Researchers found 37 mine sites in Australia that could be converted into renewable energy storage. So what are we waiting for?

The world is rapidly moving towards a renewable energy future. To support the transition, we must prepare back-up energy supplies for times when solar panels and wind turbines are not producing enough electricity.

One solution is to build more pumped hydro energy storage. But where should this expansion happen?

Our new research identified more than 900 suitable locations around the world: at former and existing mining sites. Some 37 sites are in Australia.

Huge open-cut mining pits would be turned into reservoirs to hold water for renewable energy storage. It would give the sites a new lease on life and help shore up the world’s low-emissions future.

The benefits of pumped hydro storage

Pumped hydro energy storage has been demonstrated at scale for more than a century. Over the past few years, we have been identifying the best sites for “closed-loop” pumped hydro systems around the world.

Unlike conventional hydropower systems operating on rivers, closed-loop systems are located away from rivers. They require only two reservoirs, one higher than the other, between which water flows down a tunnel and through a turbine, producing electricity.

The water can be released – and power produced – to cover gaps in electricity supply when output from solar and wind is low (for example on cloudy or windless days). And when wind and solar are producing more electricity than is needed – such as on sunny or windy days – this cheap surplus power is used to pump the water back up the hill to the top reservoir, ready to be released again.

Off-river sites have very small environmental footprints and require very little water to operate. Pumped hydro energy storage is also generally cheaper than battery storage at large scales.

Batteries are the preferred method for energy storage over seconds to hours, while pumped hydro is preferred for overnight and longer storage.

Pumped-hydro storage technology has been demonstrated at scale for over a century. Shutterstock

Why mining sites?

There are big benefits to converting mining areas into pumped hydro plants.

For a start, the hole has already been dug, reducing construction costs. What’s more, mining sites are typically already serviced by roads and transmission infrastructure. The site usually has access to a water source for which the mine operators may have pumping rights. And the development takes place on land that is already cleared of vegetation, avoiding the need to disturb new areas.

Finally, community support may have already been obtained for the mining operations, which could easily be rolled over into a pumped hydro site.

In Australia, one pumped hydro energy storage project is already being built at a former gold mine site at Kidston in Far North Queensland.

The feasibility of two others is being assessed at Mount Rawdon near Bundaberg in Queensland, and at Muswellbrook in New South Wales. Both would repurpose old mining pits.

What we found

Our previous research identified suitable locations in undeveloped areas (excluding protected land) and using existing reservoirs. Now, we have turned our attention to mine sites.

Our study used a computer algorithm to search the Earth’s surface for suitable sites. It looked for mining pits, pit lakes and tailings ponds in mining sites which were located near suitable land for a new upper reservoir. The idea is that the reservoir and mining site are “paired” and water pumped between them.

Globally, we identified 904 suitable mining sites across 77 countries.

Some 37 suitable sites are located in Australia. They include the Mount Rawdon and Muswellbrook mining pits already under investigation.

There are a number of potential options in Western Australia: in the iron-ore region of the Pilbara, south of Perth and around Kalgoorlie.

Options in Queensland and New South Wales are mostly located down the east coast, including the Coppabella Mine and the coal mining pits near the old Liddell Power Station. Possible sites also exist inland at Mount Isa in Queensland and at the Cadia Hill gold mine near Orange in NSW.

Potential sites in South Australia include the old Leigh Creek coal mine in the Flinders Ranges and the operating Prominent Hill mine northwest of Adelaide. Tasmania and Victoria also offer possible locations, although many other non-mining options exist in these states for pumped hydro storage.

We are not suggesting that operating mines be closed – rather, that pumped hydro storage be considered as part of site rehabilitation at the end of the mine’s life.

If old mining sites are to be converted into pumped hydro, several challenges must be addressed. For example, mine pits may contain contaminants that, if filled with water, could seep into groundwater. However, this could be overcome by lining reservoirs.

Looking ahead

Australia has set a readily achievable goal of reaching 82% renewable electricity by 2030.

The Australian Energy Market Operator suggests by 2050, this nation needs about 640 gigawatt-hours of dispatchable or “on demand” storage to support solar and wind capacity. We currently have about 17 gigawatt-hours of electricity storage, with more committed by Snowy 2.0 and other projects.

The 37 possible pumped hydro sites we’ve identified could deliver 540 gigawatt-hours of storage potential. Combined with other non-mining sites we’ve identified previously, the options are far more numerous than our needs.

