The NEI Morning Clip File

Here are some of the news clips we're reading at NEI this morning. In this morning's Burlington Free Press Jim Burbo writes that his home state of Vermont should assess nuclear energy in a rational manner:

The only way that we can make Vermont energy-independent in the near future is to establish a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant to reuse Vermont Yankee's spent fuel and to build a pair of 1000-mw nuclear power plants to use its product (one should be in northwestern Vermont where the preponderance of energy demand resides).

And as for the claim that nuclear energy is not "green," which I take to mean that it somehow degrades the environment, it is evident that it produces no air or water pollution or greenhouse gases. Nuclear has a forty year safety record superior to any other form of electric generation, and does not depend on foreign sources of oil or gas. Also it will, in the future, be essential to the transition to a hydrogen transportation economy (automobiles and trucks running on hydrogen rather than gasoline or diesel fuel), since electricity is needed to break down water into hydrogen and oxygen.

Australia's Federal Science Minister Brendan Nelson feels that his country should implement nuclear power:

Federal Science Minister Brendan Nelson believes nuclear energy is likely to be used to power Australian homes within 50 years.

Dr Nelson said the equivalent of 8,000 coal-fired power stations needed to be replaced globally in order to get greenhouse gas emission levels back below those of the pre-industrialised world over the next half a century.

He believes the use of nuclear power for domestic consumption is the best way to make this happen, including in Australia.

"In my lifetime, I think it's likely," Dr Nelson told the National Press Club.

In a recent interview, New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord
said that he will pursue an increased implementation of nuclear energy for Canada:

New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord will seek the support of his colleagues in other provinces and territories for a comprehensive nuclear-energy strategy for Canada at this week's Council of the Federation meeting.

"I think nuclear has to be part of our future," Mr. Lord said in an interview before heading to Banff, where provincial and territorial leaders will meet for three days this week to discuss a number of issues, including energy supply and postsecondary education.

Mr. Lord said it is important for Canada to diversify its energy supply, so that it is less dependent on gas and oil. "The great thing about nuclear is it is a homegrown source of energy," he said. "The uranium comes from Canada. The technology is Canadian."

Kurt Moore of Formulate Affinity explained why he feels nuclear energy is a crucial part of the solution to our energy problem in today's post:

As far as efficient methods of power generation goes, nuclear power takes the cake, and then some. Fission of an atom of uranium produces 10 million times the energy produced by the combustion of an atom of carbon from coal. That's correct, it is 10 million times more efficient that our most widely used form of energy creation. With that efficiency, comes the added bonus of there being no strip mining of our planet. I know, the gears are turning, with something that has so much potential energy, what about the waste?

Nuclear power is arguably the most clean of all forms of power generation. Most people wrongly assume that massive amounts of radioactive waste are sitting around waiting to explode. Or worse, that excess waste has no place to go. The excess waste is in large part a valid argument, however, it pales in comparison to the ozone depleting waste carbon based fuels create.

Come back this afternoon for more news from the NEI Clip File.

EDITOR'S NOTE: After spending a couple of weeks as an intern with NEI, Duncan is going to spend the rest of the Summer getting ready to return to James Madison University in September. Tomorrow will be his last day with NEI Nuclear Notes, and he's been a real help to us here during his brief tenure. Thanks, Duncan.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics

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