2010 9 new reactors, 6.2 GWe (shifted the two Canadian Reactors to 2011)
2011 11 new reactors, 9.3 GWe
2012 10 new reactors, 9.92 GWe
2013 12 new reactors, 13.08 GWe
2014 14 new reactors, 13.63 GWe
France, Germany and Sweden had significantly lower nuclear power generation in 2009. The United States and South Korea also had a slight under performance. There were varying degrees of operational issues in each country.
There was growth in generation in Japan, Russia and the UK. This was due to some earthquake damaged reactors being brought back online in Japan and overall capacity factor improvements in all three countries.
Kudankulam 1 Sept 2010
Kudankulam 2 March 2011
Rawatbhata 5 (starting Jan 2010)
Rawatbhata 6 (starting Feb 2010)
The argentinian reactor Atucha II is scheduled for an October 2010 start.
Actual and Projected Nuclear Power Generation OECD data up to October. OECD projections for November and December Actual numbers for yearend in the USA, Russia and Japan. Estimates for 2010 based on estimate based on 2008 and 2009 performance and new reactors coming online in 2010.
Power Generation and Uranium Production Bets
In terms of the series of nuclear power generation and uranium production bets that I have with Dittmar. My expectation is that I lost the first of the nuclear generation bets and won the first of the uranium production bets. I expect to win the remaining years of the nuclear generation bets and uranium production bets.
From the table above with a country by country projection
2009 2568 TWhe (not final number)
2010 2703 TWhe (scheduled completions, uprates, India fuel supply no longer a problem – 2009 agreements, Japan capacity similar to Dec 2009 when 26 TWhe was generated, France labor and operational issues resolved)
2011 2803 TWhe (Ukraine, Russia, Japan, France have room for operational improvements. They are investing in this effort. Only factored in as offsetting any random production problems)
2012 2885 TWhe
2013 2964 TWhe
2014 3120 TWhe
The data to be used in determining this bet are the figures of the World Nuclear Association for the year, compared to the midpoint of the range. The amount of production for each year is expected to be published the following year. If the amount of the production is above the midpoint, Brian Wang is right, and advancednano is right and the winner; below the midpoint Dittmar is right and the winner for that year. The figure is the TWH level of generation of commercial nuclear fission or nuclear fusion.
Brian Wang Uranium Production Projection
I accepted a bet for 2009 at 47,383 tons as over under (the actual midpoint). More uranium production means I win and less means Dittmar wins.
Dittmar offered a bet for 2010 uranium production not being higher 47,000 tons for world prod. I accepted the bet at 54,000 tons on physorg (comment section). The standard midpoint would have been 50,500 tons for 2010.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.