This means we can afford to be picky, and develop only the very best sites. So what are we waiting for?The Conversation

Timothy Weber, Research Officer for School of Engineering, Australian National University and Andrew Blakers, Professor of Engineering, Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More........

Nuclear battery: Chinese firm aiming for mass market production

The BV100 battery (Image: Betavolt)
Beijing Betavolt New Energy Technology Company Ltd claims to have developed a miniature atomic energy battery that can generate electricity stably and autonomously for 50 years without the need for charging or maintenance. It said the battery is currently in the pilot stage and will be put into mass production on the market.

Atomic energy batteries - also known as nuclear batteries or radioisotope batteries - work on the principle of utilising the energy released by the decay of nuclear isotopes and converting it into electrical energy through semiconductor converters.

Betavolt, which was established in April 2021, says its battery "combines nickel-63 nuclear isotope decay technology and China's first diamond semiconductor (4th generation semiconductor) module to successfully realise the miniaturisation of atomic energy batteries".

The company's team of scientists developed a unique single-crystal diamond semiconductor that is just 10 microns thick, placing a 2-micron-thick nickel-63 sheet between two diamond semiconductor converters. The decay energy of the radioactive source is converted into an electrical current, forming an independent unit. Betavolt said its nuclear batteries are modular and can be composed of dozens or hundreds of independent unit modules and can be used in series and parallel, so battery products of different sizes and capacities can be manufactured.

The composition of a nuclear battery (Image: Betavolt)
Betavolt says its batteries can meet the needs of long-lasting power supply in multiple scenarios such as aerospace, AI equipment, medical equipment, micro-electromechanical systems, advanced sensors, small drones and micro-robots. "If policies allow, atomic energy batteries can allow a mobile phone to never be charged, and drones that can only fly for 15 minutes can fly continuously," it said.

The first battery that the company plans to launch is the BV100, which it claims will be the world's first nuclear battery to be mass-produced. Measuring 15mm by 15mm and 5 mm thick, the battery can generate 100 microwatts, with a voltage of 3V. The company plans to launch a 1-watt battery in 2025.

Betavolt says its atomic energy battery is "absolutely safe, has no external radiation, and is suitable for use in medical devices such as pacemakers, artificial hearts, and cochleas in the human body". It adds: "Atomic energy batteries are environmentally friendly. After the decay period, the nickel-63 isotope as the radioactive source turns into a stable isotope of copper, which is non-radioactive and does not pose any threat or pollution to the environment."

The company plans to continue research on using isotopes such as strontium-90, promethium-147 and deuterium to develop atomic energy batteries with higher power and a service life of 2-30 years.Researched and written by World Nuclear News. Nuclear battery: Chinese firm aiming for mass market production : Corporate - World Nuclear News
Read More........

Walking robot tested in Finnish repository : Corporate

The ANYmal robot walks through Onkalo's underground tunnels (Image: Tapani Karjanlahti / Posiva)
A four-legged robot designed for autonomous operation in challenging environments has been put through its paces at a depth of more than 400 metres in the tunnels of the Onkalo underground used nuclear fuel repository near Olkiluoto, Finland.

A research team led by the Swiss robotics company ANYbotics visited Olkiluoto in June to test the functionality of its ANYmal robot in underground facilities. The test was organised by Euratom - the European Atomic Energy Community - together with Finnish radioactive waste management company Posiva Oy.

‍The ANYmal robot has been under development for many years. The roots of the ANYbotics company go back to the Swiss Institute of Technology, EHT. A group of researchers from the educational institution built the first four-legged robot back in 2009, and ANYbotics was founded for the commercialisation of this technology in 2016.

The ANYmal robot uses laser sensors and cameras to observe the environment and can locate its own position very precisely. By combining observation data with location data - such as a map or area scan data - it can plan its navigation route independently when necessary.

Posiva said Onkalo offered a unique framework for the robot to move, noting that there are tunnels in other parts of the world, but no other underground disposal facility has yet been built.

During the test, the robot - measuring 93cm in length, 53cm in width and 89cm in height and weighing about 50kg - travelled through the tunnels of Onkalo for about 1.5 hours. With a fully-charged battery, the robot can operate for up to 2 hours. The purpose was to test how far the robot can travel in Onkalo conditions with one charge, and whether there are any terrains in the tunnel where the robot would not be able to advance.

