A few observations - North Anna Env. Impact Hearing

Last week I had the pleasure of attending my first public meeting dealing with nuclear power. As some you may already know, Dominion Power, has applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to possibly build another reactor at their North Anna reactor site. While I have been to many public meetings in the past, I have never seen anything like this before.

North Anna Nuclear Power Station is located on a man-made lake called Lake Anna. When the NRC finally approved this site for a reactor they created a cooling lake by constructing a dam on a local river. Today Lake Anna is a playground for Virginia, homes and businesses have sprouted around the lake creating a sustained community around the plant. Like many other reactors in the United States, many of those who work at North Anna live in the surrounding community.

When the meeting began, I tried to take notes on every speaker with the hopes of actually answering every concern and question but this is just not feasible. Instead I decided to take the words directly from opponents of North Anna and use a few points made by North Anna supporters to answer these issues.

Public Citizen, PACE, NIRS, Greenpeace, Charlottesville Center for Peace and Justice and the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League all showed up for this meeting. Before the meeting even started, they held a rally in the school cafeteria to answer questions from the local community. All had key issues that they attempted to highlight, included in this:

Increased lake temperature threatens the striped bass population in the lake.
Increased water withdrawal endangers aquatic life in the lake.
Decreased flow downstream of the dam threatens aquatic habitat.

I would like to take a few points from a gentleman who spoke on this topic. His name is Delbert Horn.

"I read on Public Citizen’s web site, that higher water temperatures will threaten the Striped Bass population in the Lake. I was curious, so I read the Environmental Impact Statement. I learned the Dept. of Game and Inland Fisheries introduced Striped Bass to Lake Anna, and they have to restock 100 – 200,000 Striped Bass every year, at considerable expense, because the creeks and river that feed the lake just aren’t deep enough, and fast enough for spawning runs. "

You see, without spawning runs, a self-sustaining Striped Bass population just isn’t possible… regardless of Lake temperature.What’s interesting, though, is that Public Citizen, a government watchdog group, isn’t blowing the whistle on the State Government for supporting an artificial Striped Bass population. Instead, they filed a legal contention that Dominion will make the lake “less comfortable” for the 100 – 200,000 Striped Bass the State dumps into Lake Anna every year."

Mr. Horn went on to question a few points made by Lou Zeller, of the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, that the death rates of children doubled post-start up of North Anna. (editorial note - this was probably the most confrontational portion of the meeting) Mr. Horn stated the following:

"[Zeller] claims the data suggests these children were harmed by radioactive emissions from the plant. Mr. Zeller referenced the CDC website as his data source, so I went online myself to check out his numbers … and I encourage all of you to do the same."

"While the Blue Ridge website says their death statistics exclude accidents, homicides, and suicides, what I saw at CDC.gov proved otherwise (Louisa County). Zeller’s “Before” numbers did correctly exclude accidents, but his “After” numbers did not exclude them. This is how Zeller’s death rates are made to “almost double.”

While Mr. Horn was not the only pro-nuclear resident in the audience it was obvious that he was one of the few that actually brought something other than talking points to the meeting. When Mr. Zeller took the dais to rebutt the points made by Mr. Horn, he stuck with the same contention regarding the striped bass population, completely leaving out his contentions about the dangers of North Anna. It makes you wonder if this "environmental movement" can actually back up the claims that they have made for years about the safety and environmental impact of nuclear power.

I have more to post on this meeting, but I want to thank Mr. Horn for sending me his speech.

**UPDATE** In the interest of full disclosure, Mr. Horn is a Dominion employee. He made the statement not as a Dominion employee, but as a citizen interested in the issue.

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog