China to build 27 more nuclear power plants

Pollution from coal-fired plants and uncertainties in oil market force Beijing to look to alternative sources of energy

BEIJING - China plans to build 27 nuclear power plants by 2020, a marked increase from the current nine in operation, a top atomic energy official said yesterday.

This would work out to two to three 1,000MW nuclear plants being built annually for the next 15 years, said Mr Zhang Huazhu, chairman of the China Atomic Energy Authority (CAEA).

The new plants, alongside existing ones, will be located in the more economically developed south-eastern and coastal regions, such as the Guangdong, Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces.

Nuclear power already accounts for more than 13 per cent of the electricity supply in Guangdong and Zhejiang, said Mr Zhang, adding that atomic energy 'is going to be an important pillar in the electricity-mix in the coastal areas'.

A report in July by the World Nuclear Association (WNA), a global industrial organisation promoting the peaceful use of atomic energy, listed Fujian and Shandong as the next two likely provinces to go nuclear with two new plants each.

These provinces house a large part of China's manufacturing base but are far from the coalfields in the north or north-west.

As a result, they are among the regions worst hit this year by the energy crisis as electricity demand soars and the transportation bottleneck shows little sign of easing.

Though several inland Chinese provinces have requested permission to build nuclear power plants as well, comments by the CAEA suggest that the central government is unlikely to accede to such requests.

China relies on fossil fuel, mainly coal, to generate about 80 per cent of its electricity, with hydropower and nuclear energy accounting for the rest.

But mounting pollution from coal-fired plants and uncertainties in the international oil market have forced Beijing to speed up its develop- ment of alternative sources of energy.

Speaking at a press conference yesterday, Mr Zhang said that China's nuclear energy strategy remained a 'moderate' one despite the central government's decision to speed up construction of the plants.

He revealed that the existing nine nuclear power plants accounted for only 2.29 per cent of total electricity generated in China.

Even with 27 new nuclear plants by 2020, this figure is expected to increase only marginally to 4 per cent, he said.

He added: 'Overall, the contribution from nuclear energy is still small. In this light, we can still call it a moderate development of nuclear energy.'

China began developing its nuclear industry 50 years ago, but it was only in 1991 that it put the country's first nuclear power plant into operation in Zhejiang, about 100km south- west of Shanghai.

Allaying concerns about safety, officials at the press conference said China has not encountered any major nuclear incident.

Staff in key posts go through thorough training and strict examinations to ensure their competence, the officials added.

Asia is the only region in the world where electricity generation by nuclear power is increasing significantly, the WNA said in an online report, pinning down most of this growth in China, Japan, India and South Korea.

There are now 100 nuclear power reactors in six Asian countries - with Japan topping the list with 53 plants - and 56 other reactors for research purposes in 14 countries in the region, the report added.

I have been saying for years basically that as China's industrial base and domestic demand (for oil) grows and will continue to expand, that their insatiable appetite for energy (oil) also will grow exponentially. Just recently, the morons in the media with all their wisdom and visionary qualities (..not) are just now finally noting that China's oil consumption is up significantly, even over the last year or two (I don't have the actual numbers in front of me at this moment). Even on CNN (TV) a week or so ago, they noted that China's consumption was up this summer (July?) as compared with the time period they reported from the same time frame last summer. Their consumption, in my humble opinion, will only keep increasing, with zero end in sight, until their demand far outstrips several other "first world" countries and potentially the oil supply available in the usual daily markets (OPEC, Russia, Brazil).

They have a staggering population numerically, and their entire economy and populace has not been brought as "on line" with the almost omnipotent petroleum-controlling dependence that the West has (and will not ever be able to break free from.). I do not expect that any Americans would want to relinquish the gas-powered lawnmower or tractor in favor of manual push-style technology from the 20's and 30' or even older "horse-drawn" methods. Gas-driven power tools are significant labor-saving devices, not to mention the speed, and individual freedom of movement that an automobile or other gas-powered vehicle has to offer.

Make no mistake, petroleum is indispensable to our way of life and this is a vital, critical, national, strategic national self interest that ties directly into base-level questions of survival itself, the absolute lowest of Maslow’s hierarchy, which keeps us in line with the cavemen.

Even if you submit that we could eventually move to different energy technologies that make our OWN consumption of oil irrelevant and “discontinued”, that does not negate that China will need more petroleum-based products, pretty much until the end of human history. Their demand can not end or ever be reversed. On the one hand, we are gradually and prudently trying to develop alternative fuel technologies; on the other hand they have no choice but to play catch up.

