Skip to main content

2005 Refueling Outages

The U.S. nuclear industry's refueling outage durations have improved substantially over the past 30 years. In the 80s and early 90s, the average duration of a refueling outage was 3 months. Now it's one month. Some plants refuel in as little as 15-20 days.

Nuclear units shut down for refueling either in the spring or fall when electric demand is lowest. In 2005, 66 nuclear units (of 103) shut down for refueling outages. 43 refueled in the Spring 2005 and 23 in Fall 2005. The average refueling outage for 2005 was 38 days. The median was 34 days. In 2004, the average and median were 42 and 35.


The record for the fastest refueling outage (scroll down to near the bottom) for a boiling water reactor was Browns Ferry 3 at 14 days and 16 hours in 2002. For a pressurized water reactor it was Braidwood 2 at 15 days and 14 hours in 2003. In 2005, the fastest refueling outages were Braidwood 2 and Limerick 2 at about 17 days.

In the 80s and early 90s, the common refueling cycle was 12 months. Now, U.S. nuclear units are either on an 18 or 24 month refueling cycle. If the nuclear reactor doesn't shutdown for maintenance, it will go the entire period supplying cheap, emission free electricity.

The longest operating period between refueling outages (scroll down to Plant Performance) by a light water reactor was Exelon's Peach Bottom 3 recorded last September at 707 days. LaSalle 1, also operated by Exelon, broke that record a couple of weeks ago and is still going. Watch for the headlines!

Technorati tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...

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...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...