Skip to main content

Focus On The Energy Bill: The Value of New Nuclear

Our friend Rod Adams was up late last night doing some celebrating:
With a unanimous vote yesterday, the Board of County Commissioners for Calvert County, Maryland decided to submit a resolution and letter of support endorsing the NuStart Energy Development Corporation's consideration of the Calvert Cliffs site for one of their proposed new reactors. Board of County Commissioners Submits Resolution in Support of NuStart Energy's Calvert Cliffs Expansion Proposal.

I just finished my own quiet - it is, after all, only a bit after 4:00 am and the rest of my family is still sleeping - cheer and fist pumping when I read that press release.

(snip)

Unlike most of the rest of the power plants that dot the shores of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, the plant does not have a smoke stack that pours out thousands of tons of pollutants every day. From a purely selfish point of view, I also know that expanding the plant there will help to keep my electrical power rates under control, especially compared to plants that use something like imported LNG.

The county commissioners know the plant, they know the workers, and they know that the plant is a major asset to their community. Once again, the people near the plants are telling the world that they want more of them in their own backyard.

One thing that uncommitted observers of the coming debates on new nuclear power plants - and we know that there are going to be some debates - need to think about is the fact that the more closely people live and work around nuclear power, the more they favor its use. Those same people should then consider whether or not that trend applies to competitive energy sources.
And with the help of the Energy Bill, and its provisions to spur the construction of new nuclear power plants, lots more folks are going to be able to consider that decision in the years to come.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

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…