Their nuclear program will not suffice. I suspect that they merely wish to increase their nuclear stockpiles, modernize their delivery systems and submit that this will be a focus of their nuclear "energy" program.

This is just an overview of the Chinese context to oil-related issues, which brings us to an explosive historical "what if" question:

In the distant future, could there be an unprecedented major global war, involving all available Chinese land forces, and levied reserves (several hundred million man army?), among other nations, engaged in the Middle East someday over oil?

Maybe 50 years ago it would not make any sense for some theoretical battle of Armageddon or other unprecedented war (by the billions) to be waged in the Middle East to play out, even from a purely theoretical standpoint. More recently, we are seeing that as oil becomes more scarce China's demand (in particular) for petroleum-based products will only skyrocket in the face of increasing market scarcity in the face of ever-increasing demand.

It only stands to reason that oil will increasingly become viewed by the Chinese leadership as essential for their national survival. Furthermore, it is not too far-fetched to envision a scenario in which they are forced by dire necessity to march into the Middle East and attempt to conquer it, if for no other reason that they perceive the need to take all of its remaining oil reserves to meet their basic needs.

As time and current events unfold, I would pay close attention to moves on the part of any Chinese "company" (remember how their structures are organized, front organizations for the P.L.A.(N).) that starts negotiating for turf in the Middle East.

They are aggressively developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems also, FYI. They have joined “The Nuclear Club.” Sorry gang, our deterrent is weakening, we can’t just say “we’ll nuke you guys if you march into the Middle East.” That way of thinking is holding less weight. We need new approaches and solutions to this major geopolitical problem. The Scottish would call this a “conundrum.” It is also a mournful dirge.

Their nuclear program will not suffice. I suspect that they merely wish to increase their nuclear stockpiles, modernize their delivery systems and submit that this will be a focus of their nuclear "energy" program.

Sorry, but I don't think it's going to down like that. China has announced today taht they plan to build up to 200 more nuclear plants by 2050. You don't build 200 nuclear plants to produce weapons. You don't build 7 plants to build weapons.

What you do build 7 or 200 plants for is to fix your failing power grid. Right now, rolling blackouts and flickering lights are the norm in China. If they want to continue to compete in the manufacturing marketplace, and make no dobuts, they want to dominate it, they need to fix their power grid. This is the first step.

The second step is reducing their oil consumption, which they're already doing. Hybrid cars are being pushed there, and they'll probably continue to put empahasis on them until a good electric alternative can be produced. And really, that's not that far off.

This is what we should be doing here. I remember when Bush took office he made a lot of noise about opening some new nuclear plants, or at least, investigating the possiblity, but he's done nothing here. Not even brought it up to be shot down. We continue to shoot oil into our veins like a crack junkie.

I'm going to have to agree with Bulwark that China wouldn't build nuclear reactors for weapons. Nuclear reactors use fuel that have been enriched to 3.5% Uranium-235 (Natural uranium only has 0.7% Uranium-235, thereabouts). Weapons grade Uranium would be processed up to Uranium 90+% Uranium-235. The weatlhy nations, or nations that have alot of resources at their disposal, such as China, would produce weapons by enriching the Uranium up to 90+% in a facility through gaseous diffusion. China already has such facilities (as well as many developed nations).

However, countries that are poor in resources and have not or not been able to build a gaseous diffusion facility, such as North Korea, Iran, Iraq, etc., would use a nuclear reactor. In a nuclear reactor, Uranium 238 (Uranium-238 make up the other 96.5% of the fuel rods) would become Plutonium 239 via neutron capture. When the reactor have operated a certain period of time, the fuel rods are pulled out and the Plutonium 239 are chemically extracted.

Both Plutonium-239 and Uranium-235 fissionable, meaning, a nuclear weapon can be made from these materials.

Enriching Uranium 235 is more efficient and is the method that the US, Russia and China use to produce weapons grade material.

I do not believe whatsoever that they will be able to build enough nuclear power plants fast enough to meet their skyrocketing domestic energy needs for the next 100 years, let alone the next 50. Their nuclear program, presently constituted will definitely NOT suffice to meet their requirements for energy. How quickly can they build the alleged 200 plants? BS. (One loophole: France, Germany, Russia, “tech support”).

