Skip to main content

SCANA Considers New Nuclear Build

From The State (S.C.):
Nuclear energy — long a radioactive bugaboo among institutional lenders — is now a power source that is getting another look, said William B. Timmerman, SCANA Corp. chairman and chief executive.

Answering an investor’s question during SCANA’s annual meeting Thursday in Columbia, Timmerman said that given the current energy environment, nuclear energy has to be on the table when making plans to meet the state’s growing power demands.

“If you asked me that two years ago, I’d say not on my watch,” Timmerman said.

Further . . .
Specifically, SCANA is dealing with:

• Increasing costs of other fuel sources such as coal and natural gas

• Environmental concerns and costs of cleanup associated with using those fuels

• An ever-growing demand for power.

For the next decade, Timmerman said SCANA can address anticipated power demands in South Carolina. After that, though, adding nuclear plants could be an option, especially if coal and natural gas prices remain high.

A few weeks ago, we reported that South Carolina state officials will be meeting in Columbia with utility executives on May 9 to dicuss new plants. Representatives from the NuStart Consortium are also expected to participate.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
Don't forget that when a company builds a new nuclear site they are going to pass the cost onto their customers. I would imagine a new nuclear site will cost somewhere above $5 billion so consumers will need to get out their checkbooks to get the same old electricity they always have but now pay more for it. SCANA's approach to building is the reason they use to justify raising rates and earning more money.

Popular posts from this blog

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…