For the test, the robot first "walked" the planned route by remote control, and scanned the map into its internal system. In the test itself, the robot moved along the scanned route autonomously, although all the time in the line of sight with the research team. It was also available for remote control at any moment, for example in case of danger. Various safety functions were programmed into the robot. For example, it went around the obstacles on the route from a certain safety distance and stopped when something came into its safety area.

Authorities are interested in the use of robots for the reason that a robot can reach places that are inaccessible to humans, for example for nuclear material protection inspection work. Carrying out nuclear safeguards with the help of a robot is also of interest to Posiva, the company said. Robots can also be used in rescue operations and industry. They can be equipped with different devices for different tasks, such as optical and thermal cameras, microphones, gas or radiation detectors.

A video of the ANYmal robot in Onkalo can be found here.Researched and written by World Nuclear News  Source: - World Nuclear News
Read More........

Japan starts discharging treated water into the sea : Regulation & Safety

The process for releasing the ALPS-treated water (Image: Tepco)
Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) announced it has begun releasing treated water currently stored at the damaged Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the ocean. The operation - expected to take up to 30 years to complete - is being closely monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

At the Fukushima Daiichi site, contaminated water - in part used to cool melted nuclear fuel - is treated by the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS), which removes most of the radioactive contamination, with the exception of tritium. This treated water is currently stored in more than 1000 tanks on site. The total tank storage capacity amounts to about 1.37 million cubic metres and all the tanks are expected to reach full capacity in late 2023 or early 2024.

Japan announced in April 2021 it planned to discharge treated water stored at the site into the sea over a period of about 30 years.

On 22 August, the government announced that it had decided to request Tepco begin preparations for the release of ALPS-treated water into the sea.

On the same day, the company transferred a very small amount of ALPS-treated water - about 1 cubic metre - to the dilution facility using the transfer facilities. This water was then diluted with about 1200 cubic metres of seawater and allowed to flow into the discharge vertical shaft (upstream water tank). The water stored in the discharge vertical shaft was then sampled.

"The results showed that the analysis value is approximately equal to the calculated concentration and below 1500 becquerels per litre," Tepco said today. "The sample of the water was also analysed by the Japan Atomic Energy Agency, who confirmed that the analysis value is below 1500 Bq/litre." In comparison, the World Health Organization guideline for drinking water is 10,000 Bq/litre.

Tepco therefore announced it has now moved to the second stage of the water release, the continuous discharge into the sea. At the same time, the company began transmitting data from various points in the process to the IAEA.

"Today at 1.00pm, the seawater transfer pumps will be started up and we will commence the discharge," Tepco said ahead of the process beginning. "During the discharge, one tank group-worth of ALPS-treated water from the measurement/confirmation facility, and the water already stored in the discharge vertical shaft (upper-stream storage) during Stage 1, will be continuously transferred/diluted and discharged into the sea.

"Furthermore, today, the intake/vertical shaft monitors will be put into operation in preparation for the discharge into the sea. We also started uploading real-time data pertaining to the discharge of ALPS-treated water into the sea to our website."
IAEA monitoring

When Japan announced the discharge plan in 2021, it asked the IAEA to review its plans against IAEA safety standards and monitor the release. Neighbouring countries have raised concerns and opposed the planned discharge. An IAEA Task Force was established to implement the assistance to Japan, which included advice from a group of internationally recognised experts from Member States, including members from the region, under the authority of the IAEA Secretariat. The IAEA opened an office at the Fukushima Daiichi plant last month.

"IAEA experts are there on the ground to serve as the eyes of the international community and ensure that the discharge is being carried out as planned consistent with IAEA safety standards," said IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi. "Through our presence, we contribute to generating the necessary confidence that the process is carried out in a safe and transparent way."

The agency, which confirmed that the discharge had begun, noted: "The IAEA's independent on-site analysis confirmed that the tritium concentration in the diluted water that is being discharged is far below the operational limit of 1500 becquerels per litre."

The IAEA said it will have a presence on site for as long as the treated water is released. It also announced the launch of a webpage to provide live data from Japan on the water discharge, including water flow rates, radiation monitoring data and the concentration of tritium after dilution.