In a sense, their "grid" can not properly support the continuing expansion of their economy, industrial base, or military requirements, and in that regard, they will be on the constant lookout for energy sources (nuclear, hydroelectric, oil, anything else). They will continue to infringe upon the rights of neighboring countries (already being done, fact), whether it is fishing rights, or you got it, territory that has relevance to their power grids. Encroachments will not be enough. They will not have enough nuclear power plants, without SIGNIFICANT external assistance from countries like France, Germany and Russia (that point is granted and is the "wild card" in the deck of their nuclear energy options).

In my opinion, they will continue to require oil to such an extent that, sooner or later, China will have zero other option but to attempt to conquer the Middle East (maybe even under a PSYOP pretext) by military force. On this point, we need to calculate their present military personnel (usually estimated at about 12m), and also their potential theoretical reserves (out of 1bn,? … 250m? 300m? 400m?).

If they can not completely and totally voluntarily derail their industrial development (at least any and all processes that require petroleum-based products) and avoid the path that the US and the West has followed from the days of the Industrial Revolution forward, they will have no other choice but to launch an attack in a gambit to conquer and control all oil assets in the Middle East. (IMHO).

If China attempts this, pretty much all industrialized nations will have to deploy all available military forces and reserve units to the Middle East for a rather cataclysmic battle. If China does decide to roll the dice, and by forced march, zero in on Middle Eastern oil, can we stop all of their land forces before they get to Saudi, Oman, Iraq, et. Al.?

I have seen this as a possibility on the horizon since about 1990 or 1991. Sooner or later, we’ll sure as hell see what happens with China’s global geopolitical ambitions vis a vis their energy (read: oil) needs. So far, their consumption of oil-based products has only been increasing and will only continue to increase, unless they can completely avoid the way the West has developed for almost 200 years or find and deploy on a MASSIVE scale some miracle technology that causes them to halt and even reverse their need for oil. Check out recent Chinese (and other countries’, I might add) oil ventures in the Middle East (in the news, online). I ran across one shocking article that mentioned that Chinese “oil” firms (remember their internal structure at all times: staff and MO courtesy of P.L.A.(N).) received certain oil rights by Saudi Arabia. They have inexorable needs. They are smart. They are moving in. They are also patient. It may take them 20 years, 50 years, 100 years etc (again, “who the heck knows”) but they may very well have no other option but to go in to the Middle East, with significant and unparalleled force in history.

They will use nuclear power plants to support their increasing internal energy needs, of course. That is a very elemental given and is pretty much assumed and doesn’t need to be belabored. It is assumed that domestic energy is a MAJOR priority given the sharp increase of their domestic energy consumption (which becomes a “vital” “strategic” “national” “self interest” for the communist Chinese government in and of itself).

After realizing that they must be forced to “stem the energy tide” and be forced to use nuclear power to with every new nuclear weapon they build or acquire meet their needs, the major military issue is that China is building up its nuclear arsenal.

This pattern will continue with zero end in sight. and any improved targeting and guidance system they utilize (whether home grown or “with help”…) our deterrence decreases.

If they march toward the Middle East, we may not have the "options" that most Americans very simply take for granted, without any further careful thinking. The underpinnings for many assumptions that have been made by us in the past are eroding. We live in dangerous times, yet the danger on the horizon is without historical unparallel.

I believe our situation with China is different with that of the former USSR. I believe the situation with the former USSR was actually more dangerous. I don't know what the official count of nuclear arsenal in China's stock pile is, but I know that is is significiantly less than that of the former USSR and even Russia today. That is true, also, when comparing the number of intercontinenal delivery systems of the two countries.

The most recent research I did, China has about 20 or so ICBM's whereas Russia currently has an inventory of around 1000 (maybe more, I don't recall the exact number). However, the resources that is available to China today is significantly more than Russia (at one time, the USSR had significantly more resources than China). Yet Russia continues to maintain a much larger inventory of missles and nuclear weapons.

I'm not trying to minimize the significance of any country having nuclear weapons. We should always keep an eye on any nation that has nuclear weapons. But if we can say that the Cold War is over and very little concern is raised of Russia's current enormous stockpile of missles and nuclear weapons, why can't we view China in the same way which has a much smaller stockpile.

The Chinese are building a larger arsenal, for sure, but even the most alarmist projections pale in comparison to Russia's current inventory.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.