be there to get us through this transition that's going to take 30 or more years."

Chu reiterated before the House Energy and Commerce Committee today that he supports loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants and is working with the White House on the issue.

"I believe nuclear power has to be part of the energy mix in this century," Chu said.

Chu also noted today that nuclear technology, along with renewables, is an area where the United States has lost its lead. "We are trying to start the American nuclear industry again," he said.

Coal currently provides half of U.S. power, while nuclear energy accounts for about 20 percent.

Tribal collges and AISES (American Indian Science and Engineering Society) should be encouraged by AREVA's launch of new recruitment communications campaign simultaneously in six countries or regions throughout the world: in Germany, China, North America, France, India and the Middle East. The campaign has been designed to attract skilled candidates the world over and thus enable AREVA to recruit 12,000 people, mostly engineers and technicians in 2009.

AREVA aims to attract prime candidates inside and outside of France to meet both the company's growth needs and the energy challenges of the future. That's why the company is launching today a groundbreaking communications campaign in Germany, China, North America, France, India and the Middle East. The campaign heralds a strong pro-employment message in an economic climate in which many organizations are scaling back hiring.

In just three years, AREVA has succeeded in becoming a top-of-mind employer in France (2nd most preferred company among young engineers graduating from the best schools). With this campaign, launched simultaneously in key regions, AREVA plans to fulfil the employment expectations of young engineers throughout the world. "Engineers who've recently graduated from the best schools are very similar regardless of their nationality," explains Philippe Vivien, AREVA's Senior Executive Vice-President Human Resources. They travel, visit "borderless" web sites and usually speak fluent English in addition to their mother tongue.

What's more, they're tuned into our efforts to establish a relationship with them no matter where they may be in the world.""We are a global company offering many employment opportunities for skilled engineers and technicians. That's our message and we're saying it loud and clear! underscores Mr. Vivien. With this global campaign, we want to solidify our position as a top-of-mind employer and convince engineers the world over to join us."

We've spoken with Laurence Pernot of AREVA about making this recruitment campaign the subject of our next conference call.

If you didn't have a chance to read the May 29, 2009 James Kanter article in the New York Times entitled, "In Finland, Nuclear Renaissance Runs Into Trouble", here's the link.

The Finnish reactor is a clone of the Flamanville reactor which we visited. There's no question that the project has experienced cost overruns and delays. A more detailed analysis of the reasons for these overruns and delays would provide some good lessons as Indian tribes start weighing in on U.S. energy policy and on specific projects. However, the article includes several inaccuracies and mischaracterizations about the project in Finland and about the worldwide nuclear revival now under way that make it an imperfect teaching tool..

According to the article, after four years of construction and thousands of defects and deficiencies, the reactor’s 3 billion euro price tag, about $4.2 billion, has climbed at least 50 percent. And while the reactor was originally meant to be completed this summer, AREVA and the utility that ordered it, are no longer willing to make certain predictions on when it will go online.

There are currently 45 nuclear units under construction globally, with a combined capacity of about 38,000 megawatts, the equivalent of about 10 percent of the generating capacity of the existing global fleet of nuclear plants. Most of the plants under construction are in China, Russia, and India. Others are in South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Ukraine, and Bulgaria, Finland, France, and Iran. There are two important points that can be gleaned from this recitation of reactor projects. The first is that none of these reactors are being constructed in the United States. Second is that the Finnish reactor was the first Generation III+ reactor projects launched in the world.

To refresh your recollection, the characteristics of Generation III+ designs include:

• Modular construction - components are built elsewhere and shipped.
• Evolutionary design - years of experience operating reactors has allowed engineers to simplify designs and cut construction and generation costs, while improving safety measures.
• Passive safety features - in the event of a "severe accident", safety systems use natural forces such as gravity, circulation and evaporation, rather than "active" systems such as pumps, motors and valves.
• Waste - industry experts say the new more efficient reactors, over their design lives, will generate far less waste than current reactors do.
• Standarization - standardization should result in significant savings.

The first lesson to be learned is that it's probably better not to be the first one on the block to get the newest technology. These are complicated and complex projects. The Finns understand that there are always some hurdles with projects of this magnitude. That the Finns are confident in the EPR technology is supported by its selection as the technology of choice for three other Finnish utilities: TVO, Fortum and Fennovoima. So by the time reactors in the United States are ready for construction, AREVA will have completed several others in France, Finland, and China and also completed the debugging.