The IAEA experts will observe onsite activities related to the ALPS-treated water discharge, including samples and measurements, and will interface with Tepco and officials from Japan's Nuclear Regulation Authority. The IAEA will also organise review missions periodically to observe activities on site and to request updates and additional data from Japanese authorities. The IAEA said its independent corroboration activities will also continue during the entirety of the discharge and will involve IAEA laboratories and third-party laboratories.

"All of these activities will work together to provide a comprehensive picture of the activities taking place at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant related to the ALPS-treated water discharge and whether these activities are consistent with relevant international safety standards," said Gustavo Caruso, Director and Coordinator for the ALPS Safety Review at the IAEA and Chair of the Task Force. "The data provided by Tepco, and displayed both by Tepco and IAEA, is just a single piece of the overall monitoring approach and the IAEA's ongoing safety review."Researched and written by World Nuclear News  Source: World Nuclear News
Read More........

Nuclear energy too expensive, too slow to battle climate change: report

Nuclear power as a renewable power option is more expensive and slower to implement than alternatives and therefore is not effective in the effort to battle the climate emergency, rather it is counterproductive, as the funds are then not available for more effective options, says a report on the status and trends of the international nuclear industry.
While the number of operating nuclear reactors has increased globally over the past year by four to 417 as of mid-2019, it remains significantly below historic peak of 438 in 2002, according to the World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2019 (WNISR2019), which is being released at the Central European University (CEU) in Budapest. Nuclear construction has been shrinking over the past five years with 46 units underway as of mid-2019, compared to 68 reactors in 2013 and 234 in 1979. The number of annual construction starts has fallen from 15 in the pre-Fukushima year (2010) to five in 2018 and, so far, one in 2019. The historic peak was in 1976 with 44 construction starts, more than the total in the past seven years. WNISR project coordinator and publisher Mycle Schneider stated: “There can be no doubt: the renewal rate of nuclear power plants is too slow to guarantee the survival of the technology. The world is experiencing an undeclared ‘organic’ nuclear phaseout.” Consequently, as of mid-2019, for the first time the average age of the world nuclear reactor fleet exceeds 30 years. However, renewables continue to outpace nuclear power in virtually all categories. A record 165 gigawatts (GW) of renewables were added to the world’s power grids in 2018; the nuclear operating capacity increased by 9 GW. Globally, wind power output grew by 29 per cent in 2018, solar by 13 per cent, nuclear by 2.4 per cent. Compared to a decade ago, nonhydro renewables generated over 1,900 TWh more power, exceeding coal and natural gas, while nuclear produced less. What does all this mean for the potential role of nuclear power to combat climate change? WNISR2019 provides a new focus chapter on the question. Diana Ăśrge-Vorsatz, Professor at the Central European University and Vice-Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Group III, notes in her Foreword to WNISR2019 that several IPCC scenarios that reach the 1.5°C temperature target rely heavily on nuclear power and that “these scenarios raise the question whether the nuclear industry will actually be able to deliver the magnitude of new power that is required in these scenarios in a cost-effective and timely manner. This report is perhaps the most relevant publication to answer this pertinent question.” Over the past decade, levelised cost estimates for utility-scale solar dropped by 88 per cent, wind by 69 per cent, while nuclear increased by 23 per cent. New solar plants can compete with existing coal fired plants in India, wind turbines alone generate more electricity than nuclear reactors in India and China. But new nuclear plants are also much slower to build than all other options, eg, the nine reactors started up in 2018 took an average of 10.9 years to be completed. In other words, nuclear power is an option that is more expensive and slower to implement than alternatives and therefore is not effective in the effort to battle the climate emergency, rather it is counterproductive, as the funds are then not available for more effective options. The rather surprising outcome of the analyses is that even the extended operation of existing reactors is not climate effective as operating costs exceed the costs of competing energy efficiency and new renewable energy options and therefore durably block their implementation. “You can spend a dollar, a euro, a forint or a ruble only once: the climate emergency requires that investment decisions must favor the cheapest and fastest response strategies. The nuclear power option has consistently turned out the most expensive and the slowest,” Mycle Schneider concludes. The WNISR2019 assesses in 323 pages the status and trends of the international nuclear industry and analyses the potential role of nuclear power as an option to combat climate change. Eight interdisciplinary experts from six countries, including four university professors and the Rocky Mountain Institute’s co-founder and chairman emeritus, have contributed to the report.Source: https://www.domain-b.com
Read More........