Skip to main content

Duke Power Announces COL for Two New Reactors

Just off the wire:
Duke Power confirmed today it is preparing a combined construction and operating license (COL) application for new nuclear generation. The application is for two Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 (AP1000) reactors at a site to be named
following the conclusion of its current site selection study.

Pursuit of the COL application, which is expected to be submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission within the next 24-30 months, is part of the company's long-term generation planning process, and will allow Duke Power to keep new nuclear generation as an option for meeting its customers' future energy needs.

"Our employees have proven that nuclear generation can provide safe, reliable and cost-effective electricity for our customers," said Brew Barron, Duke Power chief nuclear officer. "Preparing this application provides us the option to continue using a diverse fuel mix in the future."

Duke Power's selection of the Westinghouse AP1000 reactor design allows the company to rely on proven, safe nuclear technology and progressive innovation as it considers a new nuclear power plant. The AP1000 design is based on the same Westinghouse pressurized water reactor (PWR) technology that has achieved thousands of successful reactor-years of operation throughout the world.

Westinghouse PWR technology is currently in use at the Duke Power-operated McGuire and Catawba nuclear stations.

Westinghouse is partnering with The Shaw Group Inc., a global engineering, design, construction and operations firm, on engineering work for this project.
Duke does it again. Amazing. More later.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
According to AP 5/15/05; Duke is considering a site on the Yadkin river near Mocksville.
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ/MGArticle/WSJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031782732756

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…